Browser choice in Linux Lite 2.2

[br1anstorm]

I have come very late (perhaps too late?) to this debate as I am still trying out various Linux distros and find it hard to keep up with all the forums.  I'm not going to comment on the "which browser" debate, but focus on the original question.  I offer thoughts as a WinXP refugee and non-techie newcomer to Linux.

1) CD versus DVD is not the key criterion.  I don't think squeezing new releases of LL on to a CD is critical.  DVDs are cheap, and are probably much more widely used.  Most disk drives now handle both CDs and DVDs. If new users are really stuck with old computers that can't cope with a DVD, they are probably going to be looking at something even lighter than LL (like Puppy).  The pursuit of "Lite"ness is rather because.......

2) What's important is that Linux Lite should be "lite" in operation.  I don't know if I'm typical, but what attracted me was that LL would - I hoped - not make heavy demands on CPU, RAM, and graphics-processing (on all of which, older computers are "underpowered")  when actually running.

3) A browser is important to newcomers.  First, newbies are more likely than seasoned distro-hoppers to run their choices - or shortlist - of Linux distros for extended Live sessions, over weeks or months.  If no browser is included in the Live media, then this severely limits the scope for newbies to check out how LL works with music, video, Flash, etc etc.  Having a very limited browser capable only of accessing the online webpages is a neat idea, but I suspect will cause frustration.

4) Choice of browser still matters.  For EU competition reasons Microsoft has long been obliged to invite users to choose if they want an alternative to bundled IE.  Linux (open-source, community-based) has traditionally tended to look to Firefox (ditto) - and given how widely FF is used now, it is still the most sensible default.  It is surely very simple to offer the option to change via the software manager once a distro is installed if a user has a personal preference for an alternative.

5) If slimming the Linux Lite package is the objective, then look at other options.  Everyone, but everyone, needs a browser, either from the start (in Live session) or certainly as soon as they install.  It is an essential, and is needed from Day 1.  If the LL package needs to be pruned, then target those elements which are discretionary, or less "urgent", or much more a matter of individual choice.  I can think of two potentially bulky areas which could be tackled - as follows:

6) One possibility would be not to include the entire LibreOffice bundle - which is big - in the initial package.  I have tried one distro (can't now recall the name) which just included LibreOffice Manager.  This meant that after installation or when office-software was needed, the Manager could 'call down' the relevant component of LibreOffice for installation.  (Another sizeable piece of software is Gimp:  could that be left out for users to install later - in the grounds that new users are unlikely to be doing much image-editing until after they have installed the OS?

7) Can the Games-related  software be pruned?  Games - and the software to run them - are often bulky too.  More to the point, while everyone has to browse, not everyone is into games.    Could Steam be left out - for those who wanted it to install it later?

I confess I have no idea how much space would be saved (compared to omission of a browser) by any of my suggestions.  But I do think that cutting out the browser is not the best move:  I suspect that having no normal browser for use in Live sessions may deter, or alienate, potential new users.

[bitsnpcs]

Thank You elliott for the information about startpage, and explaining tor and vpn 
I will follow your advice and not use tor for emails or payments, and update it when the onion flashes, I am unsure how to disable java in tor but will look at this later on tonight.

gold_finger thank you for the links.

[gold_finger]

On a technical note, I noticed my resource usage on LL 2.0 was about 2X what Jerry had posted for LL 2.2 which I know was out of whack with what I have seen in the past.

You might be seeing a total useage that includes things that are cached in the memory for later re-use.  Try running following command before starting up any programs (do this 10-15 seconds after machine is up and running):

Code: [Select]

free -h
Copy the output and paste it into your text editor just so you have a copy to compare to.  Then open a browser and go to a few websites.  Close browser.  Open LibreOffice, then close it.  Then type command again and compare output to your first one.

What you'll notice is that the amount of usage shown under the "Used" and "Free" columns differs for the two lines "Mem" and "-/+ buffers/cache".  The amount under "Used" for the "Mem" line includes anything cached to memory as well as current memory being used.  The amount shown on second line filters out things that are just cached and waiting to be re-used.  Eg.  Browser or LibreOffice will likely start up much quicker on second attempt because a portion of program is cached in memory waiting to be re-used.  Your first output will probably not show much difference between those two lines.  Your second output will show much greater difference because programs have been started and part of them remain in cache until needed again or replaced when the memory space is needed for something else.



