Linux Lite Forums

General => On Topic => Topic started by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 02:59:13 PM

Title: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 02:59:13 PM
I just finished doing some searching for discussions about web browsers in Lite. I found a few, but none were exactly what I was looking for, and several of them were pretty dated. I hope this is the correct place to post this. If not, somebody tell me and I'll try and do better.

I have seen more than one comment on the forum about problems with Firefox and a few of you have expressed discontent with how big and bloated Firefox has become. I hold that thought myself. I went through it with Netscape, Firefox, and several Linux distros. Each of them became bigger and more bloated with every update.

So what I'd like to see is which browsers some of you are using and why you chose that specific browser over others. I know that what I'd really like to find is a browser that is lightweight, is fast, offers Flash and Java, and also a few extensions like an ad blocker and a really good download manager. Right now I have Adblock Plus, DownThemAll, and Password Exporter extensions on Firefox.

So, what's your favorite, and why?
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: elelme on June 28, 2017, 03:49:40 PM
Steve,
  I started, of course, with Firefox, and may go back to the improved version that is coming, or
so I have heard. Meanwhile, having used ChromeOS, I avoided the Chromium browser and instead
went to Vivaldi, which has been a pleasant experience. Have used Midori, but now it seems out of
date. Also used Qupzilla, but it, too, seems out of date. What about SeaMonkey? Can't seem to find
it in Synaptic.
  Note that I have only been weeks with Linux Lite and have a lot to learn....
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bayoubooger on June 28, 2017, 04:11:26 PM
have used them all and I use chrome for convenience and don't worry about them tracking me. I don't use subversive websites, Liked seamonkey and comodo dragon. Firefox got to bloated for me.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 04:24:02 PM
Thanks for your reply, elelme. I don't see that the fact you've only been with Lite a few weeks is a problem. I'm just wondering what others have tried and/or are using. Vivaldi and Midori are two that I found doing 'Net research. I read as much as I could on each one. Vivaldi seemed to be a more popular alternative than Midori.

I also found and read a bit on SlimJet. While it's not real popular at this point, it seems to be garnering more attention all the time. At least that's what I was able to gather. I saw some advantages I liked with the SlimJet browser.

As for Seamonkey, that is an option I already had in the back of my head. I've used Seamonkey in the past and don't have any real problems with it. I don't think it's as fast a browser as maybe Vivaldi or SlimJet. Installing it isn't a problem. You just have to download the latest release, then decompress the tarball, and run using the ./seamonkey command. You can easily setup a launcher using the directory name followed by "seamonkey", without the quotes.

Seamonkey is actually pretty high on my list of possibles due to it also having a mail client and WYSIWYG website creator. My days of coding are over. Any website I happen to create in the future will be via some type of WYSIWYG editor. I might add a couple lines of code here or there, but all out coding is a thing of the past for me.

Thanks for offering your input!
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 04:26:30 PM
There is another of the "too bloated" comments about Firefox. Thanks, bayoubooger. I noticed you said you "liked Seamonkey". Would you say Seamonkey is a better and faster browser than Firefox?
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bayoubooger on June 28, 2017, 06:00:17 PM
Hi Steve,

Haven't tried seamonkey in many years, at least 5.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Artim on June 28, 2017, 07:16:02 PM
OMYGOSH YES!  Seamonkey has thousands fewer lines of code than Firefox!  PLUS it has a simple, Thunderbird-like e-mail client. And yet it is faster and more nimble.  Most Firefox add-ons work in Seamonkey too.  Seamonkey is the default on other lightweight distros because of it's speed, low demand on resources, and "Firefox-like" interface.  It would be an awesome first choice for Linux Lite, and in keeping with it's philosophy.

Wanna try it?


Clicky add it to Linux Lite by adding the Ubuntuzilla repository.


Open a terminal and type


Code: [Select]
sudo apt-key adv –recv-keys –keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com C1289A29

Then add the repository:



Code: [Select]
echo -e “ndeb http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt all main” | sudo tee -a /etc/apt/sources.list > /dev/null

Now you can close the terminal and open Synaptic Package Manager for a nice friendly graphical way to install Seamonkey.  Refresh Synaptic, and Seamonkey should appear among the choices now.  Simply find it and click and Mark for Installation -> Apply.










Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 07:16:42 PM
I went ahead and added an entry to my software sources and then installed Seamonkey via Synaptic. I figured I'd give it a tryout and see how well I really like it. I've used it off and on over the past few years. There is really nothing about it I don't like. I use lots less addons and extensions than I did in the past so that wasn't a big concern.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 07:22:31 PM
Hah! RandomBoy, you snuck your comment in JUST before I posted. Yep. That's just exactly what I did. I probably should have posted how I did that, but since you have everybody can follow your directions to install Seamonkey in an easier way. Kudos, my friend. Well played!

[Edit] If Seamonkey has that many fewer lines of code, I might have to second that motion of using Seamonkey as the default browser and mail client in Lite. And you get the WYSIWYG editor as a bonus for anyone wanting to do a little website creating.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: gold_finger on June 28, 2017, 09:29:12 PM
@ smhardesty,


Don't know if you already stumbled on this, but here's a link to thread started by Jerry last year about a browser poll conducted by DistroWatch:  https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/on-topic/preferred-web-browser-distrowatch-poll/ (https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/on-topic/preferred-web-browser-distrowatch-poll/).


Since time of that thread I've been using Vivaldi as main, full-featured browser on all computers.  I use it with uBlock Origin and uMatrix addons to block ads and all unwanted content/connections.  (Used to use Firefox and/or PaleMoon with Adblock Plus, NoScript and a couple of other addons.)  Vivaldi is faster, very customizable and I like the interface better.  All of my computers also have Firefox, Qupzilla and Dillo on them as well (and Slimjet on some of them), mainly for occasional use on sites I temporarily want access to without blocking elements that I have set-up in Vivaldi.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 28, 2017, 10:33:44 PM
gold_finger,

No, I somehow managed to not find that poll or thread. Very interesting, not only the poll, but more importantly the comments from many users that agree Firefox has become bloated. It seems there are nearly as many solutions as there are of us.

I have never tried Vivaldi so I can't comment one way or the other on it. I have used Seamonkey and know that it is very similar to Firefox in many ways. That may have been the primary reason I went ahead and installed it.

I'm fairly certain I'm finished with Firefox and I know I need a solid replacement for it, and since I have also been using Thunderbird I guess it just makes sense to me to replace both at the same time. With Seamonkey offering both I've always felt very comfortable using it.

In the past, I stopped using Seamonkey several times because I was unable to get some extension installed. Since I've stopped using nearly all my usual addons and extensions I don't see a reason developing that would cause me to steer away from Seamonkey, unless development stopped on the project.

I may be tempted to try one or more of the alternative browsers along with Seamonkey. Nothing wrong with more than one browser, and I might stumble across something I like really well.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: paul1149 on June 28, 2017, 11:06:20 PM
I was an Opera fan since v 3.62. Switched to FF for a while when it was new and exciting, but got tired of needing extensions to do everything and switched back to Opera. When Opera self-destructed at v. 12, I found Slimjet, which is excellent. But SJ's admins aren't very engaged with the user base, and it was hard to get answers to problems. When under Linux it wouldn't play a lot of videos because of codec rights, I began to look elsewhere.

Vivaldi, headed by the guy who started the original Opera, is excellent, and getting better. Their forum is very busy and you will get an answer. Pace of development is solid. They also will have an onboard email prog as Opera once did. The two things I miss that SJ has are onboard youtube downloading and clipboard image uploading. I still use SJ as my second browser. FF is off the machine. When I need a non-Blink browser for testing I use lightweight Epiphany.

Here's a good article on a few of the useful features of Vivaldi: https://vivaldi.com/blog/vivaldi-the-best-browser-for-journalists/
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 29, 2017, 12:05:31 AM
I used Opera for a spell way back when. I would say version 3.X. I don't recall either really liking or disliking it. I think I probably gave it a whirl when some Mozilla browser disappointed me in some way.

