Clayton said the following on 12/09/2009 08:20 AM:
The old KDE3 filemanager was not copied into KDE4, it was rewritten.
But what about Konqueror? It was there before and it isn't now. It was removed when Konq was "converted" for KDE4.
The same reasoning does not apply.
It was removed.
See what I wrote above...
So in KDE4 there's Dolphin, which was a 'clean sheet', and Konqueror that looks _almost_ the same as the one in KDE3 but if the clean-sheet effort went into Dolphin what went into the KDE4 version of Konqueror? Was KDE's Konqueror a clean sheet design as well? That seems odd if the was this new Dolphin. Why duplicate effort. I'm sure many people will ask why have Dolphin in the first place when Konqueror was doing such a good job. The best I can figure is that someone thought that a file manager and a web browser shouldn't be both the same thing. Heck, Mozilla broke apart into Firefox and Thunderbird, so there's precedence. But then why keep Konqueror around? Don't tell me that its now 'just' a web browser. It makes a better file manager than Dolphin! There's a gap here. It may be in my perception, since I'm one of the old Dinosaurs that love the 'novelty' of KDE4 and since I'm a slow lumbering Dinosaur I'm not bothered by its poor performance, but then again as things stand, Dolphin as a file manager doesn't seem to offer any advantage over bastardizing this Konqueror-that-isn't-a-file-manager of KDE4 when used as a file manager. Or maybe the gap is somewhere else. Tell me again why I should be using Dolphin rather than Konqueror as a file manager. Dinosaur brains are geared for eating and eviscerating. You can tell: there's a lot of us about. -- Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency. -- Douglas MacArthur -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org