APR
9
2007

Ars Technica: A First Look At Dolphin

Ryan Paul over at Ars Technica has a short article talking about Dolphin and KDE 4. "The Linux-based Dolphin file manager is now scheduled for official inclusion in KDE 4, the next major release of the KDE desktop environment. Dolphin includes several unique usability enhancements that aren't available in Konqueror, KDE's current file manager..."

Comments

When I first heard Konqueror wasn't going to be the default file manager I was very upset. However after trying Dolphin I see why it has been chosen as the new default. It is very simple to use and will be great for new users. I will continue using Konqueror personally because it is so powerful and I am so used to it but Dolphin is a fine file manager and I am sure both projects will become even better by the time KDE 4.0 is released.

BTW why doesn't someone from the Dolphin project get interviewed for KDE://Radio? or is that podcast pretty much dead?


By Devon at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

KDE://Radio: it's not so much dead as i simply don't have time atm. another person was set to continue it a couple months back, but that hasn't worked out. if anyone is willing and able to step up, please email me.


By Aaron J. Seigo at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Radio == support for PLS files?


By bert at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I agree. I've been using Dolphin for a little while now and I really enjoy it. It's clean, easy to understand, and fast. Konqueror was fine for me but far to buggy because of all the features I rarely used being present. My wife hated Konqueror with a passion because she couldn't understand it and refused to use it. And for the guy above who wanted name, her name is Amanda (I won't give her last name for obvious reasons.) I showed her Dolphin and she's much happier using linux now. I have no problem with changing the default file manager to konqueror from dolphin in kcontrol. And I think if you do have a problem with this you should reconsider your position as a "power user." Having Dolphin available now allows us to reach the average computer user as an audience. And having Konqueror still available to be made default allows us to keep our power user audience. It's a win-win. Keep up the good work guys.


By Carl at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

Up to now I didn't really care about all that much about dolphin. But having people compare it to nautilus or apple's finder has alerted me. To put it simply: I find those two to be utterly unusable. And I must agree with the grandparent poster that the greatest piece of software in KDE is konqueror.

Now that's only my personal and uninformed opinion and I don't want to add more oil to the fire. But if it's going to take more than 2 or 3 clicks to restore konqueror as default file manager, I fear the result could be disastrous for KDE.

I guess I'll have to check out a live CD really soon.


By anonymous coward at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

"But having people compare it to nautilus or apple's finder has alerted me. To put it simply: I find those two to be utterly unusable."

I agree completely. I have to say that this fad-like talk of "usability" at the moment is rather baffling. Every piece of software I've tried to use that claims to have "good usability" just seems to me to make assumptions about what I want to do with it - assumptions which are often wrong, and mean that I have to spend longer trying to find out-of-the-way options to achieve what I could do before much more easily.

Please don't go down this road.


By Peter Lewis at Wed, 2007/04/11 - 5:00am

As soon as I read the comparisons to Nautilus, I said to myself, "Here we go again." Dolphin meat must taste delicious to hungry trolls.


By Louis at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

I just was a little curious and installed dolphin with KDE 3.5 . In general I agree that although browser and filemanager in konqui are very powerfull, the usability of both components is not very good and it did not happen very much concerning that in the past.
Now seeing dolphin which seems very polished, but still lacks a lot of features, I am glad to see something is happening. But honestly I would rather see improvements in konqui than having a new and separate filemanager. Of course is will be now problem for me to change the default to konqui. But will konqui will be still see improvements in usability of the filemanager component and the interaction between filemanager/ browser if there is another default filemanager? I fear that wont be the case and that would be really a shame. So why not have an experimental branch of konqui for testing/ improving usability instead of a new filemanager? Then good thing would easier find their way back.


By mark at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

And of course Dolphin has changed a lot since the KDE 3.5 release. The KDE4 version is being actively developed with new features being added and improved all the time.


By Matt Williams at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

I was gonna say...

I just tried Dolphin in 3.5.6 again just now and...it makes me go "Hmm..."

For example, I put it in detailed mode and it has filename, size, and what appears to be mtime. I don't even have the option to sort things by mimetype (or other metadata- something I'd really like to see in the future). I found that you can change the navigation back to a path, but it's wonky and changes its mind occasionally, and it doesn't have hover-preview at all, it seems. I'll grant that it has potential (an easy button for split pane, for example is nice, though it doesn't let me split more than once and only vertcally). I'm not overwhelmingly negative about this, but Dolphin 0.8.2-r1 definitely needs some time to bake.


