Is Konqueror web browser w/ RH 7.3 any good? Should i use netscape?

[THELAIR]

I just got RH 7.3 installed on my laptop, everything cept for my lucent wireless card is working great.

My question is there are 3 web browsers that im aware of for linux

Opera
Netscape (4.7 and 5.0 i think?)
and
Konqueror

Im using Konquer now, and it seems great. Am i missing anything? is there a defacto well known standard that "web browser x" is the one that all linux users should be surfin with?

Thanks

 

[Agamar]

The version of Mozilla that most likely came preinstalled with your RD 7.3 (has icon of a dragon head) is one of the better browsers. I would try it out. It is what Netscape is based on (and now it is even better, since Netscape was based on version 0.9.2 or so, and it is at revistion 0.9.9)

 

[Armitage]

Konqueror isn't bad, but I've still found some things that don't work right with it.
Mozilla is very good.

 

[SinNisTeR]

go with mozilla and install the flash plugin

 

[1611AV]

Mozilla??? Mozilla is horribly slow at rendering pages. After getting tired of Mozilla loading pages so slowly, I compared load times for one particular web page with Mozilla .9.8, Konqueror, and Galeon. Galeon loaded the same webpage in only 2/3 the time that it took to load it in Mozilla. Konqueror was good also. Galeon is simply a much snappier web browser. Mozilla = Slowzilla.

AV1611 out...

 

[FOBSIDE]

i liked galeon a lot actually. it was really fast.

 

[Nothinman]

Galeon rocks, although Mozilla runs fine on my box too.

 

[Colt45]

I usually use a combination of Mozilla and Galeon.

I do find Galeon is a touch faster though.

 

[skriefal]

I haven't had any speed problems with Mozilla. I've been running the nightly builds under Windows and Linux for a few months, and they usually seem noticeably faster than IE6. Haven't used Konqueror enough to comment on it, and haven't used Galeon at all.

 

[Pocatello]

I have Red Hat 7.2, everything works great except for my D-Link USB wireless network adapter. Is there a wireless network solution for Red Hat Linux?

 

[N11]

Mozilla is one of the ugliest browsers by default. You load it up after a fresh install and question what the developers were thinking with the fonts and general texture. Either they don't understand what is aesthetically appeasing or they are blind.

That being said... I had a chance to format and install rh7.3/kde3 a few nights ago. I'm still running it. KDE 3 is beautiful and so is konquerer. I am very pleased with this. I will not be returning to windows on my primary system anytime soon.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Mozilla is one of the ugliest browsers by default. You load it up after a fresh install and question what the developers were thinking with the fonts and general texture. Either they don't understand what is aesthetically appeasing or they are blind. >>



Isnt that subjective?

 

[N11]

I don't think so. I open up the browser and the fonts immediately look bad.

I go to anandtech.com with it and I cannot read the text without putting my face close to the screen.

I'm just surprised they release it this way is all.

 

[N11]

Here are some default screen shot comparisons between mozilla and konqueror. Granted neither of them look nearly as good as IE off a fresh install, but konqueror has certainly made a ton of ground in my opinion.

Mozilla

Konqueror

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< I don't think so. I open up the browser and the fonts immediately look bad.

I go to anandtech.com with it and I cannot read the text without putting my face close to the screen.

I'm just surprised they release it this way is all. >>



Mozilla has always looked fine to me. On certain sites I had to increase the size of the text though. But I dont mind any of the fonts or anything, which is why I think it is subjective (if you were answering my question, if not sorry).

 

[N11]

Here I am trying to read what you just said, with Mozilla.

Mozilla

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Here I am trying to read what you just said, with Mozilla.

Mozilla >>



So switch your font or make it bigger

Anyhow, something looking good or bad is objective. Ask N11 if you want to know if something looks good or not. He is the official AT judge of stuff.

 

[N11]

Find me one person who thinks that screen shot looks good and I'll rectify the unrectifiable!

 

[manly]

I've used Mozilla on both Linux and Windows (since 0.9.4), and I get readable fonts on par with what I'd expect (from IE for example) and nothing like your screenshots. It's more readable than NS 4.x on Linux, which suffers from tiny fonts (and other problems).

I'll agree that Mozilla's Classic Theme is kinda ugly, but not terribly so (it's a remake of NS Communicator). I use the Modern Theme though, which again while isn't 100% polished, I find the overall aesthetics pretty good and functional.

If I had to guess, the nasty fonts you experience appear to be related to font AA of some kind. I don't believe I utilize any font AA on Linux; and I don't recall if I currently do so in Windows (in the past I did, with okay results).

In exchange for the polish of IE, I get a fast rendering engine, arguably better security/privacy, tabbed browsing, better standards compliance and for my use, a lot of productivity. Not to say that IE isn't a good browser, but for my use, Mozilla is better.

I haven't used Konqueror (or KDE) much, but I find its toolbar to lacking in the usability department. I do plan on trying to switch to KDE3 as my desktop environment in the near future though.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Find me one person who thinks that screen shot looks good and I'll rectify the unrectifiable! >>



I found it fine. Not great, but not unbearable. I would definitely change the defaults to increase the size a bit. All I said is that how these things look is subjective. Its opinion. I like one thing better than you do. You like something better than I do. Its all opinion and neither of us are wrong. Thats all I said and all I meant

 

[N11]

I am by no means an x windows guru... it isn't often that I get past the command line.

AA is enabled, and I can't really tolerate KDE in general without it. There's no harm here really, Mozilla does seem to render slower for me than Konqueror which is another reason I prefer it over Mozilla.

Subjective or not... If I stare at that stuff for very long I'm going to require a new prescription.

 

[manly]

Nah,

IMO it's not subjective at all. Those screenshots are pretty bad. On a whim, I checked out Mozilla running under Red Hat 7.3/KDE3 (my new evaluation install) and the fonts are mostly okay. The one exception is the Forums selection drop-down listbox in the upper-right corner. The type is a bit small and does look a little rugged like your screenshot shows. If I zoom the text to 120% (View menu), then all the fonts look fine. If you're familiar with typography, it seems like tiny fonts are somewhat "greeked" and results in ugly readability.

But besides that, all my other fonts in the forums and also the AnandTech web page look good and readable.

Note that my primary system is SuSE 7.2/GNOME 1.4 and like I said a few mins prior, all the fonts in that Mozilla setup for the sites I frequent (including this one) don't exhibit anything like those screenshots.

 

[Finite]

Konqueror is a SWEET browser. If it is what I am thinking it was then ITS AWSOME. You have options to interface it with another program which allows you to do something really cool. Ha hahahahahah, sorry about the vagueness of what I am saying but what I am speeking of was written in an article posted on this site. Hold up let me see if I can find it.......I was pretty sure that it was the "Whats Holding Linux Back" article that Paul Sullivan wrote which had what I am looking for but after reading that article again I think it was KDE that was awsome no Konq.. Hell its been to long I can't remember. I am off to install Linux now, I miss it.

PS: Ya I know Konq is part of KDE

 

[Nothinman]

AA is enabled, and I can't really tolerate KDE in general without it.

Here comes more subjectiveness, I can't stand AA fonts in X because they just look blurry.

 

[skriefal]

<< I can't stand AA fonts in X because they just look blurry. >>



Ditto. I greatly dislike blurry AA fonts.

The Mozilla screenshot posted by N11 really was bad, though. I haven't seen anything even close to that bad with Mozilla, although I have seen that sort of thing with Konqueror. I don't believe it's really a browser issue -- it's either due to poor font choices in the brower's fonts selection dialog, or crappy fonts in general, or perhaps AA. None of those are browser specific.