Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48
Originally Posted by SkittleLinux18 Ok, cool. Also, I have been reverting back to firefox. But, my question is this: Is Firefox affiliated with Google in any way that would subject ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #21
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    120

    Quote Originally Posted by SkittleLinux18 View Post
    Ok, cool. Also, I have been reverting back to firefox. But, my question is this: Is Firefox affiliated with Google in any way that would subject me to their privacy laws? Or is this browser still safe?
    Firefox itself is in no way related to Google just like Internet Explorer or Opera. They are independent Web Browsers. They may have contracts with google but i imagine that is about as far as it goes.

    In terms of search engines, i converted to duckduckgo.com a far while ago and only use google for images. I haven't converted from gmail or removed my Facebook account, but i am waiting for these social networks that are about privacy to appear like Daispora before i make that move from Facebook.

    For email accounts there are heaps to choose from. It really depends on whether you want to go with a free one or sign-up to one under your internet service provider. I looked into one called gmx mail, but other than registering i haven't really done much more with it. It takes alot to convert email.

  2. #22
    Guest
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazydog View Post
    I was just looking through the about:config o my Firefox 10.0.2 and did a search on Google.
    There are a lot of Webofturst (WOT) references in there with Google attached to them.
    Is WOT a Google product?
    As far as I know, no. I believe it does interact with search engines. I don't use/trust WOT or have anything related to it installed, thus it does not appear in my about:config.

    Quote Originally Posted by SL6-A1000 View Post
    Firefox itself is in no way related to Google just like Internet Explorer or Opera. They are independent Web Browsers. They may have contracts with google but i imagine that is about as far as it goes.
    "In no way related" is an over simplification. Especially when a company provides the vast majority of another's funding and ensures that it's search engine and tracking software are installed and enabled by default...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozill...la_Corporation
    The majority of the revenues comes from Google Inc., which is the default search engine on Mozilla Firefox.
    Mozilla millions still 86% Google cash ? The Register
    Google still provides 86 per cent of Mozilla's revenue, according to the open source outfit's latest financial statement.
    Last edited by cynwulf; 03-09-2012 at 10:30 AM.

  3. #23
    Linux Guru Lazydog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Keystone State
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    "In no way related" is an over simplification. Especially when a company provides the vast majority of another's funding and ensures that it's search engine and tracking software are installed and enabled by default...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozill...la_Corporation


    Mozilla millions still 86% Google cash ? The Register
    And I like Firefox too.

    It is a real shame that this sh*t goes on on a daily basis everywhere.

    Regards
    Robert

    Linux
    The adventure of a life time.

    Linux User #296285
    Get Counted

  4. #24
    Guest
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    312
    In my opinion all browsers are crap. It's just a question of finding the least crap browser - that was Firefox, nowadays I'm not so sure.

    There are several reasons why I have wanted to move away from Firefox over the last year or two... the google affiliation and the general direction the browser seems to be heading are just two of these...

    Another reason is that Firefox and the rest of the Mozilla XUL based programs are getting very bloated. Firefox has now gotten to the stage where it's using more memory than Seamonkey... They are also performing badly on older hardware - on older systems rendering is just slower when compared with chromium and opera. I remember the days of Firefox 1.0 and the early Phoenix/Firebird releases. It was fast and lightweight, but all of that seems to have gone out of the window over the last few years as Mozilla have continued to build onto the same bloated code base.

    I have a really crap old laptop which is used as a spare - it's something like an 800MHz CPU and about 256MB of RAM. It runs Debian 6 with openbox. Firefox (iceweasel) is like molasses - jerky scrolling, slow rendering, etc... I installed opera and scrolling was smooth, it was usable - Firefox was not.

    Despite all of this, Firefox still gets a lot of things right - especially with regard to customisation and add ons. Opera lacks autocomplete and introduces other annoyances (add ons are simply not as good) - then there's chrome/chromium which is google...

    Instead of continuing to develop Firefox, the Mozilla foundation should be looking at the next generation Mozilla browser, especially when you take the "google millions" into consideration.
    Last edited by cynwulf; 03-09-2012 at 11:54 AM.

  5. #25
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    In my opinion all browsers are crap. It's just a question of finding the least crap browser - that was Firefox, nowadays I'm not so sure.

    There are several reasons why I have wanted to move away from Firefox over the last year or two... the google affiliation and the general direction the browser seems to be heading are just two of these...

