Chrome for webptop - Atrix 4G Themes and Apps

Now that the apks were modified to allow docking without the dock
IS there anyway we can replace Firefox with Google Chrome, or Chromium.
This would give us Chrome OS, and a much nicer browser.
Is it difficult?

SS2006 said:
Now that the apks were modified to allow docking without the dock
IS there anyway we can replace Firefox with Google Chrome, or Chromium.
This would give us Chrome OS, and a much nicer browser.
Is it difficult?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't be done unless your completely rewrite chrome for ARM, or Google makes an ARM based Chrome browser that will work on phones.

There's no official chrome for arm, but there is a chromium-browser port for arm:
http://ports.ubuntu.com/pool/main/c/chromium-browser/
Chromium is the open source base that Google Chrome is built on

Posted in the wrong section, please follow the rules.
Thread will be moved.

You can do it!
Come be part of the team!
http://www.chromium.org/Home
A how to:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/LinuxChromiumArm
And a most recent build bot build:
http://build.chromium.org/f/chromium/snapshots/Arm/82626/
That last one is untested.. I'm thinking of giving it a try once I hack the webtop with Sogarths script.
Anyway ARM branch is part of the Chromium project, I know cause I build Chromium OS for ARM a few times and it requires Chromium browser.
If anyone has a bit of time and a big machine to build on, please let us know or post the .deb when your done!

Related

Dorothy Browser open beta for Windows Mobile 6.x is now available!!

