<snip>
> Anyway the code path in question has been reworked in 4.8 and uses now
> evil
> technology coming from mobile devices ;-)

I know that this is sarcasm, but it seemed a good place to jump in to the
thread... :-)

One of the major complaints I have against mobile technology is the
widgets in use on mobile platforms.  As a whole, they tend to be larger
and have more limited interactivity due to the assumption that they need
to (and in fact can only) be tapped with a finger.

I have attached a screenprint of both Konqueror and Dolphin running at the
same time.  I want to point out several things that I consider
showstoppers, though others may of course consider them nits.

1.) Note the number of toolbars buttons shown on Konqueror and Dolphin
both.  Now measure the horizontal screen pixels taken by each toolbar and
divide by the number of toolbar buttons.  Result?  Dolphin wastes screen
space.

2.) Note the treeview on Konqueror, and how much information about the
filesystem is displayed.  Note the "equivalent" feature on Dolphin, and
how little information is displayed.

3.) Note that Konqueror gives additional graphical information on
directory entry rights (via the lock icon) that Dolphin does not.

4.) Note the horribly ugly colors Dolphin uses by default.  I know, "it's
a default", but the icon set is fairly ugly as well.

I could go on with both functional and asthetic problems shown in KDE4
applications, but I won't. :-)  I know that some of the problems were
inherited from Qt4 (I am not as stupid as some think; I have in fact used
both Qt3 and Qt4, but for vastly different purposes), but KDE chose to use
that toolkit and is ultimately responsible for fixing them.

When Dolphin can look and act exactly like Konqueror in that screenshot I
will look at KDE4 once again.  Until then, sorry, your product is not good
enough in the areas that I use.

Tim

Attachments:

• konqueror_vs_dolphin.png