Torsten Rahn

Torsten,

> You fail to mention though which version of "Konqueror 3.5" you've been using.
> Konqueror 3.5 doesn't exist :-) !

My apologies, it was 3.4.91 (beta 1) on KDE 3.5. Got confused between my KDE
and Konqueror version numbers.

I personally find it a bit weird that they would go to the effort of putting
the new rendering engine in it (with the Acid 2 fixes - originally planned
for 3.5) then not update the version number accordingly. After all, version
numbers do not really mean much. Usually, they just denote how much of a
change it was. I would have thought the new engine was a big change, but I
guess they disagree. Oh well :)

> So depending on "compile-time options", "debug-mode" and further
> optimizations you might get very different results (only for the better ;-)
> -- especially on startup-time. Would you please add this information and
> maybe a sentence on this topic? Thanks in advance :-)

Nope. "Each test is done with a default browser install, without tweaking
any settings".

I will not retest with any special compilation options. It would mean
retesting _every_ browser (since it would be wrong to give one browser an
unfair advantage) - and the majority of (non-Gentoo) users do not compile
for themselves. Even if they did, they do not really know which options to
use to really optimise it for their own install.

On SuSE, the normal way to install things is using YaST, and installing the
relevant packages, so that is what I did - using the packages available from
KDE.org, built for my version of SuSE.

This uses KDE's own settings, and I hope they can choose the most
appropriate options. Otherwise all their (normal) users will suffer. This is
the most appropriate way to test, in my opinion.


Mark 'Tarquin' Wilton-Jones - author of http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/