Slashdot Mirror


Konqueror Compiled For Mac OS X; KOffice Next

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.'"

10 of 509 comments (clear)

  1. Now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

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

    1. Re:Now... by gusnz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As another poster mentioned, the whole KDE environment has been ported to Cygwin. It works, but it's a pain as it has to run inside a whole X session.

      However, I know what you mean... and yes I would love a Windows-native Konqueror port! There's one guy who is (supposedly) starting a port. It looks impressive on the front page, but has been stalled for a year and if you browse through the project forums, the guy admits he isn't really a Windows developer and is still deciding on what compiler to use. So basically, are there any skilled C++ hackers out there who would like to get involved in a KHTML -> Windows port? There's a few good reasons:

      1) Choice of browsers on Windows. Even if you just ported KHTML rather than the full Konqueror, the KHTML engine rocks and could make great inroads against IE (compared to Mozilla/MozFirebird, which doesn't seem as fast as IE to load or as responsive on low-end hardware, even though it's a superior browser/renderer engine).

      2) Porting all of Konq would rock too, as it offers a lot over plain vanilla EXPLORER.EXE.

      3) Development, as the parent pointed out. I'm a XHTML/DHTML/CSS/JavaScript/etc. coder, and would like to certify that my projects work in KHTML. It's damn hard currently. And once Windows developers can get pages working perfectly in KHTML, all Konqueror/Safari users win.

      4) Giving average desktop users more exposure to OSS. I'm looking at chucking Linux on this box again (last I tried was Mandrake 6 or 7) and wouldn't mind familiarising myself with its apps on a day-to-day basis first.

      5) Why not? It's there ;).

  2. The question is.. by subk · · Score: 4, Interesting
    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?

    --
    Now, if you'll excuse me, I have backups to corrupt.
    1. Re:The question is.. by cbreaker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  3. Re:OS X Maximizes browser choice? by OmniVector · · Score: 5, Interesting
    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.
    --
    - tristan
  4. To Answer all the "Why Bother?" Posts... by manly_15 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've made the transition from Mandrake on a Desktop to OSX on a Powerbook. Surprisingly, KDE has some apps that are very good and designed well enough to compliment an OSX environment.

    Example 1: KMail! If you haven't ever tried this email client, try it NOW. It has some of the most killer email filtering speed I have ever seen in an email application. It nicely integrates with GnuPG. It has good keyboard shortcuts. It's set up not to download images from emails. It stores emails with maildir by default. It's pretty. Did I mention that it's fast? Up until 10.3's much improved mail.app, I would have killed to have KMail running naitively on OS X.

    Ex 2: KOffice. I've never used it, but it's absolutely essential that OS X has a free naitive-running office package. Unless the OO.org aqua port gets back up, this package will likely be KOffice.

    Ex 3: Konqueror is a very good file manager. While the OS X file manager is very good, there are a couple of areas that it misses. For example, I can use konqueror to select all items matching the file pattern '*foo*.bar'. In OS X, I have to drop to a terminal, and loose the trash can functionality, or switch views and sort by type, which takes longer. As another poster said, SMB apparently works better in konqueror than Finder (thanks, I'll have to try that!). If konqueror can run, then so can any other KDE app, especially when you consider that Konqueror is the most (featureful | bloated) app in KDE.

    So that's why people bother. Props to them!

  5. Biting the fodder with KOffice by theolein · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I see all the "Why bother" posts and have seen only one short paragraph with the obvious answer: KOffice.

    The majority of OSX users may not need Konqueror, even though it seems to support many features only available on OSX through payable alternatives (GUI SSH and SFTP support with RBrowser for example), but it is a first step to getting KOffice ported natively to the Mac which could finally help OSX users drop MS software in a large number of cases.

    KOffice is not where OpenOffice is but a native Mac port could spur development so that it becomes a first rate alternative to MS' Office X suite, and given that there is no guarantee that MS will ever make a Mac version compatible with it's new so called security features, this is an excellent idea.

  6. From good to troll in 3 bullet points. by Inoshiro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "- it was designed from the ground up and is conceptually sound, unlike mozilla which was a hack job on top of netscape's browser"

    Nope. They dropped the old code and started from scratch a long, looong time ago.

    "- unlike other browsers (mozilla, IE), it was designed using 'mature' technology (HTML4, CSS, etc.) and does not have nearly as many compatibility woes as IE, nor as many add-on hacks, as the other browsers had, due to changing stnadards over the years (in other words: it's a newer, fresher code base)"

    Nope. Konq doesn't pass basic CSS tests that I have written. Mozilla does.

    "- unlike mozilla/firebird, I can use it for hours/days with many pages open (15+) without the entire affair slowing to a crawl and/or dying"

    Nope in my case. I'm not sure your problem, but I have no problem with my 2-3 windows with about 7-15 tabs each, open for the entirety my computer is on. The average between reboots on my workstation is a month. I'll close Mozilla to update to a more recent nightly, but that's about it. My hardware isn't insane either --- XP 1700+ w/ 768mb RAM.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:From good to troll in 3 bullet points. by nitehorse · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually....

      If you'd bother to use a version that isn't almost a year old (hint: KDE 3.2, we've had alpha and even beta releases out for a few weeks now) you'd know that it does pass. At least, it sure looks like it does to me. Granted, the CSS isn't quite perfect (the floating box in particular looks like its offset from the right edge is incorrect) but Konq is surprisingly good these days. And rendering errors like this one are getting fixed all the time.

      -clee

  7. A couple corrections by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > You sound like a troll (nobody mentioned anything about a full-tilt KDE port on OS X, fool)

    You call him a troll, yet you're name-calling?

    > it has more/better features than mozilla (fish://, file://, ftp:// smtp://, etc. etc.)

    Hold on, many people here habitually abuse MS for making the "browser the OS" and certainly can spot feature-creep a mile away, but when it comes to KDE's browser its suddenly okay? I like having a whole seperate browser for web and use Nautilus for file browsing. Keeping WAN and Local/LAN seperate is a big plus in mine, and many other's books.

    >unlike other browsers (mozilla, IE), it was designed using 'mature' technology

    How isn't Moz 'mature?'

    >unlike mozilla which was a hack job on top of netscape's browser

    This is just untrue. The Moz team gutten NS to the point where they were writing just about everything from scratch.

    >unlike mozilla/firebird, I can use it for hours/days with many pages open (15+)

    I can do this easily with Moz/Firebird on both Win and Linux. I average 20 tabs and half of them are auto-refreshing every few minutes and this is far from a top of the line machine.