LWN.net Logo

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

By Jonathan Corbet
April 2, 2012
When one talks about web browsers for desktop Linux systems, there are usually two options on the table: Firefox or Chromium. There are a number of other browsers out there, though, including Epiphany, the GNOME project's official web browser. In past years, development of Epiphany appears to have slowed considerably, and it has not drawn much in the way of attention. Recently, though, there have been indications of a new burst of activity around Epiphany, so your editor decided to take a fresh look.

According to its web page, Epiphany "provides an elegant, responsive and uncomplicated user interface that fits in perfectly with GNOME." The initial experience is indeed uncomplicated; Epiphany, when it starts up, presents a single, unadorned, white window with an empty address bar at the top. No splash screens, no welcome messages, and no home page; indeed, Epiphany seems to lack the concept of a home page entirely. Actually getting content into the browser window is a matter of typing something into the bar at the top or dragging it over from some other application.

Epiphany is meant to be a fast browser. Much of its performance will naturally be bounded by the speed of the net and by the speed of the Webkit engine on which Epiphany is based, but your editor's subjective experience is that its developers have certainly not gotten in the way. Interaction with the net feels quick in a way that it most certainly does not with some other browsers. It can be a real pleasure to watch things happen so quickly.

[Epiphany] For the purposes of simply reading web pages, the simplicity of Epiphany's design is also quite nice. There has been a clear effort to remove as much non-content junk from the screen as possible. In particular, the developers seem to have decided to leave as much vertical space as possible for web content. In these days when the designers of monitors seem to have all concluded that widescreen movie watching is the only interesting use case for their products, it is nice to get some of that vertical real estate back. More web page and less scrolling is always a good thing.

Interestingly, hovering over a link in Epiphany does not produce any sort of display showing where the link goes. That is a bit of information that browsers have provided since the beginning; its absence here is strange and a bit jarring. It is nice to have some clue of what awaits at the far end of a link, and there is no real reason not to provide it.

Many of the keyboard and mouse shortcuts that one would expect are there, so moving to Epiphany is not a huge shock. That said, there are a few things missing. Your editor misses moving through a page's history with shift and the mouse scrollwheel; that lack is made worse by Epiphany's failure to implement the "forward" and "back" buttons (buttons 8 and 9) found on some mice. The address bar pulls up options from the history like other browsers, but the tab key, which selects an item in Firefox, just causes them all to disappear with Epiphany. One must, instead, use the arrow keys, taking the hand out of home position and slowing the whole process. But these complaints are minor; the basic operation of the browser is mostly as one would expect.

All the minimalism does come with a bit of a cost, though. The ability to put a small number of frequently-used bookmarks into a toolbar over the window itself can be quite useful, but it is missing from Epiphany. Even the bookmarks themselves are not directly accessible; instead, they are found in a second-level menu behind a button with a gear-shaped icon. That button provides access to a number of other standard functions - open a tab, print the page, view page source, etc. Some interesting things are missing, though: this menu lacks any option to set preferences, access help, or even to quit the application.

This is a GNOME application we're talking about, so your editor was entirely prepared to believe that the Epiphany developers had concluded that a simple application like a web browser has no knobs that a user might actually want to tweak if they knew what was good for them. That turns out not to be the case, though; Epiphany does allow for the tweaking of a certain number of preferences, including the download location, font sizes (though the useful ability to set a minimum font size is missing), JavaScript and cookie behavior, and so on. How this window is obtained is, sadly, an indication of where GNOME is going.

GNOME 3 users know that the top of the screen is occupied by a mostly empty black bar; toward the left end an icon and name for the currently-focused application appears. Thus far, that icon has been mostly a decorative feature. But, it seems, the GNOME developers intend it to be for an application menu. So, to get at Epiphany's preferences window, help browser, history browser, etc., or to tell it to quit, one must move out of the application and to that icon (labeled "Web," not "Epiphany") to request it from the global application menu. That icon is detached from the window(s) it relates to; indeed, it is likely, in multi-monitor setups, to be on an entirely different screen. But running up mileage on the pointer to get to that menu is the distraction-free computing paradigm of the future, it seems.

