[OpenIndiana-discuss] google drive on openindiana?

Wed Aug 15 16:33:54 UTC 2012

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Bob Friesenhahn <
bfriesen at simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Robbie Crash wrote:
>
>  Chrome/Chromium is a better browser than Firefox in essentially every
>> single way. Promoting a better browser is not shameful, it's good customer
>> service.
>>
>
> I have used both and the user experience seems very similar to me. There
> are a few web sites which refuse to offer multimedia to Linux FireFox (even
> though it is technically capable) but offer it to Chrome.  Presumably this
> is due to the contractual agreements between Google and the many thousands
> of web sites which are allied with them because of Google's monopoly
> position on the Internet.

More likely it's based on the fact that the websites are built to work with
IE than with anything else and the builtin support in Chrome for
proprietary file types handles those links, where as Firefox requires
additional extensions. Such as mp3 handling, supported by Chrome by
default, but handled by the native application in Firefox if there's one
registered. Same thing as how on Windows if you have QuickTime installed,
Firefox plays mp3s with that rather than downloading the file.

>
>
>  Chromium is fully open source. The difference is that Google Chrome is a
>> customized Chromium build. The same as the build on Ubuntu is different
>>
>
> Customized apparently means offers a lot more essential stuff. Hardly
> anyone is using Chromium.

Customized means it includes proprietary filetype handling, and includes
usage stats and the other things listed on the differences page I linked to.

>
>
>  If the Ubuntu system you were on had no way to select a different browser,
>> that would be something the system was having an issue with. Sounds like
>> there wasn't another handler installed for http links.
>>
>
> This was obviously a Google-supplied dialog window.  It interjected itself
> into the OS dialogs when it was installed.  There are plenty of other
> browers on the system.
>
The "do you want Chrome to be your default browser" windows was undoubtedly
a Google window, the lack of ability to choose a different browser isn't
something that a browser should typically be able to do. I just built and
tested this on an Ubuntu VM with Chrome and Firefox installed as default,
and links opened in Firefox. When I launched Chrome by hand, it did ask if
I wanted to use it as default. Selecting no, links still opened in Firefox.
The behaviour you're seeing is not normal.

>
>  Chrome is only 1.2GB of space when you have multiple versions installed,
>> so
>> Adobe Reader didn't install it at that point, it would've been installed
>> previously, and Reader MAY have upgraded it when you agreed to install
>> Chrome when you agreed to download the Reader installer. It's very clear
>> on
>> the screen, it has a picture of Chrome, the Chrome logo, a highlighted box
>> that says "Yes, install Chrome as my default browser and Google Toolbar
>> for
>> Internet Explorer – *optional*. (28.4 MB) Install
>> Options<http://get.adobe.com/**reader/ <http://get.adobe.com/reader/>>
>>
>
> There was no mention of Chrome at the time.  The installation was on a a
> from-scratch Windows install.

The mention of Chrome is on the
http://get.adobe.com/**reader/<http://get.adobe.com/reader/> page
when you go there through IE. Downloading Reader from elsewhere, or through
alternate browsers does not offer Chrome, but instead offers McAfee AV if
you visit through Chrome, and nothing if you go through Firefox. But in IE,
I assure you it's there, and from what I can tell, not installed in any
other way.

>
>
>  Adobe ditched Flash for Android, not for anything else. And really, that
>> was for the best, Flash sucks on Android. Google's inclusion of Flash is
>> no
>>
>
> Adobe ditched the Flash plugin for Linux and Solaris, in part due to their
> contracts with Google.  It may still work today but will be worse than
> useless in less than a year.
>
> Adobe abandoned Linux and Solaris. Google is supporting Flash on Linux
through PPAPI. Google is helping in this situation, not hindering, by
offering an avenue to have updated Flash support. Adobe has always been
awful at supporting Flash on Linux. I don't understand what rationale
Google would have to say to Adobe "We don't want you supporting the
platform you barely support, we'll do that for you."

>
>  Google has some significant issues, their data collection being the most
>> obvious. But to say that they're acting anything like MS did in the 90s is
>> ridiculous.
>>
>
> Google has built up a huge position on the Internet and billions of people
> only experience the Internet by launching from Google.
>
People go to Google because it offers the best service. The majority of
people's initial browser launch doesn't start at Google. It starts at MSN
or Apple, people then choose to go to Google. Simply being dominant in the
market doesn't mean you're being anti-competitive or shitty.

>
> Regardless, I am not seeing that Chromium is available for Solaris.

>
> Bob
> --
> Bob Friesenhahn
> bfriesen at simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/**
> users/bfriesen/ <http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/>
> GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
> OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
>
>

-- 
Seconds to the drop, but it seems like hours.

http://www.openmedia.ca
https://robbiecrash.me