Ark Linux Review, A Distro with an Identity Crisis 181
mikemuch writes "ExtremeTech has a review of Ark Linux 2006.1, which launched earlier this month. Overall, the reviewer likes this free KDE-based distro, but had to question some implementation choices, such as using the less-compatible Konqueror over Firefox for its default web browser. And for a distro that bills itself as 'a Linux distribution for everyone — designed to be easy to install and learn for users without prior Linux' the installation should hide command-line scrolling and be able to more automatically install standard graphics card drivers."
Konqueror (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Let's be accurate. (Score:5, Interesting)
A quick way to compare KHTML to Gecko (the rendering engine of Firefox) is to look at the source code for each. What one will immediately notice is that while both are written in C++, the code of KHTML is far cleaner than that of Gecko. Gecko suffers from an over-architecturing, which directly leads to code bloat and unnecessary complexity. KHTML, on the other hand, has been designed to be simple and clear, without an overly convoluted architecture.
What we end up getting with KHTML is a rendering engine that is of a far higher quality than that of Gecko, mainly because the developers are so easily able to extend it. With the upcoming KDE 4 release, which will likely be portable to Windows and Mac OS X, the portability advantages of Gecko's architecture will be rendered obsolete.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Developement on a native port is relatively new though, see here [sourceforge.net].
KDE on Cygwin (Score:2)
It's very impressive, but slow. I ended up running kde apps from a fixed-size X server window running the ion window manager.
Real KDE for Win32 can't come fast enough!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No. The KDE libraries are being ported so you can code/port KDE applications for Windows and MacOS X using features of KDE such as KParts, KIO (ssh://, audiocd://) and so on. More or less with just a recompile. That will give you a native app for that OS, not the whole environment.
I'm sure someone will port things like Konqueror and Kicker though (KWin is very X11-specific), so maybe you'll be able to run the complete KDE desktop o
Re:Let's be accurate. (Score:5, Informative)
That's a little unfair. In fact I have read the source code to each and I wouldn't say one is far clearer than the other. Maybe that used to be the case but they've cleaned Gecko up a lot in the past few years. It's true that the Mozilla dialect of C++ is a little more obtuse than the Qt dialect, however, Mozilla is a hell of a lot more portable than KHTML is not only between operating systems but also between compilers, and that makes a big difference. Gecko also has a lot of features that KHTML does not have - for instance the combination of the fact that its objects are easily exposed to JavaScript and XUL is what makes the Firefox extensions culture so vibrant. Where are the extensions to Konqueror? There might be a few, I guess, but nothing like what you have with Firefox. It's hard to see how they could have made extensions so powerful without the platform parts like XPCOM which make the C++ harder to read.
Meaningless assertion, not backed up by fact. I claim the opposite. Gecko is fast, very standards compliant and trivial to extend using reasonably well documented APIs and technologies. For instance look at XTF. It has support for a lot of new things like SVG, MathML, designMode and so on. KHTML might support these things, depending if you use the Apple fork ... or it might not.
No, I rather think it won't. The portability of Geckos architecture already allowed it to make massive gains on Windows, the only platform that matters statistically. Where was KHTML in all of this? Now don't get me wrong, it's not a bad rendering engine at all, but to claim a Windows port of KHTML will make Gecko obsolete is rather naive. Maybe KDE 4 will rock my world but right now it's mostly a set of marketing web pages and fancy codenames for various abstractions over already quite abstract technologies (HAL, gstreamer etc).
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't at all what he said. He didn't say that the new KHTML will make Gecko obsolete. He said that the new KHTML's portability to Windows will make Gecko's portability advantage obsolete.
KHTML is simply better than Gecko. (Score:2)
You mention all these things like MathML that Firefox supports or will support. Why are the developers focusing on parsing these things when they still can't pass ACID2? (I will remind that Safari and Konqueror, both based on KHTML, were the first browsers ever to pass ACID2)
Re: (Score:2)
And AFAIK Opera has been free (ad supported) for a long time. Even in the dark ages when Mozilla was just beginning to take off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, yeah, where's the problem? (Score:5, Interesting)
As such, firefox is dedicated to being a browser where the web is a primary focus, whereas konqueror is more like a swiss army knife where the web is an included convenience.
