Linux - Software This forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum. |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 03:39 AM
|
#1
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Rep:
|
Best lightweight browser for Fluxbox ? Epiphany , Opera, Kazehakase, Midori, Arora ?
Hi All
I need a fast, low memory Internet browser for my fluxbox Ubuntu System.
I have gtk2-engine-nodoka installed. I have tried my best to avoid applications that needs gnome or kde libraries. I not sure which browser is the best. I am actually making a custom livecd, so I need to pick one.
I am not interested in text based browsers like links2 or browsers without proper css capabilities like dillo.
I have read a few reviews and everyone is saying something different.
Thank you in advance.
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 12:43 PM
|
#2
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Distribution: Mageia 6, KDE Neon
Posts: 4,313
|
I'm very impressed with Midori. It's fast, plays most of not all net content and best of all it's lightweight. I currently use it with PCLXDE.
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 12:56 PM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Montreal,Quebec
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 825
Rep:
|
Chromium is quite fast, but the fastest is Dillo (the svn version if you want CSS support).
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 07:50 PM
|
#4
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Thank you all.
I think il try Opera for a while and see if it delivers. Epiphany failed, I could not set proxy setting because I dont have gnome. I do export http_proxy='PROXY_URL:PROXY_PORT' in bash shell before executing Epiphany but it still did not find the proxy.
Midori seemed nice, after I export proxy in shell Midori found proxy , Midori was fast and agile, but it crashed every time I tried to log into this website so then i moved on to better things Opera. Opera is very slick and fast with very nice rendering and also has a Opera Turbo option which appeals much to me. Ive tried Kazehakase and liked the browser, it might not be that light weight though, it also crashed ounce , that was enough for me. So far im happy with Opera and if it dissapoints also, il try Arora. Dillo is a last resort for me, I dont like the UI at all.
Thanks all.
Last edited by tERn; 10-14-2009 at 07:52 PM.
Reason: typo
|
|
|
10-14-2009, 10:48 PM
|
#5
|
Gentoo support team
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,083
|
It mostly comes to your likings.
Dillo is not an option when it comes to css, even from the live repository (at least the last time I tried, it might have changed a bit but I wouldn't hold my breath). I'd rather use no css at all that a broken implementation, because at least it's readable.
Opera and arora might be a bit lighter, they are both qt based but that's not too relevant. Opera does its own and arora uses webkit to render the web.
Midori, epiphany, kazehakase, galeon, etc. are gtk+ based (epiphany requires also the gnome libs, so...). Midori uses webkit, epiphany and kazehakase can use both webkit or gecko I think. Galeon is gecko based if it even exist still.
No gecko based browser can so the lightest in the world, that's a thing to consider. Gecko is a heavy metal machine, even if it's inside an otherwise light browser like kazehakase.
I'd rather advice to use seamonkey 2.x, which is coming in a very good shape, and supports all the features that firefox does and more, without all the bloat. Additionally you can always disable the components you are not going to use via use flags, like the mail client, composer, etc). Sometimes, more is less. Being able to use noscript to disable all the crap that sites like to inject into our eyes is a big plus when it comes to saving time and machine resources.
However, arora has a flash blocker feature out of the box which is very nice since 0.8 or so, and now it can even remember passwords and block adds as well. If only webkit worked a bit better and it had a better control of javascript, like noscript does, then I'd probably be using it instead of seamonkey 2.
However, today, having a gecko based browser is almost a must, just in case.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
10-15-2009, 11:09 AM
|
#6
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Thank you much i92guboj
Your post has been very informative and i will certainly give seamonkey a try.
Regards
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 12:34 PM
|
#7
|
Gentoo support team
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,083
|
If you are going to try it, try 2.0_rc1 (or 2.0 once it goes out). 1.x will not work that easily with extensions and doesn't include the save session feature and other things.
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 01:49 PM
|
#8
|
Senior Member
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: OZ
Distribution: Debian Sid/RPIOS
Posts: 4,903
|
Google Chrome/Chromium is fast and a bit lighter than Firefox.
personally I like Firefox, it is really only a resource hog when viewing a site that uses flash or java.
