Bon, j’ai testé pleins de tutos depuis la sortie de Chrome pour essayer de le faire fonctionner avec Linux, mais rien à faire…
Jusqu’à ce matin, où la sortie de Wine 1.1.4 m’a permis de le faire. Voici donc un petit tuto rapide pour tous les linuxiens qui veulent tester la “chose” de Google. Je pars du principe que vous êtes sous Ubuntu mais ça devrait marcher aussi sur les autres OS Linux.

D’abord, il faut verifier que vous avez bien la dernière version de Wine, à savoir la 1.1.4

wine --version

Si ce n’est pas le cas, rajoutez le dépôt suivant dans votre sources.list et faites un apt-get update puis apt-get upgrade

deb http://wine.budgetdedicated.com/apt hardy main

Téléchargez ensuite le setup de Chrome

Et lancez l’installation

wine chrome_installer.exe

A la fin de cette installation, Chrome se lancera mais ne sera pas fonctionnel. Vous pouvez donc le refermer directement et on va installer quelques DLL pour qu’il tourne mieux.

Chargez donc le script suivant, rendez le executable et demandez lui de télécharger les fameuses DLL en question

wget http://www.kegel.com/wine/winetricks
chmod +x winetricks
./winetricks riched20 riched30

Installez ensuite les polices de caractères nécessaires à Chrome pour rester “joli tout plein”

./winetricks corefonts tahoma

Et voilà, le moment fatidique arrive… Voici la grosse ligne de commande pour lancer Google Chrome

wine ~/.wine/drive_c/windows/profiles/$USER/Local Settings/Application Data/Google/Chrome/Application/chrome.exe --new-http --in-process-plugins

Et normalement, le navigateur devrait se lancer… Je l’ai pas mal testé, il fonctionne plutôt bien mais les connexions HTTPS ne fonctionnent pas et la petite barre de chargement bleue se retrouve parfois au dessus d’autres fenêtres mais c’est pas bien gênant.

Be happy ! Et faites tourner, je suis sûr que ça va intéresser plein de monde.

YouPlayer

est un lecteur intégré à Firefox qui vous permet de conserver les liens de vos vidéos préférées, trouvées sur YouTube, DailyMotion, Google Vidéo, MetaCafe, MySpace et j'en passe. Elle se présente sous forme d'un panneau latéral et en un seul clic, vous pourrez visionner vos vidéos à satiété. Le panneau comprend aussi une fonction de recherche sur YouTube, DailyMotion, Google Vidéo, MetaCafe, MySpace.

Son utilisation est simplissime. Recherchez une vidéo qui vous intéresse à l'aide du module de recherche intégré. Une fois celle-ci trouvée faites un glisser/déposer dans la partie inférieure du volet.

Fonctionne avec Firefox: 2.0 – 3.0

Téléchargement

Helo aquí:

Chrome. Si en el navegador de Google se teclea about:internets aparecen dibujada una series de tubo en 3-D en la pantalla. Es una parodia sobre la desafortunada afirmación de que Internet es como una serie de tubos que popularizó un político americano de limitados conocimientos de lo que es la Red. Los tubos son de Pipes, un módulo creado por Marcelo Vianna en 1997, para XScreenSaver. XScreenSaver es un salvapantallas para Linux creado por jwz. Jamie Zawinski (jwz) es un héroe de Internet: era uno de los ingenieros de Mosaic/Netscape y trabajó con el objetivo de cambiar el mundo a mediados de los 90. Para cambiar el mundo, lo último que hizo jwz antes de abandonar Netscape fue liderar el movimiento para liberar Netscape de modo que como software libre pudiera tener un futuro, antes de fenecer ante Microsoft. Ese futuro fue la Fundación Mozilla y el renacido navegador Firefox. Firefox logró hacerse con cierta popularidad frente a Microsoft, y todo ese proceso sin duda inspiró a Google para crear su propio navegador, llamado Chrome. Si en el navegador de Google se teclea about:internets...

(Vía una serie de tubos desde Valleywag.)

# Enlace Permanente

Social media tools are some of the latest crazes these days. We happen to be huge fans of a ton of them here on ReadWriteWeb. Yet the biggest problem with most social media tools is that they aren't for everyone. There's a constant debate on how early adopters can persuade more mainstream users to try these tools out. We might have the most flexible social media tool available for any user: Yoono!

Yoono is a Firefox extension that sits in your browser's sidebar and provides access to a ton of widgets that help keep you connected to your friends. The available widgets range from your favorite social networks such as Twitter, FriendFeed, Facebook, and Flickr, to providing related web page recommendations.However the things that Yoono is able to do are endless. Essentially Yoono is a tool that can do a lot more than it seems at first glance.

