andre_debian@numericable.fr wrote:
On Monday 02 May 2016 13:09:56 Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Monday 02 May 2016 12:00:51 andre_debian@numericable.fr wrote:
I think that Konqueror is not a navigator
It used to be a superb one. For years it was my browser of choice.
I'm asking myself how you can consider that Konqueror "is a superb one" navigator.
It depends on your definition of "navigator". Almost everything I do on my PC is done using Konqueror as a navigator to view/play/edit/run files/programs, local and remote - things no other web browser or file manager can do. While Konqueror is essentially my desktop and could get me anyhere I want/need to go, sometimes the menu or taskbar are faster/easier.
That said, it is frustrating that I can only use Konqueror to view websites I know it can handle. I still use Konqueror as a gateway browser ('open with Chromium') because there are enough of my regular sites that still work in Konqueror and I prefer the simpler/depreciated Google interface. Maybe I'm stubborn, but Iceweasel and Chromium are pigs and not something to leave running when you're using a Pi2 PC.
...It's probably a pipe dream, but it would be real nice if there were a way that I could have a whitelist of sites that would open in Konqueror with all others automatically opening in an external browser.
On Mon, 2 May 2016 09:42:04 -0700 "Dave Lers" lists@dalrun.com wrote:
andre_debian@numericable.fr wrote:
On Monday 02 May 2016 13:09:56 Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Monday 02 May 2016 12:00:51 andre_debian@numericable.fr wrote:
I think that Konqueror is not a navigator
It used to be a superb one. For years it was my browser of choice.
I'm asking myself how you can consider that Konqueror "is a superb one" navigator.
It depends on your definition of "navigator". Almost everything I do on my PC is done using Konqueror as a navigator to view/play/edit/run files/programs, local and remote - things no other web browser or file manager can do. While Konqueror is essentially my desktop and could get me anyhere I want/need to go, sometimes the menu or taskbar are faster/easier.
That said, it is frustrating that I can only use Konqueror to view websites I know it can handle. I still use Konqueror as a gateway browser ('open with Chromium') because there are enough of my regular sites that still work in Konqueror and I prefer the simpler/depreciated Google interface. Maybe I'm stubborn, but Iceweasel and Chromium are pigs and not something to leave running when you're using a Pi2 PC.
...It's probably a pipe dream, but it would be real nice if there were a way that I could have a whitelist of sites that would open in Konqueror with all others automatically opening in an external browser.
Konqueror is still an excellent file manager and a decent swiss-army knife for lesser-known (and therefore lesser-updated) communication protocols, but it's probably not viable as a general-purpose web browser anymore.
Konqueror supports CSS1, CSS2, HTML <= 4.0X, XHTML 1.0, and Javascript versions contemporary with those (I'd have to do some research to figure out exactly what those are). Sites that limit themselves to those or downgrade gracefully should still work. Sites using HTML 5, CSS3, or some recent Javascript constructions will probably break to varying degrees. Konqueror also has a few CSS rendering wrinkles in its positioning code, so even if a site should be compatible, things can end up in the wrong spots on the screen.
If Chrome/Chromium, Opera, and Firefox/Iceweasel aren't to your taste, there are still some alternative browsers out there--Midori and Vivaldi come to mind. Midori is supposed to be light, although it gives up some features to accomplish that.
(Me? PaleMoon, which is a fork of Firefox from before they trashed the UI, but I'm a control freak with unusual requirements.)
E. Liddell
On Mon, 2 May 2016, E. Liddell wrote:
(Me? PaleMoon, which is a fork of Firefox from before they trashed the UI, but I'm a control freak with unusual requirements.)
please just a little bit about how Palemoon suits your control freak/unusual requirements?
f.
On Mon, 2 May 2016 18:38:15 -0400 (EDT) Felmon Davis davisf@union.edu wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2016, E. Liddell wrote:
(Me? PaleMoon, which is a fork of Firefox from before they trashed the UI, but I'm a control freak with unusual requirements.)
please just a little bit about how Palemoon suits your control freak/unusual requirements?
Basically, it has all of the configurability Firefox had before Mozilla started systematically gutting it a little while back. This includes supporting at least 75% of the Firefox extensions that existed when it was forked.
My primary browser profile has a whole bunch of add-ons and settings designed to keep me from seeing anything I don't want to see. I don't, as a general rule, load scripts, video, audio, webfonts, or even images unless I actually feel that they'll add something to the page. The extension I use for image filtering (ImgLikeOpera) no longer works with Firefox, and all the substitutes I've tried are inferior. It still works perfectly well with PaleMoon. Like I said, control freak. ;)
In this profile, I typically have 100+ tabs open, spread across eight windows. PaleMoon doesn't seem to have any problem with this, and remains responsive.
The profile I use when dabbling in web development has a completely different set of extensions--Firebug and such. Another profile points at a proxy server. Not all browsers make it easy to have multiple diverse profiles for the same user.
Also, because PaleMoon uses the old, pre-Australis Firefox UI, it doesn't try to hide important things that I want to see, like the address bar and main menu. It's even still got a status bar. And the tabs are where I expect them to be, above the content and below the address bar. It's *possible* to wrestle current versions of Firefox around to the point where they look sane, but you have to download and configure a couple of extra extensions that wouldn't be necessary if they'd just left well enough alone.