So, what's the mysterious "less compatible" component? Every now and then I'll find some page that won't work. Once in a blue moon, a right click Firefox open will do better, so I keep it around. The problem is mostly with non free junk like Macromedia Flash and IE specific navigation.
I use Konqueror as my primary browser because it's file handling is so excellent. The web looks like an extension of my computer and I like it that way. It renders standard compatible web pages without a problem and it's split tab capability (think the old Windoze 3.1 file manager) makes it an excellent research tool. Integration of tools like kpdf and kget make a seemless browsing experience that is top notch. Next to that, Firefox feels cramped.
But, hey, I could be missing something. What is it?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Extensions.
I'm currently running 6 of them in Firefox. 7 if you count the Filterset.G updater (for Adblock Plus)
1) Adblock Plus. Hardly ever see ads.
2) Tidy HTML validator. Validates and "tidys" up any HTML without having to query an external server. Works on sites that require a session or authentication or just aren't public yet.
3) Remove It Permanently. Just right click and remove any part of a page you don't like. The ad div at the top of Slashdot? Go
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Accessibility. Because of my visual disability, I have to have light text on a dark background, meaning I need to override the specified colors on many web pages, which Konqueror doesn't let you do. Firefox does. Even IE does.
But, hey, I could be missing something. Where in Konqueror can I do this?Re: (Score:2)
Swiss army knife? Call it KParts integration (Score:5, Insightful)
This myth should actually be seen as a compliment to KDE. Why? The components you mention all come from the standard KDE libraries, or they are supplied by additionally installed applications. Konqueror is just a shell, host for all of them. Just like ActiveX/OLE integrates applications seamlessly together in Windows.
Konqueror can host a KHTMLPart, KatePart (text editor), file-viewer part, image-viewer part. They can all be developed by separate appliations. Install a PDF viewer, and Konqueror can load it's PDFPart too. The networking support you mention come from the standard KDE-IO libraries, they haven't been klunged into Konqueror at all (every KDE application has KDE-IO and KPart support!).
Saying that this would remove developer resources from KHTML isn't really true. Developers working on a PDFPart likely wouldn't have ended up coding for KHTML anyways.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I think Firefox should be installed though as a second browser for those sites that do not render properly on Konqueror... just as many users used to fire up IE whenever Firefox didn't get it r
Re: (Score:2)
its a fiasco and no one seems to care, and that is why zealots mod down informative posts, always instead of debating on merits. sometimes they hypocritically mod the second post down calling it redundant to stifle free and open debate. This post will be no exception probably. You will see.
I'm sorry, did you consider your post to be informative? I merely thought it a rambling rant laden with typos and poor grammar. I mean, come on -- you're harping on a bug that you found five years back, and was fixed
Re: (Score:2)
Reviewer missed the point (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In Konqueror (recent versions, KDE 3.5+ I think), you can have it automatically underline misspelled words, while in Firefox you have to manually run the spellchecker and use it through a modal window. I'm sorry, 1996 called, and they want their spellchecking interface back. There's no reason why you should have to do anything except right-click for alternative spellings; f
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Konqueror 2.X was a poor imitation of Internet Explorer (without the vulnerabilities). But things have moved on a lot since those days
Re: (Score:2)
> ACID2), it has tabs, it accepts Mozilla-style extensions. In fact, it does everything Opera does -- but,
> unlike Opera, you get the source code.