It would, of course, be purely gratuitous for your editor to point out that getting at the global application menu is especially challenging in a focus-follows-mouse setting, so he would not dream of doing that.

There are a few other settings available to those who are willing to wander into the dconf registry. If you do not want Google to be the recipient of any non-URL text typed into the location bar, for example, you'll need to go into dconf to change the search URL. There's a surprising number of options for configuring Epiphany to run in a locked-down kiosk mode. Happily, the minimum font size option - useful for those of us who want text at the smallest easily-readable size, but no smaller - can also be found there.

There is an extension mechanism for Epiphany, but, seemingly, no way to obtain extensions from the net. Instead, the few available extensions are assumed to be available on the local system, usually packaged by the distributor. The options are limited but they do include useful tools like Adblock and Greasemonkey. There is also a "subscribe to RSS feed" extension, but it appears to only work with locally-running feed reader applications. In general, it would appear that the Epiphany developers don't expect to see vast numbers of extensions as one might find for other browsers.

Epiphany's developers seem to have a number of plans for the near future. The blank initial page may eventually be replaced by an "overview" that includes bookmarks and recent history; it seems intended to at least partially mirror GNOME Shell's overview screen. The planned Queues feature looks useful; it will let users move those pages they plan to read out of their bookmarks and/or open tabs. A port to the WebKit2 API is also in the works; that will allow Epiphany to run different tabs in different processes. And, of course, there is a data synchronization feature that will allow users to store history, bookmarks, and more in a central location.

In summary: the renewed effort has turned Epiphany into a quick and focused tool that can be quite pleasurable to use if you are willing to accept its limitations. It sometimes seems like the problem of writing a workable free web browser has been solved for some time, but there is value in continued innovation and experimentation in this area. Many of us spend a lot of time dinking around working on the web; better tools for that work can only be welcome. For some people, Epiphany, in its current or future form, may well be that better tool.


(Log in to post comments)

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 2, 2012 23:28 UTC (Mon) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

> It would, of course, be purely gratuitous for your editor to point out
> that getting at the global application menu is especially challenging in a
> focus-follows-mouse setting, so he would not dream of doing that.

epiphany uses a menu on focus-fallows-mouse desktops, as is noted in the gnome 3.4 release notes

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 2, 2012 23:38 UTC (Mon) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

Um...not on my focus-follows-mouse desktop....

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 2, 2012 23:53 UTC (Mon) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.4/#rnusers....

> Focus-follows-mouse Users

> An exception will be made for focus-follows-mouse users; for them, a classic menu bar will be shown.

I read this, but when i test it with my epiphany 3.4.0.1, (after switching to focus-fallows-mouse) doesn't work, hmmm.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 12, 2012 7:02 UTC (Thu) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

The intention with the text "will be" was to inform that it doesn't at the moment, but will in future. I didn't expect that to be read differently.. not at the moment, otherwise I would've written "is" instead of "will be".

This shouldn't be too much work, I can ask the status for this RFE.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 2, 2012 23:33 UTC (Mon) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.22+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Chromium/17.0.963.56 Chrome/17.0.963.56 Safari/535.22+ Ubuntu/12.04 (3.4.0.1-2ubuntu1) Epiphany/3.4.0.1

thats got to be the most fugly user agent I've ever seen

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 3, 2012 3:06 UTC (Tue) by krakensden (subscriber, #72039) [Link]

Better ugly than broken.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 3, 2012 4:18 UTC (Tue) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

but do you realize that this gets send, UNcompressed, for EVERY SINGLE request? Such a long user-agent is a large overhead when it's usefulness to the web is dubious at best, and, through promoting bad coding, often harmful.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 3, 2012 9:53 UTC (Tue) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]

It's the price of doing business on the web these days. There still exist broken sites that use the User-Agent header for anything other than logging.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 5, 2012 8:35 UTC (Thu) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]

