Kmeleon - Windows Gecko Browser

Chasuk writes "Slashdot users who are also Windows users might be interested in visiting this site, where they can download Kmeleon, which is described on that site thusly: "K-Meleon is the Windows answer to Galeon. Thus, K-Meleon is a lite Web browser based on gecko (the mozilla rendering engine). It's fast, it has a light interface, and it is fully standards-compliant. To make it simple, K-Meleon could be considered as the unbloated Mozilla version for Windows.""

Slashdot - News for Lawyers

Yes, let's not discuss technical issues or figure if something is useful or not, let's get bogged down on licenses.

I for one, am getting tired of how complicated this is getting. If these license issues generate so many discussions with lots of confused developers, then maybe these licenses are too complicated for developers. Either simplify and clairify these damned things once and for all, or make "license/copyright law" a part of the CS curriculum.

I'm starting to miss language war discussions, coding style holy wars, etc. License non-sense is just so uninteresting.

Taking note?

I wonder if the Mozilla people are taking note of the vocal (at least on slashdot) outcry for a SMALL, STANDARDS COMPLIANT, SIMPLE, and FAST browser?

I don't know who wants bundled applications, every feature you can think of, and huge executible size, but appearently someone does, cause that is what they are delivering.

At least there are projects out now to fix this, and since Mozilla is open source, it IS possible to strip it down when it reaches final form.

(disclaimer: I've used every mozilla release since R4, unless you are testing with a quad-xeon, don't flame me telling me it's fast and not bloated)

Finkployd

That's it!

Mozilla without the mail/news/etc...

Sometimes (almost always) you just want a browser, and not all that other stuff... though it does use the IE bookmarking system (never really did like that - it always moved them around on me).

Even if it isn't all that full-featured at this point, it may be an important stepping stone.

--

IE replacement

It could also be considered a browser to replace IE, since IE doesn't have mail or news built-in either.

--

I feal the dragons breath again.

This reminds me of the energy and the hope embodied in the original QT release. When a bunch of Ozis added strong encryption in 24 hours and 5 Norwegians ( 3 Troll, 2 KDE ) ported it to QT in a couple of days ( fast 2 meg binary that crashed as much as Mozilla did 8 months ago ). Back then it looked like a 6 month project.

We have come a long way with people calling the project dead and others resigning because it just wasn't working out. Now it looks like there is a light at the end of the tonel. Mozilla will be done eventually. Maybe in as little as 3 months.

Now with at least 3 mostly standards compliant browsers, two of which support the same plugins ( Mozilla and Konquorer ) there is a chance to take back the web and marginalize proprietary interfaces.

I like choice. I want to use 3 or 4 different browsers depending on mood, lighting and How I will use the site. However I want them to agree on what "HTML" stands for. I want XML and other buzzwords to be accurately supported. I want the freedom to use what I like.

IE Engine Replacement?

A long time ago when Mozilla was in the initial stages, there was a utility that let you replace the Internet Explorer engine with Mozilla's engine. Does anyone know where I can find this? I just love NetCaptor [netcaptor.com] as a browser, but it only uses the Internet Explorer engine... If I had the time, I'd code one based on Mozilla just like it, but I don't...

Re:Why should we care about a windows app?

I'm saying that pages render correctly only in IE precisely because no one will write pages that work in anything else. IE's version of HTML is just that -- a variant, developed by Microsoft, and intended to make theirs the only usable browser. They are not interested in aiding communication on the web, they are interested in making sure that people only use their products. Mozilla, Opera, et. al. are not broken. They support the W3C specs very nicely, thank you. IE is broken. However, because no one cares about anything but "where they want to go today," the idea of web "standards" is being rapidly eroded into ".NET".

I'm glad that you have no problem with doing your part to solidify and permanently establish Microsoft's supreme decision-making authority for every user of the Internet. Personally, I am trying to do something about it -- by arguing with you, by running the latest Mozilla builds, by trying to push friends and coworkers into avoiding IE, and at least into avoiding sites that only work with IE.

Re:Why should we care about a windows app?

Oh god, somebody shoot me. You know, it's people like you which cause people like me to think that /. should be renamed LinuxDot: New for Linux weenies. Seriously though, the developmet of Galeon was posted, so why not this? Just because it isn't for Linux, it doesn't "deserve" to be on /.? Maybe /. should stop posting articles about all sattilites that don't run Linux. Given the fact that Linux (and OSS in general) are about creating a more friendly software environment where people help each other out...

A lot of nerds DO use Windows you know. I for one, would much rather use NT than Linux. It's not a religious thing, I just like NT better. And when Linux with GNOME takes up less memory than NT4, please call me up so I can faint at how they squeezed that fat thing into 18MB of RAM. Geez...

Inaccurate my ass.

Common misconception that is.

Funny how when I click that mail button, it opens *Eudora*.

I don't have Outlook or Outlook Express installed, there is this really neat option at install time to turn OE off, and same thing with Outlook when you install Office.

Gee, there's some massive integration for you, they're entirely seperate programs!

See, now Netscape mail is integrated, I can't choose to not install it during the Communicator installation. No matter what, its there. Outlook Express I can quite easily get rid of, and tell IE to use Eudora, or Agent, or The Bat, or whatever other mail program happens to interest me today.

Apparently both you and the moderators haven't actually gone and looked yet.

Re:standards?

I think that perhaps our underinformed friend was referring to the fact that there is nowhere to place the proxy settings and therefore it is utterly useless to him.

While this is not exactly a 'standard compliant' required feature, it is a feature that I would expect in any modern browser -- even a trimmed down one like this is.

While the mozilla project does support projects, this is NOT the mozilla project; it is only using the Gecko rendering engine that was made by the Mozilla team for use in, among other things, the Mozilla project.

Rami
--

Windows & Slashdot

... must go better together than most folks want to admit. This site is seriously Slashdotted at the moment.

Re:standards?

This isn't insightful, it's stupid. The phrase "standards-compliant" refers to W3C standards, such as XML and CSS.

By the way, Mozilla *does* support proxies.


--
"Where, where is the town? Now, it's nothing but flowers!"

Ugh, license issues revisited

Well, I feel sorry for the guy who developed this. As a Galeon developer I realize the pain he's about to endure.

Well, besides the fact that he calls the "GPL" the "GNU private license", he has licensed it under that while at the same time distributing included MPLed Mozilla files. I'm still not a license expert, but this seems like bigtime violation to me (even more than we did with Galeon :)).

More to come later when I re-check my facts.