Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Konqueror Compiled For Mac OS X; KOffice Next

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the polished dept.

OS X 509

scishop writes "Benjamin Reed has just compiled Konqueror for Mac OS X after porting the KUniqueApplication class. A screenshot of the running program can be found here. According to Reed's blog, 'next up is KOffice.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't forget... (-1)

SCO$699FeeTroll (695565) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833050)

...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.

I wAnT ToO RuB My PeNiS On YoUr Fp. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833058)

That's right yuo fail it. Run along now Linux boy, there's nothing here for you.

Re:Don't forget... (-1, Offtopic)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833089)

You're lame.

Re:Don't forget... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833120)

yo mama, nigger

seems odd... (1)

fiftyfly (516990) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833056)

that this port would have taken longer then, say, the port for my pda (zaurus 5500) or cygwin?

Re:seems odd... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833067)

while I agree that it is odd, there were a good number of other browsers for OSX

MSIE, Netscape/Mozilla, Safari, Camino, etc.

Re:seems odd... (4, Informative)

after (669640) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833086)

What a great idea!

That IS odd that they could not have ported
that to the Cygwin platform... I mean, X11
is available and all.

Wait, but isnt there already a port of KDE [sourceforge.net]
to Cygwin?

Re:seems odd... (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833166)

Shame it is so dam slow on Cygwin...

Re:seems odd... (-1, Offtopic)

after (669640) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833168)

okay, you know what?

fuck this. every thime i try to be informative,
i get modded down.

so fuck the mod and fuck you and fuck slashdot
and fuck your stupid mom and dad and fuck your
cat and your car and your stupid friends and
fuck slashdot.

fucking rate this down bitch. fuck.

Re:seems odd... (5, Informative)

Durin_Deathless (668544) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833107)

This port doesn't use X11 at all. I have been on the maillist, and the stumbling block has been the X11 specific code(and a minor thing in QT-mac, reguarding extensions of shared libs). This is a real achievement, and rangerrick is to be greatly congratulated!

Re:seems odd... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833165)

This is a real achievement,...

No, it was just a lot of work. There is a difference, though I suspect that detail is lost on a lot of people here.

Not really (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833130)

Mac users aren't exactly known for being technical, or even smart. Just rich.

Dear Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833059)

I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

with much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

OS X has BSD and X11 (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833060)

What's the big fucking deal?

Don't you mean (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833062)

Konquerer Kompiled For OS X, KOffice Knext?

Now... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833066)

Can we get a KTHML compatible browser compiled for Windows? Konquerer or Safari, anything... make it easier to test web designs.

Where can I get it? (0)

omey (717285) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833071)

Where can I DL it. I want, I want.

OS X Maximizes browser choice? (3, Interesting)

weston (16146) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833072)

I wonder if there's a platform on which you get more browser choice than Mac OS X....

'course, the number of Mac/OS X only browsers sortof makes it cheating...

Re:OS X Maximizes browser choice? (5, Interesting)

OmniVector (569062) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833212)

lets see.
you get:
  • gecko
    • mozilla
    • firebird
    • camino
  • khtml
    • konqueror
    • omniweb
    • safari
  • mac ie
  • opera
  • icab


that's getting to be quite an impressive list. 4/9 of those are mac only. i doubt you can consider mac ie a separate browser from windows ie, even though they are two totally different rendering engines.

icab is crap, and no one uses it anymore. mac ie still gets used quite a bit soley because it's the default browser shipped with 10.0, 10.1, and 10.2. it's also included in 10.3, and i know some people who are too stubborn to give safari a try. i still consider it crap however. omniweb is safari in drag. and konqueror, although nice it is finally ported, is more or less for proof of concept. opera for mac isn't even up to 7.0 yet if i remember right, with opera being all pissed at apple releasing safari. so that really leaves you with safari, and the mozilla browsers. the only 2 that are mac only in that lot are camino and safari.

i'm dying for a browser as powerful and simple as safari to hit linux. epiphany's not quite there.

The question is.. (4, Interesting)

subk (551165) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833073)

Someone please answer this -- this is not flamebait.