By Wyatt at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Why wouldn't konqui see improvements brought about through work on dolphin? Come on, this isn't the 1980s any more: we have shared libraries. One of KDE's biggest strengths is its aggressive re-use of code between projects. So all the bits the will be useful for konqui and dolphin (who knows, maybe other projects too) will eventually get moved into kdelibs.
I was firmly in the konqui-only camp until I actually tried dolphin: I've tried dual-pane file managers before and hated most of them, but dolphin is different. Sure, it's not exactly polished yet, but I find myself using it more and more for file management (including over network protocols). And I have to agree with the previous poster's comment that kparts within konqueror are just annoying. Not only does it make it easy to close the window, forgetting that you're closing the file manager window not just a helper application, but it gets in the way of clicking on a file to open it, then clicking on another file to open that too - you can't click on the second file because your konqui window has been co-opted to display the first file you clicked on.


By Adrian Baugh at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

heck, good bits from dolphin are even finding their way into the file dialog.. e.g. the sidebar speedbar/bookmarks area was just replaced with a common implementation from dolphin that was polished in beauty by kevin ottens and moved to kdelibs.


By Aaron J. Seigo at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I'm using Konqueror for all of my non-konsole file management, and most of my web browsing.

Sometimes I'm missing features that mc has (like browsing into RPMs out of the box), and I also think that it could be better in split-window mode. E.g. you only see the path of the active window, not both at the same time.

But in total I like it very much. I'll give Dolphin a try, and the improvements I've heard of sound interesting. What I am wondering about though is whether it wouldn't be a good idea to integrate all the new Dolpin features into Konqueror, too. Why shouldn't Konqueror also use the new path feature with the drop-downs for quick navigation to subfolders?

I don't like the whole concept of separate applications very much - the document- or data-centric approach, combined with "browsing" (i.e. keeping a back/forward history) makes much more sense in most cases, and I think that to a large extent KDE improved the situation with its very modular approach and direct links between apps (like being able to open apps in an editor directly from the preview). So I'm curious if Dolphin will be an improvement for me or not.


By Joachim Werner at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

> wouldn't be a good idea to integrate all the
> new Dolpin features into Konqueror, too.

we are integrating many of the features that makes sense given konqueror's reason for existing. we're not going to make konqi something it isn't, that'd be even worse than introducing a new app.

honestly, i'm surprised that the people concerned about dolphin don't realize that this allows us to keep konqueror for what it is as opposed to ruin it by turning it into something else.

> Why shouldn't Konqueror also use the new path feature with
> the drop-downs for quick navigation to subfolders?

perhaps; it would need to default to the editable version, as the breadcrumbs really don't make much sense for browsing, particularly on the web.

> So I'm curious if Dolphin will be an improvement for me or not.

honestly, it might not be. and that's the beauty of the situation: you can choose to use what works for you. the default is being picked with the greatest % of people in mind so that fewer people have to take action and configure things.


By Aaron J. Seigo at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Breadcrumb is a non-sense:

- It cannot traverse directories with 711 permission.
example: /home can be 711 chmoded to prevent one user to see that another one mad a mistake. You are in /, how to you go to you home dir with breadcrumbe?
- not easy to enter directories starting with a dot. (while with classical view, no problem.
- users comming from windows are already familiar with classical path
- if path is too long, how is it handleled?
- if current directory has let say 150 directories, how do you traverse? Do you scroll the breadcrumb dropdown menu for hours until you find the entry?

For sure, it can be called "usability"!


By olahaye74 at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I like your comment a lot because it's constructive, so let me address it point by point (as I now use dolphin as my file manager in 3.5). Also, you should note that there is always the classic text box entry available in dolphin; a button switches between the two, and you can press ctrl+L to put focus on it.

Speaking of Dolphin specifically...

711 permission:
Your example doesn't work well, because the Bookmarks represent the root of the breadcrumb. To get to your home directory, you just choose it at the left hand of the widget.
*You are correct that without the bookmarks in place it wouldn't work*

Hidden directories:
To access them with bread crumbs, you must show hidden files (Alt+.) or press Ctrl+L to show the text entry (which conveniently puts the cursor at the end of the line)

Users coming from windows familiarity:
Skipping the whole debate of catering to windows users, when I first switched to linux, I wasn't familiar with linux's path system. That was enough to throw me off a bit at first. Anyway, I think this is your weakest argument.

Path is too long:
To test this, I made a recursively linked home directory. It took 9 six(6) character directories to fill up my bar for my window size. After the bar was filled, each breadcrumb scaled, much like the tabs do in Opera 9 or Firefox 1.5. I got in more than 24 deep, and still found it usable. NB that the tooltip for each crumb shows that directory's name.

Many directories in current directory:
First, I'd hope you use the main browser window for that, as that functionality in the breadcumb just provides an alternate method. The way it works in Dolphin 0.8.2 isn't scrolling, but a large menu that adds columns as necessary. My 1600x1200 resolution, with 8pt font, gives me one column for every 59 directories (tested with 102 directories. I did find about a .5-.75s lag for the menu to come up.

In conclusion, dolphin has a pretty solid implementation of breadcrumbs, and allows you to bypass the weaknesses of the widget by having a quickly accessible text entry field.
---
While creating this post, I found some other problems/bugs. Note I'm using Dolphin 0.8.2 in KDE 3.5.5, so they may be fixed already.

1. I cannot select the first directory in the popdown menu. The menu goes away, but dolphin does not navigate to the directory.
2. I had to restart Dolphin for the bookmarks to update in the pull down on the breadcrumb widget, when I added a new one. Using the bookmarks in the side panel (which I don't normally use) worked fine.
3. Some right click functionality would be nice. I think showing the dropdown menu without navigating to the directory first would be nice.


By Soap at Wed, 2007/04/11 - 5:00am

Thanks for you comment, this is the 1st time I recieve positive feedback instead for "garbage".

although, regarding argument, My whole impression is the following:

- When when it's not possible / not easy with breadcrumbs, then you can use the classic way. (IMHO, this demonstrate pretty well the weakbness of the breadcrumb usability: some impossibilities without any (IMHO) real advantages over the classic method).

- for Hidden directories, it's the same as for gtk apps: right click / show hidden files, but it's not obvious IMHO.

- User comming from windows: maybe the weakest argument, but honestly, do you think breadcrumb is something that would reduce the feeling that unix is different from windows?

- Path too long: IMHO, scaling is not the solution. when you go deep into diretory tree, the last directoy names are more important than the 1st ones. when you scale, even the current directory name is sqwized. Having the whole widget scroll would help (classic way does this, and IMHO, it's more user friendly.).

- Many directories: using classic way allows autocompletion, while using breadcrumb requires your brain to find the directory and point to it. once again, IMHO, not a progress in usability...

As for the point you raised, I think these are not critical and will be sorted out soon if not already in kde 3.80

Personaly I'm realy disapointed by this move (Dolphin , ...) and this is the 1st time since I'm using KDE (I started with KDE 0.4 long ago if my memory is correct). Unfortunately developpers have the power to decide and apparently, there is no way to help them change their mind.

I can't test KDE4, but Dolphin in kde 3.5.6 is not of any use to me: no way to split view in 3 pans: one for my blog preview, one for my ftp content upload to my blog and one for my local files to drag&drop to the ftp upload pan.

Olivier.


By olahaye74 at Wed, 2007/04/11 - 5:00am

> I started with KDE 0.4 long ago if my memory is correct
Well, I don't believe there ever was a KDE 0.4 :) KDE 1.0 had alphas and betas, but no version numbers lower than 1.0 as far as I can recall... that was a long time ago already...

/me recalls trying to get X working in 1997 or 98 to test a KDE 1.0 beta on Redhat only to find his video card was not supported by any X drivers...


By Troy Unrau at Thu, 2007/04/12 - 5:00am

> perhaps; it would need to default to the editable version, as the breadcrumbs
> really don't make much sense for browsing, particularly on the web.

Yes, default to the editable version, although this makes little difference if it is configurable.

It has nothing to do with browsing -- "browsing" your local file system is still browsing! Breadcrumbs are usefull for some protocols and not for others. Like other features and toolbar items, it can appear only on those protocols for which it is useful (HTTP probably isn't one of these, OTOH it would be useful for FTP [Konqueror *does* browse when using the FTP protocol]).