@ elliot, eightbit and anyone else interested:

Re: Google, privacy, general erosion of rights -- following tech security conference video is along lines of what I'm talking about.  A real eye opener for anyone not overly familiar with the pervasiveness of the data collection.  Be forewarned, this is a loooong video (approx. 2.5 hrs.), but worth viewing if you have time.  (The speaker in the video does contract work for gov't., so he tends to downplay potential danger of info in gov't's hands and the extend of sharing of corporate data collected with gov't.  But basics of presentation are good and will probably shock anyone with just a main stream media attained perspective of the situation.)


Some other links regarding issue in general and some specific examples of ways data is already being used for more than people probably bargained for:

http://archive.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2006/05/70886

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/orwells_nightmare_the_nsa_and_googlebig_brother_meets_big_business

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-01/what-google-knows-about-you

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-05/deas-cover-program-revealed-more-troubling-pervasive-nsa-surveillance

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/08/15/a-view-down-the-road/

http://www.storyleak.com/biometric-classroom-monitor-students-eye-movements-conversations/

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/10/peekaboo-i-see-you-government-uses-authority-meant-terrorism-other-uses

[elliott]

startpage is *not* associated with google, and they do not keep any search logs to store. they are the opposite of google, basically, and better. you can install the HTTPS to your toolbar from the site with one click. i found it a lot better than the duckduckgo search personally. you can also go into about:config and have your toolbar use startpage instead of google.

download the tor bundle, works on all os's not a linux thing. it's a copy of firefox that automatically connects you to tor network so it is as easy as opening firefox. you should be able to use it on anything that can run firefox. the situation your talking about is people who did not update tor, or made obvious mistakes i will explain, but i remember the exploit that effected many who did not update. *a lot of people ignored the flashing onion warning on task bar basically.* this is also very important, if you give personal information on tor, you are also exposed. do not use it to check email or purchase things if you want to be safe. all traffic is not visible to your isp, and if you want to use a vpn with, then your isp will have no idea your even using tor.

vpn's work for phones tablets and pc's so i would recommend using both tor is not safe for giving out your identity or personal information. your connection is jumping encrypted through 3 countries, but the last one, can be run by someone who see's your real login or name and steal it. so this is where a vpn is better, but tor is still the most anonymous method if used correctly (do not send personal information keep updated)  vpn you can do your usual business and the tunnel is protected and you can use personal information safely.

i found a deal that you can get 1 year this month on a ghostvpn, and if you join for a year you can pay as litttle as 3.30 from another service no special. you can buy with gift cards to stay anonymous or bitcoins if your really paranoid.... i hope i explained the difference between tor and a vpn, because they are both used for different reasons. i hope you understand the difference between tor and a vpn, tor should be updated and java off, the update issue was a big deal recently, but when used right, tor works better than anything, but very slow. if you want all traffic protected including downloading torrents, buying stuff with your credit card, you need to go vpn over tor.

[bitsnpcs]

I found it to be an interesting video elliott.
Do Google own startpage.com ?
I tried TOR browser recently for the first time. It has startpage as default.
I am unsure about TOR as its new to me, I noticed a while back people were making TOR stuff with Raspberry Pi, and maybe it's done with Linux machines of higher spec than the Pi too ?
I had looked at this when I was thinking of trying out TOR and it seems from the overly complex (to me) security required that many TOR users are not happy to use TOR but would rather exploit the machines helping to deliver it.
The police here made over 100 raids on the same day of users of TOR there were no details as to what they were doing to get raided.
Less than a week before these raids the BBC in conjunction with the Open University began their episode 1 of the 6 part Cybercrime series, they focused in on TOR on that.
It may be coincidence or it may be to discourage the use of TOR browser.

[elliott]

"don't be evil" - google

i also do not buy their slogan and believe they are here to do two things, 1) offer great services for free, and 2) log all information for the highest bidders or current status...hopefully not to be misused in the future is not good enough assurance, this may be an issue if your into any issues later to be called controversial, abortion, religion, race, the first, the second amendment, sexuality, or anything in theory. free thinkers or poets have lost their life in history... we know too much power in the hands of anyone has and almost will always be abused by human nature. so they build their services on a false idealism of not being evil, like a joke to throw in future faces?

the first thing i do when i fresh install linux lite is install openvpn (it should come installed!) but one command does it. i rather take my chances protecting all my traffic even if all i do is average non interesting stuff. i think its now our job to make them work for owning the amount of information they want... everything. so a vpn might bring more attention to yourself? don't break the law, its a few dollars a year for a chance at making change in how we communicate and stops censorship via googles, facebooks and others "algorithms". also i hear vpn use has gone up 300% since snowden leaks too so the timing is right. 3.30 a month some services and join anon if you want, i seen 10 dollars a year special this month. i realize most linux users are aware of all this stuff, apologies just hoping to reach one or two who is not.

