Slashdot Mirror


Linux: Browser Wars

Anderson Silva writes "LinuxToday has an article doing a pretty basic comparison on some of the major linux browsers. Although a nice article, and with a fair result, I still think Opera is the best browser available for Linux." I prefer knoqueror, although recent builds seem to have random hangs on images.google.com.

19 of 352 comments (clear)

  1. Spellchecker by Ford+Fulkerson · · Score: 5, Funny
    I prefer knoqueror


    I guess slashcode still doesn't include a spellchecker.

    --

    Somewhere in the heavens... they are waiting.
  2. Opera Slow? by Rura+Penthe · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article: Opera is slick, but it's page rendering is nothing short of horrendous. Galeon performed well in all tests, and, aesthetics aside, it's a good choice.

    I haven't noticed this myself...In my experience Opera has (almost always) been very fast in rendering HTML for viewing. Its only problem is that it waits for images to load before it displays anything past the image tag in question. Perhaps this was why it took so long to load the page in the test.

  3. Less crappy browsers by Dreven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This proves once again, that there still isn't a good browser for Linux. So we have to decide on which one is less crappy, and not which one is better.

    I don't understand why this is so. It sickens me that browsing on windows with IE is more stable then anything on the linux platform. Its just not right.

  4. This guy needs to develop some aethestic sense by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The author of this article referes to Galeon as "nasty" and "tacky". I'm looking at a Galeon window right now, and it has only six small icons, a URL bar, the throbber, and standard GNOME menubar. I think it looks very minimal and tastful.

    The author says Opera is clean and simple. In my eyes, Opera is horrible. It's default screen is covered with 500 different widgets. When you load a page, they all start whizzing and moving around. It's very distracting. Opera doesn't look at home on GNOME nor KDE, which just adds to its problems. Opera, with its adverts and grotesque widgets, is a visual insult.

  5. loading slashdot?... by gkuchta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Slashdot uses a lot of tables on the pages which can take a while to render, so what better test for a browser. Obviously this is a pretty extreme test as most pages are nowhere near as big.

    Opera: 127 seconds
    Konqueror: 57 seconds
    Mozilla: 71 seconds
    Galeon: 64 seconds
    Skipstone: 57 seconds (Note: Browser crashed on first attempt.)
    Netscape: 34 seconds
    Winner: Netscape Navigator


    These load times are absurd. Is this guy connected to the internet via a 300-baud phone-coupler attached to a telephone line spliced together with paper clips? I'm on a cablemodem, and it takes less than two-seconds to fully load slashdot. I think it took about 9 or 10 when I was on a dialup. Anyone else think these figures look a little inflated?

    --
    when salmon are outlawed, only outlaws will have salmon
    1. Re:loading slashdot?... by rho · · Score: 5, Informative

      He saved the page to local disk -- network time had nothing to do with it.

      However, his hardware did: a Pentium 166. My main machine is a P-133, and I normally see such load times on complicated sites. While I could use a faster computer, a slower one is a good indicator of when your HTML is getting out of hand and that it's time to stop dinking with it.

      Regardless, I still use Netscape 4.7x for these reasons -- it's fast, relatively stable while Mozilla on a P-133 is a complete joke.

      --
      Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
  6. Totally meaningless by randombit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Mozilla version shipping with Mandrake 8.0 is 0.8.7. While stability is pretty much unchanged since then, Mozilla has gotten noticably faster during the 0.9.x cycle. 0.9.1 is usable on a 350 Mhz Pentium II... sort of. 0.9.3, while still being slower than Navigator 4.77, isn't bad at all. It's finally fast enough that I can use it as my normal, day-to-day browser (I was using Nav 4.77, because while it was unstable as hell, at least I didn't have to wait 20 seconds for a page to load).

    I imagine that simliar situations are true for at least one or two of the other browsers compared. Development on Mozilla, especially, is happening very fast and comparing something current 6 months ago is not, IMHO particularly meaningful.

  7. Explorer? by yooden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A German magazine did a similar thing a while ago, only they included MSIE. It won hands on in every discipline from speed to adherence to standards.
    A pity that it wasn't at least mentioned.

  8. Gimme a break... by quartz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article: Konqueror: Clean, simple and boring. Perfectly functional, with the bare minimum of fuss. The spinning KDE logo in the corner looks very nice, but of course adds nothing to your browsing experience.

    Konqueror, boring? Gimme a break. It's completely themable and it doesn't even need its own themes like Mozilla, you can use general KDE themes. And it works wonderfully as a file manager (and network browser and PDF and manpage viewer), with smooth icon previews of HTML, ps, pdf, images and text files. You can split the view in however many sub-windows you want, you can even have a shell prompt as a subwindow. It has a full screen mode. Right now, I'm browsing with KDE and Konqueror in "Aqua" theme and it looks, well, let's just say you have to buy an Apple if you want something to look cooler than that.

    And what's up with testing on a ridiculously outdated machine? P166, no MMX, 32 MB RAM? You've gotta be kidding me. If I wanted a browser that worked fast on this configuration, I'd have stuck with Netscape 3.0...