Hi gurus,
We, Company 100 Inc., is pleased to announce the availability of long-waited Dorothy Browser open beta for Windows Mobile 6.x!
Dorothy Browser, built upon WebKit engine, the best of breed browser engine, delivers the real Web experience to your mobile devices with unrivaled performance.
As an official contributor and maintainer of WebKit engine for Qualcomm BrewMP in the WebKit development community, we are dedicated to deliver the best performing mobile browsing experience to WM phone users, inheriting all the benefits from the open source WebKit community.
Please try out our latest beta version of our Dorothy Browser on your WM phones and experience yourself its flying performance.
The open beta can be downloaded from our Dorothy Browser website.
BTW, if you happen to be present at MWC in Barcelona, please swing by our booth, located in Hall1, 1F05, and check out our Dorothy Browser Emerald demo, an enhanced version of Dorothy Browser with advanced UI/UX leveraging OpenGL ES H/W acceleration.
Thanks for your interest in Dorothy Browser and hope you all enjoy it!!
Should you have any inquiry about our browser, please feel free to contact us at contact at company100 dot net any time.
I found this by doing a quick google search... But is there any particular reason why you do not share the url yourself??
Not really. The forum does not allow junior members to specify any external URL or email address inside the message.
mrcrowley666 said:
I found this by doing a quick google search... But is there any particular reason why you do not share the url yourself??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see... http://www.dorothybrowser.com/
I have tried this on 3 different sites so far with very mixed results.
It locked up my phone completly while trying to access google.co.uk This happened on 2 seperate occasions.
I tried touch.facebook.com and it renders this site very nicely indeed. I was most impressed with this one.
I also tried the full facebook site facebook.com I found it was able to render this site completly just how my desktop computer would. Very impressive Text was readable after zooming just a few times, even though the text was still tiny. Very slick rendering. Its a tad jerky while moving around the page i suspect my device is struggling a bit with the requirments.
I noticed ram usage is very high. I only had 25 mb left when i checked. Haven't seen a program use this much ram before.
All in all it looks very promising.
BTW my device is Omnia i900 with wm6.5
Just downloaded and installed the WVGA version. Massive improvement over the closed beta! Pages seem to load pretty fast too. Installed on Storage Card.
Bugs noticed:
* Can't zoom in or out when a webpage is still loading - as soon as a I try to scroll the page resets to overview mode.
* Settings page doesn't always show current settings (ie. Enable/Disable buttons appear to be not selected)
Feature Requests:
* Zoom slider and/or pinch-to-zoom please.
* Option to set manually the browser cache location
* User agent customisation
* (Optional) Flash support
Eagerly awaiting the next beta release. Thanks
Looks promising to me.
I have one request... Flash!
Thus far the only browser I've found that supports flash is SkyFire .. and I suppose Mach5 but you gotta pay for that one. Anyway both of those are server based browsers.
FLASH FLASH FLASH.
Gawwd is it too much to ask to watch HULU on my PPC?
Hulu has even blocked Skyfire now....grrrr
Can't detect server on my Touch Pro 2 on metro pcs. I can use it (browser) via wifi...but no data connection.
So i will stick to Opera 9.7....
mrcrowley666 said:
I have tried this on 3 different sites so far with very mixed results.
It locked up my phone completly while trying to access google.co.uk This happened on 2 seperate occasions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, I actually had a similar problem with another website - for some reason it loaded up really slowly / not properly either. Opening the same website in Opera Mobile 10 beta 3 had on the same phone with the same connection it had no issues.
Thanks! I've tried, and...it eats so much ram! I prefer Skyfire, who have flash support.
TechnoHippie said:
FLASH FLASH FLASH.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Opera Mobile 10 (now in beta 3) supports flash, YMMV. Plugins need to be enabled in advanced options.
Plugin support is a must for mobile browsers now - Dorothy needs it as well, to stand a chance.
this is starting to become pretty cool. Interface looks good and pages look great after they render. Please think about including flick scrolling cuz it would help make moving through pages easier. It also seems buggy when trying to pan around. I hope you continue updating good ol dorothy! Big improvement over recent upgrades! please update us frequently too
Company100, can u guys use like a newer build of the Webkit browsing engine or something? Would like to be able to use the HTML5-enabled versions of GMail and the Google Buzz mobile websites.
Thanks
Life Saver.. Sort of
My entire peer set uses Gowalla which is only available for iPhone, Android, BlackBerry... basically every platform but WinMo. This is the first mobile browser that works with that particular site for WinMo. I still use Skyfire as my main browser for my Pure, but I bet the Emerald release of Dorothy will change that. I also found it faster on the sites it could access VS. Skyfire. So if you can hear me Company100 PLEASE include me in the beta as soon as possible for Emerald.
Shalom,
SAB
WOOOOW, I'm very impressed. Really cool browser. Rendering is awesome.
But needs some improvements in cinetic scrolling! and the browser graphics. Looks like a 90-tech-underground-site-style. Keep it simple and clean. Less is more
What about longpress menus? Like press'n'hold on a link opens a menu where you can open in another tab. OHHH, just saw it now. No tabbed browsing...
If I remember correctly, Webkit is partly LGPL licensed, more specifically, webcore is, that I know. I am unable to find source code related to Dorothy's port of Webkit on Winmo.
I understand that LGPL can be linked to closed-source applications, but the library themselves must comply with the license, which states that the source code must be disclosed.
As Dorothy browser does dynamically links to webkit (webkit-ce.dll), they do not have to release the source code of the application itself, only the source code of their branch of webkit. I think it is generally considered okay to not release themselves the code if the same exact code is available from another project's website. Additionally, the source code has to be as easily accessible than the binaries.
This post may seem harsh, and I am sorry if my tone is mistaken. I simply am curious and am not thinking that they are deliberately making it hard to get the source code. I think it is not malice, but simply carelessness. Those license are not easy to abide to.
[EDIT]
I will contact them directly too, but I posted there because I may have been blind and didn't see the source elsewere...
samueldr said:
If I remember correctly, Webkit is partly LGPL licensed, more specifically, webcore is, that I know. I am unable to find source code related to Dorothy's port of Webkit on Winmo.
I understand that LGPL can be linked to closed-source applications, but the library themselves must comply with the license, which states that the source code must be disclosed.
As Dorothy browser does dynamically links to webkit (webkit-ce.dll), they do not have to release the source code of the application itself, only the source code of their branch of webkit. I think it is generally considered okay to not release themselves the code if the same exact code is available from another project's website. Additionally, the source code has to be as easily accessible than the binaries.
This post may seem harsh, and I am sorry if my tone is mistaken. I simply am curious and am not thinking that they are deliberately making it hard to get the source code. I think it is not malice, but simply carelessness. Those license are not easy to abide to.
[EDIT]
I will contact them directly too, but I posted there because I may have been blind and didn't see the source elsewere...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does it exist something most updated or this project is "died"?

