Madman wrote:

Ignacio Serantes wrote:Gah, see, you're missing the point. You're not SUPPOSED to use Konqueror for file-management, that's what Dolphin is there for. Dolphin is the, "same application to do the same thing", and that's file management, but when a website e.g. points to an FTP location, it's nice that Konqueror can handle that just fine in the same window - with a somewhat half-decent file-management mode. Hell, with a very well implemented file-management mode.

No, Konqueror developers was missing the point. Konqueror 3 was an excelent swiss army knife, great as file and container manager and good, at least for me, as browser.

Konqueror 4 was mediocre and very unstable as browser, at least in the past, I don't use it now so I don't know current status. As container manager is poor compared with Konqueror 3 and Dolphin is better as file browser so, if Konqueror is no more a swiss army knife, I prefer tools better than a mediocre one: Dolphin, Chrome or Arora, or even Konqueror 3 (I still using it in a legacy encoding site and as workaround to legacy encoding KDE 4 WONTFIX bug).

As I write before is my opinion but, really, if Arora or Chrome don't exists, I would prefer Konqueror 3 over Konqueror 4.

Currently, to doing things like you exposed, I use clipboard actions. Right click over the link, copy and the best tool was available to me (in your example dolphin or filezilla). I don't use in KDE 3 clipboard actions because Konqueror 3 was great but, in KDE 4, klipper is really a powerful help.

> in KDE 4, klipper is really a powerful help.

yes, but its's not because klipper has so improved. it's just 'cause the other stuff around it dropped.

samhain wrote:> in KDE 4, klipper is really a powerful help.

yes, but its's not because klipper has so improved. it's just 'cause the other stuff around it dropped.

Yes, in some aspects you are right but not totally. Klipper was amazing in KDE 3 but I don't know.

For example now I download youtube videos using clipboard actions and not an external application. If I don't play with klipper to simulate the same functionality I have with Konqueror 3, I never discover it's real potential .

Obviously is not as powerful as a Firefox plugin but, for URIs, with a bash script and a regular expression you can do amazing things and, the best of all, is that works with any application .

For what is worth. I like konqueror and I dont think it shuold be replaced.

You are right, on KDE 3.5 I do not use klipper, there's simply no need.
And konqeror should definitly stay. I cannot stand dolphin.

Ignacio Serantes wrote:No, Konqueror developers was missing the point.

That's what the problem is. The Konqueror developers believe Konqueror should be something OTHER THAT what YOU think it should be, and they're going through great pains to make it that - a web-browser that uses KParts to view a wider range of protocols and file-types in a way that doesn't suck, but still a web-browser.

I think what Konqueror needs to survive is to return to its roots as the ultimate "Swiss Army Knife". Already OpenSuse have replaced it with Firefox as the default web browser, even in the KDE version, and I suspect other distributions will not be far behind.

To a large extent, I suspect both Konqueror and Dolphin are victims of Dolphin's success. I've seen some of the early mailing list debates, where people were asking for Konqueror-like features in Dolphin, such as tabs and split views, and the Dolphin devs pleading with power-users to go back to Konqueror and leave Dolphin as a simple file-manager a la Nautilus or Windows Explorer.

But Dolphin just had too many benefits to ignore, the navbar being the primary one for me. We were promised, from the beginning that many of the innovations of dolphin would find their way into Konqueror, but we have seen very little of that. So Dolphin has become more complicated than its creators envisaged, while Konqueror has suffered entropy, with little support from the FOSS community at large.

Now I find myself using Dolphin most of the time for file management, and being frustrated at times with it's lack of power compared to Konqueror, but equally frustrated with Konqueror for the dated user interface when I do use it.

As others have said, it is going to be really difficult for Konqueror to compete with the forces that Google, Mozilla and Apple can muster to develop a web browser. And at the same time, Dolphin continues to make steady progress as a file-manager.

So why try to compete with either of these, when Konqueror is capable of being something much much more. Just for example, recently, I wanted to do some cleaning up of files on 2 different ftp servers, plus my hard drive. Konqueror made that not only easy, but safe. I split my view 3 ways, so that I could see exactly what was in each directory at any given time, copying and moving files between them at will.

In an open source environment, there is absolutely no reason why Konqueror could not become a better and better Swiss Army Knife, picking up the innovations of the specialist applications and merging them into a single brilliant package for power users.

Surely that is a better fate than fading into oblivion, which, I'm afraid, seems to be its current course.

Madman wrote:

Ignacio Serantes wrote:No, Konqueror developers was missing the point.

That's what the problem is. The Konqueror developers believe Konqueror should be something OTHER THAT what YOU think it should be, and they're going through great pains to make it that - a web-browser that uses KParts to view a wider range of protocols and file-types in a way that doesn't suck, but still a web-browser.

Then there is no problem at all. Konqueror developers change the program objectives and I change the program I use.

That's the beauty of open source and both, developers and me, are happy with the change .

I agree that Konqueror isn't good with GMail, that's why I started using KMail in first place. And I thik Konqueror has a long way to go to become perfect.
Unfortunally I am a "dolphin kid" meaning that when I started using Linux (Kubuntu 7.10) it already had Dolphin and I never actually used Konqueror in "it's glory days". So I have no idea how good it was. I know I felt lost in it.
Anyway since then I decided to switch from Firefox to Konqueror as web browser and I still use Dolphin as my main browser. I only use Konqueror as file browser when there's something related to "web-developing".
The good thing about Konqueror is that when a site doesn't load correctly you just switch to WebKit, and when that fails you open the site in Firefox.
But I do hope that KHTML gets better, or is somehow merged back with WebKit. But it won't happen, at least not soon.

Wouldn't mind if someone like Nokia put big pushes into KHTML, but with QtWebkit, I can't see that happening...

Madman wrote:Wouldn't mind if someone like Nokia put big pushes into KHTML, but with QtWebkit, I can't see that happening...

Nokia don't spend a cent in KHTML because Webkit was fully implemented and add other render engine, so similar, is a nonsense.

Maybe they spend some money adding Gecko to Qt, for publicity/comercial/compatibility reasons but KHTML?, I don't think so.

konqueror works fine with :

blip.tv (better than youtube. no time limit and you can see ogv! without html5 just kmplayer)

mediafire (now becasue mediafire has fixed the story)



it doesn't work with wordpress very well (khtml)

that is only the i am missing

"Someone like". I put that there for a reason.

Madman wrote:

Ignacio Serantes wrote:

Madman wrote:It's not a dedicated file manager, ...

So you need Dolphin to do things that Konqueror can't do, like Nepomuk integration. I prefer use all the time the same application to do the same thing and not use different applications.

Gah, see, you're missing the point. You're not SUPPOSED to use Konqueror for file-management, that's what Dolphin is there for. Dolphin is the, "same application to do the same thing", and that's file management, but when a website e.g. points to an FTP location, it's nice that Konqueror can handle that just fine in the same window - with a somewhat half-decent file-management mode. Hell, with a very well implemented file-management mode.

And that's why I've starting making my own live CD, so I can run KDE3 forever. Because I'm not SUPPOSED to use Konqueror as a file manager any more, and I really really hate that. I have to admit that I probably find that a little more heartbreaking than I should. IOt really shouldn't be that big a deal. As a file manager, Konqueror 4 is still superior to nautilus and thunar or whatever, and there's nothing wrong with Dolphin. Dolphin fits into the KDE4 Desktop design more neatly than Konqueror, and I appreciate why that's desirable... but Dolphin should have been a reason not to screw with Konqueror, instead of a reason to screw with Konqueror. If they hadn't screwed with Konqueror I would have gladly put up with the locking an unlocking of widgets and the fact that it's just so much slower now. (Your milage may vary.)

I love the fact that Konqueror can do a little web browsing from time to time. Also, I love that I can open applications and files with HTML links... but I don't think konqueror is a very good full time web browser. I don't know about file management and image viewing from a web browser, or what Nepomuk is. I just know that certain sites keep telling me to upgrade my browser, and certain links don't show up on certain pages. It takes a minute for a flash movie to get rolling. But who cares? There are plenty of decent web browsers, but only one konqueror.

For years, every KDE live CD included mozilla or firefox, and everything was fine, but then, all of a sudden, firefox was dropped from KDE live CDs. Someome apparently decided that we were SUPPOSED to use Konqueror as a web browser. Even if many of us didn't prefer it. It was the beginning of the era of obsessive micromanagement that we now find ourselves in, where we are SUPPOSED to use this, and we're not SUPPOSED to use that.

Konqueror 3 says: I'm awesome. See what you can do with that. It's all about possibility instead of proscription. KDE4 says: I'm awesome, and this is what you're SUPPOSED to do with that. You have the right of refusal, of course. There is no such thing as "this is what you HAVE to do with that." But the subtext of you're SUPPOSED to is everywhere. And again, it bugs me more than it should. KDE4 works okay for me most of the time now, but whenever I use it, I feel unhappy.

If opensuse is integrating firefox with KDE, it should be available for other distros eventually, right? Problem solved, for those who want it. I don't know why everything needs to be integrated. Seems pretty anal to me.

Madman wrote:"Someone like". I put that there for a reason.

Yes, I noted it, but I try to explain that, if Nokia, a company with biggest reasons to push KHTML don't do it, more difficult that other companies or institutions assumes that funding.

Sorry for my engrish .