To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I don't see a remarkable difference in functionality between using konqueror or Dolphin as the file browser.
The addition of per directory view settings is eagerly awaited.
There is no doubt that the default view settings for file browsing needed attention and this could have been done with konqueror also.
Since Dolphin also uses the kio slaves for extendability, what exactly needed an entire code rewrite for a file browser? A few buttons more applicable to filesystem browsing?
So essentially, like konqueror, Dolphin is a small GUI shell with MOST of its functionality coming from other plugins, libraries, etc.
So inthe grand scheme of things, who cares. Other than a few cosmetic fixups it will be just the same as using konqueror was.






Member since:
2005-07-06
Indeed, the introduction of a standalone filemanager, whilst leaving Konq as the web browser still fits within the goal of one app per task, because previously konq was doing more than one!
I think Konquerer suffered a bit, usability-wise because it was two large apps in one - just looked a mess at times. Still, I used it a lot because it was powerful and I loved all the protocols it supported.
So, as long as all the good file manager functionality makes it to Dolphin, then I think this will be step forward for KDE in this area.