It is fun to use the Firefox/Iceweasel User Agent Switcher to disable sending the User-Agent header and see what issues come up. There are some websites that produce tracebacks when doing that. Most annoying is that mediawiki sites require the User-Agent header to be set. For them I send "W3C standards are important. Stop obsessing over user-agent already.".

http://chrispederick.com/work/user-agent-switcher/

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 5, 2012 8:51 UTC (Thu) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

I've definitely done this sort of thing, back in the day. I ended up just setting my user agent to that of Firefox mainline on Windows XP, cause that was the most common user agent, sans IE 7, which would get differn't behavior.

I did never run across this mediawiki thing you talk about, but if so, that is totally sad, considering mediawiki is FOSS.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 5, 2012 23:08 UTC (Thu) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User-Agent_policy

"Scripts should use an informative User-Agent string with contact information, or they may be IP-blocked without notice."

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 9, 2012 9:28 UTC (Mon) by Nikerabbit (subscriber, #59780) [Link]

You are barking at the wrong tree :) The linked page clearly states it is a policy about Wikimedia sites, not about the MediaWiki software. And yes, the names are confusingly similar.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 11, 2012 21:32 UTC (Wed) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]

Unfortunately they seem to have hard-coded that policy in mediawiki, so sites like http://libreplanet.org/ have the same issue.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 2, 2012 23:42 UTC (Mon) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link]

> (labeled "Web," not "Epiphany")

Didn't you get the memo? Epiphany has been renamed.

https://lwn.net/Articles/488963/
(it is in the release notes).

"Web"

Posted Apr 2, 2012 23:46 UTC (Mon) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

...except if you look at the project's web site, or at the blog entries of the people working on it, they both still say Epiphany. And that's the name people know; "Web" is so generic as to be meaningless. So I made the decision to treat the name change as, at best, a future item.

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 2:16 UTC (Tue) by horen (subscriber, #2514) [Link]

Yes, well, I figured I'd see what's-what, so "sudo apt-get install epiphany" and, 1-2-3, it was installed. Went to invoke it... hmmm... nothing under "Internet", but found it in a listing of all applications. OK... WTF?? It's a bloody GAME!!

"sudo apt-get purge epiphany" !!

Tried "sudo apt-get install web"... E: Unable to locate package web

Riiight... I'm running Linux Mint 11 w/Gnome DE... but it's "only" Gnome 2. Bloody hell!!

Hey! It's not like I was going to leave Firefox, right?

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 3:47 UTC (Tue) by jbicha (subscriber, #75043) [Link]

Try apt-get install epiphany-browser

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 4:20 UTC (Tue) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

I went through this same dance as well...

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 4:04 UTC (Tue) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582) [Link]

Indeed. And apart from being generic, how is one supposed to find the web page for web? Google search for "web"? "Web browser"? "Web web browser"?

(OK, that last search term actually gives the relevant wikipedia page as the first hit. But it's still idiotic.)

"Web"

Posted Apr 4, 2012 17:16 UTC (Wed) by mgedmin (subscriber, #34497) [Link]

Google search for "GNOME web browser" gives me Epiphany's home page as the first hit.

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 4:16 UTC (Tue) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]

Evidently its name is changing to "Gnome Web". Or "Gnome 3 Web". Or "Gnome3Web". Or something. We can be reasonably confident it's not "GNOME3Web".

We should be thankful they are not calling it "Gnome Internet". Or "Gnome Internet Tourist".

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 4:34 UTC (Tue) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link]

"Navigator" -> "Explorer" -> "Konqueror" -> ????

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 10:47 UTC (Tue) by wstephenson (subscriber, #14795) [Link]

"Invader with a humanitarian pretext".

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 11:07 UTC (Tue) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]

That would be Missionary.

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 15:06 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

That should be what they call Epiphany from now on. It's too awesome to let go now.

