What is Digg?Sponsored by Guitar Center
When Heavy-handed Hints Fail--Guitar Center Wishlist Posters view!
guitarcenter.com - Cool personalized designs send a friendly reminder that a new Stratocaster would rock, thanks.
40 Comments
- shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+51because needlessly splitting customer focus is moronic.
- noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -8/+38I say Debian should just take the logo and shut the ***** up. Mozilla is just trying to protect their identity, possibly because it is the most popularly used piece of Open Source software right now. Besides the whole logo thing, Firefox fits all of the other free software guidelines that Debian follows.
- reverb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Article merely summarizes one of Shuttleworth's blog posts. I dugg the source instead:
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Shuttleworth_on_Firefox_and_Ubuntu_vs_Debian - DaedalusvX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Particularly in a market where standardization and predictability of the platform is the primary concern, to both developers and end users.
- Sutoka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Ubuntu is just a freaking distribution of Linux! It's not some magical thing any more than OpenSUSE, Fedora, Slackware, Gentoo, Sorcerer (ok bad example ;-), RedHat Enterprise Linux, Scientific Linux, or any other freaking distribution out there!
Now if you're talking about the ideology, then you're totally off topic here. - codefreakxff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Don't be a moron.
http://digg.com/playable_web_games/Random_Essay_Generator - DaedalusvX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@Sutoka
Which raises the question, why does Debian maintain old builds of Firefox in the first place? Browsers are not the sort of software where you supplant newer versions with older versions for any reason, other than perhaps backwards compatibility testing. But even in that case, a developer shouldn't need the latest security patches -- their development environment is by default a trusted environment.
And requiring security patches to pass through Mozilla is not an absurd requirement. It makes sure that patches are uniform across all systems and are carefully reviewed. Debian is, of course, always free to offer Firefox source snapshots alongside unofficial patches (like Gentoo) or to issue binary patches.
The situation as it stands is not without better alternatives and basically adds up to the Debian people being obstinate for little more than the sake of being obstinate. - JohnTheLutheran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Too right! Debian should stop being distinctively Debian and behave like every other distro. After all, choice and freedom are confusing - roll on the day when Debian gets merged into its parent distro, Ubuntu.
And as you point out, Firefox is entirely free apart from the bits that aren't. What's the problem?
More constructively: the key issue here is choice and freedom. Ubuntu is about providing a user-friendly desktop distro, which it does very well. Debian is about providing a distro that is 100% free, which it also does very well (and I'm very happy with it as a desktop distro). For Debian to flex on the logo issue would strike at the heart of its philosophy in a way that doesn't apply to Ubuntu.
Why can't people just accept that free software is precisely about freedom, rather than saying, "Debian is t3h suxx0r!!!", "Mo$illa is evil!!!!!!!" just because some people make different choices when exercising the freedom that free software is all about. - TheWriteGuy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7It appears that Ubuntu bypasses Debian with regard to Firefox. I take it that Ubuntu works on Firefox on its own and actively keeps personal communications open with the Mozilla team in order to retain the official Firefox logo and name.
- naxx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Swiftfox contains some proprietary binaries and thus not pure OSS - if you care for those.
- thepatryn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@DaedalusvX
You should inform yourself about the Debian development cycle. Basically, in a Debian stable release (current one's Sarge, next is Etch) it's almost forbidden to introduce new versions of software, as that would also add new bugs. Don't think only about security, if someone is using Firefox 1.0.7 in Debian Sarge and suddenly through an update Firefox 1.5 is installed, many thinks could broke for that user, and that's why Debian doesn't upload new versions of software into the stable branch, they "just" patch security bugs.
For people who want new versions of everything (like me) there's the testing and unstable branches, which are not as unstable as their names imply. - JSchwage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Thank God! I was fearing the day I'd install Ubuntu with a default browser named Iceweasel.
- Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@DaedalusvX: You question is answered by thepatryn, a couple posts up:
"You should inform yourself about the Debian development cycle. Basically, in a Debian stable release (current one's Sarge, next is Etch) it's almost forbidden to introduce new versions of software, as that would also add new bugs. Don't think only about security, if someone is using Firefox 1.0.7 in Debian Sarge and suddenly through an update Firefox 1.5 is installed, many thinks could broke for that user, and that's why Debian doesn't upload new versions of software into the stable branch, they "just" patch security bugs."
@youseeme: "possibly because it is the most popularly used piece of Open Source software right now."