$ inxi -F
System: Host craigevil Kernel 2.6.31-3.dmz.1-liquorix-686 i686 (32 bit) Distro Debian GNU/Linux squeeze/sid
CPU: Single core Intel Pentium 4 (UP) cache 1024 KB flags (sse3 nx lm) bmips 5591.35
Clock Speeds: (1) 2792.600 MHz (2) 2792.600 MHz
Graphics: Card Intel 82915G/GV/910GL Integrated Graphics Controller X.Org 1.6.4 Res: 1280x1024@60.0hz
GLX Renderer Mesa DRI Intel 915G GEM 20090712 2009Q2 RC3 x86/MMX/SSE2 GLX Version 1.4 Mesa 7.6 Direct Rendering Yes
Audio: Card Intel 82801FB/FBM/FR/FW/FRW (ICH6 Family) High Definition Audio Controller driver HDA Intel
Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture Version 1.0.20
Network: Card Intel 82562ET/EZ/GT/GZ - PRO/100 VE (LOM) Ethernet Controller driver e100 at port dcc0
Disks: HDD Total Size: 160.0GB (14.2% used) 1: /dev/sda WDC WD1600JS-75N 160.0GB
Partition: ID:/ size: 103G used: 22G (22%) ID:swap-1 size: 5.25GB used: 0.01GB (0%)
Info: Processes 121 Uptime 2 days Memory 263.6/493.6MB Client Shell inxi 1.1.13
Thats with Firefox+chatzilla and several tabs, its been open since I booted, also evince, shell-fm, pacmanfm, conky and a couple other things running.
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 03:02 PM
|
#9
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Hi
I first tried Seamonkey 1.17 and it worked fine. It did not look so good because it did not import my gtk2 theme that i was using. I donwloaded the 2.0_rc1 and I am very pleased with it, I am using the gtk2-engine-nodoka and now my theme works with Seamonkey. The only negative for me is that the tabs doesnt have a exit on them and that its on the far right, but that is a minor. I find Seamonkey very fast with rendering. I think Seamonkey is a good fit for my system.
I see that Seemonkey also uses the gecko engine, but I guess I can live with that.
I also like Firefox, it only uses abit too much memory to my liking.
Greetings
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 03:22 PM
|
#10
|
Gentoo support team
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,083
|
Seamonkey 2.x uses XUL just like firefox, to render the interface (gecko for the web stuff as you say). It's not proper gtk2, though the look will be very close. There are some minor glitches, for example in the rendering of checkboxes, the border around the tabs section which is a bit disruptive for my taste, and the tabs themselves, that are not rendered the same than the gtk native ones. However it's close enough and I am not too concerned with the look. The only problem is that the tabs in seamonkey don't have good contrast with dark schemes, but I think that gtk has also that problem (and sometimes also with the text in the tabs, which is quite annoying).
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 06:01 PM
|
#11
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Hmm, I dont know if its just my gtk2-engine (nodoka) but my tabs are looking quite fine.
|
|
|
10-15-2009, 06:38 PM
|
#12
|
Gentoo support team
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,083
|
You are probably right, there's something odd in the way that qtcurve seems to handle the tabs, and it's not just in seamonkey, though in SM is much more noticeable. I think it's time to play with the theme engines again, I only do it like once each two years or so
Thanks for the pointer.
|
|
|
10-16-2009, 09:34 PM
|
#13
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Hi graigevil.
Quote:
Google Chrome/Chromium is fast and a bit lighter than Firefox.
|
I agree with you with chromium-browser. It really looks nice and handles fast and uses little memory. I think you understated the fact that it is a bit lighter than firefox. I had a few heave weight tabs open like facebook, youtube playing something, and a few other and it only used 50mb of memory while firefox normally took 250mb away at that point. Thank you for pointing it out for me. I will still decide between chromium, seamonkey and opera.
|
|
|
10-16-2009, 09:38 PM
|
#14
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Ubuntu (Fluxbox)
Posts: 28
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Hi graigevil.
Quote:
Google Chrome/Chromium is fast and a bit lighter than Firefox.
|
I agree with you with chromium-browser. It really looks nice and handles fast and uses little memory. I think you understated the fact that it is a bit lighter than firefox. I had a few heave weight tabs open like facebook, youtube playing something, and a few other and it only used 50mb of memory while firefox normally took 250mb away at that point. Thank you for pointing it out for me. I will still decide between chromium, seamonkey and opera.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
05-13-2012, 03:42 PM
|
#15
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Feb 2008
Posts: 4
Rep:
|
Incredible
Heyy!! It's incredible that nobody said a word about Qupzilla!!
It is a very good lightweight browser based on QT libs, the best I've ever used. It doesn't crashes like midori does sometimes, and it's lighter than chromium!! It's really customizable and has adblock installed by default: as for the menus, they're pretty similar to firefox!
Just have a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QupZilla
and try it, you won't want to come back!
------------------------------------------
BMN user
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 AM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|