Vivaldi and SlimJet are 2 browsers that seem to have a decent following of you guys on this forum. I suppose if I'm to be completely thorough in my search for a replacement for Firefox I need to consider trying these out, at least for a while. My only hesitation in doing that is the unnerving feeling of "fouling up" or "dirtying" my Linux Lite install. I'm really pleased with everything about Lite and have my install tweaked to where I'm happy with it. I guess I could always set a restore point and backtrack after installing and uninstalling different browsers. That's a distinct possibility.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bitsnpcs on June 29, 2017, 02:03:22 AM
So, what's your favorite, and why?

On LL I use Firefox browser.
I have used Konqueror browser before on old Knoppix CD someone let me use before I had ever installed any Linux distro or considered doing so.
On Windows I use Firefox.
Sometimes at windows I use TOR browser, because the isp blocks too many sites for silly reasons, eg, how to convert an audio, or edit a photo, it blocks the site saying its copyright infringement, isp doesn't know if I made a song of myself singing, and there is zero info about copyrighted materials on that site, so I use TOR to read that.
Before that I would use PACS edit and Firefox to bypass isp blocks , the pacs hosted by universities students syndicated here to bypass such censorship over sites for information that are not having copyright infringing material.
Before that older windows I would just use my own proxy scans and own judged.

Add-ons on Firefox LL I use ABP - sometimes (not using on LL site), no others.
Add-ons on Firefox Windows I use ABP , and used to use other for SQL injection, not meant for that but can use it etc
TOR at windows it has the default add-ons, abp, no script, I didnt change anything on it.

Why?
Browsing on LL I use Firefox because for me it works, no issues, browsing is super fast.
1 add-on, no browser profile ever used, no browser saved passwords.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: TMG1961 on June 29, 2017, 03:46:53 AM
I am using slimjet at the moment. Used firefox and chromium before but prefer slimjet. Installed ad blocker (disabled on LL site) and lastpass.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bayoubooger on June 29, 2017, 06:41:14 AM
OMYGOSH YES!  Seamonkey has thousands fewer lines of code than Firefox!  PLUS it has a simple, Thunderbird-like e-mail client. And yet it is faster and more nimble.  Most Firefox add-ons work in Seamonkey too.  Seamonkey is the default on other lightweight distros because of it's speed, low demand on resources, and "Firefox-like" interface.  It would be an awesome first choice for Linux Lite, and in keeping with it's philosophy.

Wanna try it?


Clicky add it to Linux Lite by adding the Ubuntuzilla repository.


Open a terminal and type


Code: [Select]
sudo apt-key adv –recv-keys –keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com C1289A29

Then add the repository:



Code: [Select]
echo -e “ndeb http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt all main” | sudo tee -a /etc/apt/sources.list > /dev/null

Now you can close the terminal and open Synaptic Package Manager for a nice friendly graphical way to install Seamonkey.  Refresh Synaptic, and Seamonkey should appear among the choices now.  Simply find it and click and Mark for Installation -> Apply.

did that, how do I fix this?

===========================
Install Updates Error log
===========================
Install Updates could not fetch the package cache information lists.
Go to https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/ and paste the log below into a new or existing thread for assistance.

============ Log ===========

E: Type '“ndeb' is not known on line 59 in source list /etc/apt/sources.list
E: The list of sources could not be read.












Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: paul1149 on June 29, 2017, 07:35:14 AM
My only hesitation in doing that is the unnerving feeling of "fouling up" or "dirtying" my Linux Lite install.


I could be wrong, but I haven't noticed anywhere near the installation fatigue in Linux that happens with Windows. Other alternatives would be to try the browsers in a VM (I think Virtual Box comes installed in LL, if not, it's in the repository), or run it from a live Linux USB stick. They won't be running as fast, though.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 29, 2017, 02:03:01 PM
Looks like I'm about 4 or 5 replies behind. Let me take bayoubooger first. I almost didn't see your part of that post. I had to slow myself down and go over it a couple times. Finally saw your problem posted at the bottom. I believe you need to change "ndeb" to just "deb". I never caught the typo when RandmonBoy posted it. Unless you hear differently from RandomBoy or somebody else, I believe you should make that correction, then refresh your list. That should solve that problem.

I've got a glitch in my Repositories too. I haven't taken the time to try and resolve it yet. Might do that when I get done on the forum today. Mine occurred when I added a couple of Repositories so that I could install different image viewers and editors. I need to go see what I did wrong.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bayoubooger on June 29, 2017, 02:09:04 PM
I did a Systemback since was only about 3 days old, not touching it again..Thanks
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 29, 2017, 03:11:23 PM
OK. Now to reply to bitsnpcs, TMG1961, and paul1149.

I also tried using Konqueror a long time ago. I distinctly recall not having a pleasant experience with it. I remember there were several websites that just weren't rendered correctly and several more that wouldn't load at all. It has a use, but I don't think it's as a regular, daily, primary browser.

I've never used TOR browser. I know it exists, but have never installed it at all.

SlimJet gets yet another vote from TMG1961. It seems there is a following for SlimJet on this forum if nowhere else. One I may need to try.

You're absolutely correct, paul1149. There is no way any Linux distro would ever suffer the installation problems that Windows does. I can still recall all the garbage that I'd find in the Registry on computers I was trying to fix for customers. Towards the end of my computer career I spent about 75% of my time doing nothing but fresh installs on PCs that were just ate up with everything from viruses to worms, to overly congested Registries. The average user usually had a few word docs and then a varying amount of photos on their PCs. It was a whole lot easier to just copy the things they wanted to keep onto either a CD/DVD, or drag them across my network to one of my files servers, then wipe the hard drive clean and do a nice, fresh install. The customers were overly appreciative when they got their PCs back running just like when new.

I hadn't really thought about trying the browsers while running a Live version of Lite. That's an idea I might very well try. I know everything would be a bit slower that way, but I would really only want to see the basics of the browser anyway. Yeah, that's a great idea!
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on June 30, 2017, 02:40:33 PM
I'm really settling in with Seamonkey. I have installed only 3 extensions - Adblock Plus, DownThemAll, and Sea Fox. I had just a bit of trouble getting Adblock Plus to install. Turns out that the current version of it doesn't work on Seamonkey ver 2.46, so I had to find a previous version of Adblock that would work. That makes no sense, but it works. I have ver 2.82 installed instead of 2.91 and it's working just fine. DownThemAll was no trouble and neither was Sea Fox. I only installed Sea Fox to make Seamonkey a little more familiar to me. It changes just enough of the interface to make me feel at home. One caveat to installing was that I now have a "Close Tab" X on each tab instead of a single X on the far right side. I had tried to find some way to do that yesterday and couldn't get it done. I had planned on doing some more research into that, but after I installed Sea Fox I had no reason to.

I did a little unscientific and crude testing of Seamonkey versus Firefox. I did this more to convince myself I really wanted to leave Firefox behind and go forward with Seamonkey being my every day browser of choice. I loaded pages in each browser that I knew took a little extra time to load. On every occasion Seamonkey beat Firefox hands down. I then decided to try running bandwidth speed tests on several different sites. This is the one thing that didn't make sense to me. The actual download and upload speed results were the same. I expected that, but the ping times were quite a bit different. That one got me. I'm not really sure why ping times in Seamonkey were quicker than in Firefox, but they were. Then I performed simple page loads while watching my resources. Seamonkey definitely won there. It wasn't as significant a difference as I thought it might be, but Seamonkey won for sure.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: newtusmaximus on July 01, 2017, 04:25:05 AM
I have been using MIN as a very light quick browser.  No fuss   Review= http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2016/05/minimal-web-browser-linux
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on July 01, 2017, 02:23:41 PM
MIN. Now there is a browser I can honestly say I've never heard of. Might be one more I need to add to my list to try out.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: trinidad on July 10, 2017, 06:50:50 AM
Linux Lite is certainly the best distro for Windows refugees and converts. The GUI is without a doubt the most easily grasped by new users coming from Windows. It is always my first recommendation to people looking for an alternative to MS. I follow the forum here regularly and keep both an up to date 32 and 64 bit LL system for testing and reference, and I burn new dvds regularly of the ISO to stay current for any new users that might come to me with the desire try LL. That said my personal and business systems are Deb 8, Deb 9, and Windows 10. What follows is my opinion about browsers, and some simple common sense assessments of why I recommend them, even though the choices may be boring.

