Any tried Dooble? - New Qt Web Browser

[sertse]

http://dooble.sourceforge.net/ .It's also into the Karmic repos.


Has anyone tried it? It's Qt and uses the Webkit, similiar to Arora. It looks very alpha though. It's nice however that there are quite a few options for Qt browsers these days, Konqueror, Arora, Rekonq and now this.

[siimo]

Their site looks rather noob. Especially the comparison of different rendering engines in the table - not very accurate is an understatement. :/

[joey-elijah]

What an ugly logo...

[Skripka]

I don't know what the point is. Why have what is basically another QtWebkit browser fork? There are already 3 or 4 others that are more fully developed and are there already--why have yet another? I don't see the point.

[DeadSuperHero]

Sigh. So many QtWebkit browsers, so few actual definitive browsers that get everything done.

It just fractures and fractures and fractures. It'd be nice to see some of these teams actually merge together and get some substantial work done, all they're really doing is creating more problems for one another.

[Islington]

Sigh. So many QtWebkit browsers, so few actual definitive browsers that get everything done.

It just fractures and fractures and fractures. It'd be nice to see some of these teams actually merge together and get some substantial work done, all they're really doing is creating more problems for one another.

Nothing you said makes any sense. Please explain.

[OutOfReach]

Sigh. So many QtWebkit browsers, so few actual definitive browsers that get everything done.

It just fractures and fractures and fractures. It'd be nice to see some of these teams actually merge together and get some substantial work done, all they're really doing is creating more problems for one another.

+1
I agree. Arora, Rekonq, and now Dooble all feel the same. Close to no features, and honestly QWebkit still needs a bit of work.

I guess this is one of those "Be careful what you wish for" cases when we wished for more Qt web browsers.

[Skripka]

+1
I agree. Arora, Rekonq, and now Dooble all feel the same. Close to no features, and honestly QWebkit still needs a bit of work.

I guess this is one of those "Be careful what you wish for" cases when we wished for more Qt web browsers.

Rekonq is different in that it actually integrates with KDE-which none of the other QtWebkit browsers do-also in the recent git builds has a much more elegant interface, is in the midst of adding an analogue of Opera Speed Dial...it is a bit less stable-but that is life.

[DeadSuperHero]

Nothing you said makes any sense. Please explain.

All right, fair call. Not everyone understands KDE's predicament.

There are, as of now, 7 Qt/Webkit browsers that I know of. Possibly more.

-Konqueror w/ Webkit Kpart
-Arora
-Rekonq
-Rekonq2 (Unrelated to Rekonq's own project, took
-Foxkit
-Eureka
-QtWebkit Test Browser


None of them fully implement Webkit properly, making each different browser have its own disgusting little quirks. (For example, I really wanted to like Aurora and Rekonq, but neither one will allow me to save or load content on Joomla.)

I find it ironic that developers are trying to accept open standards by rallying around it, and by doing so have no standard Linux webkit experience at all. I think if many of these teams worked together to make one or two different browsers, the problem would be much less pronounced.

[Frak]

*Drags a Browser object, a couple of button objects, a dropdown box object, a menubar object, and a statusbar object with a progress bar. Ties it all together in PyQT*

There, a QTWebkit browser, ready to go.

[hoppipolla]

I think the reality is just that GTK is still very mainstream, so the best browsers still use that.

I quite like the look of Arora, but right now I'm still a firm fan of Chromium and Firefox :)

Give it time and we will get more, but it's gonna take some effort to pull people off the main 2!

[misfitpierce]

I will try it out but as said they compare their 08 browser to old rendering engines from years ago... Why? Its baffling. I will check it out though but it looks odd, and website seems very low tech and information needs to be updated and compared to new age rendering engines.

[joey-elijah]

I can't install it being a x64 bit user. --force-architecture doesn't work (it installs, but won't run).

However i really don't feel i missing out on much besides yet another half-baked bordering-on-pointless webkit browser.

Don't get me wrong, i'm all about choice. However at some point choice needs to translate into progress something none of these 'dooble' type webkit browsers are achieving. There are only so many "basic" web-browsers one needs, however decent fully functional browsers are what people -really- want.

If some of the smaller ones bandied together to create a new "standard" linux web browser (complete with extension framework perhaps? ) then there would really be choice and not the illusion of choice.