Linux Web Browsers Compared

Rob Valliere writes: "The best Linux Web browsers have dramatically improved in the past few months: they are all stable, standards compliant and loaded with solid feature enhancements and additions. Using Red Hat 7.2 and the KDE desktop, the premier Linux browsers are Galeon 1.0.3, Mozilla 0.9.8 and Opera 6.0 TP3. The best Web downloads and installs were from Opera and Mozilla, which have minimal dependencies. Galeon is a small download but can be difficult to upgrade due to its Mozilla and GNOME dependencies."

Comments

My question is this -

[G-funk]

What's the best Open Source browser that doesn't have mozilla dependencies? Konqueror? Or something I'm not aware of? I'd like something that can handle most html3 (nothing too crazy mind you) to embed to handle simple display stuff.

Re:My question is this -

[pridefinger]

I was going to suggest Opera, but the fact that you specified Open Source cuts it out of the picture. If you are embedding it for commercial use, Konqueror is probably your best bet as far as licensing. Having worked at an embedded linux company that went with Opera, despite it's proprietary nature, I'm quite biased to it (it's what I use everywhere, everyday, so when I get the funds for a Zaurus, I'll be right at home).

Anyway, Konqueror is next IMHO.

-Pride

Let's hope..

[IamTheRealMike]

that now all the major Linux/Cross platform web browsers, and even IE 6 are paying attention to the W3C standards that we will all one day be choosing our browser based on what we like, rather than what web developers like

galeon difficult to install?

[303]

apt-get install galeon :)

No problems with Galeon

[igiveup]

You do have to have Gnome and Mozilla installed, but I have not had any extra problems installing Galeon once those two are installed. I would like to see the Gecko rendering engine avaible as an individual library (if it already is, then forgive my ignorance).

Using mozilla

[mansoft]

It's curious to see how netscape 4.x isn't even included in that group. Some years ago it was the only browser we could use to decently surf the web.

I've been using mozilla since the M1x releases, and it has certainly improved its capabilities and stability. However I still find the interface too heavy. Perhaps galeon does it better, though.

What I still miss in mozilla (now using 0.9.8) is acceptable support for java and flash. When both plugins are installed they give me so many problems that I end up by uninstalling them.

KDE

[asv108]

So basically this guy had a grudge against Konqueror because he had trouble upgrading KDE. I wouldn't call this a very objective or informative review. The other weakness he cites with Konqueror is lack of features, but most people don't even use the latest "bells and whistles" offered with a new browser build. Usually those "Features" turn out to be annoyances like sidebars.

Re:KDE

[sultanoslack]

He's a Redhat user and that's all that really needs to be said. He's very correct that upgrading KDE is difficult on Redhat . Redhat (except for Bero) really doesn't care about KDE at all and tends to have horrible, horrible packages available. Redhat 7.2 came with KDE 2.2.1 and a half!!! It wasn't a released version! They took the code from CVS and packaged it without labeling it as "non-stable". Then when the stable versions do finally come out, Redhat doesn't get around to packaging them (again, not Bero's fault since that's not his job) until they've been out for a month. And even then they often aren't released for the last stable release of Redhat. When RH 7.1 was their latest release (I had to use Redhat at work.) they only released KDE updates for 7.2 beta! That's crazy!

So, I finally switched from Redhat to SuSE about a year and a half ago and haven't looked back. Upgrading in SuSE involves running YaST2 and choosing to upgrade KDE. Or alternatively downloading a handful of RPMs and installing them in 10 minutes.

And I also think this guy didn't give Konq a fair trial. He used the most up to date, including betas of everything else, but used Konq from a few months ago even though there is a later stable release and two new beta versions. Why is this a story? Are we supposed to give him points for trying to write a good review?

Konqueror failure - how does Redhat package it?

[Snowfox]

The author stated that attempting to install Konqueror required that he install all of the KDE environment, and that it damaged his machine.

Does Redhat not package the KDE environment in pieces? If not - why not?

With other distributions, it's been possible to install Konqueror and just the base KDE libraries for quite a long time. You should be able to fit all that you need on a handful of floppies - not a tens-of-megs RPM as the author claims.

Re:Opera needs a full-featured set for Linux

[Peaker]

Why do people like tabbed Windows?

Is your window manager not managing Windows well enough?

Re:Just displaying right is a big plus.

[Simon Brooke]

Having been (in the last year) through Konqueror, Galleon, Netscape (4.whatever), and Mozilla on a Mandrake box, I've found that Mozilla's the only one that consistantly displays pages correctly. The other 3 I found would often screw up font sizes and leave side bars unreadable.

Yes, but, seriously, how many of those pages were valid, standards conformant code? For a long time Konqueror was the only browser which displayed all the features of my home page (which is valid code) correctly. Now Mozilla has caught up, and I believe (though I haven't checked myself) later IE6's can display it too. But while Konqi has some deficiencies in its ECMAScript, it's HTML/CSS rendering are highly standards-conformant

It's not the Konqi team's fault if 90% of the commercial 'Web designers' out there are blithering incompetents who could not write valid code to save their lives.

Re:Opera needs a full-featured set for Linux

[Yosho]

Well, I don't believe it's a case of the window manager not working well enough, but it just not being the right tool for the job -- in Opera, I always have at least eight different pages open, sometimes upwards of a dozen. If these were all shown in the taskbar, the rest of my programs would be crowded into obscurity.

Not to mention that Opera's one instance in the taskbar function kinda like a control for all of the tabs -- if I suddenly decide I want Opera minimized so I can do something on the desktop, I just click the minimize button. If I have eight pages open in a non-tabbed browser, though, that's eight times I have to click minimize.

It also makes it very easy to close everything at once -- when I want to shut down a non-tabbed browser, I've got to close every window individually, while I can do it all at once in Opera.

There's also one other thing I love about Opera that Mozilla can't do yet -- start up with multiple pages. Typically whenever I sit down at the computer, the first thing I'm going to do is quickly check those eight pages. As soon as Opera opens, it begins loading all of them, and I can switch through the tabs at my leisure. In every other browser I'm aware of, though, I have to load them one at a time. (While this is only a small saving grace on a high-bandwidth connection, think about how long you'd have to wait for each individual page to load on a modem...)

Re:Opera needs a full-featured set for Linux

[Kwil]

I just place my browsing windows in one desktop, and my taskbar in that desktop is equivalent to your browser tab. In other desktops, those windows are not visible.


Linux using elitist. :-)

Some of us don't have the luxury of multiple desktops - in which case Opera's ability to have multi-tabbed windows is a mind saver.