For Linux:

1) Firefox quite simply because Mozilla has the most resources for development and integration with current Linux systems, and is also the most likely to be up to date as far as security for the same reason.

2) Forg if you play with Gopher. Everything else uses insecure addons.

3) Tor if you live outside the US. You may browse anonymously with it, but if you use a major ISP in the US you’ll draw a flag from big brother, and they may decide to monitor everything you do online for a while. Mathematically, ridiculously so, you’re likely to be more anonymous using Windows 10 if you use a major ISP in the US. If you’re a terrorist or a criminal you’re better off with Android and a burner phone.

Other than pure text browsers, and console or forensic browsing, most of the Linux browsers of any ilk are based on Mozilla. Have been for long time now.

For Windows 10

2) the Edge browser for Windows 10 for similar reasons. MS security updates are integrated to it, and often not to alternative browsers. One of the primary sources of infections for a Windows system is the use of alternative browsers, and gaming, music, video and some shopping sites often install browsers as conditions of use opening up ugly security holes in Windows systems. If you use MS, stick with its native system components.

Worth remembering as well in the US, many important web security efforts are driven by MS and it is easy for a regular Linux user to get out of step with some things. Versions of Firefox below 52 do not work on many online banking sites anymore, and some of the so called lighter browsers will fail you there even though you may think they are on pace with Firefox.

TC
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on July 10, 2017, 02:45:31 PM
Thanks for your input, trinidad. You stated that Firefox is probably the most up to date as far as security is concerned. I've been using SeaMonkey for a bit now and have decided to use it as my daily browser. Before I installed it I did quite a bit of reading articles on the 'Net. I distinctly recall reading one article stating that SeaMonkey received security updates as often as Firefox. I'm no expert on that. Maybe you or somebody else knows for sure and could elaborate a bit. I added the repository to install SeaMonkey via Synaptic and left the repository in my software sources. So any updates to SeaMonkey should be included when I do my updates. Is that correct? I also will occasionally check for updates manually via the 'Help' > 'Check for Updates' method in SeaMonkey.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Artim on July 10, 2017, 02:51:25 PM
Seamonkey-build is the package you get from the Ubuntuzilla repository.  It is always updated.  Updates generally aren't needed very often since it has so much less complicated, thousands fewer lines of code than Firefox.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: ultrastevep on August 26, 2017, 07:33:47 AM
Looks like I'm about 4 or 5 replies behind. Let me take bayoubooger first. I almost didn't see your part of that post. I had to slow myself down and go over it a couple times. Finally saw your problem posted at the bottom. I believe you need to change "ndeb" to just "deb". I never caught the typo when RandmonBoy posted it. Unless you hear differently from RandomBoy or somebody else, I believe you should make that correction, then refresh your list. That should solve that problem.

I've got a glitch in my Repositories too. I haven't taken the time to try and resolve it yet. Might do that when I get done on the forum today. Mine occurred when I added a couple of Repositories so that I could install different image viewers and editors. I need to go see what I did wrong.

I know this is an old posting, but i tried the above and now my repository is messed up. Could anyone let me know how to modify this?

Thanks,
Steve
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: ultrastevep on August 26, 2017, 08:11:05 AM
Never mind, I figured it out myself... :o

I guess it's time to clean install a new Linux Lite build on my Netbook.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bluzeo on September 02, 2017, 07:00:42 PM
for me guys it been Chromuim and Brave browser i use brave more then i do Chromuim .
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Searchernow on September 26, 2017, 09:31:42 AM
Randomboy in this thread offered command llnes for adding SeaMonkey to Synaptic.
Is that information given correct?
I did enter those command lines, now I cannot open Synaptic - I get the following:

An error occurred..

E: Type ‘“ndeb’ is not known on line 20 in source list /etc/apt/sources.list
E: The list of sources could not be read.
Go to the repository dialogue to correct the problem.
E: _cache->open() failed, please report.