    Another reason is that Firefox and the rest of the Mozilla XUL based programs are getting very bloated. Firefox has now gotten to the stage where it's using more memory than Seamonkey... They are also performing badly on older hardware - on older systems rendering is just slower when compared with chromium and opera. I remember the days of Firefox 1.0 and the early Phoenix/Firebird releases. It was fast and lightweight, but all of that seems to have gone out of the window over the last few years as Mozilla have continued to build onto the same bloated code base.

    I have a really crap old laptop which is used as a spare - it's something like an 800MHz CPU and about 256MB of RAM. It runs Debian 6 with openbox. Firefox (iceweasel) is like molasses - jerky scrolling, slow rendering, etc... I installed opera and scrolling was smooth, it was usable - Firefox was not.

    Despite all of this, Firefox still gets a lot of things right - especially with regard to customisation and add ons. Opera lacks autocomplete and introduces other annoyances (add ons are simply not as good) - then there's chrome/chromium which is google...

    Instead of continuing to develop Firefox, the Mozilla foundation should be looking at the next generation Mozilla browser, especially when you take the "google millions" into consideration.
    The problem with Chrome is that its back with Google, so if you don't want to use google, chrome isn't the browser for you.

    I found it interesting, looking at the different web browsers like you. I recently changed from Firefox to Seamonkey simply because SeaMonkey is less resource intensive and also i like the all-in-one suite that it provides. Although if it was up to me i would probably end up using Safari, i find Safari more customizable and user friendly than Chrome. But Safari is Apple and good luck getting that to work on anything other than Mac or Windows.

    I was comparing Firefox on my desktop to other Web Browsers and their RAM usage. I found Firefox is very resource intensive using up around 140 MB of ram on idle compared to SeaMonkey on idle at about 90 MB. But i also looked at the other Web broswers like Safari, IE, K-Meleon, and Opera.
    What was interesting is that IE or Trident-based web browsers are the least resource intensive browser of all, at least from my small little test. While Gecko-base (Firefox) were the most intensive.

    This is what i got for RAM on idle (all latest versions)
    Safari: 30-40 MB (WebKit)
    K-Meleon: 10-17 MB (Trident)
    Internet Explorer: 15-25 MB (Trident)
    Firefox: 100-150 MB (Gecko)
    Seamonkey: 90-120 MB (Gecko)
    Opera: 60-75 MB (Presto)

    I was actually surprised at how much RAM Opera chews up on idle, i would have thought being a more refined base they would have a very slim-line engine, guess i was wrong with that assumption. I didn't test Chrome or Chromium simply because i didn't have them installed, but my guess would be they are similar to Safari give or take. But people are welcome to add them. I am sure it wouldn't vary too much. RAM is RAM.

    With that not Caraval its not surprising your web browser with Firefox was slow, potentially 50% of your RAM was being used just to run the damn thing.

  6. #26
    Guest
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by SL6-A1000 View Post
    The problem with Chrome is that its back with Google, so if you don't want to use google, chrome isn't the browser for you.
    The google tracking in chromium can be disabled as with firefox, chrome is another matter... but yes you're right in essence - if someone doesn't want google then switching to chrome/chromium would seem absurd (though I have never had any intention of switching to chromium anyway).

  7. #27
    Trusted Penguin Dapper Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Sovereign State of South Carolina
    Posts
    4,630
    I'm using Chromium more than Firefox these days and am not really happy with either for some of the same and different reasons. I wish we had a version of Links Graphics with Java and Flash support built in but that would probably "defeat its own purpose." I need Java for work, Flash I depend on less.
    Linux Mint + IceWM Registered: #371367 New Members: click here

  8. #28
    Guest
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    312
    Sadly there seems to be less choice than ever when it comes to browsers... everything is either google or google (tracking/spyware) affiliated or burdened with poor UI design, lack of add ons, bloat.......

  9. #29
    Linux Engineer hazel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    1,198
    I now use graphical links almost exclusively. I think it was Ozar who recommended it to me. It is blissfully fast; you can't imagine how it zips around sites until you've used it. The UI is very basic but it handles graphics well, though it won't do animations on principle. And no ads by default; no need for an add-on to block them!

    The only thing is it doesn't do javascript. Older versions did but not this graphical one. So I still need firefox for one or two sites. I use it when I must; otherwise it's links for me.
    "I'm just a little old lady; don't try to dazzle me with jargon!"

  10. #30
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    120
    surely the developers of these browsers should be able to refine them so that they keep the existing functionality without need at least 100mb of ram just to run. Otherwise we will eventually need 1gb of ram just for a web browser. Which is obsurd

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •