news at pointerstop.ca
Tue Jan 15 13:42:10 GMT 2008
Terence Simpson wrote:
> David McGlone wrote:
>> On Saturday 12 January 2008 6:14:33 pm Terence Simpson wrote:
>>> Dotan Cohen wrote:
>>>> On 12/01/2008, Terence Simpson <stdin at stdin.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Well, Dolphin is the file manager and Konqueror is the Web Browser.
>>>>> Did you expect the Web Browser to have all the features of a file
>>>> Well, yes, as it originally _was_ a file manager before it was a web
>>>> browser. And so far as I've been led to understand (please RTFM me
>>>> with information otherwise) Konqueror retains all it's features for
>>> No, Konqueror uses the Dolphin KPart to use some file managing features.
>>> (A KPart is like a plugin, not exactly the same but a decent analogy for
>> first off, let me laugh. LOL I'm sorry man are you new to linux or kde?
>> Konqueror has been a file manager since I don't know how long, let me say
>> RH 6.1 or somewhere around there. can anyone verify? Anyway I've been
>> using konqueror as a file manager for quite a few years I'd say a good 6
>> or 8 years and been using linux for around 10 or 12 years. Also from what
>> I can see, I believe you got it backwards, wouldn't it make more sense if
>> dolphin was using the konqueror kpart since konqueror has been around as
>> a file manager for a long long time. Matter of fact all dolphin is, is a
>> stripped down and re-arranged konqueror with a different name. :-)
> To answer your questions:
> 1) No
> 2) No
> 3) Didn't say it wasn't
> 4) There is no Konqueror KPart for file managing, only the Dolplin KPart.
> I hope that answered all of those queries.
Sometimes, I despair of Linux ever surviving. I expect developers to make
changes that suit developers - that's the nature of community-maintained
software - but if you're just going to show complete disrespect for the
users of the software, everybody would be much better off if you'd just
ignore us. Yes, David is being a little rude, but you seem to be
intentionally telling us all to just "live with it", and it's no surprise
if it rubs us the wrong way.
#3 was not strictly said, but you certainly implied it. #4 is completely
irrelevant - Konqueror has a file manager kpart, and what it's called
doesn't matter a bit to the users. It _would_ have made much more sense to
users if both Dolphin and Konqueror had continued to use the same kpart.
To cripple konqueror by giving it only _some_ of Dolphin's features, and
not even giving Dolphin all the features Konqueror used to have is going to
hurt some users and annoy far more.
More information about the kubuntu-users