Shuttleworth: Chrome Nearly Replaced FF In Ubuntu

jbrodkin writes "Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth is a big fan of Google Chrome, and says the browser could replace the standard Firefox in future versions of Ubuntu Linux. 'We looked at it closely in the last cycle and the decision was to stick with Firefox,' he says. But the work that Google is doing with Chrome OS — essentially the Chrome browser on top of Linux — is potentially leading to a future in which 'Chrome on Ubuntu and Chrome on Linux is a better experience than Chrome on any other platform [i.e. Windows and Mac].' In a wide-ranging interview, Shuttleworth also discussed why he spent $20 million to become a space tourist but doesn't own a smartphone, controversies over Linux and Unity, the future of Ubuntu tablets, and says the move toward putting personal data in the cloud is 'a little scary.'"

Chromium?

[oldhack]

If he likes Chrome so much, why not invest in developing FOSS browser based on Chromium?

Re:right then

[__Paul__]

Epiphany. The world's most useless browser. Basically, it was Galeon with all its features removed, and then replaced with a silly tag-based bookmarking system that is so unintuitive to use that no-one would ever bother with it.

The Cloud vs. Free Software

[tbf]

The Cloud is closed. Even more closed than all IBM's, Microsoft and Apples of this world ever have been. Does Mark realise that he makes his entire Ubuntu project obsolete by trusting The Cloud? We can just stick with the pre-installed Windows or OSX, if all our stuff is in that fucking Cloud. Actually would be more secure than using Googlezillas Spyware...

Re:right then

[khellendros1984]

The choice of a default browser for a distro that caters toward less-experienced users (like Ubuntu) is very important. Frankly, most users probably won't change away from whatever the OS came with.

It's a similar situation for the other Window Managers. Why require a user to install and configure major interface-changing software like that, when you're marketing your OS as dead-simple to use?

Re:One more reason:

[grcumb]

Why is Ubuntu so prone to horrible choices like this?

The answer's pretty simple: They've stopped listening.

Ubuntu is slipping out of control. Canonical have stopped listening and – more importantly – working with the community. The number of defects is growing, but Canonical’s response is to make it harder for mere mortals to submit bugs. They seem to think that strong guidance is needed for their product to grow in new and interesting ways. Fair enough, but they’re confusing leadership with control. They’re simply imposing their views because they don’t value the discussion. They’re treating criticism as opposition and shutting themselves off from valid feedback.

Worse, they simply don’t have the number of skilled developers they need to achieve their goals. When I look at the bug queues on some packages, I shudder in sympathy with the poor souls who are expected to wrangle them. Canonical is clearly embarked on an impossible task, but nobody’s either got the guts or the vision to spell this out to Shuttleworth and co.

(This is excerpted from a slightly longer piece [imagicity.com] I wrote after 11.04 was released.)

Re:let your users decide (or they will leave)

[t2t10]

Not all Linux users are 'nerdy' enough to want to play around with a different browser. Some just want to stay with the default. Same for other applications.

And they should get the tried and true, instead of whbatever a geek like Shuttleworth happens to like these days.

With your same argument I could say that IE is the best browser, because for many years it held more than 50-70% of internet users.

Stop hallucinating and putting words in my mouth. Where did I make an argument anywhere that more users for software means that something is better? I didn't even use those numbers.

I said that Shuttleworth shouldn't willy-nilly replace software because he thinks something is better, he should rely on actual statistics. Before even considering making something the default, it should have a substantial and growing user base. Whether that's 20%, 30%, or 50% is debatable.

What's not debatable is that imposing beta quality software with no user base just because someone happens to package a distribution is a lousy idea.

Re:NoScript?

[tehcyder]

But you should use 2 browsers anyway

Make that at least 2 browsers. I use Chromium (Google search/maps/etc.), Firefox (general browsing), and Opera (shopping and banking). All have privacy and security set to not-quite-paranoid levels, with history, cookies, and flash objects completely wiped per session and occasionally wiped within a session. I don't use Chrome, and I only use IE on the windows PC at work where it's almost mandatory for intranet stuff.

Unless you're a spy, terrorist or criminal, you are quite paranoid.