5 ms·

I'm using w3m as my terminal browser. What do I need a specialized wikipedia browser for?

• capableweb 5y ago
  If you're a w3m user, you must surely know that w3m usage is not suuuper common right? Maybe, just maybe, this project is not for you. Not everything is for everyone.
  • 3ds 5y ago
    Sure. You can also use lynx. Both browsers already solve the problem of browsing text based web sites on the command line. I am just wondering why you'd want another one, that isn't even a regular browser.
    • capableweb 5y ago
      I'm sure lynx + w3m together hold less than 0.01% of the global browser usage. Why would you even want lynx or w3m when curl/netcat already exists and allows you to view text on the commandline from http/s servers? Because it's more comfortable for you. Just like this tool is more comfortable for you if you just want to visit Wikipedia articles in the commandline. Some tools are specialized, I'm not sure why you think that's such a bad thing. Otherwise we'd all use netcat to view websites, then you can read most protocols too, not just http/s.
      • shiomiru 5y ago
        It seems to me that they're explicitly asking how this tool is more comfortable to use than w3m. Not sure how browser market share has anything to do with that. This tool being specialized to do this one job doesn't mean it's automatically better at it than one with a wider range of functions. For example, in a Wikipedia-only browser you can't open references (without using another application) which arguably results in worse UX.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]