There is a ton of stuff that Opera does that Konq doesn't. Here's what keeps me coming back to Opera:
* opening previously closed tabs -- Konq only has a tool for opening crashed pages, and that doesn't always work
* saving individual sessions
* put
Re: (Score:2)
How do people . . . (Score:2)
Re:How do people . . . (Score:4, Informative)
Rule #1: Don't try to please everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're going to build a distro, or any product for that matter, think long and carefully who you really want to target.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know, I think Microsoft has a pretty good track record targetting the lowest common denominator. But like with other products, there's only room for a very few, very big players operating on huge volume and razor-thin margins that aim for "everybody". Most companies find that they just can't do that and find themselves a niche. But there being 100 niche compani
Easy linux for masses (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, isn't this what Ubuntu (or Kubunto, for those who prefer KDE) is supposed to be? Or Red Hat? Or did I miss something?
Am I the only one who finds this article [bbspot.com] insightful, rather than funny?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And why wouldn't some of the Ubuntu toolset make it back into Debian eventually ? Some of it is quite good.
Re: (Score:2)
Apart from that, I agree that it would indeed be way simpler if everybody would just work together... That's people for you I guess. At least there's some constructive sharing going on.
So which is it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Price: Free download.
Pros: Easy to install; KDE desktop; good software selection.
Cons: Uses Firefox as the default browser; feels like it needs a little fine tuning to make it as slick as Xandros; didn't automatically install the right drivers for my nvidia card.
Summary: A decent Linux distro that provides a fair amount of useful software, Ark Linux lags behind Ubuntu and Xandros in polish. It seems to be trying to find its place under the sun.
(emphasis added)
This article wasn't too particularly useful, and even contradicted itself! Well, maybe next time.
Re:So which is it? (Score:5, Informative)
It's Konqueror. The Ark Linux devs give their reasons in one of the forums:
http://forum.arklinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=65&highwhat's with that, after all? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Did he look at the logs, look and find no information, or ???
YAN desktop image doesn't tell anyone anything, considering that you can make a KDE desktop look like pretty much anything, and a l
Re: (Score:2)
He doesn't care, and neither should the users.
I don't care how the inside of the car works, how the inside of the computer works, as long as it performs its task. Now, don't get me wrong, it's beneficial to know, but it doesn't mean he should need to know, or even care.
Re: (Score:2)
However I don't know if Ark is geared towards casual users or Unix people.
OTOH, even the Unix people get tired of tinkering after a while and like their machines to "just work" (while still having access to the Unix tools).
Tetris! (Score:4, Funny)
That's got to be worth something, no?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe but when you install (k)ubuntu, you can read Slashdot at the same time :)
Re: (Score:2)
Konqueror (Score:5, Informative)
The file dialog for Konqueror, when I download and save binaries, is infinitely better than the one in Firefox. The UI on Konqueror is also much easier to customize, adding or removing buttons at will. Some of the buttons I find quite useful, like scaling the web page larger or smaller. I also like the fact that plug-ins run as a separate process than the browser and I can run them niced. It also means I can run a 64-bit browser and integrate 32-bit plugins.
I also like the bookmark toolbar better in Konqueror. I can easily add folders or book marks to any folder I want with only a couple clicks.
As a file browser, Konqueror is actually quite nice. It's not the big bloated mess people make it out to be. In fact, if anything is a big bloated mess, it's Firefox. Konqueror uses kparts, so that if, for example, I open a
Hell, I can't even open more than one instance of Firefox, even on different machines if my home directory is shared over a network. Konqueror has no such problems.
The Konqueror browser I'm typing this from has 18 open tabs and has been open for probably about a week or two. It's consuming 475MB of virtual memory and 116MB of resident memory, but I have had a *lot* more tabs open in the past. I can rarely keep Firefox going for more than 24 hours or so, and it gobbles up memory at an astronomical rate (even 1.5.0.6).
As far as rendering web sites goes, I believe Firefox had problems with Slashdot for the longest time, while Konqueror did not.
Re: (Score:2)
Konqueror looks like a swiss army knife, but it's really just a container for various parts, and new parts can be added to it without having to
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I can easily add folders or book marks to any folder I want with only a couple clicks.
There's actually a Firefox extension providing this same functionality
But overall, I agree 100%. Konqueror's been my primary browser for a good four years or so. I switched to Firefox for a few months, and while there were things it did better (faster rendering, some nice extensions), I switched back within a few months.