Why bother? I seriously doubt anyone would go full-tilt KDE on an OS X box. Mozilla or Firebird are great browser choices.. Why bother to port Konqueror?

Re:The question is.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833092)

Dunno. Don't care either. Safari (which is based on Konqueror) is already my default browser. I don't see the reason to install Konqueror too. It's redundantly redundant.

Re:The question is.. (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833106)

I guess the best answer is: Because it's there.

But Konqueror is a good browser and the KDE folks put a lot of work into it. Options are good, and this is just another option.

Re:The question is.. (1)

subk (551165) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833122)

..YAUPTWGNMS

Yet Another Useless Port That Wont Gain New Market Share.

Re:The question is.. (4, Interesting)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833141)

This still doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. It's free software, and this guy loves his Mac apparently, so why not?

I guess I'm not as cynical as some people.

Re:The question is.. (1)

subk (551165) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833169)

Right on. I see the merit in spending time porting an app for your own personal enjoyment, but right now IMHO the KDE team could reap great benefit from spending time on a Windows port of Konqueror and KOffice (possible?)--a platform which does not yet have great choices for (good) free software packages.

Re:The question is.. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833128)

Why bother? I seriously doubt anyone would go full-tilt KDE on an OS X box. Mozilla or Firebird are great browser choices.. Why bother to port Konqueror?

Konqueror is more than just a web browser. I would install it on Mac OS X to get all the wonderful KIO slaves that come with it like tar and sftp.

Re:The question is.. (5, Insightful)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833146)

It's more than just about a browser. It's about porting Linux/KDE stuff over without middlemen like X11. That's a nice little achievement.

And if someone really really sees no point, THEY DON"T HAVE TO USE IT. :-)

Inertia. (5, Insightful)

abulafia (7826) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833140)

I am not a KDE or an OSX developer. (Well, I do some OSX administration, and port our apps to the platform. But that isn't the same thing.)

I'd say that covering platforms is important, because when someone says, but do you suppot Blah, you can answer that yes, indeed, you do.

Keep in mind that short term tactics are great, but strategy is what frequently offers tactical brilliance a place to shine. If KDE is everywhere, people will start to use it. That's useful. for KDE. See? Think companies, down the road.

-j, who really can't stand such heavyweight stuff.

Re:The question is.. (4, Insightful)

gregfortune (313889) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833148)

At it's core, this is simply a UI choice. Do you like how Safari renders, but don't like the interface? Now you've got another choice. Not too thrilled with Mozilla? Again, another choice.

This also signals the beginning of an infusion of KDE apps into Mac OS X. Basically, this proves it can be done and more are likely to follow.

Re:The question is.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833195)

absolutely its been two weeks since my install and i am still trying to make the home button of my konqueror take me to google instead of my home directory. :(

Re:The question is.. (3, Informative)

keating_5 (656347) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833208)

Konqueror is more than a web-browser. Its other major use is as a file manager, among other things.

Re:The question is.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833214)

... or you can just take a page our of the Microsoft book and simply "EMBRACE AND EXTEND".

Hey, why not?

Impressive. (2, Funny)

BandwidthHog (257320) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833075)

But has anybody managed to get Linux running on it?

*ducks*

Re:Impressive. (1)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833147)

throws big fucking shoe and a Panther box too

;-)

F'n Rocks (2, Insightful)

Funksaw (636954) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833076)

Konquerer is my browser of choice on Linux, and it's cool that we've got another choice for browser. Yeah, I use Safari, but as this is one step to porting most of the KDE stuff, I can't help but wonder if this is a big step towards the holy grail of Linux-to-MacOSX conversions, OpenOffice.

-- Funksaw

Re:F'n Rocks (1, Troll)

0x1337 (659448) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833224)

Not that I have anything against OS X or anything, but I don't see myself converting to a $2000 computer (or more, depending how many toy^H^H^Hfeatures you desire) with a closed source (Its OSS kernel doesn't constitute the entire OS, just the executive) ~$100 OS where each upgrade costs another $100. By all means - if you have the finances go for it. I don't - and likely never will. I think I'll stick to my $500 AthlonXP + Slackware9.1 for now. And in a couple of years - Ill switch to an $500 Athlon64 + SlackwareX.X.

why help a megacorporation like apple? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833077)

Why do you give your free labor to help a megacorporation like apple?

