Application: GNU IceCat
Category: Internet
Description: GNUzilla is the GNU version of the Mozilla suite, and GNU IceCat is the GNU version of the Firefox browser. Unlike Firefox, IceCat only recommends free software plug-ins and add-ons..
Download GNU IceCat 3.6 Development Test 1 [8.38MB download / 16MB installed]
(MD5: ab571e47c85a2d17154248ba919a1725)
Release Notes:
Development Test 1 (2010-01-25):
- Initial Release of GNU IceCat 3.6
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
Mozilla Firefox (and FFP) does *NOT* ship with closed source software and has not since the 3.5 release which saw the advent of the new crash reporter. That was the only closed bit. That text is basically an edited version of the text from when FF had closed source bits.
So, yes, Firefox will point to closed source plugins when you want to enable certain content online (Java, Flash, Silverlight)... but Firefox is *ALSO* entirely free software and has been for quite some time now. Saying that Icecat's advantage is that it is entirely free software is seriously disingenuous.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
thanks, I just only pulled the text from their home page thats all, but again thanks for the clarification
your friendly neighbourhood moderator Zach Thibeau
Please alter the text to be more factual. If the original publisher twists the truth in their description of it, it doesn't mean that we have to. Something like this is far more accurate:
"GNUzilla is the GNU version of the Mozilla suite, and GNU IceCat is the GNU version of the Firefox browser. Unlike Firefox, IceCat only recommends free software plug-ins and add-ons."
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Using IceCat allows us to get rid of the trademark policy from Mozilla.
Default icons, names (tm) or (r), binaries (installers)...
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html
From a software dev point of view, IceCat is an interesting solution if you want a custom browser (with different default settings, for instance) that you can redistribute.
I bet if we did a custom version with what GNU views as 'bad things' in it and called it GNU IceCat they'd have something to say about that, too. And if they didn't, all it means is that IceCat could be anything and nothing and the name has no value attached to it.
You can already do a custom version of Firefox that you can redistribute. You just can't call it Firefox and trade off the value Mozilla has built up in the brand. You're free to call it IceCat or IceWeasel or WigglyBrowser. And that's a smart move on Mozilla's part so folks don't go mucking about with it and decreasing the value of their trademark (since it's the value of their trademark that goes to paying coders, buying servers, paying for bandwidth, etc).
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I think you've missed the point - IceCat is a lot better than Firefox because it doesn't have the trademark restrictions Firefox has.
Incidently, if you did a custom version with "what GNU views as 'bad things' in it" and called it IceCat, you'd have no problem from GNU as long as you complied with the licence it's under.
It has advantages if you want to just take it and customize it without having to recompile it. That's great if you want to customize it a bit. But that also means you can legally combine it with a few spyware extensions and still call it GNU Icecat, which devalues the name. If that happens enough, then no one will want to touch GNU Icecat except techies that understand exactly what it is and which website is safe to get it from. There is value in trademarks within open source and everyone from Mozilla to Redhat to Ubuntu to Debian to SUSE understands that and requires you to follow guidelines.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
FUD.
Hey, John knows what he's talking about... he's only been working with (not for) Mozilla for upwards of 6-7 years now.
What Mozilla is doing with trademarking an open source project is in fact legitimate. Nobody who understands the issues at hand; in fact, not one high-profile member of the open source community is taking Mozilla to task for this. It's just a few random people who don't fully understand open source who think Mozilla is doing something wrong. They are not.
Recompiling open source packages and distributing them with badware is not FUD to scare people. It happens, and it's happened at a site that was made to look a lot (but not exactly) like this one, and it comes up on the first page of a Google search that someone would be likely to make to find this site. The makers of that site spam their links on other sites as well because they want people to use their hacked distributions. It's your prerogative if you want to put your head in the sand and pretend none of this has any effect on you, but don't trash talk those who are doing things right just because you've given up.
That being said, IceCat and other Firefox derivatives have the advantage of not being held back by Mozilla's trademark, but this comes at a potential cost, too. Mozilla has a lot of fans who trust Firefox and that's because they don't allow just anyone to make a Firefox with spyware bundled. The open source license does allow you to recompile it with spyware or even legit stuff, but then you have to change the name. I would like to examine the motives of anyone who has a problem with that before using their software.
Hello!
Thanks for your effort in building this Windows version of IceCat!
I'm really interested in this portable version.
It seems to be working pretty well, but have slower performances than Firefox v3.6
In fact, with Sunspider Javascript Benchmark, IceCat is 3 times slower than Firefox.
Did you build your version without optimization?
I hope you'll keep on working on this.