I then tried to "Install Updates" and got the following:

===========================
Install Updates Error log
===========================
Install Updates could not fetch the package cache information lists.
Go to https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/ and paste the log below into a new or existing thread for assistance.

============ Log ===========

E: Type ‘“ndeb’ is not known on line 20 in source list /etc/apt/sources.list
E: The list of sources could not be read.

How do I get out of this?
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Searchernow on September 26, 2017, 09:40:46 AM
Looks like I'm about 4 or 5 replies behind. Let me take bayoubooger first. I almost didn't see your part of that post. I had to slow myself down and go over it a couple times. Finally saw your problem posted at the bottom. I believe you need to change "ndeb" to just "deb". I never caught the typo when RandmonBoy posted it. Unless you hear differently from RandomBoy or somebody else, I believe you should make that correction, then refresh your list. That should solve that problem.

I've got a glitch in my Repositories too. I haven't taken the time to try and resolve it yet. Might do that when I get done on the forum today. Mine occurred when I added a couple of Repositories so that I could install different image viewers and editors. I need to go see what I did wrong.

Since my post I see I am not the only one who has had repositories messed up.

"I believe you need to change "ndeb" to just "deb"" - ok, but how do I do that?
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Searchernow on September 26, 2017, 09:53:46 AM
Never mind, I figured it out myself... :o

I guess it's time to clean install a new Linux Lite build on my Netbook.


Hi,

you say you figured it out - do you mean re-installing, or have you found another solution?
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Artim on September 26, 2017, 08:42:57 PM
I think I goofed... change "ndeb" to "deb."

I open Thunar as root:

Code: [Select]
sudo thunar
Enter password, and Thunar, the File Manager, opens in "Super User" mode, with a warning to be careful.

Navigate to etc/apt/sources and find the file named sources.list.  Right-click on the file and open it with Text Editor.

Add this line to the the bottom of the sources.list file:

Quote
deb http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt (http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt) all main


Save and close the file. Then run the following command to import Ubuntuzilla public key to your keyring so that
the integrity of packages downloaded from this repository can be verified by APT.

Inn the terminal type:

Code: [Select]
sudo apt-key adv --recv-keys --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com 2667CA5C


And then

Code: [Select]
sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get install seamonkey-mozilla-build


That's the quickest and easiest way.  Seamonkey installs and is now included in updates from the Ubuntuzilla repository.

I hope I've cleared it all up.

You'll LOVE Seamonkey!








Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Searchernow on September 27, 2017, 02:27:50 PM
thanks, but I don't intend going into root, I don't know enough to be careful!

Unless I hear more I will try Systemback.

Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: TheDead on September 27, 2017, 04:09:49 PM
I like Vivaldi, but it's proprietary, like Opera. Sea Monkey/PaleMoon/Brave are opened source. I would put Midori in there since I like but it crashes too much.

I agree that Firefox is not "the best / fastest / etc." correct me if I'm but the thing is, like @Jerry mentioned in another thread (excuse me if I do not have the exact phrasing though) one of the main goal for LL is to get Windows users to migrate. Ask most Windows users and most of them know Chrome/FireFox and maybe Opera, almost none know ANY of the ones above. Even Chromium is borderline.

Having the option is nice but I think LL should keep with the 'non-scary" stuff to reel-in and catch 'doze users!

Cheers!

TheDead (TheUxNo0b)
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Coastie on September 28, 2017, 03:47:34 PM
I finally got this to work but had to make the make some changes:

Open Thunar as root:

sudo thunar

Enter password, and Thunar, the File Manager, opens in "Super User" mode, with a warning to be careful.

Navigate to etc/apt/sources and find the file named sources.listRight-click on the file and open it with Software & Updates

Add this repo:

deb [url=http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt]http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt (http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt)[/url] all main

Save and close the file. Then run the following command to import Ubuntuzilla public key to your keyring so that the integrity of packages downloaded from this repository can be verified by APT.

