Pros / Cons: Replacing Konqueror with Firefox

[Mustafa Muhammad]

On Aug 8, 2015 4:55 PM, "Sindre Wetjen" <sindre.w at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Friday 07 August 2015 15:03:41 Mustafa Muhammad wrote:
> > Pros
> > 1) We will have the most popular open source browser, only chrome (not
> > chromium) has more users than Firefox and it's not fully open source (it
> > had flash built in)
>
> There is another way to look at that. We will have the least popular
rendering
> engine (except KHTML, but I don't consider it relevant since QtWebKit is
the
> default in konq).

And this is a bad thing.

>
> > 3) Familiar experience for first time users, Firefox tries to look
similar
> > on all platforms.
>
> Why is this an issue? Browsers are a location bar and tabs. They all look
the
> same.

It is not a big issue, this is what I am trying to say.

>
> >
> > 4) Better support for internet video
>
> That is not true. Konq supports the same amount of video formats as
Firefox
> fedora (VP8 only). If you want h264 you have to go through some
configuration
> for both browsers.

Firefox is implementing media source extensions, which is required for VP9
in YouTube and probably in other websites.

>
> > 5) Much better support for the latest standard (HTML 5), if you compare
> > Konq to Firefox in http://html5test.com you will be shocked.
>
> Doesn't really help if they don't target your rendering engine.

I didn't understand what you are trying to say.

>
> > 6) Support for addons to extend the functionality.
>
> I think this is the best argument for making Firefox default, as that is a
> thing that users actually miss. But with Firefox having made an 1)
extremely
> insecure plugin structure and 2) creating an Apple like authentication
scheme,
> it kinds of comes back in a negative way. And while users may accept
this, IMO
> its not something Fedora should default on to people.
>
> > 7) Higher number of users and developers mean bugs and security
> > vulnerabilities gets found and fixed faster.
>
> There are more users on WebKit (Safari is more popular than Firefox,
atleast
> in my country), the devs do you have numbers that actually quantify that
> statement?

https://stats.wikimedia.org/archive/squid_reports/2015-06/SquidReportClients.htm

>
> > 8) Firefox is faster than Konq.
>
> This is only relevant for people opening a lot of tabs. Which usually (in
my
> experience) overlap with people being able to install their own browsers.
>
> >
> > Pros
> > Less integration with Plasma desktop and KDE apps.
>
> Here are some more cons:
> - The kWallet plugin is BROKEN (which means that if you actually want
password
> protection you have to enable it yourself and write in a separate
password).
> - Upstream is pushing for more and more sharing of personal data.
> - Linux support for stuff has been dabbing off a lot lately compared to
Blink
> based browsers.
> - Extension system is not good.
> - HW support is in a testing state, at best.
> - Flash is a lost cause (it might not be a big deal in some time, but
right
> now people actually use it)
>
> I would like to express my support for Kevin Koflers suggestion of just
keeping
> Konq until there actually is a good alternative as now it only seems we
are
> changing to abide by some people that is fully capable of installing
Firefox
> them self. Even if you install Firefox by default, the users that you
would
> target with "Can't install a new browser" would be the ones you would be
> better off installing proprietary Chrome for anyways.
>
> - Sindre
>
> _______________________________________________
> kde mailing list
> kde at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde
> New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kde/attachments/20150809/b65e4f4d/attachment.html>