[Q] Chromium OS vs Android

Not to sure if anyone has heard of Hexxeh before but here is a short wiki descript regarding Chromium OS builds: "By May 2010, compiled versions of the work-in-progress source code had been downloaded from the Internet more than a million times. The most popular version was created by Liam McLoughlin, a 17-year-old college student in Manchester, England, posting under the name "Hexxeh". McLoughlin's builds boot from a USB memory stick and included features that Google engineers had not yet implemented, such as support for the Java programming language"
Anyhow several Google videos show that he has successfully managed to boot one of his Chromium OS builds called "Flow" on a tablet. And was wondering if anyone has thought about doing this.
His main website: http://chromeos.hexxeh.net/
I've used Flow on a laptop. Not very useful on a tablet - it's basically just a back end for a web browser, with no (well, minimal) apps. Useful for giving to the kids to play web games without breaking your system. However, using the Android OS built for tablets you get access to all the apps.
Looks like someone is working on it!
http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/chrome-os-tablet-from-acer-outed-by-bug-reports-20110428/

Android app port to Ubuntu Touch

Hey!
We know, that we can't run Android apps on Ubuntu Touch. The UT is a great operating system, but it has a big problem. It doesn't have any "neccessary" or "must have" applications NOW. These apps are the following by the community's opinion: FacebookMessenger, WhatsApp, Google Maps, a browser (like Chrome, Opera mini or Firefox), instagram, etc.
So, I want to know, that we are possible to port these (or any other) Android apps to UT, or not? If the answer is yes, i want to create a team. In this team i want to port Android apps, or create this apps alternatives.
Guess not much up in the forums
Request: Simyo Call Status App [Netherlands]
Hi there,
I haven't been on the xda forums a lot since the end of 2009 I believe but, since Canonical announced Ubuntu Touch this year, I have my reasons to pick up browsing the forums again. The Ubuntu Touch region, specifically.
Now, you were asking if there's any Android Apps to port to Ubuntu Touch.
I have a request that might not be of interest to a lot of people but will get pretty important to me once a 'user version' of Ubuntu Touch is released:
Simyo Netherlands provides an App to check your current "Belstatus" or call status.
This app provides me (on my iPhone) with the current remaining minutes/sms messages and remaining data (megabyte) for the current month within the contract.
Below the link to the Android equivalent in the Play Store, which might be portable to an Ubuntu Touch app:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=nl.simyo.mijnsimyo
Let me know if this is something you'd be interested in doing.
I might be of some help being a C# programmer, but I still need to check out the Ubuntu Touch SDK (my HTML5 and QML knowledge is poor) and that's something I won't be able to very soon....
frummel said:
I might be of some help being a C# programmer, but I still need to check out the Ubuntu Touch SDK (my HTML5 and QML knowledge is poor) and that's something I won't be able to very soon....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a little bit of C# knowledge, but i'm good in HTML5, so this is a good beginning i think.
DLevai94 said:
I have a little bit of C# knowledge, but i'm good in HTML5, so this is a good beginning i think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can port any already existing apps that are found on Android, you just need the API from the app developers.
Google Maps
same here.. looking to port my android apps to ubuntu touch, developed using java..
is there some porting apps like Command Tools in Blackberry OS10
srdananjaya said:
same here.. looking to port my android apps to ubuntu touch, developed using java..
is there some porting apps like Command Tools in Blackberry OS10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, there's no tool like that for Ubuntu Touch (yet?).
I'd be willing to port my Android apps to Ubuntu touch. Does the work need to be done from scratch? Is there a simpler way to port a java, native, android app to Ubuntu?
I can't contribute anything app-wise, but this sounds like a really good idea; best of luck!
Ubuntu-Touch must LIVE! I have use it and it is cool system. Some problems with applications time to time appeares. And it is very hard find developers for apps. But I think if required apps appeares -- more people move to UT. And first of all that system must use NOT for games.
DLevai94 said:
Hey!
We know, that we can't run Android apps on Ubuntu Touch. The UT is a great operating system, but it has a big problem. It doesn't have any "neccessary" or "must have" applications NOW. These apps are the following by the community's opinion: FacebookMessenger, WhatsApp, Google Maps, a browser (like Chrome, Opera mini or Firefox), instagram, etc.
So, I want to know, that we are possible to port these (or any other) Android apps to UT, or not? If the answer is yes, i want to create a team. In this team i want to port Android apps, or create this apps alternatives.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Till last some years UT has some changes. For example appears OpenVPN network manager in a base apps. But unfortunately that feature with unresolved bugs. Also I didn't find any browsers like QupZilla/Mozilla FireFox or Lynx. So As for me we required updated OS for first. And normal browser. Current versions of browsers are unusable. That i big part of work. For that required powerful developers group. I try to compile and run some examples to UT but unfortunately unsuccessful. But I try. Who also try do something but with successful result?

