Konquerer vs. Mozilla

firephoto · Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:27 pm Post subject:

I ran into this login/logout (or lack of) issue a few weeks ago. I ended up clearing some cookies, then I had to enable and allow all cookies and it worked fine. Seems as though there is some sort of problem with konqueror and multiple site cookies that it doesn't like you allowing or disallowing them manually.

Oh and also I didn't know I could open/move/rename/copy files on my webserver with firefox via an ssh connection?

_________________
#gentoo-kde on freenode

corey_s · Apprentice Joined: 29 Jun 2003 Posts: 264

Deathwing00 · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:02 am Post subject:

Split from https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-397945.html

CorpseOfMystic · Apprentice Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Posts: 159

codergeek42 · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:34 am Post subject:

[off-topic]
Omg. Deathwing00, your avatar is awesome. >^__^<
[/off-topic]

[on-topic]
Why are we even arguing this in the first place? Gentoo (and F/OSS in general) is all about choice, right? So if you like Konqeuror, use it. If you like Firefox, use it. If you like Epiphany, use it. I, personally, am a huge fan of Epiphany, but that's completely useless. Gecko and KHTML, last I read (sorry I can't find the link at the moment), were both at about the same level of standards-compliance, so that's not such a big issue anymore.
[o/n-topic]
_________________
~~ Peter: Programmer, Mathematician, STEM & Free Software Advocate, Enlightened Agent, Transhumanist, Fedora contributor
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF

cokey · Advocate Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355

CorpseOfMystic · Apprentice Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Posts: 159

Varean · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:51 am Post subject:

Konqueror isn't a very good browser, I agree. Its not supported by many websites and I don't find it very functional as a web browser anyway. I just use it as a file manager...
_________________
Registered Linux User #387568

enderandrew · l33t Joined: 25 Oct 2005 Posts: 731

Last time I checked, Firefox worked just fine ontop of KDE.

So, if you prefer Firefox over Konquerer, that doesn't really say anything about KDE vs Gnome.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile.

omp · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:45 am Post subject:

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

I've always found it interesting that some people can make the same argument that Microsoft makes for ramming its web browser into the OS at the kernel level for all intents and purposes which has proven to be stupid given the seemingly constant security issues that in part can be blamed on the way they "integrated" [There is that buzz word KDE/Gnome buffs are so fond of to the point of not making any damned sense at all since so many of the supposedly great and all powerful integrated programs are a pile of integrated crap.]IE into the OS. I am of the opinion that you cannot twist reality so that one is able to claim that the internet includes every single function in the whole damned universe. Konquer is not a superior web browser to Firefox when you use a sane definition that excludes features that are not really web browsing features. [Everything that has to do with file management essentially.] To try and iclude file management features into the whole debate of a web browser would be like saying that Windows is the greatest OS because internet explorer is a part of the kernel. Please compare appropriate feature sets before saying something is so much greater than another thing.

If Konqueror is so damned great why is it missing a built in rss reader? I can name two other web browsers that have them, the popup blocking that it does have is pretty crappy too I get popups with 3.4 [3.5 gave me a bunch of build errors so I will continue to wait for that to stabilize.] on sites I don't get popups with either of my other browsers. Why is it that when you use black themes some websites just go straight to hell with black on black text, Firefox has this sort of problem too although it does it on slightly fewer sites than Konqueror does so I would say in that respect they are both equal, Opera seems to handle darker themes the best although it does have its own problems with text fields just like the other two.. Can you configure Konqueror to use custom forms of highlighting for different types of links to delineate java script etc? Is it possible to add features to the browser in such a way that all of the features added to the browser are self contained and therefor will in all likelyhood not pollute any unique settings you might have for your DE/WM, while still keeping the functionality exactly the same regardless of what DE/WM you choose to use?

