So essentially what this means is that Konqueror becomes less and less
relevant. A real shame.
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 17:31:10 Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 15:09:30 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
> Quoting José Matos <jamatos(a)fc.up.pt>:
> > On Wednesday 10 March 2010 05:24:05 Eli Wapniarski wrote:
> >> And its usually up to everyone else to do what needs to be done to get
> >> their browser to work otherwise people can't use it, even if they
> >> want to. Konqueror is capable of using webkit as its main rendering
> >> engine. Chrome uses webkit. Chrome works, KDE based aps don't. Hell
> >> their are times when I've tried to access pages on KDE's site and
> >> have seen Konqueror crash.
> > FWIW one of the reasons given for chrome to use a separate process for
> > each tab was that if flash crashes then the browser will not be taken
> > with.
> > So the idea that flash crashes in other browsers other than
> > konqueror is not a
> > new one. :-)
> Perhaps not, but it still doesn't take anything away from the fact
> that under Chrome / Webkit the browser does not crash when I try to
> view flash videos in CNN and other sites; under Konqueror / Webkit it
> does. They're both Webkit. So..... huh ??????
It's not WebKit as WebKit... Konqueror uses QtWebKit and lot of stuff is
different to Chrome WebKit. Especially handling of non native ns plugins
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.