Re:why help a megacorporation like apple? (1)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833090)

You certainly told 'em, Anonymous Coward, man of the people...

Re:why help a megacorporation like apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833123)

I mean of course I love to see Apple exploit insecure consumers trying to purchase cool.

But I'm not gonna go work for a megacorp for free.

I mean would you show up at GM corporate headquarters and say "Hi, is there any work I can do for free?"

Re:why help a megacorporation like apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833153)

I mean would you show up at GM corporate headquarters and say "Hi, is there any work I can do for free?"

Of course not, because they wouldn't use a typical mac user who would in all likelihood show up wearing a tutu and a ball gag, even for free - they'd just kick their ass. That type of behavior is only tolerated in Cupertino.

Only then, it's more like, "Hmmf, iff ffrrr anfy wffrk ff cffn dff fffr frrr?"

Re:why help a megacorporation like apple? (1)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833181)

(shakes head) you dont get it at all do you... why do people put out things freeware for OS's why do people do ANYTHING nice??? because some people do things because its there, and dont really care, nor see it being that big a deal to try to make money of it themselves

Re:why help a megacorporation like apple? (1)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833206)

Exactly. I say that if one does not care for this recent development, why not ignore it and move along? Instead, ACs ocme out of the woodwork to start some crap for no other reason other than to annoy. Feh.

Re:why help a megacorporation like apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833211)

You don't get it all do you?

OS X isn't some open source project. It's a closed system controlled by a ruthless megacorporation.

If you want to help the Free Software community there are a lot better things you could do than to help help Apple Corporation further exploit the Free Software community for superprofits. (Or if you must boy down and welcome your corporate overlords at least fucking get paid for it ya sucker.)

Sometimes I wonder.. (4, Funny)

keplon (690637) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833081)

..Is using the letter "K" in every program made for the KDE Environment overKill?

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (2, Funny)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833116)

Excuse me, this is KDE. We don't tolerate that kind of krap.

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833117)

Dude: shut the fucK up!

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833133)

Don't be a Killjoy.

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (1)

subk (551165) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833142)

Nope. Just good-ole American Brand Rekognition.

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833155)

Gnot really, when you stop to consider the gnaming convensions of other projects.

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (4, Insightful)

clarkcox3 (194009) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833170)

It's no worse than all the OSX apps that start with a lowercase "i".

iThink iT's a great fit for the iCorproation.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833177)

with such a penchant for annoying letteriffic names for everything.

Re:Sometimes I wonder.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833197)

Making fun of gnaming conventions? iThink you're krazy.

why? (0, Redundant)

jwachter (319790) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833084)

Sorry if this seems like a troll, but why is this an important achievement? I guess it's nice to have another browser on OSX and all, but it seems like a lot of effort for a small result.

Re:why? (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833132)

Well, for one, just because it's on Slashdot doesn't mean it's important or an achievment!

I guess the idea for this is that since Konqueror was able to be compiled, it signifies that their work on porting KDE in general is coming along quite well.

Re:why? (1)

gregfortune (313889) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833134)

Because, it's the first step to creating ports of all major KDE apps. Konqueror was probably a good first bet because the rendering engine, KHTML, is already know to work on the Mac platform.

Re:why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833135)

why is this an important achievement?

Bekause.

Re:why? (4, Informative)

abigor (540274) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833156)

Can other browsers drag a file from a remote machine via ssh and drop it on another machine via ftp? Browse a digital camera? Connect to SMB shares? And of course, browse the Web - all at the same time, in different tabs and split screens?

No. Konqueror browses practically everything, not just the Web.

All that said, I do wonder if the kioslaves made it into this OS X version of Konqueror.

Really?? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833087)

iKant believe it!

Maybe the KDE guys will all go over to Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833091)

It would seriously freshen up the water in the Linux swimming hole, if you know what I mean. With all the corporate ass kissing of Troll Tech, I bet Jobs will look forward to it. Hurry along boys, I hope you have $4,000 each to buy a computer from two years ago in a shiny case.

