konqueror

[Barry O'Donovan]

On Sun 17 Apr 2005 13:34, Stefan Strasser wrote:
> >>that is _the_ argument.
> >
> > No, it's not.
>
> I think it is. I expected this to be argued when I wrote this because
> developers always looks for reasons to decide which product fits
> better for their needs. but that's not how the average user decides,
> even if the real reason that he's using firefox is just the brand
> 'firefox', it's still an argument to have firefox integrated into
> kde, because you won't change that by making konqueror better.

I suppose what your argument will come down to then is how you define an 
"average user". If you know of the existence of Firefox and understand 
the differences between Firefox and IE (say) on both a philosophical 
level and a technical level then you are not what I would define "an 
average user" for KDE.

I just spent last Wednesday at the Irish ICT Expo promoting KDE and 
presenting UNIX/KDE as a viable alternative for the enterprise 
environment. This is where KDE is currently best able and equipped to 
compete - not on the home computer where different household members 
want different things from their computer and particularly the ability 
to play the latest game.

Questions that were asked by business people in managerial positions 
where "can I browse the Internet", not do you have IE, Firefox, etc.

Also, in the enterprise environment, you are dealing with people with 
little or no understanding of the difference between UNIX and Windows, 
let alone Konqueror and Firefox. All they want is a contemporary 
looking browser with a location bar, bookmarks, etc. 

Using Firefox with KDE is as painful as using Adobe Reader with KDE - 
they do not integrate with the desktop, they do not share common KDE 
resources, they take too long to load, they have too high a memory 
footprint and they look out of place.

Perhaps there is merit in porting Gecko to KDE but in the end it will 
still look just like Konqueror, not Firefox, as it is a "background 
component" just like KHTML. Personally, I believe that Konqueror is 
fantastic, that the developers have done a sterling job and that they 
should concentrate on improving KHTML rather than getting distracted in 
porting Gecko (*).

I will also only include Konqueror on any enterprise rollouts I oversee. 
Secretaries, bankers, lawyers, doctors, etc only want a browser that 
works and they do not need to be confused by choice. Also, more apps 
means more admin overhead. (This is, of course, said in the context of 
KDE in enterprise deployments, choice is good for the average user when 
he/she wants it).

(*) this may actually already be done?? Last years conference?

-- 
Regards,
Barry O'Donovan
http://www.barryodonovan.com/
http://www.ihl.ucd.ie/	

Public key: http://www.barryodonovan.com/gpg.asc

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-quality/attachments/20050417/9a2eba1f/attachment.pgp