Galeon or Phoenix??
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: November 28th, 2002, 10:46 am
Galeon or Phoenix??
Which one is faster, in your opinion?
- WinterWolf
- Posts: 74
- Joined: November 28th, 2002, 10:25 pm
They use the same core
But, Pheonix is a little more bleeding edge, so i think Pheonix.
- aleejooo
- Posts: 207
- Joined: December 21st, 2002, 12:00 pm
Re: They use the same core
WinterWolf wrote:But, Pheonix is a little more bleeding edge, so i think Pheonix.
I think the same way, also Galeon has much more complicated interface, even more than Mozilla with all the visible toolbars.
Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make them all yourself.
- A wise bathroom wall.
- A wise bathroom wall.
-
- Posts: 16
- Joined: November 13th, 2002, 10:41 am
- Contact:
a point for Galeon
Galeon is the choice of web browser for GNOME Office, and will thus certainly be worth a look (if by default, in some cases) for a significant number of GNU/Linux users. Once the GNOME 2 build is finished, it should be even more worthwhile.
- eck
- Posts: 2
- Joined: December 26th, 2002, 1:58 am
- Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
- Contact:
They feel about the same to me, and I just noticed Galeon taking up a bit more memory than Phoenix was, with approximately the same content open. I'm back to using Galeon because the crash-recover feature actually *works*.
I'm really missing a lot of the Phoenix extensions, though: Nuke Image, Tab Extensions, even StumbleUpon. If only the Tab Extensions crash-recover feature would work!
The one thing I like a lot in Galeon, that's much faster than the equivalent in Phoenix, is easily migrating tabs between windows.
I'm really missing a lot of the Phoenix extensions, though: Nuke Image, Tab Extensions, even StumbleUpon. If only the Tab Extensions crash-recover feature would work!
The one thing I like a lot in Galeon, that's much faster than the equivalent in Phoenix, is easily migrating tabs between windows.
- Radiowriter
- Posts: 3146
- Joined: November 4th, 2002, 7:44 pm
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
-
- Posts: 999
- Joined: November 4th, 2002, 5:47 pm
- Location: UK
- Contact:
- Radiowriter
- Posts: 3146
- Joined: November 4th, 2002, 7:44 pm
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
-
- Posts: 999
- Joined: November 4th, 2002, 5:47 pm
- Location: UK
- Contact:
- Radiowriter
- Posts: 3146
- Joined: November 4th, 2002, 7:44 pm
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
cdn wrote:was being flippant, since Konqueror is part of kdebase, which is needed by most of the other KDE apps : )
Dammit, Jim...I'm an end-user, not a friggin' code junky! (Sorry...70's flashback.) Apparently I was veering off the learning curve, there. Thanks for straightening me out!
Sarcasm - Another service I offer.
Firefox 3.0 :: XP
Firefox 3.0 :: XP
- aleejooo
- Posts: 207
- Joined: December 21st, 2002, 12:00 pm
cdn wrote:remove KDE
But if you remove Konqueror and also KDE, most of the apps in there will not work properly, something similar to as if in the Windo$$$ world, some1 tries to remove IE completely.
Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make them all yourself.
- A wise bathroom wall.
- A wise bathroom wall.