1 |
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Thomas Rösner wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Etaoin Shrdlu wrote: |
4 |
>> On Thursday 30 November 2006 10:22, Jorge Almeida wrote: |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> > On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Dale wrote: |
8 |
>> > |
9 |
>> > > used epiphany before. What's it look like? |
10 |
>> > > |
11 |
>> > Have no idea, I didn't tried either. Being something from Gnome, I |
12 |
>> > suspect it's not very customizable, but I may be completely wrong. |
13 |
>> > |
14 |
> |
15 |
> If all apps were like Epiphany, Gnome wouldn't be beaten around that much, me |
16 |
> thinks (and I wouldn't use ROX-Filer instead of Nautilus). If you want to try |
17 |
> something fresh, perhaps you find this article gives you an impulse: |
18 |
> |
19 |
> http://ploum.frimouvy.org/?2006/03/15/100-why-you-should-try-epiphany-as-your-default-browser-with-gnome-214 |
20 |
> |
21 |
Thanks for your suggestion, Thomas, but the key word is "with-gnome". I |
22 |
won't comment on the customizability of Epiphany, since I haven't tried |
23 |
it. But I checked that it requires a lot of Gnome dependencies, which |
24 |
I'm not willing to install. And I use KDE, not because I find it perfect |
25 |
but because AFAIK it's the only DE that has two features that for me are |
26 |
a must: (1) Several virtual desktops, plus the possibility to switch |
27 |
desktops via configurable keyboard shortcuts, and (2) the possibility of |
28 |
setting different background images for different desktops. |
29 |
The latter is not just a matter of eye candy, it's just how I see which |
30 |
virtual desktop is the current one. |
31 |
|
32 |
I don't think Gnome can do this, at least not unless you're a |
33 |
guru-wizard, which I'm not. |
34 |
|
35 |
Cheers. |
36 |
-- |
37 |
Jorge |