218

pembo13 wrote:

Zayed wrote:I think the main problem is in the websites themselves. Right now KHTML scores 85 point in the Acid3 and 100% in Acid2.

Anyway, there is no manpower enough to improve the browsing experience in the KDE. This is the real problem.

Well blaming the websites is a cop out if more and more KHTML is the the only one that has so many problems.

I agree with you that blaming websites will not resolve KHTML problems . But we should know the root of the problems before start solving them. KHTML is improving ever release. In kde 4.2.1, I can use it in all websites which I surf regularly apart from that need WYSIWYG editor support.

Zayed wrote:I agree with you that blaming websites will not resolve KHTML problems . But we should know the root of the problems before start solving them. KHTML is improving ever release. In kde 4.2.1, I can use it in all websites which I surf regularly apart from that need WYSIWYG editor support.

Not being able to work in GMail is a big deal for me, as I send all my emails there. The fact that no one is going to test their website in Konqueror is also going to be a big deal.

I've read on Ars Techinca that WebKit will be merged back to KHTML sometime ago. But I have no idea when if even this will happen.
I must confess that I'm one of KDE Firefox users, mainly because I grew accustomed to it and it has scores of extensions, add-ons, themes and so on.

I hope that for at least KDE4.5 Konqueror would be made on plasma idea (just like Amarok) and you will be able to add widgets (preferably almost any plasma-desktop widget) and themes to it. That and a support for all major sites and Flash (it's still isn't working in YouTube in me even with Qt4.5)

I had to vote against this.
Konqueror/KHTML is getting close to being the best and needs all of the users
and developers it can get.

I only use FF if Konqueror really goes wrong.

RyanMcCoskrie wrote:Konqueror/KHTML is getting close to being the best

Best of what? In comparison to what?

KHTML = No GMail, so no go for me...

I wish we could have a dedicated, WebKit-based web bowser in KDE...

I also am a Firefox user and am quite surprised that there are still people who use Konqueror, I used to use it because it is quicker than any other browser apart from maybe Chrome on Windows (from an application perspective not rendering on Javascript nonsense) but it soon came to light that I couldn't use Gmail or Google Calendar well enough so I changed as well as numerous other problems so Firefox became the better option and haven't looked back since.

This thread was logged with the intention of raising awareness to the desire of many people to have a Webkit browser in KHTML not to have an argument over where problems lay. Use the voting icons to log your appreciation or disapproval for the suggestion and let the people decide what KDE needs the most. No one is saying that anyone has to stop development on KHTML but we just have an option to user either Webkit or KHTML and then the user can decide on what they want to use. Unfortunately open source software has its own style of evolution where the less desired software is pruned and this may be the start of that stage in evolution.

Cypher wrote:I wish we could have a dedicated, WebKit-based web bowser in KDE...

Well, if you really want one: try rekonq. It's still early days for it so don't expect it to be perfect. It works decently though (my main issue with it, right now, is that it doesn't remember the fontsizes you want). And since you use OpenSUSE, it's available in the factory repos.

behavedave wrote:I also am a Firefox user and am quite surprised that there are still people who use Konqueror, I used to use it because it is quicker than any other browser apart from maybe Chrome on Windows (from an application perspective not rendering on Javascript nonsense) but it soon came to light that I couldn't use Gmail or Google Calendar well enough so I changed as well as numerous other problems so Firefox became the better option and haven't looked back since.

This thread was logged with the intention of raising awareness to the desire of many people to have a Webkit browser in KHTML not to have an argument over where problems lay. Use the voting icons to log your appreciation or disapproval for the suggestion and let the people decide what KDE needs the most. No one is saying that anyone has to stop development on KHTML but we just have an option to user either Webkit or KHTML and then the user can decide on what they want to use. Unfortunately open source software has its own style of evolution where the less desired software is pruned and this may be the start of that stage in evolution.

Then this wish is implemented since there is webkit part for konqueror. It is simply to swich just install webkitpart and then from View menu choose Webkit.

I am happy Konqueror user. In past I used Mozilla/Firefox but is think, that:

1) Konqueror is faster - I didn't do any measurement, this is my feeling
2) Konqueror is well integrated in KDE - e.g. opening PDF Konqueror offers Okular automatically, in KDE 3.5 Kpdf was opening in new tab - great - it offers the right application for opening files, all KDE applications are opening links in Konqueror without any special setup
3) Konqueror simply looks nice in KDE, while Firefox never looks good in KDE. It can look good in Gnome, but who cares about Gnome
4) There are only very few pages for which Konqueror does not work correctly and I have to start FF or Opera. GMail is not a problem for me as I am using Kmail to read and write emails. No need to log in Gmail from browser.

I'm a happy Konqueror user, I still use KDE 3.5 and since I finally found a working solution for Flash (via KMPlayer, see http://www.linuxquestions.org/blog/trevorparsons-289609/2008/9/30/flash-in-konqueror-1207/) I don't need to start Firefox or Opera any more.

I think that KHTML shouldn't be abandoned, but made better. Webkit is not the solution, it is controlled by Apple and has got some very annoying bugs and rendering glitches I don't find in KHTML.

If we just had more Manpower...

blueget wrote:I'm a happy Konqueror user, I still use KDE 3.5 and since I finally found a working solution for Flash (via KMPlayer, see http://www.linuxquestions.org/blog/trevorparsons-289609/2008/9/30/flash-in-konqueror-1207/) I don't need to start Firefox or Opera any more.

What is the problem with Flash? I am using 64bit flash plugin with Konqueror in KDE 4.2.1 and I don't have any problem. It is the most stable combination I have ever had on linux.

KejPi wrote:(...)
3) Konqueror simply looks nice in KDE, while Firefox never looks good in KDE. It can look good in Gnome, but who cares about Gnome
(...)

Who cares about how it looks?

But I agree with you about the integration.

KejPi wrote:I am happy Konqueror user. In past I used Mozilla/Firefox but is think, that:

1) Konqueror is faster - I didn't do any measurement, this is my feeling
2) Konqueror is well integrated in KDE - e.g. opening PDF Konqueror offers Okular automatically, in KDE 3.5 Kpdf was opening in new tab - great - it offers the right application for opening files, all KDE applications are opening links in Konqueror without any special setup
3) Konqueror simply looks nice in KDE, while Firefox never looks good in KDE. It can look good in Gnome, but who cares about Gnome
4) There are only very few pages for which Konqueror does not work correctly and I have to start FF or Opera. GMail is not a problem for me as I am using Kmail to read and write emails. No need to log in Gmail from browser.

I don't think you've read y this thread. No one has a significant problem with Konqueror, just KHTML

einar wrote:Bear in mind that KHTML can't be abandoned for the whole life of KDE 4.x, due to the nature of kdelibs (API stability, for example).

Does this mean that i will ever have KHTML in RAM for the whole life of KDE 4.x?
Even if I decide to use Arora, rekonq, Firefox, Opera...