This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 15:55:13 -0400 From: Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com> To: Silicon Valley Users Group <svlug@svlug.org> Subject: Re: [svlug] Karsten's browser reviews (updated) On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 08:19:53PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > I'm looking for feedback, particularly on Konqueror (Rick?). Well, I'm not Rick, but Konqueror 2.1.1 is my primary browser, and I love it. The "j" and "k" keys have vi bindings, so you don't have to move your hands from the home row. Speaking of the keyboard, Konqueror is *very* keyboard-friendly; you rarely need the mouse, just tab, space, and enter. The Java/Javascript/cookie management is to die for. You can set per-site or per-domain policies (accept or reject) on each and edit the policies at will. And you can even have Javascript enabled globally (I don't) and disable window.open() independently of that. It's got a really nice cookie browser that shows your cookies in an expandable, hierarchial format by domain/site, and each cookie's key and value, along with buttons that will let you delete a single cookie, an entire site's/domain's, or all. Besides all that, the HTML renderer is quite good. It's more forgiving than Netscape of broken HTML (which unfortunately is out there more and more). It starts rendering as soon as it starts getting data, so that definitely contributes to the feeling of speed. One bitch with it, though; it does that stupid favicon.ico thing and I've found no way to turn it off. It also does Netscape plugins, although that's still a little shaky right now. And it's quick and reasonably light (considering the KDE baggage it's carrying). Anyway, I highly recommend giving it a try. I've been using it for probably a couple of months now and I haven't regretted it. === Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:02:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Wayne Earl <wayne@qconcepts.net> To: Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com> Cc: Silicon Valley Users Group <svlug@svlug.org> Subject: Compiling KDE (Was Re: [svlug] Karsten's browser reviews (updated)) On Tue, 15 May 2001, Bill Jonas wrote: > It also does Netscape plugins, although that's still a little shaky right > now. And it's quick and reasonably light (considering the KDE baggage > it's carrying). While I also use Konqueror as my primary browser, there is just about nothing under kde or gnome that is "reasonably light". Having recently built an OpenBSD machine for desktop usage, I wanted to compile and install kde 2.1.1 out of the snapshot ports tree. For those of you unfamiliar with a BSD ports tree, essentially, it's a tree of makefiles, where the makefile downloads source, applies patches, and compiles and installs the software. Properly implemented, this deals with dependencies quite nicely, and you can tweak compiling options for all of your applications. It is also under cvs control, so is easily updated (<FLAMEBAIT>A ports tree is what apt-get should become when it grows up. (duck and grin.)</FLAMEBAIT>). Anyways, I begin this process at about 11pm, on a 128k SDSL line that the machine had all to itself (It's a P2-300 with 256MB of RAM; not the fastest in the world, but it functions quite nicely). With the download of qt, kdelibs, kdedocs, kdeoffice, etc... took about an hour or so, compile time was just over 11 hours, on a machine idle except for the compiling. Now, I could have opted out of the koffice suite (which would have cut compile time by a couple of hours, I'm sure). But kspread and konqueror were the whole POINT of the install (I use wmaker as a desktop, thank you). I also like some of the smaller kde apps that come with 2.x (kcalc, kscd, etc). Ugh. Looks like I've become spoiled with binary packages when I install kde under linux. Methinks we're expecting too much out of window managers these days. === Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:24:43 -0700 To: Silicon Valley Users Group <svlug@svlug.org> Subject: Re: [svlug] Karsten's browser reviews (updated) From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> begin Bill Jonas quotation: > Well, I'm not Rick.... ...but you're welcome to forge my posts on the Net, any day. ;-> I concur with your comments on Konqueror 2.1.1. I was meaning to write something like your post, before the misadventure with Galeon packages clobbered my laptop for several hours last night, but