Actually I think Apache2 is the most popular open source software right now. - drag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Actually I think Apache2 is the most popular open source software right now."
In terms of user base it's probably TCP/IP networking.
TCP/IP was created by Berkley University for it's BSD operating system based on criteria laid out by Darpa for a network protocol that was reliable on unreliable networks. BSD itself was based on AT&T code that was released freely since AT&T was forbid to sell computers under their special monopoly status. AT&T was essentially open source, BSD's TCP/IP stack was DEFINATELY open source.
It was integrated back into Unix commercial varients and not only forms the basis of the Internet networking, but also is probably why Unix was so widly successfull compared to it's competition (none of which exist anymore). The other systems used propriatory networking protocol and couldn't communicate with each other.
Other software companies integrated the BSD TCP/IP software stack, including Microsoft for NT's networking capabilities.
Of course, as a reward, the propriatory Unix companies turned around and sued BSD which was ending up them settling out of court with a promise to remove all traces of original AT&T source code (which was freely given to them to use, originally). This set BSD back 10 years or so. Which is why we have things like GPL licenses, and paranoid Debian freakniks getting all excited over licensing issues.
Other then that..
Oh and most larger sites are still using Apache 1.3. Apache2 has had a horrible track record when it comes to security which one of the reasons those places have avoided it for now, but 2.2 looks better. - pile0nades, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2tl;dr
- TheWriteGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Did you upgrade or do a clean install? On a clean install, you clearly get the familiar "swirling fox" Firefox logo.
- Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well imo Ubuntu adds many unnecessary things which is why I switched to pure debian, it runs MUCH faster now and I don't really see a difference in usability.
- thepatryn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Whooops, I intended to reply on the thread below, but its reply button was hidden. :(
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I upgraded to Edgy from Dapper using the output manager. I got the firefox icon and not that blue globe
- Doriath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I stopped reading with "its study is a necessity for any one wishing to intellectually advance beyond their childhood"
And nothing that you had to say after that was worth my time. - JohnTheLutheran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@reverb: yes, but Mark Shuttleworth's article was fair, balanced and reasonable, a breath of fresh air compared with all the flame wars and FUD accusing Debian of behaving like fanatical toddlers (for the temerity of sticking with the principles on which the whole Debian project is founded - and people who don't like that are free to choose another distro), or - on the other hand - accusing "Mo$illa" (chortle!) of turning into Microsoft Mark II.
Shuttleworth, on the other hand, recognises that different distros have different philosophies and purposes, and need to make their own choices accordingly. But that's far less exciting than another round of Debian and/or Mozilla-bashing. - gravityboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3If Debian required Ubuntu to submit all patches back and have them approved, people would be on Ubuntu's side here, screaming for Debian's murder. But because it's firefox, that somehow makes it Ok. No other free software project requires this sort of patch approval nonsense. Not Xorg, not Gnome, not KDE, not Apache, not any of the GNU apps, or any other major one you care to name. It goes against the spirit of the whole thing.
- JudgeDredd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That would be because you are using the Ubuntu version of FF. You can find both the FF version and the Mozilla version in /usr/bin . Look for either "Mozilla" or "Firefox" and you should find two scripts leading to the programs. I am thinking one is called "Firefox," the other "Firefox.Ubuntu." Sorry. I am too lazy to take 5 seconds to find out. Assuming you upgraded to Edgy, the .Ubuntu one is 2.0. The other one is whatever you used before.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Maybe the increased slack for Firefox is out of increased love, which comes from being one of the most successful OS and multiplatform apps.
- Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"like comparing Ubuntu now, and its equivalent in the 1800s."
... There was an equivalent?
...... There were computers? :| - Kruncher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wrong, check the icon when run on the live disk
- Kruncher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Has anyone else noticed that Firefox in Edgy Eft still has the blue world icon as the actual icon shown in the title bar when run?
- renrutal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sorry, the problem is either in your computer, or between the keyboard and the chair.
- millette, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Xfree (before Xorg) actually pulled something like that, and every distro switched.
- wildcard58th, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"It appears that Ubuntu bypasses Debian with regard to Firefox. I take it that Ubuntu works on Firefox on its own and actively keeps personal communications open with the Mozilla team in order to retain the official Firefox logo and name."