It figures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833093)

After I spent a day or so compiling Fink KDE on my G3....

When will Linux heads learn that distributing source code is a Good Idea, but only distributing source code and not binaries is a Bad Idea. It's good that I can fix the code if there's something wrong with it, but it's idiotic that I should be forced to use a program like fink to download sourcecode (which is bigger than binaries by definition) only to then waste time compiling it with the default options selected!

Re:It figures (1)

skwirl42 (262355) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833182)

Umm... okay, so I figure you don't know about dselect, or apt-get, which ship with fink. They both install binaries from the fink distribution, without the need to build from source.

Just to check, I went into dselect, and lo and behold, KDE, pre-built, as binaries, is available. Saves ya lots of time. Not everything is available as binaries, but a large portion of them are.

Re:It figures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833201)

Hey Dink,

This is native, not X11.

RTFB (blog).

That's good (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833095)

because, from what I've heard, most of the browsers for OSX blow goats.

But why bother? (0, Redundant)

-kertrats- (718219) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833099)

Why bother when Safari runs perfectly well?

Sorry if this isnt a web browser, i dont know what this is, but that screenshot looks very much like a web browser. And if it isnt, then just mark this as a |=1|257 |)057 message.

Re:But why bother? (1)

gregfortune (313889) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833173)

Because it's a UI choice. If you like how Safari renders, but the UI doesn't work like you want, give Konqi a try.

screenshot (1)

n0nsensical (633430) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833102)

"A screenshot of the running program can be found here."

...taken just before it crashed.

Why isn't X11 running? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833105)

In that screenshot, X11 isn't running. Does this mean that Konqueror is running w/o X Windows?!

If so, holy crap!

Re:Why isn't X11 running? (4, Informative)

clarkcox3 (194009) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833183)

Yes, that's the whole point of what he did. You can already run KDE under X11 on OSX. (I've done it before). The thing that is special about this was that he actually *ported* it to OSX's Quartz windowing system.

Re:Why isn't X11 running? (3, Interesting)

gregfortune (313889) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833186)

Qt can run without X. Take a look at Qtopia, for example. There's a Qt/Mac version too so presumably Konqi is running through Qt. Of course, if Konqi was using any pure Xlib calls, then either they are gone or this guy pulled some serious magic stunts :)

How long till KDE can be the DE? (0, Troll)

Safrax (697056) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833109)

It would be kickin' rad if they figure out a way to replace the mac os window manager (I do not think of os x as anything more than a window manager, imho) with KDE.

Re:How long till KDE can be the DE? (1)

Phishcast (673016) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833174)

Uhh...Hey dude, install a PPC distro of Linux. Be happy with your KDE apps.

Re:How long till KDE can be the DE? (1)

libra-dragon (701553) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833215)

You can do that with Darwin or X11 root window, but why?

Unicode? (1)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833111)

If K-Office has got proper Unicode support, then... it certainly is a good idea to switch away from MS some more...

Ok..... Why? (1)

strider_starslayer (730294) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833112)

I've really got to ask why on this one... I mean cross compatibility and all- great stuff, but WHY? X allready has a really good, open source, web browser in Safari, it can run a native port of Mozilla, and you can run BSD apps in the downloadable X server- so what possible reason can there be to completely port it- other then perhaps 'look I ported it'?

Re:Ok..... Why? (1)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833127)

I think it's more of a proof that Linux stuff can be ported without relying on X, which is why people still put up with MS Office for Mac rather than use OpenOffice. I know that's one of the reasons I do. (Flame away!)

Re:Ok..... Why? (1)

gregfortune (313889) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833199)

How about the look and feel of Konqueror? Some people may prefer the UI of Konqueror over the UI of Safari.

Oh yeah... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833114)

Great work! Until recently, the only decent browser on MacOSX has been Safari. I've tried mozilla (too slow), Internet Explorer (trivial joke) and Opera (too unstable). So I, for one, welcome this new browser into the Macintosh world.

But, take a good look at it, folks. MacOSX. Gotta admit it: it's pretty beatiful, huh?

Now why don't we try to mimic that interface into Linux instead of everything Windows has?