Chris you can also go into about:config and tell firefox to tell websites you are using the most common os win7 and fix fingerprint issues, may help avoiding needing a plugin... i am unsure if you can do this on chrome. sorry if that has nothing to do with fixing your problem, but am just glad someone else feels google may be more than just great free services with no strings attached. maybe about:config could help but make sure to back up what you change! i use it to get deep inside settings normally not available and remove google stuff too.

gold_finger this video brings more light on issues u mentioned google is part in that most would have never imagined i bet including you and me... but i think people do get what google really is, just ignore it because the services are free and can can do what others cannot. who else can give you free phone calls right from your free email? that saves a lot of people money, only google can pull these things off to ensure everyone needs something from them even if you prefer https://www.startpage.com ...this video explains how they will be involved in every aspect of your life and not only online and how business moves already made long ago, plans too much invested in to see any chance of them ever changing. just controlling more than we can imagine, i believe for us to take their word that it's only for advertisement is foolish, especially what we have learned more public about mass surveillance... which are not used for advertisements in any way! fascist/socialist tools or here to protect us from ourselves? willing or unwillingly not really important, but it seems simply spelled out as dangerous...

"he who owns google, owns the world" -quote read on usenet when google was first formed as a search engine, by someone who must have known purchasers were a combination of the largest richest business's and had plans bigger plans than running a search engine. wise well beyond his years if i remember correct google was still nothing then and i took it as a joke then.. literally did not see it coming, they were just a search engine at the time!

[ChrisL]

I do have to say however, you speak of Google as if it took your first born. If you do not mind me asking, why such the rage against Google? Something terrible must have happened I assume?

Sorry, didn't have chance to get back on this sooner, but feel that's a reasonable question and deserves an answer considering the admittedly harsh tone of my prior post.

No, Google has not done anything bad to me personally.  They bore the brunt of my general frustration, but they are just one cog in the machine.

For me, it basically all boils down to this:  I do not trust our leaders in government (from either party) and many large corporations (particularly the "too big to fail and jail" banks).  In my eyes, they have proven themselves to be corrupt to the core and they only act to enhance their own personal wealth and power.  Therefore, they are not to be believed about any supposedly innocent reasons for vacuuming up massive data dossiers on all citizens (which Google is a major contributor to).  This type of thing is an incredibly powerful and dangerous tool of control and that is the true purpose of it.

Most of us will never be the targets of the assorted obvious misuses of the data, like being the target of political blackmail.  Instead, for us mere peasants, they will find plenty of new and innovative ways to bleed more money from us.  We'll all have our own personalized new fines, surcharges, taxes, insurance rate increases, etc. to discourage certain behaviors and habits the data reveals.  Eat more fast food than some unknown limit they decide upon?  Mysterious health insurance increases for you.  Nice new car with "convenient" GPS and wifi reveals to the great data mothership that you drive a little too fast or don't wear your seatbelt -- fine in the mail and/or car insurance increase for you.  And on, and on, and on.  But ofcourse, it will all be for our own good:  to make us healthier, to make us safer, and the sure-fire winner -- "for the children".  I think most people have not considered things like this at all ... and they should.

A great thoughtful post gold_finger.  I agree totally, and yet at the same time I struggle to find a browser that supplies what I am looking for.  I thought Opera was it, but mostly back using Firefox lately. 

On a technical note, I noticed my resource usage on LL 2.0 was about 2X what Jerry had posted for LL 2.2 which I know was out of whack with what I have seen in the past.  I had a Chrome browser open but even after I closed it usage remained almost as high.  It appears to be caused by some of the add-ons in use, including FVD Speed Dial and a Sync for that application.   I may have to scale-back my "requirements" as I don't really want to up my resource usage that much and at the same time I am concerned about additional data/usage monitoring with the add-ons. Most of these "Free" add-ons are not free in that regard.

Chris 

[pete284]

Think its a good idea I intend to install Chrome, Firefox and Qupzilla on all my installations.

Browser choice is a personal preference so let them install from the outset.