I don't know about this. Look at the logo in the top left of the Firefox window. Its still the 'blue world' icon. Does the Debian Firefox 2.0 code still use the 'blue world' icon. If so, does this mean Ubuntu Edgy Firefox 2.0 is derived from the Debian code (i.e. it is an oversight not re-implementing the original, trademarked, Firefox logo) ? - corser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It's my understanding that Mozilla only requires these extra steps when the other side wishes to use the Firefox name and logo. Mozilla is trying to preserve a very well know trademark that they make money off of. I think it's reasonable to ask this, after all the code is open source and anyone can use it but the logo and name are not.
Debian is always free to make their own firefox-based browser if they are unwilling to follow the conditions that Mozilla asks of them. - towner, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Have you've been smoking too much weed lately?
- kolanos, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Frankly I see Debian as a server environment, and Ubuntu as a desktop environment. I don't see what the big deal is here... I don't use a graphical web browser on my Debian box anyways...
- Sutoka, on 10/12/2007, -16/+13Debian would also have to send all the patches they want to apply to their firefox through Mozilla first, which would destroy any timely updates for security holes (since Mozilla doesn't maintain 'old' version of firefox that Debian ships).
Mozilla could have just kept the agreement they had with Debian, but Mozilla Corporation wanted more control. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Amen.
It seems like the free software people have to name software and give it a logo befitting of an adolescent term for a taboo sex act - JudgeDredd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Well, there is something seriously wrong with FF 2.0. Something about constant crashes, being unable to change values in edit/preferences, extensions mysteriously disappearing and then reappearing, etc. Yes, Firefox is an old friend of mine. I knew her first as Phoenix. Now she is a broken down old hag. I am sure that the fine developers are well aware of her shortcomings and will have an update within the week. Why was this released when it clearly should be in beta? That said, I am posting using 2.0.
- YellowBook, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1@cacoe:
lol - andrewcole836, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Buried, duplicate story(well, rehash of a story already posted), missed it by a week, give or take a few days.
- TheWriteGuy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3While I think it's cool that Firefox is officially on Ubuntu, I find that Swiftfox works better.
- alphaterminus, on 10/12/2007, -42/+4 An essay on Ubuntu
Think back to the first time you ever heard of Ubuntu. At first glance Ubuntu may seem unenchanting, however its study is a necessity for any one wishing to intellectually advance beyond their childhood. Indispensable to homosapians today, Ubuntu is featuring more and more in the ideals of the young and upwardly mobile. Inevitably feelings run deep amongst the aristocracy, many of whom fail to comprehend the full scope of Ubuntu. At the heart of the subject are a number of key factors. I plan to examine each of these factors in detail and and asses their importance.
Social Factors
Society is a simple word with a very complex definition. When Lance Bandaner said 'twelve times I've traversed the ocean of youthful ambition but society still collects my foot prints' [1] he created a monster which society has been attempting to tame ever since. Much has been said about the influence of the media on Ubuntu. Observers claim it is quite good.
Nothing represents every day life better than Ubuntu, and I mean nothing. Society is powered by peer pressure, one of the most powerful forces in the world. As long as peer pressure uses its power for good, Ubuntu will have its place in society.
Economic Factors
We no longer live in a world which barters 'I'll give you three cows for that hat, it�s lovely.' Our existance is a generation which cries 'Hat - $20.' We shall examine the Fish-Out-Of-Water model, a lovely model.
Housing
Prices
Ubuntu
Indisputably there is a link. How can this be explained? Clearly housing prices plays in increasingly important role in the market economy. Many analysts fear a subsequent depression.
Political Factors
Politics was once a game featuring competitors from elite classes. Comparing current political thought with that held just ten years ago is like comparing Ubuntu now, and its equivalent in the 1800s.
Consider this, spoken at the tender age of 14 by style icon Noah T. Time 'The success of any political system can only truly be assessed once the fat lady has sung.' [2] I argue that his insight into Ubuntu provided the inspiration for these great words. If our political system can be seen as a cake, then Ubuntu makes a good case for being the icing.
One of the great ironies of this age is Ubuntu. Isn't it ironic, don't you think?
Conclusion
In summary, Ubuntu has a special place in the heart of mankind. It questions, 'literally' plants seeds for harvest, and it is human.
As a parting shot here are the words of super-star Whoopi De Niro: 'I love Ubuntu? Yes! Hurray for Ubuntu!' [3]
[1] Lance Bandaner - Adventurous Spirit - 1993 See-Saw Publishing
[2] Time - Yes Indeed - 1987 Indegro Books
[3] It Magazine - Issue 302 - Spam Media Group
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is