Beast thought to be extinct seen in the wild!

[GreyGeek]

In over a decade of using Linux I don't ever recall seeing what I saw this morning: a Linux "Black Screen of Death"!!! :eek:

Really! I'm not lying. I have photographic proof!

I was running FoxPro 11.0 at the time and clicked to change a tab when the beast appeared on my screen. I took several photos, but like the pictures of BigFoot they are fuzzing and indistinct.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/963246


PS: Here's the photo:

http://ubuntuone.com/7BXUe0XzQ2A3CRrvtpiy9V

Scary beast indeed! Even more rare than scary!

[Flip the Switch]

Best to have kept quiet about this.
Now everyone will want one!

[The Liquidator]

Clearly a fake I think

[vw72]

Isn't Foxpro 11 a Windows app? Looks like Linux was just trying to emulate the full Windows experience.

[GreyGeek]

Isn't Foxpro 11 a Windows app? Looks like Linux was just trying to emulate the full Windows experience.

I suspect that since support for FF is being (has been?) dropped from Kubuntu installations of it are getting farther away from compatibility with the latest GTK+ libraries. That being said, I also noticed that FF was, for me, slowing down considerably with each release, contrary to the experience of many. And, using SR's "host" file nearly destroyed its usability because many sites expect to see a token from their ad servers and hobbled service and/or features if they don't get it back, and FF would ceased to perform on many sites, even though Chromium would work fine, sans, ads on those site. Anyway, the increase in crashing under Precise, which was occurring at least 10 times or more per hour, was becoming too much of an aggravation, so I decided to move to Chromium.

[rms]

Anyway, the increase in crashing under Precise, which was occurring at least 10 times or more per hour, was becoming too much of an aggravation, so I decided to move to Chromium.

Is Chromium working without crashes since it is likewise a GTK app? Reconq is super fast in Precise(only tried it from live CD) but somehow it's not a worthy replacement for FF and its many addons. Well, neither is Chromium for that matter.

Edit: Dropping one of the best browser out there is really bad news.

[Snowhog]

I've been using Chromium exclusively since at least 11.10, maybe 11.04. I find it to be robust and fast. I very rarely see a crash (it does/has happened), but on the rare occasion it does, I ensure no part of it is still running (top), and if if it is, kill it, then at worst, log out of the Desktop and log back in, and relaunch Chromium.

[rms]

For the past 6 months in which I've been using Kubuntu prevalently, Firefox gave me zero trouble. It is a bit slower compared to other browsers (like, give or take a second means anything) but feels like a well trained Hungarian Vizsla in hunting. Invaluable helper.

Can't see how can I settle for a stupid puppy...

[Teunis]

My new computer had Chromium pre-installed in Win7 so over the past week I tried it a couple of times and finally found it's best use, to download Firefox.
Luckily Kubuntu has the Firefox install button right in view.

I can't get much mileage out of Reconq, for me it seems unstable.

[dibl]

I have been a chromium-browser fanboy for 2 or 3 years now, even though you occasionally come across a site where only FF provides the correct rendering of embedded interactive data entry functions. My wife has to use FF on her Debian system because of that, for her work. However, I was amused to see this thread today because just this very morning my wife complained that her FF crashed 3 times when all she did was click on a tab. So I set up chromium-browser and told her to only use FF for her stupid MDECA school district database site, which chromium-browser does not render "correctly". I may have to look into chromium's browser personality impersonation capability if this keeps up.

[GreyGeek]

The only complaint I have about Chromium is the lack of a decent video download extension that works on YouTube. All that I've tried from Chromium's extension site fail to work properly.

[tdockery97]

The only complaint I have about Chromium is the lack of a decent video download extension that works on YouTube. All that I've tried from Chromium's extension site fail to work properly.

For YouTube I find the best "download" tool is just to copy the file from Chromium's cache to my video folder. That doesn't work well for embedded videos on some sites, but usually works well for YouTube.

[dibl]

Upon looking in my tools > extensions, I see I've got "The Ultimate YouTube Downloader", ver. 111.1, and "Youtube Downloader", ver. 11.0. I'm actually not sure which one works, but one of them does.

Also, I highly recommend the "Ghostery" tracker-blocker.

[GreyGeek]

..... "The Ultimate YouTube Downloader",...

This one was not available on the Extension page linked in Chromium, but a Google search found it and it works well. Thanks!

[dibl]

That's crazy. I disabled them one at a time and tested on youtube.com. On my rig, it's only Youtube Downloader that provides the download button and works correctly. Go figure!