Chrome OS and Android apps

Not so good...
Android apps on Chrome OS: hands-on and initial thoughts
http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/06/17/android-apps-on-chrome-os-hands-on-and-initial-thoughts/
As expected.....
lollyjay said:
Not so good...
Android apps on Chrome OS: hands-on and initial thoughts
http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/06/17/android-apps-on-chrome-os-hands-on-and-initial-thoughts/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay but you do realize it's on an unstable dev build on a Chromebook with one of the lowest-end processors in a Chromebook (ARM Rockchip)? Until it gets in the stable build and is also tested on other hardware (like the x86 Pixel), I wouldn't judge it too much.
Also, the privacy issues with ChromiumOS(not just ChromeOS), prevent it from being a real threat.
moriel5 said:
Also, the privacy issues with ChromiumOS(not just ChromeOS), prevent it from being a real threat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not about the "threat" (let's not be religious here) - it's about the options.
I honestly prefer a google supported OS with google supported hardware instead of a hack like Remix OS.
Chromebooks are amazing tools. I am expecting Android apps on Chromebooks to cause a very deep disruption in the PC market.
note the asus flip is the only chromebook with arm chip in the 3 ones that get the m53 dev update.
so i assume for the moment only the arm code is ready.
from what i know google does not want to use the android x86 open source project to make their x86 compatibility layer unlike remix os
this explain why no other chromebook have the playstore for the moment.
and yes this asus is only to show the extreme lower end part of chromebooks.
wait until the x86 code they are building is coming...
it will be another story.
you want to be scared?
imagine cloudready or just chromium os for pc
with playstore inside
if it comes.
or29544 said:
It's not about the "threat" (let's not be religious here) - it's about the options.
I honestly prefer a google supported OS with google supported hardware instead of a hack like Remix OS.
Chromebooks are amazing tools. I am expecting Android apps on Chromebooks to cause a very deep disruption in the PC market.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't worry, while I am deeply against Google's behaviour in matters such as privacy, I do agree that if someone absolutely wants to use Google, he/she should be able to.
What I was referring to was being locked to sending personal data to Google, some of it unwantedly.
I think that ChromeOS, or at least ChromiumOS, should at least allow you to create a local owner account, with connecting to Google as an option, should you wish to.
Had that been an option, then I would have been of the same opinion as you.
Anyway remix for the moment make a really bad desktop.
Without a way to select sound inputs and outputs most of the time we got no sound or sound in the wrong output...
Also it need to change resolution on the fly like most os does...or just change screen scaling because remix os on some screens is not usable at all...
And what about include a desktop grade browser that support extensions.because remix browser is as useless as edge for the moment.
The things is ,chrome os have all those fixes already inside.
tailslol said:
Anyway remix for the moment make a really bad desktop.
Without a way to select sound inputs and outputs most of the time we got no sound or sound in the wrong output...
Also it need to change resolution on the fly like most os does...or just change screen scaling because remix os on some screens is not usable at all...
And what about include a desktop grade browser that support extensions.because remix browser is as useless as edge for the moment.
The things is ,chrome os have all those fixes already inside.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with about half of what you said.
However, changing the DPI on the fly may have to wait until Android N.
And while I don't think that a browser has to have addon support, I do prefer it that way.
By the way, Firefox for Android supports both addons and themes, as well as plugins and addon frameworks (e.g. Greasemonkey), so technically you could put it on RemixOS.
And I thought RemixOS doesn't have it's own browser, rather arriving with the AOSP Browser?
I personally prefer Lightning Browser on Android, it's so light without comprimising on absolute necessaties.
All the rest, you're right, there already tools to those on the fly (with root).
moriel5 said:
I agree with about half of what you said.
However, changing the DPI on the fly may have to wait until Android N.
And while I don't think that a browser has to have addon support, I do prefer it that way.
By the way, Firefox for Android supports both addons and themes, as well as plugins and addon frameworks (e.g. Greasemonkey), so technically you could put it on RemixOS.
And I thought RemixOS doesn't have it's own browser, rather arriving with the AOSP Browser?
I personally prefer Lightning Browser on Android, it's so light without comprimising on absolute necessaties.
All the rest, you're right, there already tools to those on the fly (with root).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well now it comes with chrome included.about firefox well i never used on android.
but in case of need of flash or silverlight for old sites i dont think it will handle them with addblock in same time.
root and tools in remix is another story,mostly because this is not easy,and most of those tools just not work on remix,for example on remix to be able to patch sound you need to change the kernel...
