# Internet browser for Linux **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 19, 2004, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598 "2004-12-19T03:33:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DougC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@DougC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DougC)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/21 "2004-12-22T18:25:21Z")
> [@](#): > > If you don’t feel like installing more USB ports, they do make USB to PS2 adapters that you can try for either your mouse or keyboard. Most USB mice and keyboards come with the adapters included these days. - - - The mouse was on a PS2 adaptor previously, that is what it would not work right on. The PS/2 adaptors do not work with the keyboard, I already tried, and others online said it’s a mouse-only accessory. …I don’t think hardly any mouse nowadays really comes with a PS/2 plug, all the recent ones I have seen were USB with a PS/2 adaptor. And when I bought the keyboard the copy said it had a PS/2 plug but they lied. * * * …And what I hate about USB mice+keybords is that they are not functional until the OS has fuly booted, which it doesn’t always do every time–or you stop it from doing, in order to make necessary adjustments. _Especially_ for a Linux machine, I would have preferred PS/2 plugs. ~ ---
**Author:** ![Balduran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cc9497/32.png) [@Balduran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balduran)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/22 "2004-12-22T19:05:18Z")
> [@DougC](#): > > - > - > - The mouse was on a PS2 adaptor previously, that is what it would not work right on. The PS/2 adaptors do not work with the keyboard, I already tried, and others online said it’s a mouse-only accessory. …I don’t think hardly any mouse nowadays really comes with a PS/2 plug, all the recent ones I have seen were USB with a PS/2 adaptor. And when I bought the keyboard the copy said it had a PS/2 plug but they lied. > > * * * > > …And what I hate about USB mice+keybords is that they are not functional until the OS has fuly booted, which it doesn’t always do every time–or you stop it from doing, in order to make necessary adjustments. _Especially_ for a Linux machine, I would have preferred PS/2 plugs. > ~ Try what I suggested above. Use your favorite terminal and text editor to open “/etc/X11/XF86Config” and see if it has what I’ve written above. Usually all it takes is to modify protocol to imps/2, add the zaxis mapping line, restart X, and the scroll will work correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/23 "2004-12-22T20:48:48Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > Actually they’re saying it’s XFree86, not Linux or Mozilla, that’s troubling him. But don’t worry. XFree86 troubles everybody. And he didn’t seem to get exactly what that meant. XFree86 is included in virtually every Linux distro in existence nowadays, so it may as well be considered part of the OS. Especially since “Linux” by a technical definition just means the kernel and nothing else. Should we tell people that they’re having a problem with HURD when their Linux installs are acting up? ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/24 "2004-12-23T21:52:18Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > And he didn’t seem to get exactly what that meant. So he asks questions and finds out. > [@](#): > > XFree86 is included in virtually every Linux distro in existence nowadays, so it may as well be considered part of the OS. Well, no. Especially since it _isn’t_ a part of the OS. > [@](#): > > Especially since “Linux” by a technical definition just means the kernel and nothing else. Now you’re catching on. > [@](#): > > Should we tell people that they’re having a problem with HURD when their Linux installs are acting up? Do you even know what the HURD is? If he was having problems with that, he’d know it. ---
**Author:** ![Myglaren](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Myglaren](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Myglaren)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/25 "2004-12-23T22:04:59Z")
I found ‘Galeon’ to be a very nice browser, but also used Mozilla 1.4 and Konqueror (which I found to be somewhat kludgy) Firefox is now my current browser of choice, with occasional dips into Netscape, just for a change. Mouse is handled equally well by either system. How about a USB hub? works for me. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/26 "2004-12-24T08:07:46Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > So he asks questions and finds out. Well, no. Especially since it _isn’t_ a part of the OS. Now you’re catching on. Do you even know what the HURD is? If he was having problems with that, he’d know it. HURD is most of the rest of a minimal Linux install - outside the Kernal, the software comes from the older HURD project. It’s a silly acronym that circularly references another silly acronym. Duh. That doesn’t mean that these distinctions are useful or relevant in the slightest way for the discussion. A user who doesn’t know what XFree86 is (not claiming the OP doesn’t, but he hasn’t shown he does either) gets nothing out of the explanation that XFree86 is broken. I chimed in because the answers to the questions were pretty much unhelpful. If maintaining technical exactitude is more important than coming up with a helpful, useful response, then I guess I see why calling tech support is so irritating. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/27 "2004-12-24T10:55:34Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > Opera has made Linux versions of its browsers for years as well, and I used them before I switched to Mozilla. But Opera’s marketshare (and, therefore, web designer mindshare) has fallen, especially after the Firefox Revolution. That means fewer websites are really built with Opera in mind, which can have an effect on how good it looks. Just a minor quibble; Opera’s share hasn’t fallen, it’s been consistent at about 2% for the last year, if you believe the W3C. Most of Firefox’s gains have come out of IE, which is As It Should Be. Regardless, though, I think the number of websites designed with Opera specifically in mind was always minimal (alright, zeroish), and will continue to be. Opera has become much better at rendering the vast majority of sites, however, since the development crew there is really quite good at balancing standards-compliance with quirk tolerance. Practically the only problems I come across these days are sites which detect my browser and deliberately break themselves if they don’t find IE/Netscape/Mozilla. Strangely, these aren’t generally MS sites these days. That said, I’ve never found the Linux version of Opera to be as polished as the Windows one. The rendering engine is the same, of course, but the UI widgets and general stability don’t seem to be all that hot. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2004, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598/28 "2004-12-26T23:25:11Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > HURD is most of the rest of a minimal Linux install - outside the Kernal, the software comes from the older HURD project. It’s a silly acronym that circularly references another silly acronym. Duh. No, that’s not a usage I’ve ever heard and I actually use Linux. You could be right and I could have missed out on a usage that you have heard of, but it’s rather more likely that you are wrong. Technically speaking, the minimal Linux install is a kernel. That’s it. You can add on a libc and a shell and all of the utilities, but they should not be confused with what Linux actually is. [The BSDs, on the other hand, actually have a nontrivial base system.](http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/bsd4linux3.php) This is a fundamental difference between Linux and the BSDs, and it should not be obscured. Finally, the HURD [is a collection of servers that run on top of the Mach microkernel that can replace a more traditional monolithic Unix kernel.](http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html) It isn’t a collection of utilities in the way you apparently think of them: It includes a filesystem server, not ls. > [@](#): > > If maintaining technical exactitude is more important than coming up with a helpful, useful response, then I guess I see why calling tech support is so irritating. So, lying to people is helpful _how_? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/internet-browser-for-linux/280598.md?page=1)