Re:Oh yeah... (1)

foonf (447461) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833193)

Don't worry, this should have precisely zero advantages over Safari, since Safari IS a Mac port of the very same KHTML engine used by Konqueror, plus some enhancements by Apple. This just takes those enhancements, and the native UI, back away. But it does mean the rest of KDE should be portable also, which I suppose is the real point. Although off-hand I can't think of a single KDE application which really demands to be installed (Scribus, the open-source DTP app, is pure QT and probably runs on OS X already), and I only use KDE on Linux for the desktop and file manager (which would both be totally redundant on OS X).

Great. An also-ran browser on an also-ran OS. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833115)

Yay.

Re:Great. An also-ran browser on an also-ran OS. (1)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833159)

Hey, tough guy. What's "also-ran" mean to you?

And how brave are you to hide behind anonymity?

Re:Great. An also-ran browser on an also-ran OS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833217)

In the case of OS/X, "also-ran" means nobody uses it but marketing-susceptible technophobes and elitist, but mostly ignorant lower-echelon media types.

In the case of Konqueror, it means people who are unable to muster the brainpower to download firebird.

Deal with it, community-college boy.

Re:Great. An also-ran browser on an also-ran OS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833163)

Why is this flamebait? Seriously. We've been told Linux has surpassed OS/X on the desktop, and Mozilla has clearly surpassed Konqueror. Both also-rans. News for nerds? Maybe. Stuff that matters? No freaking way.

Freakin' Mac-o-philes.

Re:Great. An also-ran browser on an also-ran OS. (1)

grubi (683777) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833219)

How has Linux surpassed OS X on the desktop? What? There are more Linux home users than OS X users? When did THAT happen?

Woot! (4, Insightful)

LittleLebowskiUrbanA (619114) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833119)

Finall, a capable browser for Samba networks for Macs! Finder crashes and just plain doesn't work for me browsing Windows networks from my Powerbook running Panther. Whereas typing smb:/// in Konqueror just works like Apple claims Finder does.

A bit offtopic, but I need to vent (4, Informative)

Starship Trooper (523907) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833131)

Perhaps someone on the Qt/Mac or equivalent GTK project could answer this for me. Why is it that when these toolkits get ported to another other platform, be it Windows, MacOS, BeOS or what have you, they insist on looking and acting as GTK or Qt applications rather than native apps? A Qt/Windows or GTK/Windows app would be much more useful and usable to me if it used native Windows widgets and thus fit in with every other program I use.

As an example, I use gaim on FreeBSD because its tabbed interface is simply the best I've come across. I would love to use it instead of Trillian when I'm forced into using Windows. But the Windows port of gaim, which uses GTK+/Windows, works horribly. The GTK theme doesn't match my XP settings, widgets draw slowly and work clumsily (tooltips in particular seem to spontaneously appear and refuse to go away, even when the program is minimized!), and all in all it feels like a cheap Wal-Mart knockoff.

GTK+ widgets offer no benefits over standard Windows controls -- they draw slower, they don't match the environment, and Windows is just as themable as GTK is. Going back on-topic, this Qt/Mac port of Konqueror likewise eschews native widgets for the entirely out-of-place Qt look. All I can ask is Why? Wouldn't it be far easier for Qt/ and GTK/Windows or /Mac to simply wrap native widgets, rather than poorly ape them?

Re:A bit offtopic, but I need to vent (1)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833191)

You might want to check out WxWindows [wxwindows.org] for a toolkit that does exactly what you propose, and does it quite well. It uses Gtk widgets on X, and native Win32 widgets in Windows (and I assume Carbon or something similar on OS X and MacOS 9).


The API isn't quite as nice, clean consistent and well-documented as Qt, but it's definitely not bad, and I've written some fairly complex GUIs with it before. They look and feel truly native, though it may take some minor tweaking to get everything perfect on all the platforms you are targeting.

Re:A bit offtopic, but I need to vent (2, Insightful)

n0nsensical (633430) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833207)

A lot of window toolkit designers apparently think they can do a better job--of course they are wrong and it ends up slow and bloated. I believe wxWindows [sourceforge.net] actually does the intelligent thing and uses native widgets.