Note that I do not claim that PaleMoon is particularly lightweight. My main desktop is fairly beefy for a Linux box (3.2 GHz quad-core, 16GB RAM), and the only things that (sometimes) eat more memory than those 100+ browser tabs are VirtualBox and some really heavy compiles.
I should also note that there are certain features that a lot of people seem to want that I *don't* need. I don't care about multiple device synchronization support, for instance, and I don't generally watch streaming video. So I don't know how good my browser of choice is at those things.
(That was probably a bit disorganized. Sorry.)
E. Liddell
On Mon, 2 May 2016, E. Liddell wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2016 18:38:15 -0400 (EDT) Felmon Davis davisf@union.edu wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2016, E. Liddell wrote:
(Me? PaleMoon, which is a fork of Firefox from before they trashed the UI, but I'm a control freak with unusual requirements.)
please just a little bit about how Palemoon suits your control freak/unusual requirements?
Basically, it has all of the configurability Firefox had before Mozilla started systematically gutting it a little while back. This includes supporting at least 75% of the Firefox extensions that existed when it was forked.
My primary browser profile has a whole bunch of add-ons and settings designed to keep me from seeing anything I don't want to see. I don't, as a general rule, load scripts, video, audio, webfonts, or even images unless I actually feel that they'll add something to the page. The extension I use for image filtering (ImgLikeOpera) no longer works with Firefox, and all the substitutes I've tried are inferior. It still works perfectly well with PaleMoon. Like I said, control freak. ;)
In this profile, I typically have 100+ tabs open, spread across eight windows. PaleMoon doesn't seem to have any problem with this, and remains responsive.
100+ tabs?!?!
pardon: I'm going to delete some remarks I read with great interest but have nothing right now to reply.
The profile I use when dabbling in web development has a completely different set of extensions--Firebug and such. Another profile points at a proxy server. Not all browsers make it easy to have multiple diverse profiles for the same user.
Also, because PaleMoon uses the old, pre-Australis Firefox UI, it doesn't try to hide important things that I want to see, like the address bar and main menu. It's even still got a status bar.
[...]
I wish I had more control over fonts (or knew better how to control them). I cannot bear sites with washed-out fonts (gmail) or pages with black background and small white (or other colors!) fonts. the extensions I've tried haven't been terribly effective.
I should also note that there are certain features that a lot of people seem to want that I *don't* need. I don't care about multiple device synchronization support
I definitely DON'T want that!
, for instance, and I don't generally watch streaming video. So I don't know how good my browser of choice is at those things.
I often have need to download streams.
(That was probably a bit disorganized. Sorry.)
no apologies at all needed, I found it very interesting. (again, forgive the deletions.)
I certainly don't have your needs (or kit!) but I would like an extension that keeps advertisement audio from playing.
generally I'm not that concerned about blocking ads but I see the point, especially on pages with far more ads than content.
I'll have a closer look at Palemoon. just tried to darken the fonts on gmail but didn't get very far. I just want black on a light background. (my main email client is actually alpine - text; so simple and clean.)
thanks again for the remarks.
f.
On Tuesday 03 May 2016 02:07:30 Felmon Davis wrote:
I wish I had more control over fonts (or knew better how to control them). I cannot bear sites with washed-out fonts (gmail) or pages with black background and small white (or other colors!) fonts. the extensions I've tried haven't been terribly effective.
I have sent Felmon off-list screenshots of my Gmail interface in both Chromium and Firefox - black on white in both cases, and whatever I did in the mists of time I did in Gmail itself, since I have adjusted neither of those browsers..
I actually read and reply to my mail in KMail, of course. And am still using POP3. It works for me. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Lisi
On Tue, 3 May 2016, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Tuesday 03 May 2016 02:07:30 Felmon Davis wrote:
I wish I had more control over fonts (or knew better how to control them). I cannot bear sites with washed-out fonts (gmail) or pages with black background and small white (or other colors!) fonts. the extensions I've tried haven't been terribly effective.
I have sent Felmon off-list screenshots of my Gmail interface in both Chromium and Firefox - black on white in both cases, and whatever I did in the mists of time I did in Gmail itself, since I have adjusted neither of those browsers..
thus only succeeding in making me envious.
I actually read and reply to my mail in KMail, of course. And am still using POP3. It works for me. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Lisi
again, Alpine here via imap (but everything goes through gmail).
f.
On Tuesday 03 May 2016 01.42:37 E. Liddell wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2016 18:38:15 -0400 (EDT)
Felmon Davis davisf@union.edu wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2016, E. Liddell wrote:
(Me? PaleMoon, which is a fork of Firefox from before they trashed the UI, but I'm a control freak with unusual requirements.)
Thanks for pointing to it - however I was surprised to see that actually, when it comes to privacy, Vivaldi does better.
I do like Ghostery and it's not compatible with PaleMoon's latest version...
Vivaldi bas a little unstable in it's first months, but it has become a reliable browser now.
My setup is also relatively beefy, so maybe it's not for everyone...
Thierry
-
Dave Lers -
E. Liddell -
Felmon Davis -
Lisi Reisz -
Thierry de Coulon