The only Firefox functionality which I found useful at the time was adblock, and between squid/adza
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Konqueror (Score:5, Interesting)
That's what I thought too.
Then I changed my browser identification in GMail to be Mozilla/5.0 and then it suddenly worked.
Apparently Google are screwing up with Konqueror by checking the browser id.
I don't suppose they do this out of bad intentions, but they prefer the site reverting to HTML than not working cryptically.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
apt-get firefox (Score:3, Informative)
Overall, the reviewer likes this free KDE-based distro, but had to question some implementation choices, such as using the less-compatible Konqueror over Firefox for its default web browser.
Simple:
apt-get firefox
enter
From the Ark Linux website: Ark Linux uses a combination of rpm and apt-get.
That wasn't so hard was it?
How about some constructive criticism? (Score:2)
The article (and most posts) have been focusing on things that aren't particularly relevant. Why Konqueror ? Why not Firefox? Who cares? You can install Firefox with a single line in the konsole.
What else is bad... the installation should hide command-line scrolling and be able to more automatically install standard graphics card drivers.
Why hide the command-line? Does it "put off" users? Will it provoque an epileptic reaction in newbie? ... Again a totally useless comment in itself.
As for installing the
Oh come on. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've never used Ark Linux before, but the idea that somehow by castrating Linux and making it look and feel like Windows it will somehow compete with or replace Windows strikes me as highly unlikely.
Apple - which, depending on what numbers you buy into, has even a greater market share than Linux, though has barely put up any kind of substantial fight against Microsoft in terms of the number of people using it - and where the Mac *has* succeeded is in the ways it is different from Windows. I wonder how many Mac users would applaud a choice by Apple to change something in the Mac OS so as "not to scare off Windows users." Answer: almost none. Or perhaps, none. Frankly, and I'm not even a Mac user, a Mac user who took that attitude would disappoint me as someone who is at least amused by OS partisanship.
If you are going to use Linux, or FreeBSD, be ready to use a command line. Some people can get by without it because they don't do much, or have incredible luck and every upgrade works perfectly and nothing ever breaks, but frankly, the population that is served by hiding the command line is miniscule compared to those of us who appreciate - and in fact use Linux or a BSD *because* of that command line.
I'm really getting tired of this idea of making "Linux ready for the desktop" in the sense of making it flashy and "slick" like Windows. I've got no objection to making Linux look nice and function logically in terms of its GUI, but not at the expense of dumbing it down and hiding its strengths, which a lot of people want to do.
I want VERBOSE error and status messages, and as much access to the console and logs as possible. Transparency all the way down. I want this in Windows too since I'm forced to use it for work but I'm not going to get it.
The command line is what makes UNIX-like OSes what they are - to me, anyway.
I'm sick of people trying to make it Windows, or make it like Windows, or look like Windows.
I'm not particularly interested in sacrificing functionality so people who are afraid or unwilling to learn command line basics.
As for the default browser, for god's sake, can we stop pretending that it MATTERS WHAT IS INSTALLED BY DEFAULT. Can we stop pretending that the main concern about Linux is what COMPLETE COMPUTER ILLITERATES will make of it? Sheesh. INSTALL AN ALTERNATE BROWSWER IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE DEFAULT CHOICE LIKE SO MANY WINDOWS USERS DO WHEN THEY DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL FIREFOX.
Guess what? In Linux you can install what you want, change the wallpaper, and change your menus and shortcuts around. Shocker!
Macs aren't (and rightfully so) measured against Windows in terms of similarity to Windows's philosophy of design (and look and feel) and neither should Linux. By which I mean, they're not measured against it as if not being like Windows is a deficit.
The idea is to present a significant alternative to Windows which is better (verbosity of the OS is definitely a plus - how many people like the way a Windows fresh install tries to hide system folders, file extensions, and resort to other such dicketry? Not me and frankly not anyone I know, including those who have a fraction of interest in computers than I do). How many people applaud having a completely withered, pathetic command line in Windows? Not me. How many people think having everything so GUI-centric in Windows has improved peoples computing skills, overall productivity, and so forth? I'm not bashing GUIs and wizards; I'm just saying that the command line should be a transparent, well-documented alternative so if the average user wants to automate simple tasks (like rotating wallpaper hourly or something), it's clear and obvious how to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
And I probably couldn't have said it better either.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not particularly interested in sacrificing functionality so people who are afraid or unwilling to learn command line basics.
I agree with many of the points you made, but the above sentence strikes me as a little wrong headed. Why would you have to sacrifice functionality by providing a non-CLI interface? Ideally the interface is somewhat abstracted and programs should be fully accessible from both the CLI and the GUI. I think it is important to remember that adding a GUI does not remove any functiona
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
My favorite distro that I've tried is Gentoo. Sure, it's a pain in the butt and I wouldn't recommend it for most Windows-converts, but I learned so much about how Linux works and how everythin
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it is aimed at people that indeed don't do much or, more accurately, don't use many different tools. Lots of people only use their mailer, text processing and browser.
Re: (Score:2)
And I really can't wrap my head around why the irrational fear of scrolling text i
Java? (Score:2)
(Unless I'm doing something wrong myself, in which case I am most certain that I will be corrected.)
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO, if Sun's going to require people download and install Java by hand, Sun needs to have a team dedicated to nothing but making that process as easy as possible for EVERY platform. If they're not, they need to let third parties do it for them. If neither, then I say *don't* install Java and complain to every website *using* Java about their lack of civic responsi
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that Sun needs to be a little more open with the use of their free as in beer Java browser plugin. But if it can be done for Windows machines coming out of computer manufacturers, why not in a Linux distro?
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft and/or HP or Dell has paid Sun the necessary license fees to redistribute it for general use. The free Java is only available direct from Sun or as part of a Java-based software package.
Correction ;) (Score:3, Informative)
After a few back-and-forths with Sun's legal department, even Debian have packaged it for their non-free section: http://packages.debian.org/src:sun-java5 [debian.org]. Users can simply install the sun-java5-plugin package. In a few days time, the packages will be eligible [bjorn.haxx.se] for inclusion in the forthcoming Debian 4.0 ("etch") release.
Konqueror is more secure than Firefox (Score:3, Informative)
There must not be a mechanism in a web browser (or any other application that displays untrusted content) for a document to request privileges above and beyond those that are actually required for displaying untrusted content. Rather, the user must request privileges by installing a plugin or extension outside the encapsulated user interface.
Re: (Score:2)
That's already how it works. "A document" can't ask for extended privs. Show me the HTML snippet that invokes "extended privileges" in a standard Firefox. There actuall
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I wanted to do that I had to install an extension to let me install an extension from a downloaded XPI file on my local disk rather than installing it directly from a web page through an "install" link.
It was a few days after that I switched to KHTML-based browsers, though I've been using Camino a bunch lately... the problem isn't inherent in Gecko, the way Microsoft's ActiveX flaw is inherent in their HTML control... it's just that
Re: (Score:2)
This, at the worst, means you need to insert a XSS attack in your exploit.
I don't think having a simple, in-the-browser interface for installing browser extensions is inherently bad
Not if the extensions are sandboxed, no.
Whether they run with local user privileges or system privileges is a secondary issue.
This is similar to Apple's decision to have "Open Safe Files AFter Downloading" turned on by default. Th
TFA missed some stuff (Score:3, Interesting)
There does not appear to be a GUI tool to configure file sharing. Even Konqueror won't do it. If you right click on a folder and try to create a share and it stalls out after excreting a dialogue box. I think even KateOS is more polished (I've never actually used KateOS, but it is from Poland, hence the reference).
Oh, and the reviewer is lucky he used the System Install rather than going down the Expert path. The version of qtparted they used seems to be broken. See the Arklinux forum [arklinux.org].
Trying to start Celestia and Stellarium (and Dog only knows what else) causes X to buckle.
