Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Sep 2008 21:47 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 331321
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Was that really needed?
From an editorial standpoint, it was certainly poor form. Even as a regular comment, it would be of questionable value. Then again, OSNews gets lots of posts of questionable value, and we're used to it. But putting such a comment in the story blurb was just plain tacky.
"Does it even need feature parity with Konqueror? AFAIK even KDE has moved to a "simpler" file manager (Dolphin) by default"
This ironic turn of events (KDE switching to Dolphin while Nautilus continues to improve) is one of the reasons I moved away from KDE. Gnome is on my machine. KDE4 is not. KDE3 remains however and will stay there until it is no longer in Debian Stable (or Testing if I get antsy). I for one am glad to see Nautilus improve. It's still far from being any sort of mess.





Member since:
2008-03-08
Was that really needed?
Does it even need feature parity with Konqueror? AFAIK even KDE has moved to a "simpler" file manager (Dolphin) by default (have no idea where that lies in the comparison...).