    1. Re:Gimme a break... by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And what's up with testing on a ridiculously outdated machine? P166, no MMX, 32 MB RAM?

      Sure, it's a bit old, but machines like that are still pervasive. School labs and libraries are full of computers like this. I'd rather not have my local library make a decision between providing usable web access and purchasing more books. It should be perfectly reasonable to browse the web on these old computers, saving money for other uses.

  9. Versions? by icqqm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but aren't the versions of the browsers used somehow important to the story? Was it Mozilla 0.9, or 0.9.2? Netscape 4.08 or Netscape 4.7, or Netscape 6? Hard to tell what these tests mean, especially if not the latest versions of each browser are being used.

  10. no text only browsers (and why?) by johnjones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    why oh why where text only browsers not included ?

    is this because their user base is small ?
    I personally use it but I find that alot of people dont

    because I find lynx the fall back GOD the page doent render in netscape or some fool has FSCK the HTML I just use lynx and away I go

    really how much information (I am intrested in )is presented in pictures on the web
    not much I am sure

    lynx is my fallback king (-;
    I use it when I telnet into places to check they can see stuff plus all I need is a telnet app which I can obtain for most OS's

    what do you relie on to ALWAYS give you the web ?
    (me its a telnet client and lynx)

    regards

    john jones

  11. Bah by Enahs · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Startup test, from blackbox, showed konqueror to be the clear loser. Well, duh, kdeinit wasn't running yet! A fairer test would have been in in konqueror's "native environment."



    Hey, at least I didn't post a lame joke about the obvious misspelling. Get a life, people, willya?

    --
    Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
  12. images.google.com by Skynet · · Score: 5, Funny

    *CmdrTaco loads images.google.com*
    *CmdrTaco types in "tux the penguin nude"*
    *Penguin loads up in goatse position*
    CmdrTaco: hmmmm....
    *CmdrTaco types in "RMS nude"*
    *Google locks...*
    CmdrTaco: ^$%$#@!

    --
    Execute? [Y/N] _
  13. Grey is not bad by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Winner [for "The Look"]: Mozilla, hands down. It's terrific that someone decided to take the route away from the greys.

    Oh goody. I was tired of all my applications looking the same and behaving the same. I love guessing which color means disabled for each different application. I like having my system wide colors that I've carefully chosen to minimize eye strain thrown out the window.

    System wide colors and looks are feature. If you're sick of living in grey land, change it globally. Gnome supports this. KDE supports this. Windows supports this.

    Mozilla is a great browser, but their decision to roll their own user interface was a mistake. Fortunately Mozilla is modular, and as the core engine stabilizes I plan on moving to a more system friendly browser using that engine. Probably Galeon or Skipstone.

  14. Windows: Browser wars by imevil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I had to do a Browser comparison with an application which needed hiding and displaying parts of a web page: depending on what you clicked some different stuff appeared.

    This application uses a lot of features a browser can handle: stylesheets (and the nasty "display" attribute), JavaScript, tables, forms and XML.

    I tried the following browsers (under Windows, since the people who will use it mainly have Windows):

    Netscape 4.x
    Netscape 6.1
    Internet Explorer 5.x
    Opera 5.12
    Amaya 5.1
    Mozilla 0.9.3

    Here are the results:
    - IE kicked ass in everything, and even displayed the XML stuff right.
    - NS 6.1 kicked ass too, but 6 or 7 times slower. Prettier display, but hideously slow (and no XML, but we didn't care). Same thing for Mozilla (duh).
    - NS 4.x sucked. Couldn't handle the "display: none" property properly. No XML.
    - Opera faked kicking ass, but in fact had JavaScript problems... just wouldn't show anything whatever you clicked. No XML.
    -Amaya didn't even fake. I guess it was a JavaScript problem because the display of the object was weird. But it faked some XML. displayed the source as plain text (ohh it's displaying something!! no, it's the source)

    Conclusion: best results on Win: (sniff) IE. Followed by NS6.1 and Mozilla. Then comes Opera.

    Gotta try some browsers under Mac and Linux now too, maybe.

    E

  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. IE 5/WINE howto by rinkjustice · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's an IE 5/WINE howto at:

    http://www.hardcorelinux.com/wine-howto.htm

    which shows you how to run IE 5 in Linux. Someone wrote me recently stating v5.5 doesn't work w/ the command-line parameters i used, but I know personally circa 5.0 does. It works decently too, rendering pages nearly as well as the Windows counterpart.

  17. Best Browser, according to /. readers by mosch · · Score: 5, Informative
    Everybody knows that actions speak louder than words. A few weeks ago I posted a link to a page that I mirrored, as the original site got slashbanged. Looking at the logs, I have:
    • 1440 people using IE 5.5
    • 1163 people using IE 5.0/5.01
    • 954 people using Mozilla
    • 748 people using Netscape 4.7x
    • 309 people using IE 6.0 preview
    • 227 people using Opera
    • 178 people using Konqueror
    • 215 people using Netscape 4.6x
    • 102 people using Galeon
    • 22 people using iCab
    • 1 person using SkipStone