Another problem with smaller distros is that there isn't much of a community to help you if you are having problems. For instance there are fewer than 200 posts on the Arklinux forum spread over two languages. On the other paw, if I'm having problems with Yetis I can go over to the Bigfootforums [bigfootforums.com] where there are roughly 230,000 posters who can help me out. The Ark developers respond on the forums when they can, but really, they need to spend their time being developers. One of the things I look for in a distro is a well-developed, friendly community, not so big that you get lost in the shuffle (e.g. Ubuntu) but large enough so there will be someone who can help you. Maybe Mepis or Slackware sized groups, perhaps 25-75 posts per day.
On the plus side, Arklinux does have a very snappy and responsive "feel" to it, and I rather liked some of the customizations the developers chose. Maybe part of that is due to its cutting edge nature, particularly GCC 4.1, KDE 3.54 & X.Org 7.1 (which also accounts for some of the instability and video card problems).
It seems like if you put all the developers together from some of the smaller but very promising distros, say, Frugalware, Arklinux, Ultima, and Vectorlinux Soho, for Slackware-derived up-to-date KDE-centric Linices, you could come up with a really kickass operating system. But I am not sure developer time is necessarily additive, absent a pay-check because of issues of geographic proximity and human egos.
Re: (Score:2)
The user does not have any "dangerous" privileges - please see the description on how the security system works [arklinux.org].
While it diverges quite a bit from traditional Unix, this is part of what makes Ark easier on the average user than most of its competition (except for the "autologin as root" ones, which are actually scary).
Oh, and the reviewer is lucky he used the System Install rather than going down the Ex
Reply to the review from the Ark team (Score:3, Informative)
Hi,
thanks for reviewing Ark Linux!
We've read your review and found it very constructive - we're already working
on some improvements (the current snapshot
[http://arklinux.osuosl.org/dockyard-devel/iso/ark linux.iso] already does
away with most of the text mode stuff on installer startup).
There's also some things that aren't entirely accurate, and some things we
need more information on in order to fix them:
The installer offers 4 (not just 2) options, depending on the configuration of
your system -- the ones you omitted are Express Install (uses up all
unpartitioned space, leaves the rest alone -- this option is grayed out
unless you actually have a big enough fragment of unpartitioned space) and
Parallel Install (shrinks a FAT partition and then uses the unpartitioned
space) -- this option is grayed out unless you have a big enough FAT
partition).
We were a bit puzzled about the graphics card not being detected correctly;
Are you sure it wasn't detected correctly as opposed to it simply not having
the right Mode entries in xorg.conf? This is addressed in the FAQ section on
our website: http://www.arklinux.org/index.php?page_id=149&lang uage=en [arklinux.org]
If it really didn't detect your graphics card, please send me the output
of "lspci -vn" so we can figure out what went wrong there.
The browser choice is a matter of opinion -- you're free to disagree with our
choice, but here's the top reasons why we made it and why we stand by it:
registered with KDE, making it very easy to make it handle additional stuff:
For example, if you click on an rpm file in Ark's Konqueror (no matter
whether it's on the local filesystem or on a website), you get a graphical
tool that will let you install the file. There's no easy way to get
comparable functionality with any other browser.
Similarily, we can just embed kmplayer into Konqueror to play any video, in
the current version, even including WMV9. There are Firefox plugins for
videos, but they're always lagging behind mplayer.
it to do, and it doesn't use the wrong button order that causes lots of
people to click on the choice they didn't want to make (of course that bit
could be fixed in Firefox)
installation to 1 CD -- Firefox with all the libraries it depends on (even
excluding the ones we include in a default install) would need about 20 MB of
additional space on the CD.
