If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
even if browsers like reqong and epiphany cured cancer they are utterly useless because of the chance that some websites won't load properly. unless there are some radical cross-browser standardization these 300+ browsers will be unsung heroes.
even if browsers like reqong and epiphany cured cancer they are utterly useless because of the chance that some websites won't load properly. unless there are some radical cross-browser standardization these 300+ browsers will be unsung heroes.
That's why they all use the Webkit engine for both layout and javascript, making the chances of compatibility very high.
Besides, there aren't any browsers out there that can load 100% of websites. Personally I use 1 main browser but occasionally use a couple others at times, so I certainly wouldn't consider that to make a browser useless anyway. (none of those 3 include reqonq or epiphany)
I would prefer it if all those browsers died and all this work was put into porting firefox to qt (or efl or gtk3 for the matter). But anyways.
It's been tried several times at least, but it never got very far. But even if it was ported to Qt, it still wouldn't be integrated with KDE, that is a completely separate issue and a completely separate set of changes.
Comment