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 14:09 UTC (Tue) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link]

Good. This reduces confusion. Can we also rename "GNOME" to "Computer"? That way phrases like "Log in to GNOME" and "GNOME desktop" would make more sense to real users. It would also help if "Evolution" were called "Mail" and "Nautilus" were called "Files." Having names for things that are different from their purposes is too much burden for users, which is why all vehicles are called "Car" and not "Mustang" or something, and why we don't name public buildings.

"Web"

Posted Apr 3, 2012 16:06 UTC (Tue) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246) [Link]

Reminds me of this: https://xkcd.com/547/

"Web"

Posted Apr 4, 2012 9:11 UTC (Wed) by juliank (subscriber, #45896) [Link]

The official name of Nautilus is "Files" already. For Evolution, the problem is that the UI combines multiple tasks, like Mail, contacts, and Calendar. Writing two new small frontends called Mail and Calendar would help here.

Gnome for Web

Posted Apr 3, 2012 15:26 UTC (Tue) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018) [Link]

Gnome Internet shall be call Gnome4Web and will be an online version :-)

"Web"

Posted Apr 12, 2012 8:15 UTC (Thu) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

I think that is best. The "Web" is just for the application menu and so on. It'll be confusing anywhere else. Same for e.g. "Documents"; confusing anywhere else so just put GNOME in front of it.

So outside name "Web", internal name is "epiphany". I do expect the website to be reflect "Web" at one point though. Though perhaps maybe still with the "epiphany" URL.

link hovering

Posted Apr 3, 2012 3:50 UTC (Tue) by jbicha (subscriber, #75043) [Link]

At least here, hovering over links shows the target URL in a mini status bar, similar to how it works in Chrome/Chromium.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 3, 2012 8:35 UTC (Tue) by xan (subscriber, #58606) [Link]

> Interestingly, hovering over a link in Epiphany does not produce any sort of display showing where the link goes. That is a bit of information that browsers have provided since the beginning; its absence here is strange and a bit jarring.

We provide a hovering infobar on the bottom left of the application window with the link URL, actually. Pretty much the same than Firefox and Chrome do these days.

Link destination

Posted Apr 3, 2012 13:20 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

I can believe you do, but I don't see it, while I do with other browsers. Why do you suppose that might be..?

Link destination

Posted Apr 3, 2012 14:51 UTC (Tue) by xan (subscriber, #58606) [Link]

Not sure. Are you using a different theme than the default one (Adwaita)?

Link destination

Posted Apr 3, 2012 14:59 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

Nope, it's a pretty standard, out-of-the-box GNOME 3 environment at this point, with focus-follows-mouse being the biggest tweak.

Link destination

Posted Apr 3, 2012 19:48 UTC (Tue) by kalev (guest, #58246) [Link]

For what it's worth, the URL infobar shows up nicely in epiphany-3.4.0.1 that's in F17:

http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/epiphany-link-url-infobar.png

Link destination

Posted Apr 3, 2012 22:46 UTC (Tue) by xan (subscriber, #58606) [Link]

If that's the only thing you have tweaked I guess that must be it. It would be good if you could open a bug about it, but at the very least I'd need to know how you are setting up the focus-follows-mouse mode so that I can try to reproduce it.

Link destination

Posted Apr 3, 2012 23:35 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

I just set sloppy focus in gnome-tweak-tool.

That said, I just tried switching to click-to-focus and didn't get anything different in epiphany's behavior. So I don't think that's it.

Link destination

Posted Apr 4, 2012 9:13 UTC (Wed) by juliank (subscriber, #45896) [Link]

Just guessing, but could there be any old settings for Epiphany lying around that modify something status bar related and the new code thus disables it?

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 8:41 UTC (Tue) by brianomahoney (subscriber, #6206) [Link]

It may ONLY be me, but this sounds like Y A browser from scratch ... do we really need this?

What Linux does desperately need is a Free OpenSource integration of Exchange services in existing browsers and Email clients, ie minimally Email, Contacts and calendar.

