The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Wow..
by anon on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @13:25
|
Absolutely not..
1. there are only a few khtml developers anyways (e.g, less than 5 of them)
2. only one major open-source engine is not good
3. khtml has a more elegant design and probably has more expansion possiblities in the future. I bet khtml gets things like WebForms much quicker than Gecko does.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by fake on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @13:48
|
agreed.. and, IMHO, the most important thing is: having our own html rendering engine can give us the ability to add features, and integrate them fully in KDE, without having to rely on an external (and cross-platform) project.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by Michael Jahn on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @14:14
|
Yes, I agree with all of the arguments made. Well, at the very least it is an impressive feat and choices don't hurt anybody. Thanks, devs :)
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by FJ on Sunday 12/Sep/2004, @10:39
|
well.. i don't agree.
the future is: cross-platform. and gecko has it
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by Andre Somers on Sunday 12/Sep/2004, @10:46
|
Thanks for allowing all of us a glance in that glass bowl of yours.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by anon on Sunday 12/Sep/2004, @10:52
|
What is wrong with the cross-platformness of khtml? It's already the defacto native browser of OSX, the native engine of the most popular Linux desktop, and will be arriving in Windows soon.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Don't take me wrong but...
by Gr8teful on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @13:46
|
There are things Mozilla can't do. And Opera can't, too.
Only Konqueror deals correctly with certain sites. I'm not sure whether it's because of KHTML, it probably has to do with going beyond standards to support certain "javascript" proprietary extensions.
While I'm not exactly enthusiastic about this, it is more or less like Openoffice.org excellent compatibility with the .doc format: it is essential to make proprietary software, erm, less relevant.
So, yes, I think this Gecko porting is great (and technically impressive, considering the short time they spent). Nonetheless, what I think is more important is that people are starting to exchange ideas and programs.
Isn't it what open/free people are supposed to do best? :-) I think this is really good to the spirit.
Good luck to y'all!
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
So as to make my post more complete...
by Gr8teful on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @13:52
|
www.monark.com.br, click on "Produtos" and after a new page loads, click on words beside red arrows on the left. Expanded submenus only appear in Konqueror.
I'm not affiliated with such company.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: So as to make my post more complete...
by timecop on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @20:30
|
The website works great in Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1, which is what it was designed for, I am 100% sure.
Who the fuck cares what it looks like on a web browser running on a dead os that *NOBODY* uses.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: So as to make my post more complete...
by Matt on Sunday 12/Sep/2004, @04:17
|
Never feed the trolls & all that, but still...
First: the usage of a webbrowser for a given website is never 100% IE6. So the $$$ question should come to mind: which of my customers am I p*ss*ng off?
Second: be careful if you target an academic audience or certain other large organisations. Chances are that the people there are still forced to use Netscape 4.7 on an NT4 system or something.
As long as websites are still not build using 100% standard code, choice is good.
'nough said.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: So as to make my post more complete...
by David on Monday 13/Sep/2004, @13:36
|
Why post to this site?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Don't take me wrong but...
by David on Monday 13/Sep/2004, @11:29
|
You make a good point. I was with a group of Mac users last weekend. One worked for Apple, one for a major ISP, and one for a law firm. All used both Camino and Safari. All said that there were some sites Camino could render and Safari not, and others that Safari could render and Camino not.
And all agreed that they preferred Safari.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Wow..
by Eric Laffoon on Saturday 11/Sep/2004, @14:17
|
> should KDE get rid of khtml + kjs?
No! This is exactly the kind of senseless prattle that we should avoid as somebody is bound to think it's inside information. I was hacking Quanta only a couple meters from Lars and Zack, and KHTML is Lars' baby, along with a few other developers. I don't see them ditching it, thankfully.
> Warning: uninformed user opinion below ;)
Yes indeed. And while everyone has a right to their opinions we should also recognize that it's generally better to direct things from informed opinions. ;-)
> 1. Gecko has much more exposure (even though there is Safari) and thus at least _some_ web developers pay attention to make their site compatible.
Neither has enough market share to make a difference, but together they approach significance. FYI it's W3C standards compliance that serious web developers (who are not just using FlunkPage) want. That's a compliance issue with CSS-2 mainly right now.
> 2. Reduce duplication of efforts. The OSS world would have only one major rendering engine.
Remember KHTML working great when Mozilla was at 0.8 and less and had egregious rendering errors and couldn't even show form buttons right among other things? Go look at www.w3c.org and read everything there (that should take about a year) and tell me that you want to trust everything to one rendering engine. If that logic worked why not use IE? One is what MS is about. Choice is what OSS is about.
> 3. IMHO Gecko is still a little more standards compliant.
Okay, a little, but not by much. Now look at the architecture. Why did Apple choose KHTML when their team members were involved with Mozilla even though it was slightly more compliant? The answer to that question is why dropping it is utterly nuts.
> 4. The most important part last: devs could spend more time improving KDE instead of working on khtml :-)
BZZT!!! News flash! KHTML is part of KDE. Flash number two... uninformed users _shouldn't_ decide what developers work on... In fact since they don't what's the point? It's interesting that people almost always offer opinions with no substantial basis but rarely ask questions to determine if the facts support their initial supposition.
Informed software decisions by developers based on their assessments is why OSS is growing so fast and producing such respected software. What has been the problem with commercial software? Bean counters, investors, cliche marketing types and clueless journalists have had too much input in direction and scheduling. Think about it. If you're infected with interest (which is how developers get hooked) then seek information. ;-)
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by illogic-al on Sunday 12/Sep/2004, @19:24
|
indeed. He's more than allowed to give his opinion and If I read correctly, he actually changed his ming about some of the things he said after becoming informed.
See how much good can happen when you don't go off attacking those unfortunate enough to not know better and instead explaining in a calm manner?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Wow..
by wg on Tuesday 14/Sep/2004, @00:53
|
Maybe Eric's post was a little harsh, but he is absolutely correct. Choice is a good thing. Competition is a good thing. We need to get away from the mentality that there can (or should) only be one product in any category. If you are a commercial software company it is in your best interest to try to kill off competing products until yours is the only one left. But, if you are a consumer/user it is in your best interest to encourage the existance of multiple competing products, even if you only use one of them. If only one product exists what will you do when you become unhappy with it?
Competition causes products to improve faster. It also keeps any one product from dictating standards or having too much control of a market. Do we really want to have one development team dictating the future of the web? That is what we have now with Microsoft and IE. Is anyone happy with the current situation we're in? I'm not.
It is good to have multiple competing browser engines. It helps keep the browser developers focused on supporting standards instead of trying to rule the world. It also keeps web designers from getting lazy and only supporting the dominant web browser.
By the way, Mozilla is my browser of choice. I only use Konqueror as a file manager and to test web pages. But I hope KHTML has a bright future. KHTML is important regardless of whether or not it is the number one browser engine or not.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Wow..
by David on Monday 13/Sep/2004, @11:23
|
Reducing the duplication of effort is a trap. Do not fall for it. This is the antithesis of Free and Open Source Software. Duplication of resources has a great many advantages.
First of all, the different projects are not interchangable. A developer that is happy working on KHTML might not be happy working on Gecko. Or vice versa. Similar arguments about merging (or dumping one of) KDE and GNOME have been around for years, but they ignore that KDE development is a completely different thing than GNOME development. The communities are different, the cultures are different, the even the coding is different (C vs C++, GTK-- vs Qt, multiple disjoint APIs vs fewer complementary APIs, etc).
Second, different free projects allows cross-pollination of ideas and code. Tabbed browsing came about because *one* browser first decided to try it out. GCC only got decent C++ support because Cygnus forked off egcs. Think of all the stuff you dislike about GNOME (or KDE) and imagine that they were the standard with no alternative.
Third, why dump KTHML? Why not dump Gecko instead? Perhaps the vote will go against you. While Gecko has more support for "broken" HTML, KHTML is smaller and faster. Would you stop using a Gecko browser if the "vote" for a single engine went against you?
Fourth, choice is king. There are lots of reasons why people use Free and Open Source Software, but choice ranks up near the top. This is not a dictatorship. You cannot tell a developer what she can or cannot code for. You cannot tell a user what he can or cannot use. Heck, you can't even tell them what kernel they must use! This is not a proprietary commercial software house where the CEO gets to choose what the employees will be working on. This is not their product where the customer gets a one-size-fits-all solution.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