Konqueror even passes the Acid II test, which Firefox fails pretty badly. The
sole reason why there are sites that show ok in Firefox but not in Konqueror
is that Firefox has a bigger user base, therefore web designers adjust their
pages to its bugs. This is a bit of a chicken and egg problem -- Konqueror
isn't getting accepted widely because there are some (though rather few)
sites it doesn't render correctly, and webmasters don't bother fixing it
because "nobody uses Konqueror anyway". We've decided to make our (small)
contribution to start getting rid of the problem.
you'll remember Konqueror as a bogus browser that can render only the most
basic websites correctly, while the Firefox predecessor of the time was a
pretty decent browser and Firefox has remained that. Konqueror has managed to c
Wow. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You on the other hand fail the facts test. Acid2 [webstandards.org] is not a W3C test:
Passing the Acid2 doesn't mean all that much:
So if a browser passes it can be because:
Re: (Score:2)
Passing the Acid2 test does indeed not mean much, but there's one important thing you left out: not passing it guarantees the browser does not conform to relevant web standards. (Or that Acid2 is broken, but that's true with any test.)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, ACID2 tests a lot of corner cases (like, IMO really obscure stuff). But I doubt you'd be able to do corner cases if you didn't know where either of the edge cases are. That said, the people that are using standards compliance as an argument between non-IE browsers is really grasping at straws. Sure, there's a few differences in how well they emulate broken behavior by IE but nothing that really sets them apart.
The biggest issues have nothing to do with pass
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
ELinks [elinks.or.cz]? Supports limited Javascript, limited CSS, and does tabs. Can't quite run most Ajax stuff, but it's still a surprisingly capable text-based browser. The world isn't stuck in Lynx, you know =)
Here's why (Score:2)
Why are there no good text-based browsers?
Well, if you want one, why haven't you written one?
Seriously, most developers choose not to spend their time developing for what you correctly describe as "decades-old display technology". (I'm a developer, by the way.) I can't speak for all developers, but personally, I don't get much of a kick out of developing something that I will never use myself, that will have very few users anyway, and that will have fewer users every year.
Now, if you really, really want
Re: (Score:2)
I find that alot of the more advanced features are spread between elinks and links2. CSS, javascript, encryption etc. Even more frustratingly is that lynx seems to have better defaults etc than either.
Not to talk down lynx/links/elinks - even as they are, they're usable in ways that firefox and konqueror aren't.
I can't use Links simply due to its name (Score:2)
I found that I was completely unable to Google for it. Have you any idea how often the word "links" appears on web pages that aren't referring to this particular web browser? Trying the term "links web browser" doesn't work, either --it's still completely o
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A: To create, explore, understand and to share with the world. The four greatest reasons behind hacking.
Q: Who is going to use this?
A: My clients, my company, my friends. I run small but growing GNU Linux company in NJ. My clients, home users (including my best friend's 87 year old mother who "rocks on the Ark"), 3 recording studios, 2 photography studios, 1 independent film studio and last but not least me. All my critical systems user Ark Linux 2006.1. Which, btw, is the only
Re: (Score:2)
There are questions over whether the GPL prevents the distribution of the closed-source binary driver precompiled for
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Having a config file is flawed in the first place.
When my system boots up, the Linux kernel constructs a list of all the hardware in the system. This list is read by udev, which sets it all up by loading the correct kernel module and doing other things for each piece of hardware. It's fast, simple and works really well. So why on earth doesn't the X server do the same?
Instead we're stuck in the early 90s, with a crappy config file and sixteen different frontends to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Enabling 3D is a bit more complicated; if it were just a matter of loading the correct DRI driver, X could do it. Unfortunately, you also need to make sure the OS has loaded the correct DRM module. In cases where you even want DRI - ATi and nVidia insist on using their own (non-DRI) framework for writing x.org drivers. My personal view would be that they should add DRI autolo
Re: (Score:2)
3d should not be more compilcated. udev will already load the nvidia or ati kernel modules based on the vendor/device IDs of the video devices present in the system; the X server has no reason at all to w
Re: (Score:2)
I don't like the idea of not having a config file. What if you want to change something? What if the auto-detection doesn't work? Obviously this is simply done with an automatic detection as well as some sort of xorg.conf-custom file.
Unfortunately, getting anything to change in the UNIX world requires a lot of impetus...