faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: Webkit?
by Morty on Thursday 03/Apr/2008, @14:10
|
KHTML or WebKit does it really matter? Most web developers seem to test for browser not engine. And that would still be Konqueror.
For the record, in my browsing I have minimal need for other browsers. The few sites I wistit where Konqueror/KHTML is not up to the task, usually works when changing browser identification. Not that I have any strong feelings either way when it comes to WebKit, but I doubt it will revolutionize my browsing experience. |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Webkit?
by Grósz Dániel on Friday 04/Apr/2008, @13:28
|
"KHTML or WebKit does it really matter?"
It does because if we use QtWebKit, (even if it is not absolutely compatible with the Safari WebKit) the websites tested in Safary will be likely to work in Konqueror as well, and Safari has much bigger market share than Konqueror.
I think Konqueror should be rewritten (in the same powerful but more flexible way) because developers often say that Konqueror code is such a mess that adding even small features is painful. If KHTML improves (as it continually does) and a decent web browser based on it is written that runs on Windows and Mac OS X as well, it could enter the browser war and gain enough market share to be noticed by website developers.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Webkit?
by Morty on Friday 04/Apr/2008, @15:32
|
"the websites tested in Safary will be likely to work in Konqueror as well"
That may be, but the waste majority of sites I see that Konqueror has serious problems works when changing user agent. It's not the testing by web developers and the rendering of KHTML that is the issue, so changing to WebKit will not change this.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|