Even Internet Explorer's functionality remains absolutely consistent even after changing the shell [yes believe it or not it can be done.] yet the supposedly superior to Firefox in all ways Konqueror can't even match Internet explorer in this respect and its the one program that Konqueror can fairly be juxtaposed! Oh yea Konqueror is sooo superior to Firefox, just like Windows is the greatest Operating System ever because I never have to install a shell with it, and the shell includes a web browser which tripples as a file manager....
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

episode96 · Apprentice Joined: 08 Mar 2004 Posts: 173

KDE integration. I need no more reasons.
_________________
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.

cokey · Advocate Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355

episode96 · Apprentice Joined: 08 Mar 2004 Posts: 173

enderandrew · l33t Joined: 25 Oct 2005 Posts: 731

Here's a question for you then.

I haven't used KDE or Gnome since Mandrake 8. So I'm fairly objective here and I'm not trying to troll.

But honestly, I can't see a single reason to use Gnome.

I've seen recent benchmarks of 2.12 and 3.4, and KDE was beating Gnome in loading times and speed.
KDE is more feature rich, appears to have a better file manager, and looks better.
On top of it, QT4 is supposed to improve performance drastically, and all the announced features of KDE 4 are really starting to impress me.

Meanwhile, I keep searching for pros and cons on Gnome and I'm not finding ANYTHING. So someone please enlighten me. I've asked several times, and not once has someone come up with a single reason to use Gnome over KDE.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile.

Deathwing00 · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:57 pm Post subject:

enderandrew · l33t Joined: 25 Oct 2005 Posts: 731

Actually cokehabit has clearly turned the thread into a KDE bashing thread. He keeps maintaining there is no reason to run KDE so I'm asking why to run Gentoo.

And I read over several pages of KDE vs Gentoo here, and not once did I see any objective features, pros vs cons, or anything like that. All I saw was "KDE Suxx" or "Gnome Suxx".

So I went to Gnome's website and found nothing. And I've been Googling for weeks, and found nothing.

This is what I found:

Object oriented vs non-object oriented
QT vs GTK
C++ vs C

The only real reason I saw for running Gnome was the license and that isn't really an issue anymore. Some people were really against QT because "it wasn't really supporting OS" but the licenses have changed.

I suggested early in the thread that KDE vs Gnome shouldn't be an issue since both Konquerer and Firefox can run ontop of KDE. Others insisted on bashing KDE and I'm just trying to play devil's advocate. Besides that, I would sincerely like an answer. I'm not trying to troll. I'm trying sincerely to find out why someone would use Gnome.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile.

CorpseOfMystic · Apprentice Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Posts: 159

cokey · Advocate Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355

CorpseOfMystic · Apprentice Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Posts: 159

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

You are the only one who thinks you disproved anything, you claim victory without actually proving anything. In the past someone pointed out how Konqueror is missing a popup blocker [I think this is only true for stuff prior to 3.4, 3.4.1 is marked stable though.] and you blew that off as not even important. I already said that I get popups with Konqueror that I do not get with either of my other browsers; I've also said that it has just as many rendering problems that find thier genesis in the system theme as Firefox does. But oh I can only make snide remarks, no you can only be disingenuous and claim victory where there is none.

cokey · Advocate Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355

Jakub · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:25 pm Post subject:

I, for my part, have tried using firefox but in the end had to give it up. It was simply too slow and unresponsive. Maybe it was my problem but on the same system konqueror was super fast.

The only thing that could convince me to use firefox was the adblock extension. Konqueror has it since version 3.5 and I feel depressed when having to use anything else.

It looks great, is the fastest browser on my system (maybe apart from opera), has all the features I need, is integrated with other applications (the kate_part and kpdf_part are especially nice, also kaffeine for videos, external web pages opened as tabs in the current konq window, etc.), is very customizable (the standard setup is not nice but it took me about 2 minutes to change it, I only had to do it once). You can disable all the features you don't want (extensions and tools).

I do, however, understand, that many people use firefox, since it isn't that bad either

.

gkmac · Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:54 pm Post subject: