> > centered around konqueror, which I feel to be the best browser
>
> Uhhh. ok. It cant do the CSS i spew, nor does it have full emcascript
> support. :)  Plus, mozilla .9 and beyond are getting pretty amazingly
> fast.  Plus, I dont have to load a huge amount of KDE libs for only one
> application.

Netscape 4.77 can't do the CSS you spew. Your choise of the word spew is
definitly a good one. IF he's allready running KDE, all the KDE libs are
loaded anyway, so konqueror won't take as long to initaly load, take up as
much memory, etc. If you start konqueror alone it has to load all the libs
and creates a bigger footprint.

Anyway, in most cases Konqueror is a good browser. The support for
Netscape plugins gives it a leg up on Mozilla, Opera, Galeon, etc. I've
even got Java working at one point. KDE seems to be trying to out blinkify
GNOME however.

And didn't we learn something from Windows about centering desktop around
the browser? Oh, it was actually a good idea? Imagine that...

I've been running the mozilla nightly from 2001-05-23 for awile and have
had minimum issues. I have yet to run into the annoying bugs that turned
me off from Mozilla for so long. Looks like mozilla detected the Flash
player, so at least some of the plugins that work in 4.77 work in Mozilla.
I'll have to try out Real Player...

The one thing that will always bug me about Mozilla is it doesn't look
like GNOME. It doesn't follow the GTK themes, etc. (Ok, with the classic
theme it uses the correct highlight color.)

I don't know where I was going with this (oh wait, lunch! that's where I
was going.) but yes, GNOME does lack a good intigrated browser. GNOME is
fractured into more bits and pieces than KDE. And wether all this is good
or bad will fall to the decision of the user who wants to tweak their work
enviorment.

| Andrew S. Zbikowski       | Home: 763.591.0977 |
| http://www.ringworld.org  | Work: 763.428.9119 |
| http://www.itouthouse.com | PCS:  612.306.6055 |
|   Sinclair: "No boom?" Garibaldi: "No boom."   |
|     Ivanova: "No boom today. Boom tomorrow.    |
|             Always a boom tomorrow."           |


On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Scott Dier wrote:

> * Robert P. Goldman <goldman at htc.honeywell.com> [010604 09:21]:
> > 2.  Subjective impression of better UI.  For example, at least at the
> > most recent Gnome I tried, their help browser had no search feature!
>
> whatis: is what your looking for.  Took me 3 seconds in the gnome help
> to find that.
>
> > This seems totally goofy to me.  gnorpm has a UI that I find almost
> > totally inscrutable, etc., etc.
>
> rpm's blow :)  Progeny has some nifty gnome-based utilities for managing
> package sets, but for package-stuff-munging dselect still rules all. :)
>
>
> --
> Scott Dier <dieman at ringworld.org> <sdier at debian.org>
> http://www.ringworld.org/  #linuxos at irc.openprojects.net
>
> Sinclair: "No boom?" Garibaldi: "No boom."
> Ivanova: "No boom today. Boom tomorrow.
>           Always a boom tomorrow."
>