[gold_finger]

I do have to say however, you speak of Google as if it took your first born. If you do not mind me asking, why such the rage against Google? Something terrible must have happened I assume?

Sorry, didn't have chance to get back on this sooner, but feel that's a reasonable question and deserves an answer considering the admittedly harsh tone of my prior post.

No, Google has not done anything bad to me personally.  They bore the brunt of my general frustration, but they are just one cog in the machine.

For me, it basically all boils down to this:  I do not trust our leaders in government (from either party) and many large corporations (particularly the "too big to fail and jail" banks).  In my eyes, they have proven themselves to be corrupt to the core and they only act to enhance their own personal wealth and power.  Therefore, they are not to be believed about any supposedly innocent reasons for vacuuming up massive data dossiers on all citizens (which Google is a major contributor to).  This type of thing is an incredibly powerful and dangerous tool of control and that is the true purpose of it.

Most of us will never be the targets of the assorted obvious misuses of the data, like being the target of political blackmail.  Instead, for us mere peasants, they will find plenty of new and innovative ways to bleed more money from us.  We'll all have our own personalized new fines, surcharges, taxes, insurance rate increases, etc. to discourage certain behaviors and habits the data reveals.  Eat more fast food than some unknown limit they decide upon?  Mysterious health insurance increases for you.  Nice new car with "convenient" GPS and wifi reveals to the great data mothership that you drive a little too fast or don't wear your seatbelt -- fine in the mail and/or car insurance increase for you.  And on, and on, and on.  But ofcourse, it will all be for our own good:  to make us healthier, to make us safer, and the sure-fire winner -- "for the children".  I think most people have not considered things like this at all ... and they should.

[eightbit]

gold_finger, I appreciate your side and input. I am glad when people speak up and voice their opinion on subjects. I always want to hear the other side and consider myself open to everything. I am scientific in the way that I look at fact. I look at why Chrome is better than FIrefox. I look at why Firefox is better than Chrome. I investigate and weigh both options with the thought process of usability at this current point in time, and Chrome has the edge (currently). This may or will change and I am open to that entirely...actually hope that it occurs to be quite honest.

I do have to say however, you speak of Google as if it took your first born. If you do not mind me asking, why such the rage against Google? Something terrible must have happened I assume?

[gold_finger]

Not trying to start/continue a "browser war" here.  And by no means is any of below meant to be construed as a personal attack on eightbit or anyone else.  Just clarifying a couple of points and expressing my own personal opinion on Google.

The funny thing is that by default Firefox is set to track *as well*. You have to turn it off in your settings (the same as Chrome):

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/dnt/

Interesting that I just visited this link with the default included Firefox in LL 2.0, and "Do Not Track" is set to OFF by default.

Tracking is built-in to individual websites, not Firefox.

"Do Not Track" is just a placebo to placate public fears.  It does absolutely NOTHING to stop tracking in either Firefox, Chrome, or any other browser.  It merely sends a request to the website to not track you.  There are no teeth to that request.  There is no consequence suffered by the website if it chooses to ignore that request.  And, to my knowledge, there is no notice to the user that said website ignored the request.

How is it when that newcomer opens Firefox and cannot view modern flash content because the default Linux flash plugin is no longer supported by Adobe and will never get another update beyond the now extremely outdated v11?

Adobe continues to support the old linux flash-plugin with security updates; it just won't produce new plugins for it.  My understanding is that they are gradually fading out support for flash entirely (for Windows too) over the coming years.

Personally, I have not yet run into any problems at all viewing flash content with current plugin.  Maybe I'm just lucky, I don't know.  Other things (Hal or Silverlight) do need to be added to LL in order to view DRM content (eg. Amazon Prime movies), but that has given me no problem either.

I don't use Netflix, so can't speak to that.  Definitely a good reason to use Chrome for those who can not get it to work otherwise.

Compromises do have to be made here and there -- that is inevitable and unavoidable.  Decisions rarely are simply black and white and I didn't mean to imply that Google must be avoided at any and all costs.  They do have the best search engine; and I do use it on occations myself.

Everyone has their own hierarchy of values.  What's very important to one person may be significantly less important to another.  Google is just one example of an organization that I believe behaves in a deceiptful manner and deserves to be shunned whenever possible.  To me, making it the default browser is equivalent to condoning what they do and lending support and validity to their business model.

The only thing I can see for not wanting Chrome is because it is currently popular to "hate" Google.