Regards, omb

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 9:14 UTC (Tue) by hadess (subscriber, #24252) [Link]

> It may ONLY be me, but this sounds like Y A browser from scratch ...
> do we really need this?

It was brand new in December 2002:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/epiphany/commit/?id=6876ede98...

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 9:34 UTC (Tue) by rossburton (subscriber, #7254) [Link]

That would be evolution-ews for Evolution then (http://git.gnome.org/browse/evolution-ews).

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 13:27 UTC (Tue) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]

But I thought Exchange supported stuff like Internet e-mail, vCard and iCalendar. Standards, in other words.

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 14:41 UTC (Tue) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link]

Standards which explicitly permit the creation and use of non-standardized extensions. It's worth noting that Mozilla, GNOME, and KDE don't restrict their implementation of those standards to the standardized functionality, and they each have their own notions of how to extend them.

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 16:06 UTC (Tue) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]

I suppose that if I had a point to make, it is that people tolerate the non-standard extensions far too easily. I've had to point out to plenty of people that the free/busy functionality of iCalendar does not "require an Exchange server"; it doesn't even require an authoritative server, since RFC 2446 (and 5546) describe peer-to-peer mechanisms for exchanging free/busy information, although I concede that using something like WebDAV/CalDAV is probably more convenient (RFC 2446 is a classic case of something that looks like it was written up from notes on an implementation of an existing product that the vendor wanted certified through standardisation).

Epiphany: Another retread

Posted Apr 3, 2012 15:52 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

Exchange supports some standards, but the protocol it uses to interact with clients is thoroughly non-standard. For example none of the standards you mention give the server right to wipe data on client device.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 3, 2012 18:01 UTC (Tue) by kenmoffat (subscriber, #4807) [Link]

I've been using epiphany as my secondary browser for years. Now that it uses webkit, I've still got a browser even while I'm rebuilding firefox for this {week,month}'s update (I build everything from source, because I can). In particular, it's my browser of choice for lwn.

And it's a lot more useful with epiphany-extensions (e.g. for html5tube). Still using 3.2 here.

Whether I can continue to persuade myself that it's worth building any of gnome 3 is a different question - I only use a few of the apps, one fewer since totem moved to using clutter, and they generally seem to be getting increasingly dumbed down. But for now, epiphany is part of my "must build" list.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 4, 2012 11:51 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

It would, of course, be purely gratuitous for your editor to point out that getting at the global application menu is especially challenging in a focus-follows-mouse setting, so he would not dream of doing that.
Paarfi of Roundwood, is that you? (Or are you merely chanelling Dumas?)

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 4, 2012 14:45 UTC (Wed) by skx (subscriber, #14652) [Link]

A nice Steven Brust reference - but out Editor has been known to write in this style for some time.

(Although it has been a while since we've seen "A grumpy Editors guide to ....".

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 5, 2012 4:35 UTC (Thu) by salimma (subscriber, #34460) [Link]

Interestingly, hovering over a link in Epiphany does not produce any sort of display showing where the link goes
On Epiphany 3.4.0, anyway, the link destination is shown on the bottom left of the screen (in an ephemeral status bar that goes away when you stop hovering)

Dillo renders lwn almost exactly like!

Posted Apr 12, 2012 20:57 UTC (Thu) by Velmont (guest, #46433) [Link]

I got a good laugh when I tested lwn.net in Dillo, -- a web browser I sometimes use when I have too many tabs open in Opera and just want to check something extremely quickly.

I went in to LWN, and lo' and behold. The design and web tech is so old that it works perfectly in Dillo. Really nice. :-) Not used to sites rendering like I'm used to.

lwn consistently renders almost completely wrong

Posted Apr 22, 2012 21:26 UTC (Sun) by bjartur (guest, #67801) [Link]

Yes, LWN's table layout renders the same everywhere. But no, that's a bug and not a feature. LWN's nesting of tables disables the adaptive column splitting algorithm of my stylesheet, essentially forcing my UA to render LWN articles the same way your UA renders them for you. OK, I can reverse the colors and jerk the font size up or down. But that's about it.

What use is having a license to modify any of multiple competing UAs if sites send them nothing but scrambled text illegible unless flowed according to algorithms defined more by legacy than anything else.

Even configuring a maximum width of paragraphs is risky. Web browsers have long been stagnant, not for a lack of libre implementations of standards but for a lack of site compliance with said standards. And yes, LWN, I'm looking at you.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted Apr 17, 2012 15:03 UTC (Tue) by stock (guest, #5849) [Link]

How about Browser Tuning :
[acer20:stock]:(~)$ ps aux
USER       PID %CPU %MEM    VSZ   RSS TTY      STAT START   TIME COMMAND
root         1  0.0  0.1  30440  4168 ?        Ss   Apr15   0:02 /sbin/init
root         2  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    Apr15   0:00 [kthreadd]
[ ... ]
stock    11988  0.0  0.0  16112  1940 pts/2    Ss   16:46   0:00 bash
root     12023  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    16:46   0:00 [flush-0:40]
stock    12078 10.2  1.6 609208 63060 ?        Sl   16:46   0:02 /usr/bin/firefox
stock    12099  0.8  0.5 276912 21452 ?        S    16:46   0:00 /usr/lib/mozilla/kmozillahelper
stock    12220  0.0  0.0  13452  1096 pts/2    R+   16:47   0:00 ps aux
[ ... ]
So Firefox uses 63 Mb real memory and its kmozillahelper , a Package providing integration of Mozilla applications with KDE, as found common on KDE Desktop environments, like that of Mandriva and SuSE, excuse me OpenSuSE, uses 21 Mb after a fresh startup.

My detected browser settings :

http://www.digitalcoding.com/tools/detect-browser-settings.html

Browser Information:
* Browser: Firefox
* Browser Version: 3.6.24
* User Agent String: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20120320 Mandriva Linux/1.9.2.24-0.1 (2011.0) Firefox/3.6.24

Computer Environment:
* Operating System: 0
* IP Address: 212.238.71.191 (Port : 41564, Host : ip212-238-71-191.hotspotsvankpn.com)
* Platform: Linux x86_64 - Other platform
* Screen Resolution: 1366 x 768 (Available: 1366 x 730) (Color depth: 24 Pixel depth: 24)
* .Net Framework: No or unable to detect...

Plugin Settings:
* Adobe Flash Player: Flash installed - (version : 10.1)
* Shockwave Plugin: No or unable to detect...
* QuickTime Plugin: Quicktime installed - (version : 7.6.6)
* Windows Media Player Plugin: Media player installed - (version : 6.4 or higher)

[ ... ]

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted May 5, 2012 8:53 UTC (Sat) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> In these days when the designers of monitors seem to have all concluded that widescreen movie watching is the only interesting use case for their products, it is nice to get some of that vertical real estate back. More web page and less scrolling is always a good thing.

Yes but, it is not that simple. For example, reading LWN in "landspace mode" requires less scroll wheel action than in portrait mode given the same screen size.

I'm looking forward to desktop browsers implementing the great "text-reflow" feature found in every smart phone browser: http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=1287822

Galeon

Posted May 5, 2012 14:18 UTC (Sat) by reepy (guest, #18758) [Link]

I still miss Galeon (http://galeon.sourceforge.net/). It was the predecessor to Epiphany, ran on the Mozilla rendering engine, was fast and configurable.

I still find myself configuring and installing extensions in Firefox to get it to work like Galeon did. I miss things like the next tab focus after tab closing and how it would create an XML file of the last crash state that was easy to edit.

It is good to see Epiphany is still alive.

Epiphany: the minimalist GNOME browser

Posted May 30, 2012 3:38 UTC (Wed) by gbp (guest, #84870) [Link]

I can't highlight text and search for it using the default search engine through right click in Epiphany..

Copyright © 2012, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds