Konqueror.org Launched - KDE2 Web Browser 205
Rob Kaper writes: "The KDE team has launched www.konqueror.org, a site devoted to their browser component for KDE2. "Konqi" can do HTML4, CSS2, SSL, Java, Javascript, SMB shares and soon even Netscape plug-ins such as Flash. I've seen it in action and looks like a very worthy competitor to Mozilla."
The release status of the application (Score:4)
It's an interesting world to be in, and the site is only going to get better. As the webmaster, I can say that it *will* definitely get better.
-Chris
konqi??? (Score:4)
You've got to be kidding me. Will the person responsible for this step forward so that they might be beaten with a pointy stick? It sounds like a bloody teletubby for gods sake!
Does anyone actually think to themselves, "ooh i wonder if there's anything new on slashdot, I'll just fire up Konqi".
This is right up there with Geeko, the Suse chameleon/gecko/greenturdwithatail.
Really... If you're going to name your software, for the love of god, please try to make it something inspiring instead of this cutesy crap
Re:An intriguing idea, however... (Score:1)
Ie: if you have 4 panes open, one with your local files, one with a browser, one with a file view of your files on a remote server, logged in as root, and one with a user login on a system you're in the process of changing from a user system to an mp3 server.. well, I see a bit of potential for error there. ie: Bad Idea
However, if you do a 2 pane system, one of local files, one of say, a remote ftp server where you're uploading files, this is a Good Idea.
:)
alan, stating the obvious again...
Re:An intriguing idea, however... (Score:1)
----
Re:I'm impressed (Score:1)
I can take an arbitrary piece of XML, add a stylesheet directive and turn it into a wonderful web presentation of the same data.
The book example shows Mozilla rendering the same XML fragment as a two great looking E-commerce interfaces, from the same data. Just alter the CSS and all your database content flows into the new layout.
You can achieve 99% of this with HTML and scripting, but why bother? If browsers like Mac IE and Mozilla support XML properly it will all Just Work (TM)
Shut up and got write some codes for Aribic Suppor (Score:1)
Re:What about the CSS support? (Score:2)
why aren't browsers not only keeping up, but staying ahead of the curve?
Because the people they are selling web browsers to (well, selling in a metaphorical sense) are people who view web pages, not those who make them.
Sure, you can argue that being able to display all of the CSS standards would result in a really kick-ass browser that joe-user would flock to since it renders tons of pages really well. But, by and large, struggling to adhere to every minor spec in CSS is a diminishing return proposition. If you hit the high points, you can claim CSS (or CSS1) compatibility. Some of the CSS stuff will work, and some people's pages will look neat. Makes the marketing guys happy. Makes users think you're cool. And you don't have to pay all those programmers to do a thorough job.
Let's face it, there are many other pressures on the browsers maker. If you were project manager for IE or Netscape, and you could develop either better support of CSS features, which may marginally make the rendering of pages better, or a killer end-user feature that will make joe-user go "good golly! lookee here!", which will you go for? And, of course, and spare resources you'd probably put into trying to make the thing crash a bit less often, or making it a bit less of a godawful bloated stinking whale of an application.
I suspect, by this point, that a lot of resources are spent just trying to cope with how bloated these apps are.
As for those that are up-and-coming (perhaps you'd throw Mozilla into this category) there is a struggle to get all of the "must haves" into their browser. Think of it. For a complete browser these days, you have to interpret two markup languages (HTML and XML), one scripting language, tie into Java, have a plugin architecture, support a bunch of graphics formats, tie into e-mail programs (or supply your own), and support multiple platforms. And you have to throw that program up against all of the heinous web pages out there that were poorly written, or perhaps just written in a way to try to cope with both IE and Netscape. That's a tall order... and will take a long time to develop. The pressure to cut corners and get the thing out the door is high (especially if you're a for-pay development concern). I'll be impressed if Konqueror can deliver on all of that within a reasonable time.
WinKDE? (Score:1)
Besides, you can run it from any desktop environment you want - as long as you have the KDE libraries installed
Which means you have to port the KDE libs to your platform first, unless they already make KDE for BeOS, Mac OS, or Microsoft Windows.
Re:An intriguing idea, however... (Score:2)
I suggest you read about WebDAV ( http://www.webdav.org ).
Re:KDE marketing: Screenshots first, code later (Score:1)
Re:Hi, you're a clever troll! (Score:1)
Shouldn't you be working? Business must be slow at VA if you've got the time to sit around and troll on Slashdot. I hope for your sake its your coffee break.
Considering VA Linux's whopping 5% marketshare among Linux hardware vendors [excite.com], according to IDC, I can't say im really surprised. Way to go, by the way. You guys edged past tough big-name Linux vendors like "Fujitsu Siemens" with 3%, and uhh...oh wait, you guys arent doing better than any of the others.. Oh well.
Truth hurts, doesn't it. [excite.com]
Bowie J. Poag
Re:Oh no! (Score:1)
Jonathan Moran
Re:Microsoft Anti-Trust (Score:1)
The KDE guys have not littered the field with their enemies who have been ruthlessly destroyed or muscled aside for the sake of commercial gain. Also, KDE sells to everyone for the same price (free) rather than having "most-favored" pricing for sycophants and "screw-you" pricing for those that have "transgressed" against them. Finally, KDE does not completely dominate anything in particular, and exist within a movement where doing so is not a favorable objective.
-L
Re:Again reinventing the wheel (Score:1)
Take some simple application that runs on the console, and manipulates files. If a hacker had a particular itch to have his files manipulated a certain way, then he would take this source code, add a couple of new parameter switches, and the new functionality was born.
However, now, it is a lot more complex. The projects are larger, and are inheriting more structure from their ancestors. I.e. Konqueror relates more to KDE, Gnome apps are relate more to Gnome, and Mozilla had to go for the cross platform look. Now, its not so much that people fix software to scratch an itch, its because they disagree with the way someone is scratching it.
Granted, Gnome, and KDE need their own file managers/web browsers, but that is more because the two do not have the same standards, and once you have multiple desktop environments, then you have multiple apps for that desktop.
Its no longer suitable to just take mozilla code, and a feature here and there. These applications are way beyond tweaking some file manipulation software. We are talking about hugely feature rich applications, and to add those features, it may be easier to rewrite than do s hoddy job up putting a square peg in a round hole.
I.e. Gnome with Bonobo could provide the ability to implement a HTML render in a spreadsheet (Gnumeric). To do this, you need a HTML renderer, and a spreadsheet. You can either take an existing spreadsheet / renderer, fork the code, and make it bonobo aware, or you can just write your own. The problem with the former solution is that the structure of the software may not make it that easy to be Bonobo aware.
I think the number of applications being written makes things pretty exciting, and I think it will take a couple of attempts to get things right. KDE 2, Gnome 2....as Eric Raymond said, be prepared to throw the first one away.
Regards,
Andy
What it is is this (Score:1)
Since being "online" is a separate, different experience or activity, they have wanted and used Internet apps that do it all in one place. They log on to surf pr0n, and it's nice that their browser alerts them to the fact that there's mail to pick up, because being transients on the network, they aren't going to know any other way. When they're done, they log off and close one app, and only one, and go do their strictly local stuff.
Maybe that preference for kitchen-sink internet interfaces will change, but then again people are used to it now, and they believe it is the simple way to accomplish their online activities. Do I need to go into how they view and value simplicity?
why not stick to LYNX? (Score:1)
Re:Microsoft Anti-Trust (Score:2)
it's not really the same, though somewhat similar.
The difference is that, in the Microsoft case, they were putting in a browser to expand an almost-monopoly in OSes to an almost-monopoly in browsers.
The difference is mostly that
Re:Why Konqueror? (Score:1)
A great troll!. It sucks you in with a good intro, and keeps you there with things that are actually TRUE. Then BAM! The troll side hits you like a ton of bricks.
This kind of thing makes my work day a lot more fun
Re:Released? (Score:3)
Besides, you can run it from any desktop environment you want - as long as you have the KDE libraries installed, you don't need to be running KDE's window mangager or any other KDE tools to use Konqueror.
RPMs of a recent CVS snapshot for Red Hat Linux can be found at
http://people.redhat.com/bero/experimen tal/ [redhat.com]. Konqueror is part of the kdebase package.
oops.. correction. (Score:1)
Cut out the "coverage BEFORE IT WAS EVEN A COMPLETE RECOMMENDATION" part.
Rami
--
Re:A threat to mozilla? really? (Score:1)
Yes indeed, KDE uses the very powerful component technology called KParts. It's mentionned on www.konqueror.org [konqueror.org] - you should really read it
As to being a threat to Mozilla, that is certainly not the goal. Providing something that works well (in terms of rendering, memory usage, stability etc.), and providing a choice, are more the goals. And konqueror is much more than 'just' a web browser...
Fully agreed... (Score:1)
Re:Moderate this down. (Score:1)
You get a life, I didn't use my plus one bonus, my default level just happens to be 2. If there were a -1 bonus I'd probably use it for shit like this so I don't have to listen to you little pussies bitch and moan, but there ain't one.
There, maybe this will bring my karma down. If not, someone please -1 me, several times preferably.
so? (Score:3)
file manager?
Document viewer?
Customizable?
Uh... so they want to be Emacs? (somebody had to say it =) )
"You want to kiss the sky? Better learn how to kneel." - U2
Re:KDE2/Konqueror RPMs (Score:1)
Re:[ot] wired mag (Score:1)
Nice troll... everyone knows there was NEVER a time that Wired didn't suck.
Suggested experiment (Score:1)
Install a Windows98 or NT4 (sp6a) or W2K system.
Install a Linux system, with KDE. Add Konqueror.
Run both for a little while to see how each behaves.
Now remove Konqueror from the Linux box and remove IE from the Windows box. To be fair, reboot both systems. Explore each system again.
Does removing Konqueror have the same effect on Linux with KDE as removing IE from Windows does? If so, then there is a case. Now, not having run the experimnet myself, I don't *know* the result... but I know which way I'd bet.
Re:Explorer.exe (Score:1)
Re:Pretty nifty (Score:1)
But what I'm wondering, is how low a system do you have? KDE/Qt libs hardly "bog down" a system in my experience. I suppose if you have less than P200/32MB it's an issue, but come now K6's are up to 550 Mhz, and memory is back down to roughly $1US per meg (less if you look a little).
Starting up Mozilla, I show 21MB of memory in use. So that's going to be a stetch for any terribly low-end system. This argument of system resources is just pretty much futile. Even when I was in college, living off my few hundred dollars a month Army National Guard pay, I was able to save and put together a reasonable system for the time.
Re:An intriguing idea, however... (Score:2)
--
Re:Sound familiar? (Score:1)
Update: KDE 2.0 release schedule (Score:2)
First beta (1.90, "Konfucious")in a week, gold (2.0, "Kopernicus") in September.
Re:Flamebait??!! For giving his honest opinion??? (Score:1)
Re:Sound familiar? (Score:2)
Not quite.
I can't speak for all of us, but my version of that rule (and I have the impression that most other KDE/Gnome developers share it) is more like
"Microsoft is bad, but that doesn't mean everything they do is bad".
If Microsoft comes up with something good (which has, by the way, almost never been the case - virtually all of the good stuff they have has been copied from someone else), the fact that Microsoft has it is not a reason not to re-implement it.
Having the option to make the UI look a lot like theirs is also a good thing because most future Linux/*BSD/... users are Windows users right now, and they don't want to relearn everything.
For those of us who don't like this UI look, it can easily be switched to something nicer.
Both KDE and Gnome are reasonably configurable about looks by now.
Re:Wondering... (Score:1)
Re:konqi??? (Score:1)
E-mail in web browsers (Score:1)
What does e-mail have to do with a browser?
Mail.com [mail.com], Coldmail.com [coldmail.com], Hotmail.com [hotmail.com], Yahoo.com [yahoo.com], AOL.com webmail, etc. The good ones have encrypted login pages.
Oh no... (Score:1)
Explorer.exe (Score:1)
I wonder how long before MS does something similar and calls it an "Innovation"
I'd call that the Win98 explorer.exe, where you can type a Web URL into the pathname bar.
Please make us a good browser (Score:1)
Call this a flame if you want, but I want a slim browser that supports all the latest features. KDE seem to be on a good path to that end.
Re:Way to abuse that +1 bonus, eh? (Score:2)
Yeh, I know how it works. I also know what the +1 box is for. Just beacuse a certan number of your posts were good at one point in time dosn't mean that all of them will be all the time. If you want to say something usless, click the box.
When I read a +2 I don't want to see a one line comment saying "Read the FAQ...moron". I don't litter in the +2 space please.
Oh no, another excuse to flame Mozilla (Score:2)
- This isn't trying to be cross platform in the same was as Mozilla is and this has a head start in terms of simplicity.
- A lot of the features claimed in the article are targets, not where the package is right now
Knowing how good KDE hackers are, I'm sure this will turn out to be every bit as good as they claim it is and for KDE users, it will be a better fit to that environment because of the component technology it uses. But whatever sucess Konqueror scores, there is still a place for Mozilla.--
Re:Wondering... (Score:2)
There was no indication of when this wonderful beast could finally be up and running. Reading between the lines in some places, it is not ready yet.
Oh, and... (Score:1)
--
Re:KDE marketing: Screenshots first, code later (Score:2)
KOffice could do a lot of interesting things when the first screenshots were put up - it just turned out the technology used was not reliable, so it was rewritten.
Also, this type of "marketing" (I wouldn't call it that) is, to an extent, required - we need users because in opensourceland, users == developers, and you can't get something like KOffice with only one person.
(By the way, I think it's odd you'd mention XFree86 as someone who doesn't do it - did you forget all the time before 4.0 ("we'll have 3D support then",
I like KDE's Web Browser (Score:2)
I feel it coming together. (Score:3)
I can see this assemblage of stuff morphing into a VB like application platform.
Re:Component architecture (Score:1)
Yes, KDE 2.0 uses a component architecture... haven't looked at nautilus much, but basically the way KDE 2.0 and Konqueror works is that pretty much everything is a component.
This is a quote from an interview with Mosfet (one of the KDE 2.0 developers)
"The main difference is now KDE2 is heavily component based, focusing of the browser. All of the KOffice applications (KWord, KPresenter KIllustrator, KSpread, KImageShop, KIllustrator, KChart, and KFormula) as well as many other KDE applications such as the PS/PDF viewer, mpeg and image viewers, and DVI viewers are all components now - internet transparent and embeddable in the browser. You can even embed the terminal application in the browser and change directories using the arrow buttons ;-) Pretty cool. KDE easily boasts the most extensive and complete component model support for Unix desktops."
The interview is located here [olinux.com.br]
.technomancer
Re:Sound familiar? (Score:1)
What the future will be is the embedding they are doing right now with KDE and Gnome, everything is a component and if you want HTML support in your texteditor, KLABAM! Just embed that HTML component.
Thimo
--
Re:Sound familiar? (Score:2)
The objection in Microsoft's case is that the browser if foisted upon everyone who only wants the operating system. When you try to patch the operating system by installing a service pack for Windows NT, it requires you to install Internet Explorer. The browser is similarly bundled with a variety of other Microsoft software. You cannot install IIS nor Exchange without first installing Internet Explorer. I find this less disturbing because IIS and Exchange are not core components of the operating system, but it still indicative of a trend.
The same objection will never be made in the case of Linux. You will always be able to have Linux without whatever you don't want. Download, configure, build. Make your own distribution. It is what RMS is always saying but nobody is listening: Free Software is about Freedom. With Linux, KDE, GNOME, Mozilla, and the rest, you get to decide.
Re:Way to abuse that +1 bonus, eh? (Score:1)
Never checked that button in my life. Read the FAQ on how default posting levels work moron.