Now of course we are both going to get modded offtopic into oblivion because we're not singing the praises of Konqueror for Mac OS X. So, uhh, praise be to Konqueror for Mac OS X?

Re:A bit offtopic, but I need to vent (1)

A Life in Hell (6303) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833213)

QT actually can use native controls on both windows and mac os x (and in fact, the app I'm writing does this). But there are additional issues that you need to deal with then, and remember that this is a first version!

--jj

Redundancy (1)

General Sherman (614373) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833139)

I'm sorry if I'm misinformed, but doesn't Safari use an edited version of the KHTML engine?

And since I'm pretty sure that's right, what is the point of this? I've used Konqueror before, and it's not a very good browser in any respect. It feels like some terrible OEM product.

This is not flamebait, what is the point?

Re:Redundancy (4, Informative)

clarkcox3 (194009) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833202)

You're not misinformed, Safari does indeed use the KHTML engine. But the point of this appears to be to show the world that KDE apps can be ported to OSX in a manner that they won't require X11 (which a lot of the less-expert users shy away from). This means that these applications can be "first class" Mac applications.

I.e. someday soon, we may see grandmas everywhere running KOffice instead of shelling out hundreds for MS Office.

OT, but what about Evolution? (3, Interesting)

Phishcast (673016) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833143)

Konqueror, okay. But we've got alternatives to that all over the place. The Linux app I really want to see on Mac OS X is Ximian Evolution. I've used Apple's alternative, but I really like the way Evolution ties into Exchange, and soon to be Novell Groupwise.

Is porting Gnome apps that much more difficult? Programming-challenged poster here...

Re:OT, but what about Evolution? (1)

Durin_Deathless (668544) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833176)

First we need a Mac OS X port of GTK+. Any volunteers?

Re:OT, but what about Evolution? (2, Informative)

Binary Boy (2407) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833210)

Evolution runs fine under Apple's X11, though a native port would be nice... it's a fine IMAP client in its own right, regardless of the Exchange features.

The big problem is getting those Exchange features - those are only available via the Exchange Connector for Evolution, which is a commercial product and is not available for OSX using X11. If there was a native port of Evolution then we'd still need a supported version of Connector, and would still have to pay for it.

Why? (1)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833144)

I mean, I guess this is cool, and it's not my time being spent on this, but I really don't see the point. I've used Konqueror and I honestly think that while it's not bad, it pales in comparison to Mozilla, Netscape and Opera (plus Safari on OSX). Same with KOffice, it's alright, but Open Office is far more full-featured (and MSOffice if you like that type of thing...). I'm not a huge fan of KDE in general, but there are still plenty of good things about it. However, Konqueror and Koffice are, in my opinion, not its highlights.

A native KHTML browser for OS X? (5, Funny)

Steve Jobbs (736450) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833149)

The porting of Konqueror to OS X is great news for Mac users, as they now have access to the fast, standards compliant KHTML rendering engine. Many users and developers prefer KHTML to the Internet Explorer or Gecko engines. I was wondering though...does anyone know of a KHTML browser which is completely OS X native? I mean, with a brushed metal skin and full integration into Aqua? It could maybe have other stuff too, like Google search field built-in or something. That would be cool! Anyway, in the meantime I'll just have to continue with Konqueror on OS X.

Re:A native KHTML browser for OS X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833178)

Safari is KHTML native. It's also OS X native, as far as I know :)

Question: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833150)

Is Konqueror UniKode Kompatible?

safari == konquerer port ? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833192)

i'm confused between the differences of porting konquerer and khtml. i thought apple essentially ported konquerer by using khtml as safari's back end. here's a link:

apple: webcore [apple.com]

My research shows.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7833198)

OSX is for the happily gay unix people. Happily heterosexual unix people use solaris or one of the BSDs (whazzup my peeps?). Sexually frustrated (either way) MS haters use lunix.

One big happy family.

Ouch (3, Interesting)

Squozen (301710) | more than 10 years ago | (#7833203)

Damn, that's some nasty kerning on that screenshot. Safari doesn't have that problem, I wonder why Konqueror does if it's using the same rendering engine?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?