Re: Konqueror 5.0.97 issues
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:34:24 +0200
- From: René J.V. Bertin <rjvbertin@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Konqueror 5.0.97 issues
On Monday June 18 2018 07:25:30 Duncan wrote:
>FWIW I left konqueror behind back in the kde4 era, when it became very
>evident that it wasn't getting timely security-fix releases suitable to
>usage for online banking, etc.
This may or may not have improved, because in the end Konqueror uses QtWebEngine or QtWebKit (if you're lucky the up-to-date rebooted version), and for both you thus depend on 1) how often the web framework maintainers apply security updates and 2) how closely your distribution follows those updates.
In other words, if you want to have the latest browser for security reasons you're almost by definition better off installing one of the big ones directly "from the source": Google Chrome or Firefox. Possibly even the developer version if you're really adamant on always having the latest fixes. That does mean accepting to use GTk3-based instead of Qt-based software.
More or less independent projects like Konqueror, QupZilla/Falkon, Epiphany or Otter-Browser are nice for niche applications, cross-browser checking of web sites you develop or just as a quick and supposedly lightweight browser for secondary tasks you don't want to burden your long-running main browser session with.
In my case I'm currently still more or less locked in to Google Chrome. I find Konqueror mostly "useful" to compare how QtWebEngine and QtWebKit render certain websites in the same browser (you can switch via a menu). For quick, short secondary sessions I rather use Otter-Browser because the rebooted QtWebKit is both much more lightweight and some 25% faster than Chrome (including QtWebEngine). Or I use the FireFox Developer edition because that one is about 50% (2x) faster (but at least as RAM hungry as Chrome).
All that to say that I too don't bother with Konqueror whenever something doesn't work with it.