-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 |> Mind you, they're studying at the department of computer science in one |> of our best Universities for 3+ years, at least one of them runs Linux |> on his laptop, so all in all they're quite above the average level when |> it comes to using a computer. | | If you ignore the warning to not close the main firefox window before the | customised one, you WILL end up with your firefox profile default set to the | freenet profile. Which is BAD.
Yes, I know *why* this happens. As I've written below, tinkering with browser settings is something that not a single common-user-oriented application I know does (and I'm not even sure that installer actually *asks* to install a custom profile). Most people are completely unaware that Firefox actually supports multiple profiles (many probably don't even know what profile is at all). So even computer-literate users aren't prepared to what they see when Freenet opens FF for the first time. |> I'm not pushing for any immediate changes, but perhaps being more |> user-friendly regarding the custom FF profile is something to consider |> for 0.7.1? | | I'd welcome any suggestions. So far, afaics the options are: | 1) Fix the Firefox bug that causes the profile resetting. -no-remote should | cause it not only to not coalesce with an existing Firefox copy, but also not | to write to the default profile. Also find a new skin that works with FF3, | and ideally is a little more stable! Well, current skin is terrible, just IMHO, of course. Also, at least on Windows, Firefox had asked me when Freenet ran for the first time if I want to set the "freenet" profile as default - maybe something was fixed by the FF devs themselves? | In any case we should make it obvious to the user that the freenet browser has | something to do with Freenet. Yes, I agree with that. Maybe showing a screenshot in the installer and telling the user that if your FF looks like this, then you're working with Freenet? Just to make them more ready? |> On a somewhat related note, I also got several reports that Freenet |> works very well. Interestingly, many students have discovered and began |> using FMS, but no one had mentioned Frost so far. Some have also found |> Thaw and told me that "it's not working", I know that Thaw's not without |> its share of bugs, but it *did* work for me when I was trying it out. |> Could it be DoSed now just as Frost is? | | I doubt it. Maybe it's just not very user friendly? Most likely. VolodyA suggested that they hadn't subscribed to any indices, that could be true. When I ran it, I also had intermittent problems where Thaw randomly refused to talk to the node, disabling multiple simultaneous FCP connections helped with that, but I doubt that's the case now - too advanced ;-). I'll try to find out more, but it'll only be possible next week. Regards, Victor Denisov. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFINwgW1O5++4rTuI0RAjG3AJ9KqoxSZCRBKsVc3p4Vagp0JBTicgCg1sDE flaV5a9mopIDuSgHfdRUBx0= =DNWT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