not stability or update friendly.
and not usable by everyone.
so i think google will go to the right way here.
but remix?
lets just say remix should count the month or year it have left.
tailslol said:
well now it comes with chrome included.about firefox well i never used on android.
but in case of need of flash or silverlight for old sites i dont think it will handle them with addblock in same time.
root and tools in remix is another story,mostly because this is not easy,and most of those tools just not work on remix,for example on remix to be able to patch sound you need to change the kernel...
not stability or update friendly.
and not usable by everyone.
so i think google will go to the right way here.
but remix?
lets just say remix should count the month or year it have left.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You brought some very important points, however I have to say that I disagree with you, since:
1. Jide could always update the kernel to support on the fly audio channel switching.
2. 3rd party developers could do the above.
3. RemixOS is still in beta, and literaly is reinventing the wheel when it comes to Android, so instabilities are to be expected.
About #3, some of what RemixOS is doing is becoming redundant with the native Android APIs in MM and N, so if Jide chooses to yse the native APIs, then RemixOS will become much more stable.
FF can can handle Flash fine with an adblocker (I recommend uBlock Origin), however you need a patched version of Flash for it run at all on Android 4.4 and up.
And by the way, Silverlight is unsupported on both Android and ChromeOS.
Please don't think I'm bashing you, or being zealous.
I'm just trying to answer all the points, and I have a tendency to be formal.
I personally would love to use ChromiumOS, however the mandatory Google owned user policy (the owner account has to be connected to Google), prevents me from doing that.
I need the owner account to be strictly local, plus other reasons which will take several days or weeks to explain.
Thanks for telling me that RemixOS comes with Chrome, by the way.
moriel5 said:
You brought some very important points, however I have to say that I disagree with you, since:
1. Jide could always update the kernel to support on the fly audio channel switching.
2. 3rd party developers could do the above.
3. RemixOS is still in beta, and literaly is reinventing the wheel when it comes to Android, so instabilities are to be expected.
About #3, some of what RemixOS is doing is becoming redundant with the native Android APIs in MM and N, so if Jide chooses to yse the native APIs, then RemixOS will become much more stable.
FF can can handle Flash fine with an adblocker (I recommend uBlock Origin), however you need a patched version of Flash for it run at all on Android 4.4 and up.
And by the way, Silverlight is unsupported on both Android and ChromeOS.
Please don't think I'm bashing you, or being zealous.
I'm just trying to answer all the points, and I have a tendency to be formal.
I personally would love to use ChromiumOS, however the mandatory Google owned user policy (the owner account has to be connected to Google), prevents me from doing that.
I need the owner account to be strictly local, plus other reasons which will take several days or weeks to explain.
Thanks for telling me that RemixOS comes with Chrome, by the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no it is ok,you made some point but for android n it is wait and see on what will be available in the final version.
remix was good to kick the bee hive i think
it kinda made move the big name os and things are starting to change,but as always in the long run it is another story.
Chrome OS isn't open source and the framework for Android apps on it isn't too; which means only Chromebooks, and always online is part of owning one.
Google is already taking Android down that same path more so on MM and up.
for example with permission controls(enforcement) I would like to use a word processor and one of the permissions is location so i block that but guess what can't use app until i enable location again. have to use google app installer instead of aosp, etc ...
Windows as a service =$hitty Windows (always on even if you use a local account only)
Ubuntu= Unity was ok for 12.04 LTS(went downhill from there)
Android can be viable without Google Apps/services(despite perception) there is Fdroid and XDA labs; Chrome and Chromium can not.
Maromi said:
Chrome OS isn't open source and the framework for Android apps on it isn't too; which means only Chromebooks, and always online is part of owning one.
Google is already taking Android down that same path more so on MM and up.
for example with permission controls(enforcement) I would like to use a word processor and one of the permissions is location so i block that but guess what can't use app until i enable location again. have to use google app installer instead of aosp, etc ...
Windows as a service =$hitty Windows (always on even if you use a local account only)
Ubuntu= Unity was ok for 12.04 LTS(went downhill from there)
Android can be viable without Google Apps/services(despite perception) there is Fdroid and XDA labs; Chrome and Chromium can not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it is true actual chrome os is closed source,but they use a open source base (chromium os)
and distro like cloudready or arnoldthebat are clearly advanced already.
i just hope someone will figure a way to port the android part on those distro.
but stock android N x86 will already be something good.
