| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica)The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica)Posted Jul 2, 2008 18:23 UTC (Wed) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185)In reply to: The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica) by mmarq Parent article: The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica)
"Konqueror a superior file manager, would have been even more superior with the features now in Dolphin.." Since konqueror and dolphin share their file manager parts, the dolphin features are actually in konqueror, too. Like the very, very cool and usable selection + and - icons.
(Log in to post comments)
The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica) Posted Jul 3, 2008 9:36 UTC (Thu) by quintesse (subscriber, #14569) [Link] Yeah, but I guess he referred to the _old_ Konqueror being a superior file manager. It's like I see it as well at least. I don't like single-click GUI so I have it turned off. So what I have got left is a file manager which is actually less capable than before and with Konqueror using the new "dolphin" part for it's file management means I can't go back to the old version either. But it's okay, I'm sure it will still be improved and we'll get back to the previous level of functionality (and more). In the latest KDE versions from trunk the multi-threading of dolphin has already been greatly improved. Hopefully the slow thumbnail loading will be next (maybe they should take a look at Google's Picasa or Canon's photo management software which are able to load thumbnails at incredible speeds).
|
|
||||||||||||