For mainstream users, Yoono is the perfect tool for casual surfing habits. With Yoono in your sidebar you can easily access all of your contacts from popular social networks, instant messaging platforms and receive instant update notifications of what's going on. You can keep up with your Facebook friend's updates (sorry Myspace users). If you're on Flickr, you can view the latest pics from the photostreams of your friends. For those that don't wish to leave their current page just to see one of your friend's latest pics, Yoono provides a fast loading overlay of any picture you hover your mouse over. You can also add comments to Flickr photos and upload your own images right from Yoono. For Twitter users, Yoono pushes the latest replies, direct messages, and updates from your twitter friends with the ability to reply and send updates right back. There are also widgets for Google Reader, Digg, and Youtube.

Early adopters can also find Yoono useful. Of course, the reasons stated above for mainstream users will also apply to early adopters. As an early adopter I've found more unique ways to Yoono. Normally I would overload Google Reader with a bunch of feeds that I'd like to keep track of. Flickr photostreams are a prime example of this for me. Now, I use Yoono instead to keep track of such feeds. Their web notes feature is great for annotating pages and sharing them with friends and contacts. The Discoveries widget is also valuable for finding related sites and services. We don't recommend Yoono for heavy social media usage. However, Yoono can provide assistance in lightening the load of other tools that you might use. It's just that flexible.

This extension does what it says it does; it compliments your current tools instead of replacing them. There's still plenty of room for Yoono to grow. Some of these widgets are not the real deal. The Gmail, Google Reader, and Digg widgets are more like mobile versions of their web service counterparts. Also, the extension has had numerous problems with several Firefox themes. So if you happen to run into a bug or two, turn off your theme to see if that helps. Installing a bunch of widgets at once could result in a serious overload and make Yoono seem very unappealing. Essentially, keep the amount of widgets you add low.

Learn How to Use Yoono in less than 6 Minutes

We think anyone could find Yoono to be a valuable social media tool that's easy to use. The extension provides numerous offerings and flexible options to users. Signing into social networks is a breeze and updates are instant. Here's a clip on how to use Yoono is less than 6 minutes:

• A Tale of Two Tunnels: Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 | SocialComputingMagazine.com Thomas Vander Wal does an excellent job comparing Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0, topics that are very much in the forefront of business leaders trying to understand how their businesses are changing in the 21st century.
• A Lightweight SQL Database for Cloud and Web in Launchpad Co-created by MySQL's Brian Akers, this is a database that's optimized for cloud and Web computing. I will be examining this more in the future to see how this works since databases are vital back-ends to Web 2.0 applications (Data is the new Intel Inside.)
• Google Apps adoption rates up | Videos on ZDNet Great video from this week's Office 2.0 talking about the adoption of cloud applications. Google says 3,000 businesses a day are signing up for their applications and the grow curve is going exponential. Business software is really moving out to the network, along with everything else.

This was the week Google surprised the world with Chrome, its own open source web browser. Just imagine the deadly effect that had on a dozen or more browser-specific start-ups in Silicon Valley. Lots of readers are wondering what I think of Chrome, like my opinion really matters. Chrome is okay -- faster, but not faster enough to make me change for that reason alone. It's better than IE and almost better than Firefox except there are no plug-ins to speak of. What I really wonder, though, is why Google bothered to do a browser at all? Now I know.

It's not like there aren't enough web browsers in the world. There are plenty. And though Internet Explorer still dominates the Windows market, Firefox (not to mention Opera, Safari, etc.) is there to keep Microsoft honest,. So why did Google even bother? There are two general opinions on this and they are not mutually exclusive. Naturally one opinion is widely held and the other is held mainly by me.

The first reason why Google had to do its own browser comes courtesy of my friend Dave:

"People are looking at Google Chrome and actually think Google is competing in the so-called Browser Wars," said Dave. "This is not the case at all. Google doesn't care what happens to Chrome. And, in fact would be absolutely thrilled if Firefox and Opera enhanced their browsers to the point where they trounce Chrome into extinction. Google doesn't make a dime off of Chrome. Its money comes from people using the web browser -- any browser.

"What Google does not want is Microsoft creating a browser that sucks. Actually, Google doesn't mind if Microsoft's browser sucks. What they really don't want is Microsoft to make a browser that sucks and everyone ends up using it. And, if the IE8 beta shows us anything, making a really sucky web browser is Microsoft's true ambition.

"Google's main concern is quite simple: Browsers should render pages accurately, and the JavaScript engine in the browser should be fast, efficient, and bug free. On both counts, IE8 is an abomination. JScript just doesn't behave very well and is buggy. And, IE's page-rendering engine simply does not follow the standard. Because of this, Google has to keep development on their Google Applications quite generic and simply cannot implement the features they want. You'll also notice that Microsoft recently has been putting on some very compelling web content that is only available if you use Windows and IE."

Now back to Bob. Everything Dave says makes sense and I agree with it, but it doesn't answer my real question, which is not "Why did Google have to do a browser?" but rather, "What made it impossible for Google NOT to do a browser?"

The answer to this latter question begins with Dave noticing Microsoft's recent IE- and Windows-specific web content, which cracks open the door on Google's greatest fear -- that Microsoft will turn off ads in IE.

