SRWare Iron: browser based on Chromium source
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tmx Feb 28, 2010 8:47 PM EDT |
I just found out about this browser made by a German company, it's basically Google Chrome, but without the spying. You can check their site for more info: http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php Also check their forum for the beta versions. Its still in early development, but definitely worth checking if it becomes more popular and improves. |
| tracyanne Feb 28, 2010 9:21 PM EDT |
It's interesting to see all the ways in which Google can identify and track Chome users |
| ComputerBob Mar 01, 2010 9:43 AM EDT |
I can see Iron's reasons why users might prefer Iron over Chrome, but I don't see a similar list of ways that Iron is "better" than Chromium, or any statement (at least not in English) about whether Iron includes Chrome's support for h.264 video. |
| TxtEdMacs Mar 01, 2010 9:54 AM EDT |
Since I am being so routinely overshadowed by superior humor in other forums, why not a bit of serious comment? Not every item listed as dropped is without merit, consider these few: Timestamp - could have a benign use, e.g. applying only the patch set needed when applying updates and security fixes. Alternate Error Pages - again might protect even sophisticated users from landing upon a malware site. Common spelling errors are tied to dubious sites. Error Reporting - once again could be positive, however, it should be activated only with the user opting in. [Google Updater] - this is one of MS's tricks to make its family of OSs called "[something] Windows" appear faster than it really is. Not sure where I would decide about its worth. In any case, thanks tmx I will watch to see how this develops. However, so far I really like Firefox and I would rather not see it pushed aside by either a Google tool or even a partial clone. Nonetheless, while I do not try many versions of Linux I am actively looking for both a new distribution and probably a different windows management system. Thus, this too will be watched if I decide it is time to change browsers. Txt. |
| tracyanne Mar 01, 2010 5:31 PM EDT |
Bob Iron isn't "better" than Chrome, it's merely Chrome with the ability to track and identify it's users removed., Actually that is better. |
| ComputerBob Mar 01, 2010 6:23 PM EDT |
TA - Yes, I understand that. But the point that I apparently didn't make very well was that Iron's Web site compares Iron's features to Chrome's features, but it doesn't compare Iron's features to Chromium's features. In other words, Iron's site makes it clear why users who have privacy concerns might prefer Iron over Chrome -- but it doesn't give reasons for why users might prefer Iron over Chromium. |
| TxtEdMacs Mar 01, 2010 9:53 PM EDT |
CB, Let me interprete TA message: there is NO DIFFERENCE. So other than enhanced privacy, nothing has changed. The implication is that tracking has been removed, otherwise they are essentially the same.browser. So how can one be better or worse than the other? YBT |
| tmx Mar 01, 2010 10:18 PM EDT |
Chromium-based browser can't reused propriety stuff from Google, so no watching h.264 videos for example, unless the browser maker want to pay royalties as well, until some plugins feature come along anyway. I still don't think Chrome's management of security features is good enough, though I know Google has contact NoScript author long ago to work on implementing support for it. With recent 5.0 version you can finally disable Javascript in the GUI, etc, but its not as advance as Firefox and Opera. Even have to edit the preference scripts just to change minimum font size. It seem there are other Chromium based browsers as well, such as Comodo Dragon and ChromePlus. Though its seem Iron is the one that concentrate on the privacy side. I am not fan of Chrome either since its interface is too simple, but I like to to see pages rendered in WebKit. |
| TxtEdMacs Mar 01, 2010 10:40 PM EDT |
CB, Sorry I had forgotten your question on the video h.264 driver (if that is a correct description), that is a major difference. Thus, its absence can be taken as either a deficiency or a desired attribute, all based upon the propensity of the viewer to think in such terms. That is, it's your call. YBT P.S. tmx, thanks for mentioning the proprietary codec. |
| ComputerBob Mar 01, 2010 11:34 PM EDT |
Quoting:Let me interprete TA message: there is NO DIFFERENCE. So other than enhanced privacy, nothing has changed. The implication is that tracking has been removed, otherwise they are essentially the same.browser. So how can one be better or worse than the other?I still don't think anyone is understanding what I'm saying. I'm not talking about IRON vs.CHROME -- I'm talking about IRON vs. CHROMIUM. If Iron is exactly the same thing as CHROMIUM, then why does Iron even exist? On the other hand, if there ARE differences between Iron and CHROMIUM, then why doesn't the Iron Web site mention them? I hope that this third explanation finally makes clear what I was apparently and inexplicably unable to explain sufficiently in both my first and second tries. |
| tracyanne Mar 02, 2010 3:36 AM EDT |
In that case Bob, I have no idea what you are talking about. |
| ComputerBob Mar 02, 2010 11:43 AM EDT |
Thanks to the efforts of a very good friend, here is what I am talking about: [url=https://answers.launchpad.net/chromium-browser/ question/91457]https://answers.launchpad.net/chromium-browser/ question/914...[/url] |
| tracyanne Mar 02, 2010 4:47 PM EDT |
Sorry still confused. Chrome is just the short form of Chromium. Not that it matters particularly to me, I don't particularly like Chrome, as I prefer Firefox from a usability viewpoint. I don't see that Chrome is noticeably faster than FF on Javascripty sites (I haven't noticed any difference, in fact) and the ability to pull a tab out as a separate Window doesn't excite me. |
| ComputerBob Mar 02, 2010 5:34 PM EDT |
Quoting:Sorry still confused. Chrome is just the short form of Chromium.No, it's not. No wonder you didn't understand what I was saying. |
| theboomboomcars Mar 02, 2010 6:44 PM EDT |
Quoting:Not that it matters particularly to me, I don't particularly like Chrome, as I prefer Firefox from a usability viewpoint. I don't see that Chrome is noticeably faster than FF on Javascripty sites (I haven't noticed any difference, in fact) and the ability to pull a tab out as a separate Window doesn't excite me. If I am remembering correctly Chromium is the open source version, including source code. Whereas Chrome is Google's proprietary build, and includes things like h.264 support in it. I can pull a tab out as a window in FF, if I am understanding what you are meaning correctly - drag a tab out of the tab bar and drop it on the desktop and get a new FF window with that tab. |
| tmx Mar 02, 2010 7:41 PM EDT |
Yes, that was my point, Chrome pull its code from Chromium project, which explains why Google sent out a cease and decist to the Android developer since they say he violated the propriety portion. You could ask at their forum, but atleast their source code is public. Quote: I can pull a tab out as a window in FF, if I am understanding what you are meaning correctly - drag a tab out of the tab bar and drop it on the desktop and get a new FF window with that tab. Opera can do one further by dragging a tab into the Speeddial, but I think they broke that feature with version 10.50. |
| jezuch Mar 03, 2010 3:14 AM EDT |
Quoting:I don't see that Chrome is noticeably faster than FF on Javascripty sites (I haven't noticed any difference, in fact) The real kicker is not the speed of rendering HTML and doing scripts, but the speed of the GUI. Gecko is a very fine rendering engine with very fine JavaScript support, but XUL sucks ass performance-wise, at least on Linux. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 03, 2010 3:55 AM EDT |
Firefox just has too many nice features and extensions that I really need. If only they could make the rendering engine pluggable. Firefox UI + webkit rendering engine anyone? |
| tmx Mar 03, 2010 5:13 AM EDT |
> Firefox UI + webkit rendering engine anyone?
I've been dreaming of this for couple years already. Ars wrote an article on why Mozilla is sticking with Gecko: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2008/09/mozilla-comm... There is ChromeOS, but Gecko/Firefox to me can become a web OS in itself, albeit a bit slower. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!