With regard to Google in particular, I've felt this way and acted accordingly for over 10 years -- so current "popularity" has absolutely nothing to do with it in my case.

I personally do not care whom delivers the goods...as long as they work good

That's fine.  Everyone has their own "line in the sand" so to speak.  Google crossed mine.

[bitsnpcs]

The only thing I can see for not wanting Chrome is because it is currently popular to "hate" Google. I personally do not care whom delivers the goods...as long as they work good I love firefox, do not get me wrong. I have been using it since it was "Firebird", and Seamonkey, etc. They are just now lacking features nowadays.

Hello eightbit,
I looked at Chrome a while back (on a windows computer) and Google wanted me to install its social media and set up an account on its email platform, I decided not to install Google Chrome.

[eightbit]

... there are a number of people who would react to the inclusion of anything of Google's by default as highly offensive due to the extreme level of data mining and privacy intrusions their business model is based on.  I am one of them.  Even though I know that I could (and would) immediately delete and replace it, ...

I would not find Chrome as the default browser offensive but I too would remove it immediately due to privacy concerns and replace it with Firefox.

The funny thing is that by default Firefox is set to track *as well*. You have to turn it off in your settings (the same as Chrome):

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/dnt/

Interesting that I just visited this link with the default included Firefox in LL 2.0, and "Do Not Track" is set to OFF by default.


My point is that if the only point people have in not using Chrome over Firefox is because it "tracks", that point is moot. BOTH browsers are by default set to track you and that setting can be disabled in BOTH. Actually, Chrome has even deeper settings to disable a plethora of things that can bug you (see the link I posted previously). Memory usage as far as I have seen is on par. With a few tabs open now, Firefox is consuming 180MB. Chrome with the same tabs open is consuming 190MB. Results vary, but I have not found any memory usage to be an issue with either browser even on low memory machines.

The only thing I can see for not wanting Chrome is because it is currently popular to "hate" Google. I personally do not care whom delivers the goods...as long as they work good I love firefox, do not get me wrong. I have been using it since it was "Firebird", and Seamonkey, etc. They are just now lacking features nowadays.

The way I understand it, LL is supposed to be here to be fast, light and an easy transition for newcomers migrating from Windows platforms. How is it when that newcomer opens Firefox and cannot view modern flash content because the default Linux flash plugin is no longer supported by Adobe and will never get another update beyond the now extremely outdated v11? Or the Windows user who opens Firefox and navigates to Netflix just to find that streaming their Walking Dead episodes does not work because they are running an "unsupported web browser". I can tell you for sure that anyone I would introduce it to in its default state would not go for it. It is not until I add Chrome that it is ok by their standards. Chrome fixes these problems for a new user. As much as people do not like that reality, it is a fact.

If it were different and Firefox could handle these modern technologies in Linux (be it if they decided to support them, or they decided to support Firefox) I would be all for it of course. But it cannot...so I cannot.

I have seen firsthand over the years what lack of browser support has done to OS's and devices. My beloved BeOS suffered from lack of browser support with up to date technologies. My Playbook suffered a terrible fate largely because people wanted to stream Netflix on tablets and it was unsupported (although I am not calling it the only reason, but rest assured it was a big one). The internet is the biggest item used in todays modern computing, and the browser is the tool to get you there. If it lacks technologies, the experience is hindered. And nobody likes that

[Coastie]

... there are a number of people who would react to the inclusion of anything of Google's by default as highly offensive due to the extreme level of data mining and privacy intrusions their business model is based on.  I am one of them.  Even though I know that I could (and would) immediately delete and replace it, ...

I would not find Chrome as the default browser offensive but I too would remove it immediately due to privacy concerns and replace it with Firefox.

[rokytnji]

I just installed opera-developer_27.0.1670.0_amd64.deb

After adding my preferred extentions/addons plus

In contrast to many other plugins ZenMate also fully encrypts all your browser traffic.

Other plugins just work like a proxy that change your IP but do not offer encryption. ZenMate is the first plugin to offer real security and privacy by encrypting everything you do in your browser so that hackers and sniffing spooks (such as ISPs and governments) don't have a chance to get hold of you.

and only running it for a couple of hours. I watchedwith it.

I can say it is faster than FireFox or Chromium on my Laptop so fart. It has been pretty snappy. I can't vouch for stability or ease of use yet.
2 hours is no real test yet. Plus. I am posting with it right now. No lags like I get on Firefox on certain sites like one of the forums I moderate at.