Microsoft can't do that, can they?

Microsoft can do pretty much whatever it wants in this area. There is plenty of browser competition. They can hobble their own product if they like, though it would drive users away from IE -- from a product that brings Microsoft no direct revenue anyway -- so what's the risk?

Microsoft turns off the ads in IE and what happens? Google takes a huge revenue hit, is knocked down three pegs in the eyes of Wall Street, while pretty much nothing happens to Microsoft, which would have just shown the world who is still the sheriff.

I am not saying this is going to happen, but I AM saying that it COULD happen -- and that very remote possibility is, by itself, enough to make Google have to produce its own browser.

Let me be clear that there doesn't have to be any subterfuge here on Microsoft's part. They can simply turn off the ads in IE, declaring it a non-commercial product. If you don't like it, get another browser -- there are plenty to choose from. Microsoft's revenue would go almost unchanged while Google's would plummet, if only for a few weeks or months -- just long enough for Microsoft to come through with a second punch, that is if they have thought that far ahead.

If you are wondering whether people really sit around Google asking if Microsoft would actually do something like this, well they do.

So to avoid that eventuality (and to do all the other things that Dave said, above) here we have Chrome, Google's attempt to direct the future of browser development and take some momentum away from IE.

Chrome promotes WebKit rendering, which is also done in Safari. It would not surprise me if WebKit didn't make some inroads shortly with Firefox and Opera, helping somewhat to turn the tide away from IE. Yet WebKit will change, too, by adopting Google's V8 JavaScript engine, replacing JavaScriptCore in both WebKit and Safari. Thus all the open source browsers (and Safari) become better and more alike, which helps them against IE.

A rising tide floats all (open source) ships. Google needs open source browsers to become even more competitive with IE, hence Chrome is a reference design that Google knows will work brilliantly with all Google Apps.

So much for Chrome: Now for something REALLY scary. I've been hearing that peer-to-peer file sharing has declined a bit. Actually, it's the rate of growth that has declined, but in a market where volume is always rising and prices always falling, even a decline in growth can be significant. This is happening for lots of reasons (market saturation, summer vacation, etc.) but the effect appears to be real, much to the relief of the RIAA and MPAA, which hate people sharing music, TV shows, and movies that they see as violating the intellectual property rights of their members.

But I think something else is actually happening. People are just finding new ways to share files -- ways that are harder to detect and even more chilling for society to prohibit.

Look at where P2P came from in the first place. The idea behind BitTorrent and similar programs was that many people wanted the same content and few users could afford the bandwidth to run their own dedicated servers, so sharing files by caching and re-serving small pieces of files was very efficient, especially with flat-rate bandwidth. Depending on your point of view, P2P has been a huge success or a huge pain in the ass.

But all the while, the cost of Internet bandwidth has come down A LOT. Remember P2P was born in the 1990s when most users still had dial-up connections. With the cost of Internet backbone bandwidth dropping 50 percent per year for the last decade or more, the economics have changed dramatically and it has become reasonable to effectively have your own server. No, I'm not talking about YouTube, I'm talking about dedicated servers used in large part to distribute movies and music. I'm talking about any of a number of Internet backup services.

The poster child for this new kind of service is RapidShare, a German file-sharing service that will let you distribute files up to 200 megs each for free and up to two gigs for not much money -- 55 Euros per year -- with no limit on the total number of files, total storage, total downloads or even total simultaneous downloads. Rip your copy of The Dark Knight, store it on RapidShare, then send the download URL to anyone you like or simply post it somewhere on the web. It's not as efficient as P2P, but it sure is easier AND harder to detect since nothing but http is used.

Can you see where I am going with this? How are the MPAA and the RIAA likely to respond if this technique becomes really popular? They are going to want to spy on us more, even to the point of auditing (or attempting to audit) our network backups. More lawsuits, more grandmothers and little kids being sued, less privacy.

I'm sure the RIAA and MPAA will fail in the long run. Once custom protocols and ports are dropped and you can't tell the difference between a spreadsheet and I Am Curious (Yellow) the game is up. But we're still years -- and a lot of pain -- away from that.

ecobuscador pagano

Web OS

965ª Parte Greenseng. Ecobuscador pagano

greenseng

Continuo con nuestro gozo en un pozo de los ecobuscadores que se basaban en poner el fondo en negro a google y que según lo estudiado por ellos no funciona y esta es otra posible alternativa, de hecho creo que funciona con el principio de quién contamina paga, o quién la caga la paga, muy de Kyoto la cosa de hecho los paises ricos compran los certificados de los paises pobres o subdesarrollados para mantener sus niveles de contaminación, en fin el capitalismo es ansi ya sabéis todo tiene un precio hasta nuestra conciencia ecológica lo que no tiene recambio por ahora es nuestro planeta y si, pagano aquí se entiende por pagar los certificados que venden Ximo