Maromi said:
Chrome OS isn't open source and the framework for Android apps on it isn't too; which means only Chromebooks, and always online is part of owning one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, Chromium OS is open, however your're locked to Google there.
Maromi said:
Windows as a service =$hitty Windows (always on even if you use a local account only)
Ubuntu= Unity was ok for 12.04 LTS(went downhill from there)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using the Enterprise edition allows you more freedom, however, I still can't disable Cortana.
I like Unity 8, however Canonical is right now at crossroads, and they seem to be edging the same path as Google, Microsoft, and others.
By the way, I mainly use Gnome 3.20 as well as Budgie, since I mainly use Antergos (as well as Solus OS).
Maromi said:
Android can be viable without Google Apps/services(despite perception) there is Fdroid and XDA labs; Chrome and Chromium can not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't use most of the GApps, however Chromium does run without GApps, you just can't connect it to Google without GApps.
And I don't always use F-Droid, however this post is through XDA Labs.
And I have nothing against closed-source and/or paid software, while at the same time supporting FOSS.
moriel5 said:
Actually, Chromium OS is open, however your're locled to Google there
I don't use most of the GApps, however Chromium does run without GApps, you just can't connect it to Google without GApps.
And I don't always use F-Droid, however this post is through XDA Labs.
And I have nothing against closed-source and/or paid software, while at the same time supporting FOSS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I said chrome and chromium i was talking about OS's not the browsers
I'm not against closed source. Remix OS is one.
Maromi said:
When I said chrome and chromium i was talking about OS's not the browsers
I'm not against closed source. Remix OS is one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, I was just pointing out that there is an open-source version of Chrome OS.
And thanks, I didn't notice I had made a spelling mistake until I saw it in your quote of my previous post.
It should be "locked", not "locled".
I guess we all reach one point in life sooner or later when we stop being ideologists and start being consumers. I used to care and tinker with all my software and all my devices, tuning and optimizing, caring for a device like it was a pet. I was switching linux distros like clothes, writing my DOS drivers and optimizing memory usage in config.sys - nowadays I don't care. I want Android on my system just to stick to the same UI as my tablet and phone. I want Android for the apps, not for the ideology. I couldn't care less if my user is "owned" by Google - I can handle my own privacy.
Having said that, if Google or Jide will be the first to offer Android on desktop for me - I will use it. If Chromebooks will - I will use them. I am too lazy to think about open source. Just give me something that works and it's fine for me. No matter how much we delude ourselves, RemixOS doesn't work for now. I can't be expected to throw my nVidia card just because nVidia is closed source and gives no **** about the community.
or29544 said:
I guess we all reach one point in life sooner or later when we stop being ideologists and start being consumers. I used to care and tinker with all my software and all my devices, tuning and optimizing, caring for a device like it was a pet. I was switching linux distros like clothes, writing my DOS drivers and optimizing memory usage in config.sys - nowadays I don't care. I want Android on my system just to stick to the same UI as my tablet and phone. I want Android for the apps, not for the ideology. I couldn't care less if my user is "owned" by Google - I can handle my own privacy.
Having said that, if Google or Jide will be the first to offer Android on desktop for me - I will use it. If Chromebooks will - I will use them. I am too lazy to think about open source. Just give me something that works and it's fine for me. No matter how much we delude ourselves, RemixOS doesn't work for now. I can't be expected to throw my nVidia card just because nVidia is closed source and gives no **** about the community.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm something in the middle, and I hope it will stay like that.
Ideology and practicality/consumerism.
Android and open Source Chromium
I read that GOOGLE will never release Chromium OS with android support. What I am saying is unless someone hacks the Chrome os and pulls the OS apart to get the required files and what not to make a hacked copy of chromium with android it is NEVER going to happen.

Custom Chrome Build

Hello,
i use a Samsung Phone. On this Phone, there is a Build-In Browser called "Internet". If i im right, it is a Browser based on Chromium 44. There are some features i like really much on this browser, others are not. So i wonder, if it is possible to combine this features, with some features of Chromium/Chrome to make a Custom Chromium / Chrome Browser? Mostly there are 2 features in Samsungs Browser, i wish to have in such a Custom Chromium: The Use of Firefox Account, to sync Firefox Bookmarks and Tabs also to Chromium on Android and the Fingerprint Sensor, to save Logins to Websites. Is there a way to do this and what do i need? Or is there such a Custom Chromium APK available?
I think you'll need the build-in browser's source
Do you have any idea, where i could get this Sources?

Categories

Resources