BTW, isn't FTP a "File Management" function that should be included in Dolphin?


By James Richard Tyrer at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

> BTW, isn't FTP a "File Management" function that should be included in Dolphin?

It is included already. Dolphin uses the KIO slaves like Konqueror and hence can access all common protocols like ftp:/, home:/, file:/, system:/, media:/, remote:/, applications:/, sftp:/, fish:/ and smb:/

Best regards,
Peter


By Peter Penz at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

But not http:/ ?


By reihal at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

My bad. :-( I don't know why my first attempt didn't work.

However, it probably could use a few additional features to be a good FTP client.

Integration with KGet.

Some way to store a long list of commonly used FTP sites.

With those two features, I would probably use it as my FTP app.


By James Richard Tyrer at Wed, 2007/04/11 - 5:00am

Aaron said:
"perhaps; it would need to default to the editable version, as the breadcrumbs really don't make much sense for browsing, particularly on the web."

I have to disagree on this point. I use the up arrow in Konqi all the time when browsing the web. The up arrow is essentially "breadcrumbs in a menu". For me, it is a killer feature. So, I submit that breadcrumbs do make sense for web browsing, and I'm willing to give a bona-fide breadcrumb widget a try in Konqi.

That said, I'm dubious about dolphin, but I will reserve judgment until KDE4. "No wine before its time" (Gallo, if memory serves)

Regards,

Mark


By Mark Taff at Thu, 2007/04/12 - 5:00am

"I don't like the whole concept of separate applications very much - the document- or data-centric approach"

The approach taken in Konqueror, although convenient in some ways, just hasn't worked out. The use cases for file browsing, web browsing and other forms of browsing are just too different to have one universal browser. Does a file manager need to be able to manage cookies?

Although opening documents within Konqueror itself, without a new application opening, was sometimes convenient, it caused issues in other ways. Namely, Konqueror had to become even more of a universal browser for all different types of docouments.


By segedunum at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

The not being able to browse into RPM's should be relatively easy to fix. Provide a KIO slave that can do it, and Konqueror can behave just like it does for other archives now.


By Andre at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I'm using Konqueror for all of my non-konsole file management, and most of my web browsing.

Sometimes I'm missing features that mc has (like browsing into RPMs out of the box), and I also think that it could be better in split-window mode. E.g. you only see the path of the active window, not both at the same time.

But in total I like it very much. I'll give Dolphin a try, and the improvements I've heard of sound interesting. What I am wondering about though is whether it wouldn't be a good idea to integrate all the new Dolpin features into Konqueror, too. Why shouldn't Konqueror also use the new path feature with the drop-downs for quick navigation to subfolders?

I don't like the whole concept of separate applications very much - the document- or data-centric approach, combined with "browsing" (i.e. keeping a back/forward history) makes much more sense in most cases, and I think that to a large extent KDE improved the situation with its very modular approach and direct links between apps (like being able to open apps in an editor directly from the preview). So I'm curious if Dolphin will be an improvement for me or not.


By Joachim Werner at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

"What I am wondering about though is whether it wouldn't be a good idea to integrate all the new Dolpin features into Konqueror, too. Why shouldn't Konqueror also use the new path feature with the drop-downs for quick navigation to subfolders?"

I'm pretty sure that someone (Kevin Ottens?) very recently moved the "breadcrumb" widget somewhere where it is more universally accessible so that e.g. the Open/ Save file dialogs could use it, so there's no reason why not - massive code re-use is one of KDE's defining traits, after all :). Konqueror's web/ file management duality probably complicates the direct use of this widget, though (which is partly why, of course, Dolphin exists: A *dedicated* file manager can be a *better* file manager because there are less concerns about whether the addition of a new feature will conflict with all of the other existing baggage), but I'm betting it's not something that can't be overcome :)

There is in fact some talk of a Dolphin KPart that could be re-used in Konqueror, but I have no idea what form this would take or what the visible effects would be.


By SSJ at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

they share the same codebase !


By pietervandewyngaerde at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

But will Dolphin have a Krusader kpart?!


By agc at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I believe there are plans to use Dolphin as a KPart in Konqueror for filebrowsing. This was you can keep all the nice features of Konqueror such as tabs and opening documents inline without code duplication.


By Matt Williams at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

If you're capable of installing KDE, then your also probably capable of chosing which file manager you use. So, how come Dolphin has to be the default? KDE users today have the choice to download Dolphin and use it if they want. I don't see why it has to affect Konqueror.

What's next? A new "clean" (*sigh*) window manager? So "power users" can set Kwin as default by hand? :)

I'm on a P4 and I don't really experience any speed differences between Konqueror and Dolphin. It's the interface that is different. I remember about a year back, when I first tried Dolphin. There were some good ideas, but nothing more at the time. Since then I can imagine lots of time have been spent to develop Dolphin. I'm not going to tell people what to do with their coding time but wouldn't it have been better to actually develop Konqueror in a desirable direction instead? (You know, KDE's killer application? :) )

I'd like to see many of the features of Dolphin implemented in Konqueror. Better profile management for Konqueror is a must. So I hope that code can easily be shared between the two, as some KDE developers have claimed.

I guess there's no real point in discussing this. The decision has already been made, but I think the KDE team was wrong to make this decision. It would have been much better if the different distros did this kind of thing. E.g. Kubuntu could set Dolphin as default filemanager and the rest us could set it as default if we *wanted*.

The last thing I want to say, is for the Konqueror developers. I often read forum posts with people claiming that it's wrong to combine file management and web browsing. I absolutely love that Konqueror is both a great file manager and a great web browser. Contrary to what certain "usability nuts" (*sigh*) claim file management and web browsing are closely related. You're doing a great job!


By mirshafie at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

> What's next? A new "clean" (*sigh*) window manager? So "power
> users" can set Kwin as default by hand? :)

unlikely to the point that i feel confident in saying: "no". the window manager features are easily ignored and almost never confronted by users for whom the features are too advanced / difficult to manage. the file manager, however, confronts these same people on a daily basis.

> It would have been much better if the different distros did this kind of
> thing.

they still can (e.g. by making konqueror the default if they wish). but this way we ensure a good quality file manager in dolphin as well as a good konqueror. which means we have better options for them to choose from and a default optimized for the majority of people (of which i'm not one of =)

> E.g. Kubuntu could set Dolphin as default filemanager and the rest us could
> set it as default if we *wanted*.

that's possible even with KDE upstream doing it. in fact, us doing it -ensures- that such configurability is possible. often (usually?) distros botch up some things and don't make it configurable at all. think about it.

> Contrary to what certain "usability nuts"

better them than those idiot users. oh, i'm sorry, that was probably offensive. my bad. maybe we should be more careful about how we talk about other people, particularly when we evidently don't know who they are. what do you think?

> file management and web browsing are closely related

this is quite true for certain people. the point you are missing is that for most people they aren't remotely the same, and it has nothing to do with remote vs local, or http vs file:/// ... it's about management vs browsing.

there's been actual research and testing done behind a lot of this.


By Aaron J. Seigo at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I agree with you that it's great that KDE is getting more configurable. If people want it "clean" and without lots of features that they don't use, they should be able to make their desktop environment work that way. But I stand by my statement that the development should focus on making Konqueror more configurable. E.g. many of those features that make Dolphin easy to use should have been implemented in Konqueror instead.

And for the record, I didn't actually mean that the people that make this kind of decisions are nuts. I usually speak that way with people that I meet IRL because they know what I really mean, but you're right that one should be careful with language on the internet.

Btw I want to thank you for always taking the time to answer comments!


By mirshafie at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Maybe power users will probably get to set Kmail as default by hand as well!
_____
"it's about management vs browsing." - Aseigo

Is it really? How many people actually manage files? I think fewer people do so nowadays as the trend is to let iTunes/iPhoto like apps organize your files instead of creating directory trees to hold stuff from different artists/albums whatever. I just don't see a lot of people spending time moving files around a s opposed to looking at them or using them. Of course, they'd be using iTunes/iPhoto like apps to do so, so I might have answered myself.

(responded to two people, wasn't sure where to put the response)


By Cliffton at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

I accept everyone's arguments in favour of Konqueror, but the one thing that makes it for Dolphin for me is its speed. I just installed it under KDE 3 and it starts instantly, compared to that slight delay for Konqueror. I know that the time involved is not a lot, but given they both do the basic things I want done 90% of the time, the feeling of responsiveness from Dolphin is something Konqueror cannot match.


By DJM at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

I am generally surprised by posts that include categoric point of view of the kind of "I hate totally dolphin or I like it very much", or also "konqueror versus dolphin" or also "gnome versus kde".
we need to be more objective, and help the developers with our remarks concerning usability, suggestions for improvements and always keep in mind that the applications are made to satisfy a whole community and not a particular person.

I think the categoric type of comments we generally read are the main cause why developers are now afraid of showing screenshots of work in progress.


By landolsi at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

KDE rules, gnome sucks.
vi rules, emacs sucks.
Linux rules, Microsoft sucks.
C rules, Fortran sucks.
MULTICS rules, CP/M sucks.

I don't see why a Dolphin / Konqueror flamewar should surprise you...


By Adrian Baugh at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

BTW, WTF happened 2 KVim? It was a cool idea, shame it never went off :(.


By slacker at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Have you seen the new version of Fortran? It is a great improvement over C.

Yes, Fortran IV sucks but it is a bit out of date by now.

Where is the new version of C?


By James Richard Tyrer at Wed, 2007/04/11 - 5:00am

> I think the categoric type of comments we generally read are the main cause
> why developers are now afraid of showing screenshots of work in progress.

I feel the same way, I think it's holding developers off.


By Diederik van de... at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Alright, I just had a look at Dolphin. It is a decidedly mixed bag for me.

PROS:
- It is very minimalist.
- Some of the information that it conveys about files is definitely nice.

CONS:
- It is very minimalist.
- Breadcrumbs. Seriously folks, anyone with a filesystem of any complexity realizes that breadcrumbs are the antithesis of productivity when you want to get a quick grasp of information that might be spread over a number of folders. Fine for web apps, breadcrumbs are a miserable solution in a file browsing application.

I guess the bottom line is that Dolphin doesn't offer anything compelling to a user like myself. It is simplistic and feels light weight, but I could run circles around it with the technology I've been using for years. Even without all of the bickering about whether a file browser should be able to be a web browser as well (I don't know why people have trouble with this), Konqueror is the more useful tool to such a degree that Dolphin can't even stand in its shadow.

Regards,

Steve


By SteveT at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

I think the same was said regarding the Norton Commander philosophy. I was very sceptical and thought nothing could beat this philosophy. Now, you use the same arguments pro Konqueror as a file manager I used pro Krusader.

Konqueror compares to Mozilla, Dolphin to Firefox.

When things get overcomplex you need some refactoring.

And Konqueror will be shipped with KDE 4. So what is the problem.

Today I would say: Dolphin + Console.


By bert at Mon, 2007/04/09 - 5:00am

I think you meant:

Konqueror compares to Mozilla SeaMonkey, Dolphin to Mozilla Firefox :-D


By patcito at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Seamonkey is a later naming scheme for the mozilla webbrowser


By bert at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

it's been years already since they decided to call it seamonkey, the mozilla webbrowser doesn't mean anything today. It's either firefox or seamonkey etc...


By patcito at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

like 90% of the people use windows
i don't think people have big problem to use a software who do web browsing and file manager... IE do

like we can see on this web page, there are many GUI in kde and windows who are similar
http://www.laboiteaprog.com/article-kde_vs_windows-85-5


By Marc Collin at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

just because the apps are both called "explorer" doesn't make them the same UI. windows explorer and internet explorer behave rather differently.


By Aaron J. Seigo at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

...and that's one point that I have to (painfully) admit that M$ did better than KDE...


By slacker at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Sorry Aaron, I guess you have a long time without touching a Windows box.

Simple test:
1. Open a "Windows Explorer" window.
2. Type http://www.kde.org in the addressbar.
3. Voilà! The KDE home page appears where the file icons were. No new window. No different menus.

KDE2 architects took a thing Microsoft did mostly as a excuse to crush Netscape, and make a central part of the vision of their design. Konqueror, while not a great browser at that time, was terrific in its concept of universal browser, and most old school KDE users learned to love that concept.

I really don't see that killing such a brilliant idea with things that looks like the things we had before Konqui is an advancement, but jumping back to 1999.


By Shulai at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

> I really don't see that killing such a brilliant idea

killing such a brilliant idea would be not to ship konqueror. that's not what's happening.

so i'm not sure what you and others are moaning about.

as for making universal components part of the central vision of things, that hasn't changed either.


By Aaron J. Seigo at Tue, 2007/04/10 - 5:00am

Pages