When comparing Konqueror vs Nemo, the Slant community recommends Nemo for most people. In the question“What are the best file managers for UNIX-like systems?” Nemo is ranked 7th while Konqueror is ranked 35th. The most important reason people chose Nemo is:
The most stylish among all FMs.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Amazing file manager integration
Konqueror can also work as a file manager and it does a great job at that. You can view both local or remote files (through FTP, SSH, SFTP, and Samba protocol).
Pro Low footprint in KDE
Konqueror usually has a low footprint when used in KDE because most of the resources needed are already loaded. This makes the startup time and general loading times between commands very fast compared to other browsers in KDE.
Pro Elegant
The most stylish among all FMs.
Pro Extendable
Nemo can be extended to have additional features through third party plugins.
Pro Easily open as root
Option to open folder as root from within the right click menu.
Pro Easily open file location in terminal
Option to open a folder in terminal, which can help executing commands such as bash.
Pro Has dual pane functionality
This functionality was removed in Nautilus and Dolphin at least in Ubuntu-Gnome, but Nemo kept this option, making the obvious functionality of cut, copy and paste much easier.
Pro Double pane and search by name capabilities
Pro Supports bookmarking
You can bookmark folders that you open often, this way you can easily access them from anywhere while using Nemo.
Pro Good networking options
Supports ftp, ssh and samba connections.
Pro Queues file operations
Cons
Con Lacks incognito/private mode
Konqueror lacks the option to browse the web in private mode, which is used when you don't want to leave any search history or avoid saving any cookies or cached data.
Con No large extension support
Konqueror is unable to tap into the large collection of Chrome extensions like many other browsers do. So the options to extend Konqueror's functionality are pretty limited.
Con Changing the background color or font type for customization is not practical
You have to do it with finding and editing the relevant CSS files. No buttons, menus or sliders for such customization.
Con Incomplete mimetypes
Like all nautilus forks it allows you to run svg-files due some incomplete mimetype coverage.
Con Depends on GNOME
Depends on gnome toolkits an libraries.