Re: OT: how to make kmail open links in mozilla
On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 04:20, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Jason Pepas <j.pepas@mail.utexas.edu> [2002.09.26.0940 +0200]:
> > not really a debian question, but does anyone know how to make kmail open a
> > link in an email in mozilla instead of konqueror? I have looked in the kde
> > configurator thing and didn't see any sort of option for that.
>
> The same applies to other k* apps, like knewsticker. It looks like KDE
> doesn't allow users to change middleware. heck, even windoze allows
> that ;^>
>
> this is CCed to a friend who's a KDE developer. let's see what comes
> back...
>
> --
> martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
> \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck
>
> "for art to exist,
> for any sort of aesthetic activity or perception to exist,
> a certain physiological precondition is indispensable: intoxication."
> -- friedrich nietzsche
I must say that that is one of a short list of reasons why I don't like
KDE as *my* desktop environment - I have it on my machine and keep it
configured and up-to-date (including koffice and most other core
applications,) but there is the "not built here" attitude, and the
tendency to have only one application for each function area - anything
else falls into *legacy* programs. I like how, with a shell, X11 or with
Gnome, I can dig about a selection of MUAs to find one that meets my
tastes - same with editors, cd burners, spreadsheets, most system
monitoring tools, etc.
It seems that there was a decision made early in the design, though to
focus on a select working environment that was able to make tight use of
a core of libraries and provide a complement of tools and integrated
graphical configuration focussed on user interests, rather than a bazaar
of tools of varying complexity, strengths and design considerations.
Each direction has its good points - KDE's desktop experience is
consistent and keeps the user out of issues such as dotted quad
addresses, specific kernel modules and the like most of the time, while
Gnome tends to have (somewhere on the list) the tools for a wide range
of operations, be they administrative, productivity, or just plain
silly. There also appears to be more migration of existing software to
Gnome compatibility, than is the case with KDE, due primarily to matters
of C vs C++ on one level.
I think KDE is great in its context - it is an excellent users
environment for those working with a core of productivity applications,
who are not going to hit Ctrl-Alt-F2. I hear those who have no command
line experience speaking highly of it. That is apparently where it is
better targetted. Maybe with time, more applications will appear, ones
that provide wider flexibility of working with non-KDE programs. That
said, having OS/2 experience, I found that one of the things that was a
problem there was the situation of having a dozen applications, none
that good, for a particular task[1]. KDE has tried to at least ensure
that what needed to be covered was covered, solidly and sufficiently,
but it doesn't seem to extend beyond to other software. This might even
be demonstrated by the relative speeds of starting applications: KDE
applications opened in KDE seem to start with the same speed of non-KDE
applications (including Gnome), but starting a single KDE application
when running any other environment as a desktop, and you would presume
you are booting up a new computer by the amount of time involved - in
the libraries drawn in/depended upon, there seems to be little sharing
with other already used systems (the C vs. C++ problem again, likely.)
All that said, I do have one nominal beef about KDE - I just don't find
I like how it looks, no matter what theme or personal settings I've
tried. Fully subjective - it is my taste. It is just that I can overload
my panels with applets (which is one area where Gnome is definitely
ahead - gnomeicu, gaim and minicommander have proven essential) and
scatter icons all over the desktop, and it still has an appearance I
prefer to that of KDE. It is just nominal visual design decisions that
seems to be the problem for me.
[1] News Readers and email were strong examples there - neither of the
options bundled by IBM were that good - nr2 was a news reader that
provided competent text functionality, but in the process of reading and
replying to a newsgroup, you seemed to get a thousand open windows.
Ultimail Lite was the bundled email client, which worked through
expanding the functionality of folders (a design strength of OS/2 that
was never sufficiently drawn upon by software) to meet the various tasks
of communications and storage, except that it was definitely not Lite on
the system resources, and choked the life out of the 8 MB box I first
used it on. It was still very demanding on my later 80 MB box. Various
third party developers rushed tools to market to implement their own
solutions, but most tended to focus on an individual interest of the
developer, and many seemed to think that microscopic toolbar buttons
with poorly drawn icons and tortuously labeled options in dialog boxes
was sufficient to be marketable. When IBM decided to retire their
WebExplorer program in favour of a port of Netscape, that finally solved
the problems in these two areas for most users.
--
Mark L. Kahnt, FLMI/M, ALHC, HIA, AIAA, ACS, MHP
ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting
Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935
Email: kahnt@hosehead.dyndns.org
Reply to: