Please excuse my ineptitude for clicking options in my email client. No more HTML posts, I promise. ::sheepish grin:: Rick Stout Rick Stout wrote: > I think we need to look at the browser situation from a different angle. > Perhaps a browser tightly integrated into gnome and used for Internet > surfing may be a bad idea. Aren't the biggest problems related to MS, > security, and stability the fact that the browser is synonymous with the > UI? Now while I understand that these problems aren't exactly the same, > but what's to stop it from going in that direction? Personally, I like > the fact that my browsing experience is separated from the desktop, and > I use Firefox on win32 because I don't have to worry about the browser > bringing down the desktop. I think it would be more beneficial to have a > small footprint html rendering engine built into the UI for simple tasks > (help, external calls, etc..), and leave the full-on Internet surfing to > a dedicated browser. Besides, what good is it to have two main gtk > browsers based on the same rendering engine? It leads to forked ideas > and halved resources, as well as less acceptance. > Mozilla was the standard, but the project team did say that Mozilla > should not be used as a browser. Mozilla was just to be a base, and > since Firefox was their choice for the frontend of the engine, it is > fitting that we should support it as the default. As for choice, does > that mean that *every* browser be installed by default? Choices are only > truly made once there is an understanding, and for new users, we should > point them in the direction of the biggest acceptance, as well as where > the majority of the support lies. > > Rick Stout
