Additionally, qutebrowser has a number of features that Vimium on Chrome doesn't have and probably can't implement due to the limitations of the WebExtension API.
I've used Vimium for some months myself, and wasn't really happy with it. The reasons why mainly boil down to how VimFx/Vimium are quite limited in what they can do. For example:
- They can't change the user interface at all - qutebrowser has a much more minimal UI.
- They can't spawn external processes. In qutebrowser, you can simply hit ctrl-e while editing some text input, to edit it in Vim. Or you can use `:bind ,v spawn mpv {url}` to add a keybinding which spawns mpv with the current page, to watch YouTube videos in a real video player.
- As soon as you are on some special page (like the Chrome extension store, or the "new tab" page), they stop working, because they can't intercept keypresses there.
3 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 10.1 ms ] threadAdditionally, qutebrowser has a number of features that Vimium on Chrome doesn't have and probably can't implement due to the limitations of the WebExtension API.
- They can't change the user interface at all - qutebrowser has a much more minimal UI.
- They can't spawn external processes. In qutebrowser, you can simply hit ctrl-e while editing some text input, to edit it in Vim. Or you can use `:bind ,v spawn mpv {url}` to add a keybinding which spawns mpv with the current page, to watch YouTube videos in a real video player.
- As soon as you are on some special page (like the Chrome extension store, or the "new tab" page), they stop working, because they can't intercept keypresses there.
- In general, qutebrowser is much more configurable and extensible. You can easily integrate it with shell scripts via userscripts (https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/blob/master/doc/u...), and soon there'll be a Python plugin API as well.
As for Vimperator - as mentioned, that probably won't be around in its current form much longer.