On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard(a)eircom.net> wrote:
What do you have against Firefox, as a matter of interest?
Is it a purely theological objection?
It's not a question of liking or not liking Firefox... It is a matter of
what are appropriate
apps to be default for a "KDE Spin".
Let's back up a bit... this all started with this:
*Konqueror doesn't seem like its going anywhere, and I really think that
the user experience would be better served if either Rekonq, or ideally,
Firefox were the default browsers.*
Let's first discuss "user experience". That is a very subjective term, but
by most people can be interpreted as being able to go to websites and
have the content properly and efficiently displayed. Many people have
mentioned Youtube. If user experience was the deciding factor, you would
go with Chrome. Firefox has always lagged (and will continue) in
implementing feature parity with Chrome. One only needs to go the the
bugsite to verify this. WebP still isn't there, no U2F support... the list
goes on. Why isn't Chrome a choice? Because it is considered a forbidden
so here we have an example where Fedora policy trumps "user experience".
Let's look at Firefox now... there are still many sites which use Flash.
If you don't have Flash, site content will not appear. Flash is a
another instance where Fedora policy trumps "user experience".
So this whole argument that "user experience" is paramount is nonsense. It
is regularly supplanted in the Fedora Universe because of policies. There
numerous examples of this, as you all know.
The idea that you could also encourage the usage KDE via Firefox is also a
bit absurd - as is the fact that it is too hard, confusing, etc. for
install the browser of their choice if they don't want to use Konqueror.
In most cases the first thing people are going to look for is Flash; and
to have to cope with installing that. If you can install Flash, you can
certainly install a browser.
This is the elephant in the room that has yet to be acknowledged.