Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

[integr8e]

Just out of curiosity, what are the differences between Firefox and Swiftfox? I understand Swiftfox to be a Linux specific build, and as such the better choice, but Firefox works better and with fewer bugs on my system.

[Snowhog]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

Keep in mind, this is a Wiki, but ...Swiftfox

[integr8e]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

That's exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for, thanks.

By the way, why are there so many different builds for Firefox (Firefox, Swiftfox, Swiftweasel, Fasterfox, etc.), I mean, what's the deal? Are these really needed or are programmers just going crazy trying to prove their version is the best?

[Snowhog]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

One could very well ask the question of Linux: Why are there so many variations? Developers have their own ideas/visions/concepts of what a Linux Distro should do "as they see it."

[integr8e]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

Hmmm, makes sense . . .

[dibl]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

One could very well ask the question of Linux: Why are there so many variations?

Good one, Snowhog!

Positive answer: "Because every artist gets to follow his muse ...."

Negative answer: "Because there's no in charge here ..."

[Snowhog]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

Negative answer: "Because there's no in charge here ..."

There's no 'one' in your statement!

[dibl]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

Yep -- senility!

But isn't it logically correct, anyway?

[bootdoc]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

I use swiftfox because of the flash support it has for 64 bit processors without any manual cofiguration.

[dibl]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

I use swiftfox because of the flash support it has for 64 bit processors without any manual cofiguration.

That's a pretty good reason, but in Gutsy 64-bit there's a flash package in the standard repos, so it kinda becomes a non-issue after Feisty.

[Snowhog]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

Yep -- senility!

But isn't it logically correct, anyway?

Hmm.

There's no "I" in Team.
There's "no" in Charge.

[kallikles2003]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

I'd like top try out Swiftfox on my system, but I am unsure about which architecture I should choose. My CPU is an Intel Core 2 Duo (E6550) and I run Feisty Fawn 64 bits Should I really choose the Prescott architecture? That seems quite weird.

[Qqmike]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

Lots of advantages to getting it at:

Firefox, Thunderbird, Seamonkey: http://ubuntuzilla.wiki.sourceforge.net/

The authors have written a script to do the installing for you. Importantly you get the latest version & updates (notification of and option to install) (Not true of the FX you get through Adept.) Read their FAQ, too, for common issues.

[Qqmike]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

dibl's right about the "no" statement being logically correct.
Since there is no noun/subject following "no," any statement regarding the truth value of that statement is vaccuously true (ie, you are making a claim about the empty set).

So there.

[SheeEttin]

Re: Firefox Swiftfox Comparison . . .

I'd like top try out Swiftfox on my system, but I am unsure about which architecture I should choose. My CPU is an Intel Core 2 Duo (E6550) and I run Feisty Fawn 64 bits Should I really choose the Prescott architecture? That seems quite weird.

They have a nice little chart here.

dibl's right about the "no" statement being logically correct.
Since there is no noun/subject following "no," any statement regarding the truth value of that statement is vaccuously true (ie, you are making a claim about the empty set).

So there.

I just read it as "There is no "in charge"", meaning there is no "in charge" to be... It's hard to say, but I think you get it.