BuzzPCSOS Pity really, the Web browser seemed to be quite nimble and fairly easy on resources. The setting controls certainly seemed to be quite minimal whereas my tweaking 'recipe' for Firefox grows longer each year.
To win people away from a familiar product the replacement needs to be perceived as an improvement right from the start. I guess that's why so many replacement browsers are tweaked forks of mainstream software, nothing new to learn.
that's why I loved it the same reason I loved Solus: it was not a fork, is was easy on the eyes, it was a unique creation. I think what you had to say about perception is right on. Word of mouth helps too. Thanks Buzz--I get what you are saying the smartest replacements are forks.
alfisya I would not recommend it for daily use but good enough for backup or sanity check when your main browser has issues.
About what I thought but was hoping for the best. Did not know that about youtube. I always wanted to purpose it for some duty but it never held up.
The true category of Epiphany is same as Eolie, Falkon, Midori, etc: "Lite." meaning minimum security all around, minimum/no plugins, Tamper Monkey for all...etc. I always wished a "Lite" browser meant better than "mostly functional" but Linux has not turned that corner yet...but I think Falkon has.
I never hated Monkey scripts per se, but they came from what-I-believed-to-be the sketchiest places and security was not Monkey's focus.
I digress.