you've done such a good job that I think you've covered it. I was trying last night, _after_ recovering the laptop's machine state, whether Konqueror 2.1.1 or Mozilla 0.9 is more responsive (PII-something with 128 MB RAM). It's quite close, on my box. With _both_ running simultaneously (under Window Maker), popping open new windows on either browser takes quite a few seconds as the system staggers around in swap. With either of them alone, it's a couple of seconds (whereas Communicator 4.75 -- now wiped from my systems -- took a fraction of a second). Generally, I think Konqueror wins the speed/responsiveness/ RAM-usage competition between the two, but Mozilla is acceptable by my basic "Does it allow me to throw away Communicator?" metric. Both browsers work reliably on SSL: I've heard that some on-line banking sites, specifically Wells Fargo, still won't accept Konqueror because of some bizarre Javascript/SSL snafu. Both have worked for _me_, where I've used them on SSL. I've heard claims that some Javascript code confuses Konqueror 2.1.1, and that they're working on that. Again, it works for me, in the rare cases where I'm willing to use a site despite its Javascript dependency. I haven't yet gotten Java working on Konqueror, but it hasn't been a priority. I installed Kaffe rather than Sun's JVM for reasons of licensing: It didn't work witin a few minutes of fiddling, but I haven't pursued the matter. > Besides all that, the HTML renderer is quite good. Mozilla 0.9's seems a _little_ better. But Konqueror's is quite OK. Similarly, typeface handling stikes me as a bit more fallible in Konqueror (aliasing at larger point sizes, for example), but still good. Both have been stable like a rock -- by my admittedly lax Communicator standards: Neither has blown up in the couple of weeks I've used them, and neither shows signs of Communicator's perennial memory leaks. I'm sure that by rational standards, they're both slightly flake-o, but after almost a decade of Navigator/Communicator brain-damage, I haven't yet recovered enough to notice. ;-> > One bitch with it, though; it does that stupid favicon.ico thing and > I've found no way to turn it off. There _is_ a way, in one of the KDE2/Konqueror configuration files, but I can't find that information. Aaron Lehmann knows, and perhaps he can post the technique required. The KDE bunch _did_ use to have that as a configuration option inside the browser, but decided to remove it from there as "configuration excess" (paraphrased). What would be really useful, in this discussion, would be a comparison of the current Galeon code with the other two browsers -- being careful to disclosing versions entailed, as that's been the downfall of many prior comparison efforts. In that spirit, here are some relevant package versions from my laptop: ii kernel-image-2 guido.1 Linux kernel binary image for version 2.2.19 ii konqueror 2.1.1.0-5 KDE's advanced File Manager, Web Browser and ii libc6 2.2.3-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone ii libgtk1.2 1.2.10-1 The GIMP Toolkit set of widgets for X ii libkonq3 2.1.1.0-5 Core libraries for KDE's file manager ii libnspr4 0.9-0.0.3 Netscape Portable Runtime library ii libqt2 2.3.0-final-4 Qt GUI Library (runtime version). ii libstdc++2.10 2.95.2-14 The GNU stdc++ library ii mozilla 0.9-0.0.3 An Open Source WWW browser for X and GTK+ ii wmaker 0.65.0-1 NeXTSTEP-like window manager for X I'll be trying Galeon again from the Sourceforge code, but possibly not today. === Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 17:09:48 -0700 From: Aaron Lehmann <aaronl@vitelus.com> To: Silicon Valley Users Group <svlug@svlug.org> Subject: Re: [svlug] Karsten's browser reviews (updated) On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:24:43PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote: [snip informative comparisons] > There _is_ a way, in one of the KDE2/Konqueror configuration files, but > I can't find that information. Aaron Lehmann knows, and perhaps he can > post the technique required. The KDE bunch _did_ use to have that as a > configuration option inside the browser, but decided to remove it from > there as "configuration excess" (paraphrased). Quoting myself from an earlier linux-elitists post: <malte|away> aaronl: ~/.kde/share/config/konquerorrc, section [HTML Settings], put in a line "EnableFavicon=false" (no quotes) [May I note that file looks exactly like a hell-sponsored INI file? How appropriate for disabling a "feature" that's pioneered and kept on life-support by a certain other browser...!] One of the main reasons why Konqueror isn't my main browser yet is the undesirability of a product that turns crap like this on by default and makes it unintuitive to turn off. I _like_ configuration excess. This complaint is among the top of a list including the fact that Konqueror does far more than I want (I do not want a Trash can in my web browser, even if I can turn it off. The functionality of that application isn't clearly defined and intertwined), a dependence on KDE, and a KDEish look. (OT: Anyone know how I can try out Qt themes without a full KDE installation?) I was looking at embedded Konqueror recently. It didn't depend on a dynamic KDE library, but choked even on Slashdot. I think I'll revisit it when it gets more mature. === Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:00:49 -0700 To: David Ljung Madison <svlug.org@daveola.com>, svlug@lists.svlug.org From: Deirdre Saoirse Moen <deirdre@deirdre.net> Subject: Re: [svlug] Speaking of Nautilus... >Eazel is dead: > > http://www.eazel.com > >Thanks to open source, of course, development can continue: My post to /. got a lot of email in the inbox, so I'll repost it here: What Eazel really did was dry up venture capital for Linux software businesses in the future that might *have* a viable revenue model. So, while there's a rough version of Nautilus out there (on the basis of a proposed revenue stream on *another* product that wasn't designed or implemented), that development was funded by people who wanted their money back. So, for those people who think it's "cool" that Eazel "gave" Nautilus to the Linux community, realize that they did so solely and only to buy your trust -- and they bought it with other people's money. Money that, had it not been blown on the biggest self-indulgent hackfest in the open source community's history, might fund your job next year or two years hence. But now it won't. === From: "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com> To: svlug@lists.svlug.org Subject: Browsers (was Re: [svlug] Re: svlug digest, Vol 1 #761 - 12 msgs) --PHCdUe6m4AxPMzOu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Al: Whitespace. Please. And accurate attributions. on Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:10:49PM -0700, Al Udal (aludal@SoftHome.net) wro= te: > on Mon, May 14, 2001 at 09:27:29PM -0700, Aaron Lehmann=20 > (aaronl@vitelus.com) wrote: > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 08:19:53PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > I've updated my review of GNU/Linux web browsing alternatives, larg= ely > > > > in light of recent advances by the Mozilla and Galeon teams. I'm > > > > looking for feedback, particularly on Konqueror (Rick?). > > > > > > Nice! You may want to add information on Dillo, just for completeness= .. > Dillo? One big contender was left out, its name Nautilus. Possibly. Though IMO Nautilus overreaches. If I can install it w/o having it take over my desktop, and without puzzling over it for an hour to figure out how to do this, maybe. Nautilus is YAGA -- yet another Gecko app -- for its browsing engine. Add to that -- Nautilus didn't render HTML last I checked. (Quoting Aaron Lehmann) > > > Description: GTK-based web browser > > > dillo is based on gzilla and is a free browser which uses the GTK. It > > > should be considered "early alpha" software. > > > > > > BTW, if you've been looking at Mozilla M18, then it seriously > > > deserves revisiting. Just download a binary, or compile it. Their > > > builds tend to be pretty hassle-free to get working (but start > > > counting seconds until the fisrt segfault... :) ). You may need to > > > delete your .mozilla directory. > I guess all that bunch of Konquerors (1.1, 2.0, 2.1, now 2.2.1), > Ximian Galeons (up to version 0.10.5), and naturally Easel's Nautilus > (up to version 1.03) are based on Mozilla M16-M18 rendering engine, > with somewhat graceful exception of Nautilus: it has > user-interchangeable engines - Galeon (whatever this means??? it's not > an engine...,) Lynx (again, it's not an engine, it's a Grangranpa of > engines), Mozilla (if you have one of more or less standard distros > you have one already -- beneath Netscape 4.75-4.77 hood (or bonnet?) > Or you could 'upgrade' to those ghorish builds of M12.....M18, and > their bastard sprout of Netscape 6.0), then goes 'classic' Netscape > (versions 4.75-4.77 were meant), last is user-defined, like my > Konqueror. Which leads me to a conclusion this Nautilus is not a > browser at all, like almost all of them newcomers. It's a wrapper. So, > in determining who's the best, it's wise to understand that the real > question is 'who's the best wrapper'. There's some truth to this. Though I'd phrase it as "what's the best browsing client". Several apps are freestanding and/or independent. Best I can tell Konq doesn't rely on Mozilla/Gecko. A slew of Gecko-based browsers have sprung up. (Quoting Karsten Self) > > I've installed Mozilla 0.90 on both my desktop and laptop systems. > > My main bitch was that the menu fonts were something large -- I > > prefer "fixed" for all my menus, this was something like Helvetica > > 14 or 16 point. I couldn't find a quick fix. Response seemed > > faster than M18-3, but overall impression was that it was more > > annoying than Galeon, so I wiped it. Note that Galeon is loads > > faster than the corresponding Mozilla system. > If direct hack of .Xdefaults (or better, .Xresources), and/or > netscape.ad, or whatever they have instead of it won't help, I don't > know. Generally, Mozilla developers are historically crippled with > fonts rendering, and they'd probably never learn. The best renderer of > document/menues fonts is still Netscape 4.77, whereas steps in font > sizes of M16-M18-0.8.0-0.8.1-0.9-Netscape 6 are all wrong, with no > exception.=20 Not sure quite what you're getting at. Font rendering under Gecko (M18-3) is at least as good as Netscape. Default step sizes in Netscape stink, though they're configurable. Haven't found same under Mozilla. > Well, Konqueror in KDE 2.1 renders whatever was ordered by global KDE > "desktop" viewing options, which is nice. But it's not nice that all > those Nautilus/Galeon/KDE guys don't learn all those bitter lessons of > Netscape Navigator 4.1-4.75 -- those lessons were how to compete with > M$ Internet Explorer 4.0 in automatic rendering of (all known) > non-Latin-1 encodings.=20 > GPL's allergical reaction to other licences (including M$ donated 4 > Web fonts) is just too puritan for me in this aspect. Personally, I > bought my copy of M$ Windoze 98SE and 'legally' took all those > TrueType fonts for my RHL 7, got rid of all those 75dpi*, 100dpi*, > Speedo and other junk/amateurish designs.=20 There's no inherent conflict between GPL and use of various foundries TT fonts. > Web designers in general deserve better respect in letting their > original Web documents' typefaces rendered correctly, and not by some > ridiculous substitutes with unknown metrics. =20 If Web designers actually give a shit about page rendering (and from appearances, most simply have no clue), they should use broadly available fonts, and provide clear instruction on how these fonts are to be configured on multiple platforms. GNU/Linux has had TT support for years, but webpage font rendering on GNU/Linux is notoriously inconsistant with rendering under Legacy MS Windows. I'm generally convinced that this is deliberate on the part of mainstream OS vendors, and ignorance on the part of web designers. > So, my favourite browser is, alas, M$ Internet Explorer 6.0 Beta,=20 Let's just say that's an unacceptable option on a number of points, though feature glomming is always an option. > with my regular left-hand side panel of favourites/multimedia tools > (anyone knows, does WINE support IE 5.5/IE 6.0?), but putting aside > all the sluggish backwardness of all flavours of Mozilla/Gecko > engines, it's tendency to bloat in the user product, > Java/Javascript/plugins support of varying debility, pranks with GIF > rendering, inability to maintain and render HTTP 1.1-based multiple > connections with simultaneous rendering of different parts of a Web > document, proud and stupid refusal of rendering gzipped pages of M$ > IIS, I'd be watching the KDE 2.2.1 Konqueror more closely, with other > pageants being OK, prodigies and all that, but wetting their pants too > often yet Nice troll. (Quoting Karsten Self) > > > As I say, Galeon's sweet. > Nautilus, with its side panel of Help, Notes, (file)Tree, History, > News (2 score of good sources w/headers updated automatically) is > sweeter to my palate. Well, Galeon has top tabs for pages, plus top > line of searches (Google, Usenet, Dogpile, Yahooka.com (former Yahoo!, > no, just kiddin), Dictionary.com, Freshmeat), but I haven't figured it > out yet how do I get my bookmarks rendered in its (left) side panel. Detach and move your "Personal Bookmarks" toolbar, it will render as a side panel. Though IMO poorly. Personally, I prefer just the page, ma'm. Sidebars a'la LookOut are expensive wastes of real estate. I didn't care for it in OutLook, I don't care for it in Mozilla, and I'm thankful that Galeon doesn't require this. > No Javascript support. But both are, well, mumbling toddlers so far. Incorrect. Galeon has Javascript support. (Quoting Rick Moen) > > I'll try it from tarballs, after my laptop recovers from the above > > insanity. (Quoting Rick Moen) > > > Following up on my own post: > > > The "http://galeon.ufies.org/galeon/APT" repository also provides > > > packages for Cheetah, a "fully functional, light-weight, > > > bloat-free web browser for Linux (and other free unix clones) that > > > is not dependant on KDE, GNOME or Mozilla".... (Quoting Rick Moen) > > That's for _really_ small values of "fully functional". The version > > number, 0.05, is appropriate: With luck, Cheetah may grow up to be a > > Web browser, some day. > Yes, everyone wants to be Napoleon of the browsing Web world.=20 Disagreed. lynx, w3m, and links have a niche of console-based browsing. Skipstone and Cheetah are apparently aimed as low-profile graphical browsers. The GNOME Help Browser, Nautilus, and Konqueror, are all aimed at the graphical user shell / browser niche. Mozilla is aimed at an all-in-one client by AOL, while the hacker community seems intent on stripping it to a fast, capable, browser. There's a pretty wide range of projects out there. I don't see convergence. === Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:48:14 -0700 To: svlug@lists.svlug.org Subject: Re: [svlug] My Two Kopecks on Linux Web Browsers( + today's additions) From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> [...] [Referring to Microsoft Internet Explorer:] > As it's well known, Netscape has lost, by any and all counts. [...] > So, my favourite browser is, alas, M$ Internet Explorer 6.0 Beta The former claim is Ziff-Davis Truth<tm>, which little resembles the real thing. Last I checked on MSIE, it had the following crippling problems: (1) Exists only on legacy proprietary operating systems. (2) Cookies implementation is such an atrocity that the user has no means of controlling their content. (3) Cache and histories exist as a horrendous proliferation of tiny files that cause severe fragmentation problems on the (mostly fragile) proprietary OSes supported. (4) The browser premuses to advertise itself on all printouts. (5) Excessive RAM usage. (6) Proprietary software from a company that has shown it cannot be trusted with privacy concerns (or anything else). I could probably think of other, equally damning problems with the thing, but long ago decided that it was unacceptable, and so have not kept current. > Personally, I bought my copy of M$ Windoze 98SE.... Voluntarily? Good grief! > ...got rid of all those 75dpi*, 100dpi*, Speedo and other junk/amateurish > designs. You lose. It's hard to beat Lucida. (I really have to load my copy of Adobe Garamond Type 1, one of these days, though.) > For (presumably) non-Mozilla based light(er)-weight browsers I'd > recommend Opera 5.0. Life's too short to spend on proprietary software -- given acceptable free / open-source software for the same roles. At least they did finally post the system requirements in a meaningful form, i.e., specific libs and versions: http://www.opera.com/linux/faq.html === From: Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com> To: Silicon Valley Users Group <svlug@svlug.org> Subject: Re: [svlug] Karsten's browser reviews (updated) Following up on my own post: > Well, I'm not Rick, but Konqueror 2.1.1 is my primary browser... I can't believe I forgot to include one of the coolest features in my little write-up. (Probably because I don't actually use it that much.) In addition to global and site/domain-specific policies for Java, Javascript, and cookies, you can munge your User-Agent string, with the same administrative policy control. Konqueror has its own default User-Agent string, but it comes with a pre-defined list of others, from Lynx to IE 5.5. There's also a text box for entering any arbitrary text you choose. Again, granularity is on a site and domain basis. (Obviously, this is for certain sites that you simply *have* to access that require certain User-Agents; I haven't used it much because I generally those types of sites to fsck off. But it's still a *damn* cool feature.) ===