AWESOME IDEA (Score:1)
Re:Konqi? (Score:1)
I also remember learning about Einstein's Theory of Relativity on PBS on the weekends when I was in junior high.. with the show switching between the professor in the classroom, the semi-CG, and the shots of scientists in the 1800's walking around with scrolls.
Re:What about the CSS support? (Score:4)
Care to share where some of the worst bombs are? :-) Seriously, I've noticed that the latest version of Explorer on the Mac and Mozilla on, well, anything, do an almost perfect job at CSS1, at least according to the w3.org test suite [w3.org]
That's the sound of the market not insisting on standards compliance. But note that things are really beginning to catch up now. Within a year, I susptect sites that don't effectively use CSS (including slashdot) are going to look increasingly dorky.
Really, really hard I think. Seriously, once you start getting to support CSS at the level of units in ems, exes picas, mm and pixels when your output is some random CRT, I think it would make the strong weep.
CSS3 is, alas, way out there; there's not even a unified proposal yet [w3.org]
I suspect that the first universal thing we'll see out of CSS3 is the paged media stuff, which is already sort of available in Explorer.
Doing style right is hard, and I think everybody can see now that it's worth doing right. At least, I hope that's the case...
Re:I feel it coming together. (Score:2)
Misattributed Quote (Score:2)
-- Fred Brooks _The Mythical Man Month_
Re:An intriguing idea, however... (Score:2)
Am inclined to agree. They've done it because it's 'cool' and shows off the elegance of the underlying componentised design, I guess, but the very screenshots they use to show this off clearly demonstrate why this is a usability nightmare:
Here you've got several unrelated applications munged together in panes of one window, with one menu bar and tool bar for all of them, but one status bar for each of them, which seems unrelated to the content pane. It's unclear how the panes relate to each other and how changes in one might affect the others and the rest of the system.
The advantage of this over having separate windows which the user can manage themselves? None AFAICT.
Konq's a great web browser though. I easily prefer even v1 to Netscape 4.
--
This comment was brought to you by And Clover.
The Koolness of KOM (Score:2)
A) In this case, the Microsoft way is the right way.
B) Konqueror and to a slightly lesser extent, IE, are not one huge app.
By integrating access to all sorts of data, the user experiance is greatly simplified and made much more efficient. Maybe it's just me, but browsing some files, typing in a URL to download a file, then going back to the file manager to unzip it and install is sheer coolness (or Koolness!)Normally, this efficiency would come at the expense of speed and bloat, but not in this case. Such is the magic of COM (or KOM, what KDE calls its clone if it) Because Konqueror and IE are implemented as a set of COM objects, these can be loaded at will. Unlike Bonobo (which is a damn ugly architecture, IMHO) large portions of applications with a significant amount of glue inbetween are not loaded. Instead, the system is built on a set of small reusable object. In some cases the overall bloat of the system can actually go down! Take, for example, MS Word. When IE browses over to a MS word file, the MS word editing object is loaded and inserted into IE. If you had wanted to see it, you would have had to open up word anyway, or a redundant version of the interface would have had to have been built into IE. In the case both word and IE browsing a word document are loaded, then only one copy of the editing object is loaded into memory. See, magic! This object-ness can become even more interesting. Imagine a system API implemented as a set of COM objects. (Kinda like DirectX without the hungarian notation.) Now the system is VERY cleanly extendible, with no dependencies on a specific version of the API and no ulgy _createWindowEx2ExtendedEnhancedAFX()-type function calls. In addition to all that, it's fast. Common COM local object calls are about has efficient was a C++ virtual function call (it's a deference through a v-table) Compare this to all the marshalling and dispatching inherent in Cobra, and you'll see why COM is so nifty. So it's fast, flexible, and can save memory. What's not to like?
Re:does it do DHMTL? (Score:2)
netmeister.org doesn't work (black page), but a quick check at validator. w3.org [w3.org] shows why...
Please try making the pages more standards-compliant.
Yay! (Score:2)
It just browses stuff whether it be the web, ftp or local files.
Pretty nifty (Score:2)
However, I use Window Maker, and I don't want to bog down my system with the QT libs. So it's not really something for me.
