Am Donnerstag, 17. September 2009 schrieb Philip Webb: > >> Okular 4.3.1 -- usable, but no noticeable improvement on Kpdf 3.5.10 . > > > > that is a joke, right? > > No, it's very serious: KDE 4 is jazzed up visually & dumbed down in > options.
I concur. The only (and still vividly living) hope is that it still evolves. Perhaps, 4.5 will be as good as 3.5 was back at its introduction. And I intend to keep 3.5 running for as long as possible. > Okular is as described when compared with Kpdf 3 . The only thing I really don’t like about Okular is its icon bar on the left. Even though the icons can be shrinked and the text hidden, that bar is still a waste of space. On the bright side, Okular’s rendering is better than KPDF’s (for instance antialiasing), and it supports other document types like CDR. > > wrong. bookmark editor: 'File' 'import', 'import kde 3 bookmarks'. > > What is "bookmark editor" ? The one you get when you open Konqueror’s bookmarks menu and select Edit (or Manage, whatever it’s called in the English localisation) bookmarks. > it's not a dependency of Konqueror 4 . fr...@eisen $ equery d keditbookmarks [ Searching for packages depending on keditbookmarks... ] kde-base/kdebase-meta-4.3.1 (>=kde-base/keditbookmarks-4.3.1:4.3[kdeprefix=]) > It's utter madness, but with free software there are alternatives, > which I have started to adopt (Fluxbox, Thunar, Terminal). Unfortunately, Thunar is as simple as Nautilus (or even more basic). They don’t nearly come close to Konqueror 3. Nothing else does (of course apart from Commander-style file managers like Krusader). And I don’t mean functionality only, but also Qt’s efficient use of screen space, compared to GTK. -- Gruß | Greetings | Qapla' Kids in the back seat cause accidents. Accidents in the backseat cause kids.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