In the terminal type:

sudo apt-key adv --recv-keys --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com 2667CA5C

And then only

sudo apt-get update


then (had to be to separate commands)

sudo apt-get install seamonkey-mozilla-build


I tried another method at http://sourcedigit.com/15347-how-to-install-seamonkey-2-33-on-linux-ubuntu-systems/ but I extracted in wrong place so had to uninstall it.
 
 Thanks, @RandomBoy
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Searchernow on September 29, 2017, 08:10:57 AM
Thanks to all contributors here, a very civilized forum, but I particularly note TheDead's point and I believe that LL is aimed at Windows users looking for a way into Linux that doesn't require a knowledge of (nor indeed a lack of fear of) command line use etc.

Here is the link to LL project leader Jerry's s statement, which was the clincher for me in choosing LL
https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/linux-lite-software-development/my-problems-with-linux-lite-so-far-a-brief-summary-of-problems-linux-lite-has/15/

I copy here (my post from another thread) what I did re getting back to normal re updating and software installation, (I meant EFF, Electronic Frontier Foundation, not EF as I wrote):


"I took my own advice, being in a hurry, and tried Systemback to two earlier restore points, but it didn't restore the lost functionality.

I used my original usb live and re-installed the OS, used bluetooth from phone hotspot to get online and load all updates, installed wifi driver, then I saw upgrade to LL 3.6 offered so I did that. I was happy enough to re-install (this time) and I had earlier cleaned out my Firefox of all add-ons except two from EF:. https and badger, the latter incidentally blocks most ads. Other add-ons create malware vulnerabilities with their system permissions.

I ran Home folder restore which restored Firefox and Thunderbird settings and content.

Again - this is a superb OS, especially for a Windows refugee like me. I will copy an ISO of my customized install when ready to USB for future emergencies, plus create another more generic install on another pc and copy ISO of that for others if they want."


Anyway, I think for me I will be playing it safe for now and just using what is in the Synaptic Package Manager, or advised in the excellent Help Manual. I have made Firefox more secure now so I will stay with it. Who knows what I'll be using next year.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: trinidad on September 29, 2017, 12:34:38 PM
Just to add one comment, to this discussion. When it comes to Firefox, CPU speed appears to be more important than RAM in my experience. I have a 12year old 32bit HP box that I use for testing and some building of 32bit applications and programs. I now run three HDDs on it using a Sisun mechanical drive switcher. I have 32bit LL 3.6 on an old 80g 5400 drive on this box with a completely updated system and Firefox. I have zRAM enabled. The board only has 1gig of RAM. I can watch you tube video and open other tabs at the same time and the RAM usage never exceeds 700Mb. I also run conky at the same time with 11 functions running. The CPU is very fast as this was a high end machine I purchased new with a 3Ghz CPU. During heavy load the CPU spikes at about 97% but the RAM usage rarely exceeds 600Mb. I know it is a rare machine, a 64bit capable CPU on a 32bit MOBO but it clearly indicates that CPU speed is more important than RAM to Firefox. Firefox is slowly outgrowing older slower CPUs and MOBOs with slower bus speeds but older machines with fast CPUs will continue to work just fine. I have another 32bit laptop machine with again an odd duck CPU 2.4Ghz Celeron and 2G RAM that behaves in the same way, about 1G of RAM usage with heavy load though it spikes the CPU more often. I only keep old computers that have fast CPUs. I work on many newer boxes that cannot function as well with Firefox. In 64bit even with good standard 4G RAM the older 1G up to 2G CPUs have slow downs and long CPU spikes with Firefox now. I have had some success with 32bit PAE kernels on a few slower native 64bit ASUS boxes.

TC       
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Coastie on September 29, 2017, 02:09:40 PM
Don't know what my CPU speed is but when I open together 18 or 19  Linux related You Tube pages, Firefox locks up due to a scrips problem. SeaMonkey doesn't lock up but is much slower than Chrome which doesn't lock up.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Jerry on September 29, 2017, 03:54:05 PM
19 YouTube pages, holy cow! That's a very demanding load on a browser.

Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: smhardesty on September 29, 2017, 07:02:42 PM
19 YouTube pages, holy cow! That's a very demanding load on a browser.

Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk

Ditto
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Coastie on September 29, 2017, 11:38:51 PM
Yea, 19 is a lot but it is simpler than subscribing to the ones that don't have an RSS feed. That is the most interesting way I have found to educate myself on Linux. Maybe I am asking a lot of Firefox but it just slows down SeaMonkey and does cause any problems with Chrome. Chrome just asks me if I am sure I want to open that many.  ;D
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: TheDead on October 02, 2017, 05:16:06 PM
Even on newer hardware I do not open 19 YouTube pages at a time, expecially since YouTube now does a bunch of background stuff.
Maybe some browser stock scripts when windows are minimized, this would explain different behaviors.
Heck, depending on content, even 25-30 "normal" pages can make my "High-end" PC work in Lag-O-Rama.

Anyways... I would suggest opening ONE YouTube windows and bookmark other using the a bookmark-folder named "! - Things to view" (with an exclamation mark in front so it's at the top in alphabetical order). Thats zero resources on any PC. ;)

Cheers!
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bitsnpcs on October 02, 2017, 05:29:16 PM
Yea, 19 is a lot but it is simpler than subscribing to the ones that don't have an RSS feed. That is the most interesting way I have found to educate myself on Linux. Maybe I am asking a lot of Firefox but it just slows down SeaMonkey and does cause any problems with Chrome. Chrome just asks me if I am sure I want to open that many.  ;D
It is possible to make a playlist on YouTube and click any videos to add them to the playlist, you can also edit their position in the list to produce a desired learning order.
You can make your playlist public, or you can choose to keep it private, either when creating or at any time later.
You do not need to subscribe to the channels of any videos added to your playlists.
When searching and undecided yet if you wish to add them to the playlist, you can choose "watch later" it adds them to the watch later playlist, until decided/sorted.
You can make many playlists for different areas of learning in Linux, and name them how you see fit, with a description that is useful.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Coastie on October 02, 2017, 05:53:41 PM
Thanks for the suggestions but I have a bookmarks folder of active You Tube channels that do not have RSS feeds (in addition to the 40 I subscribe to by RSS with Thunderbird) that I check daily for new videos that I might want to watch. Since Chrome just asks if I am sure then opens them in tabs without any problems, I'll just use Chrome for You Tube. Maybe a newer version of Firefox will be able to handle it.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bitsnpcs on October 02, 2017, 06:51:07 PM
A new Firefox updates pack came down in LL Install Updates for me about 1 hours ago, maybe these have something for your needs ?


Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Coastie on October 02, 2017, 07:21:43 PM
@bitsnpcs, no change after update. Maybe Firefox Quantum http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/quantum/ (http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/quantum/) which comes out Nov 14 will. Claims to be 2 X faster than from last year's Firefox and use 30% less memory than Chrome.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: bitsnpcs on October 02, 2017, 07:40:43 PM
@Coastie Thank You for the info about Firefox Quantum  :) it sounds good, hopefully it will work how you need it to.
I look forward to reading your feedback on how it goes, it will be a good test for it.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Cedarviola on November 02, 2017, 06:08:14 PM
I miss Netscape.

Recall a great joke from SNL announcing a merger between Netscape and Yahoo. They are gonna call it Netanyahu!

Have used FF for years but with the upcoming 57 update, never mind. Got the beta and it's ugly -- all W10 Flatland style. Pale Moon is my new best friend. It was a reaction to Australis.

Jim
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: Paul74 on November 04, 2017, 05:46:55 AM
Hello,

I mainly use Qupzilla, good speed on my very old HP Pavilion aving a P4 processor, 2 GB of RAM.
I also use Opera for its built-in VPN.
Title: Re: Browsers in Lite
Post by: tek10 on November 05, 2017, 08:42:40 PM
I still use Firefox as my primary browser, as I've done for many years. I've been testing Qupzilla and Vivaldi. The more I use Vivaldi, the more I like it! The same primary add-ons I use in Firefox are available in Vivaldi and it's nicely customized in ways Firefox isn't. Much of the time it seems faster to me as well, but I haven't actually tested that in a verifiable way.

I have tried to use Midori but it crashes often enough to prevent regular use of it.