Maybe one of the Mozilla-based browsers that come out next year will be right for someone in my situation. I just want something light-weight that'll handle HTML 4.0, javascript, and the other standards-based stuff. I really don't care for the proprietary things like Realmedia, Flash, and so on.
I'll take the first 100% standards-based, light-weight, speedy, crash-proof browser for Linux that comes along.
Re:ftp.kde.org /.ed? (Score:2)
If you still can't get there, you might want to try
http://people.redhat.com/bero/experimen tal/ [redhat.com]
or
http://www.nebsllc.com/kde/ftpkde2/curr ent/ [nebsllc.com]
for current KDE snapshots.
Re:I feel it coming together. (Score:2)
I can see this assemblage of stuff morphing into Mozilla. :-) Seriously, I dunno about the file system stuff, but the rest of it sounds a lot like XPToolkit [mozilla.org] combined with XPCOM [mozilla.org]. Some people would argue that we really didn't need two or three different groups persuing the same kind of architecture, but I'm just as happy to see that multiple groups have caught on to the same basic idea, which is a pretty good one. Well, except for the javascript part; I still can't think very pleasant thoughts about that...
Re:It's already here... (Score:2)
Me, I want a browser with support for HTML 4, CSS1, and perhaps XML.
It could happen with Lynx but will it?
Re:Evolution -- next generation email client and P (Score:2)
So it's a copy of Magellan for KDE?
If you want to think of it that way, go ahead. :^) I can assure you that the Evolution developers are thinking of it as a substitute for Outlook, not Magellan. But since they all seem to be in about the same application space, it doesn't really matter.
If you want a free software IMAP reader, and you're adventurous, you could always try Mutt [mutt.org] or GNUS [gnus.org] in the meantime. :^)
Just wait 'til September (Score:2)
--
Re:Why Konqueror? (Score:2)
There, you will see hundreds of applications; freeware, shareware and (I think) demos doing everything their authors could imagine. A lot of them duplicate each other. Welcome to the real world.
As for Ivory Towers, where are you? Cuba? China? A company that only uses M$ products? Duplication is normal, otherwise we would all be using whatever text processors were available in 1985.
Konquerer is another web browser with lots of lovely add-ons. If it is the best, I will move to it. If not, Mozilla should be ready by then.
Re:Way to abuse that +1 bonus, eh? (Score:2)
take my karma, please!
Re:future capabilities! (Score:2)
css1 is almost completed.
css2 has partial support.
Java applets work.
JavaScript still needs some work.
They are working at blinding speeds, though.
Try it out for yourself if you really want to know.
-- Thrakkerzog
Re:Why Konqueror? (Score:2)
When both of these were started, there was no lightweight, modern, open source rendering widget available for the approrpiate language and toolkit, and therefore both projects developed one.
KDE had the head start, and thus their widget was getting pretty capable by the time Moz was OSed. Gnome were a little behind, and therefore it was worth them switching to Mozilla (And recently this work has been taken up by Eazel for Nautilus).
The result: both Konqueror and Nautilus look as though they will be pretty capable. If they maintain some sort of parity, I guess who uses which will depend on which desktop they use (and therefore to some extent which Linux distro).
The competition will encourage developers to provide good standards support, and to fix any deficiencies in their project. Neither side will be able to argue that 'You need 64Mb for a modern web browser' if the competitor runs in 32Mb.
So I am convinced that Konqueror is a good thing, even though I expect to be browsing on Nautilus a year from now.
Re:Why Konqueror? (Score:2)
That's precisely what is *not* needed. Free Software and Open Standards are all about *interoperability*. For example - Corel might be producing the Linux distribution you want: it works out of the box and requires very little tinkering.
However, I would expect to be able to exchange files with you, created on (say) a Debian box, or a BSD box, or a Linux box created for myself from scratch. It's all about choice.
You are free to use a 100% KDE or Gnome setup if you so choose: you will find that if you only use Gnome applications, for example, they will work together very well.
... but it's a choice. I you then decide to use Athena Ghostview, you have that option. Isn't that fair enough?
--
KDE2/Konqueror RPMs (Score:4)
It's not complete and bugfree, and it has several flaws, but trying it out just to see the huge improvements from KDE1 is fun! :-)
--
Re:Ehhm,isn't this... (Score:2)
In a technical sense, though, it makes sense to integrate browser components with other parts of a system. For example, a HTML control could be made into a general GUI object, and used from things such as help browsers; graphic file decoders, a JavaScript engine and such may also be modularised as that. Which doesn't necessarily mean putting a web-navigation toolbar on every window in the system or having directories shown by default as "web pages".
As for non-GUI-dependent applications, they can be useful. (I read all my mail with mutt in an xterm.) Though as far as console-based browsers go, they're unlikely to advance far beyond where Lynx is today.
Re:I feel it coming together. (Score:2)
Not to mention work going on with wxWindows, which really rocks, especially combined with Python.
I really agree that having multiple groups working on competing projects is a good thing. There are different sets of assumptions which lead to different solutions. Prime examples: how cross platform? Relatively stand alone or part of a larger desktop environment? Run natively or in a browser?
What's really clear to me is that there needs to be a good solution that plays in the current VB space - quick and dirty bolt together applications developed with relatively low levels of expertise. VB has the corporate IT market strapped over a barrel.
As far as the javascript part is concerned, well, it's not my favorite language, but it could bring in a significant new developer base that already exists in many corporate IT departments.
Re:A threat to mozilla? really? (Score:2)
The export restrictions are no longer there, the RSA patent will expire soon (and has never been valid outside of the US), and since Konqueror doesn't use RSA directly (that's OpenSSL's part), it's not a problem.
As for the component architecture, KDE is using a shared library approach (the embedded widgets are actually in the same process), which is functionally similar to what bonobo does, but very different technically.
Both approaches have their good and bad sides - bonobo is more general, the KDE approach is more lightweight (and therefore faster) and probably more stable.
Re:I'm impressed (Score:2)
XHTML (I presume this is what you mean with XML?) is not yet fully supported, but most pages written in XHTML display well in Konqueror (to a renderer, there's not much of a difference between HTML 4.0 and XHTML 1.0).
Re:konqi??? (Score:2)
KFM does FTP (Score:2)
Once you are connected, you can browse around in your nice, GUI KFM window.
Konqi? (Score:2)
:)
Bowie J. Poag
Re:I feel it coming together. (Score:2)
Probably right out of the gate, as far as you're concerned, because of KDE. Once you accept the overhead of a desktop, you might as well take advantage of it. The nice thing is none of this is particularly closely tied to the OS, so you can forgo the overhead if you don't want the benefits.
Your analogy is a bit off though; netscape is an application, what I envision is more of a toolbox.
A threat to mozilla? really? (Score:2)
"Internet Explorer is not demonstrably the current 'best of breed' Web browser"
Nice! (Score:2)
What would you call it? The standard terms File Manager and Web Browser conjure completely different visions of applications functionality.
I wonder how long before MS does something similar and calls it an "Innovation"? And before some High Priest of Redmond jumps all over me saying that IE5 already does it, think again and read up on the app. It does a few things IE5 doesn't do very well or at all.
Sound familiar? (Score:2)
Evolution -- next generation email client and PIM (Score:2)
Evolution is the GNOME email, calendar, and contact manager. Think of it as Outlook on Linux and on steroids, and you'll get the idea. Check out the Evolution page [helixcode.com] at Helix Code [helixcode.com] for details.
Re:Sound familiar? (Score:2)
The side issue of making a browser part of the gui is the issue in my post, the government and the doj should not be able to dictate on this issue.
Re:konqi??? (Score:3)
:)
Re:future capabilities! (Score:3)
Almost all of the functionality is there right now, it just needs to be fixed up.
You can get a current copy out of the KDE CVS tree, or get an RPM at
http://people.redhat.com/bero/experimen tal/ [redhat.com].
Konqueror is part of the kdebase package. It needs kdesupport and kdelibs to run.
Re:Why Konqueror? (Score:3)
[what follows is slightly OT]
I agree with you on the whole 'too much useless crap' notion, but you seem to think that usability is the most important part of website design, as does most of the slashdot community. A lot of you/us seem bent on the idea of 'make everything text, get rid of images, get rid of animations'
I believe that it's good to consider the users who are unable to view all that fun stuff, but without it, what exactly _is_ the web? I'll tell you: gopher.
Every month, I shell out the $7 for the printed version of Wired magazine. Why? Most of the stuff in there is available online now, from wired, or otherwise. Simple. I like all the cool stuff they do with their mag. Fluorescent spot colors, metallic inks, scratch and sniff covers, all of that makes it worth the $7 to me.
Same with web sites. If a site is bland, but has good information, you'll get somewhat poor user opinions. Same as a flashy, animated, graphic, loud site with no good information. The key is getting a mix of both that degrades gracefully to browsers that don't support 'features' of your site.
Sorry. My rant-of-the-week.
Re:Microsoft Anti-Trust (Score:2)
One word which does seem to apply within and across Linux distributions is 'choice'.
does it do DHMTL? (Score:2)
Re:A threat to mozilla? really? (Score:2)
Of course recent US legislation has largely removed those barriers.
Re:The Koolness of KOM (Score:2)
What about the CSS support? (Score:4)
I'm getting really tired of writing CSS that works in only one version of one platform. What's up with that?
How hard could it possibly be to support CSS in an even way, across *all* platforms??
CSS Level 1 [w3.org]
CSS Level 2 [w3.org]
Two last notes:
IE5 *on the MACINTOSH* has the most extensive CSS1 coverage BEFORE IT WAS EVEN A COMPLETE RECOMMENDATION. Almost perfect (still problems with embedded fonts and some other stuff).
What about CSS3? Anyone heard what the browsers are doing about this? IE3 supported some minimal CSS1 back in the day, why aren't browsers not only keeping up, but staying ahead of the curve?
Rami James
Pixel Pusher
ALST R&D Center, IL
--
Re:The Koolness of KOM (Score:2)
KDE sux. (or does it?) (Score:2)
Re:does it do DHMTL? (Score:2)
The biggest problem is your reliance on the LAYER tags, which is not part of the official HTML 4.0 Transitional standard.
Beautiful Site. (Score:2)
Here's the flash support that was being referred to:
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> I've uploaded two screenshots of the flash version of Moorhuhnjagd running
> in Konqueror:
>
> ftp://139.174.246.173/pub/nsplugin/moor1.jpg or
> http://www.kudling.de/kde/moor1.jpg
>
> ftp://139.174.246.173/pub/nsplugin/moor2.jpg or
> http://www.kudling.de/kde/moor2.jpg
An intriguing idea, however... (Score:3)
A Web browser is a Web browser. A file manager is a file manager. A media player is a media player. Trying to combine these into one massive app is just a bad idea, no matter the platform or widget set or whatever. Rolling FTP into the original KFM was different; that's still managing files (on a remote machine, perhaps, but same basic idea). Not at all like Web browsing, where the goal is to view files rather than manage them.
So why bring them together into one massive app that's nightmarish to debug when you can simply make several smaller apps, each of which does its job more efficiently and is still much easier to program and maintain? You also don't have the overhead of interface components which might make sense in, say, a Web browser but not a file manager (do file managers really need a throbber? And what use is the "delete" function on a Web browser where 99.99% of the time you wouldn't even have permission to delete files anyway?)
Nothing against KDE; I prefer Gnome myself but use both on a regular basis since the Solaris boxen here only have KDE. But I'm not so sure that making Konqueror into The App That Does Everything (tm) is such a good idea.
Re:dot-com (Score:2)
It looks like your post was intended for the last news item "Attacking Open Source".
Re:Why Konqueror? (Score:2)
Would it help you if you saw it as naked capitalism: 'May the best product win'?
Who the hell is supposed to lay down which compiler, browser, editor, GUI or whatever I wish to use? You? No way. Welcome to the old Eastern Europe. Sorry, but that idea has nothing to recommend it - nothing at all.