Slashdot Mirror
Reasoning Behind The KDE League
Nerds writes: "Chris Schlaeger wrote a letter to explain to the KDE community at large why the KDE League was created. He explains why trying to compete with GNOME is a waste of time and mentions that Red Hat and VA Linux are still considering joining the League."
I am a GNOME user. I think that it is technically superior to KDE, etc. But who cares? They are both useful in their own ways, and I must admit that they both have much to learn from eachother. Sun has announced that Gnome will be the UI for futer versions of Solaris, so some major points have already been scored in that area, and KDE lacks such major strides forward.
As a GNOME user, I cautiosly support the KDE League. I use the term cautiously because I recognize that although the GNOME foundation is formed to help bring vendors together in bringing useful new technology to the desktop, while KDE League seems like a marketing venture, not really geared at the growth of their environment.
I have a friend who commented that application developemnt was more difficult and took longer in Linux than it did in Windows. Currently GNOME makes this much easier and KDE has a long way to go in bringing rapid-development technologies (in Windows: COM, DCOM, OLE, ActiveX) into their desktop. I think that if KDE is to be successful, it will need to come up with its own way of doing this.
But I have to admit, it is not about the UI. OSs thrive on offering large number of APIs to developers. KDE offers many APIs that GNOME does not. This adds a greater degree of flexibility for the developer, and as both KDE and GNOME can offer their libraries/APIs while the other is running, I think that they both help Linux. Long live competition, but let it not degenerate into a brawl.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
The letter talks about "converting all the gnome users" a couple of times, and I really think this is the wrong attitude.
So does the person who wrote it:
What they *should* be doing is trying to make things like DnD work between gnome and kde apps, as well as sharing components, themes, etc.
I thought DND was sorted out, KDE2 can use GTK themes. GNOME using KOM/KParts, or KDE using Bonobo is unlikely. However, there is work being done in other areas, such as the joint .desktop format.
If I like randomgnomemailer, but I do my PIM in randomkdepim, I'd like to share or at least transfer information between the two.
Well the latest konqueror can import (and export, I believe) Netscape bookmarks, so it's a start. But I think that things like addressbooks, bookmarks, email, etc, should be treated as documents rather than configuration for specific programs, and they should be usable outside of a GUI.
This is where microsoft and windows has it right... things are generally more "user friendly" because there are no gotchas ("sorry, you can't use this program without this other program installed)
What? MS does this too, it's standard practice to rely on other components - otherwise everything would go to hell. What would you rather people do, statically link every program? Ever install something that needed a new DirectX, or a VB runtime DLL?
Can I second that? :)
Im sorry folks, I really love C/C++ and I have a HUGE book sitting here called Programming Windows with MFC..
Ive been doing MFC for about a year just doing my own little C++ projects under windows, playing with XML parsers, and various nifty little API's and writing my own libraries to interface web applications with
I used GTK muddled through all of the code and I thought I was going crazy with GTK, I dont mind C nor any of the nuances of the language. I just found GTK annoying to use a lot, sure its neat and looks nice but... just.. blah thats my general impression of GTK, its like its written for a crowd of people who cant let go of the past
Then I found QT, I feel in love, in 30 minutes I had found my C++ toolkit that just blows eveyrthing to date (for C/C++ away)
I followed a few of the real cutesey basic Qt tutorials and then followed a few of the cutsey KDE tutorials and KDE just makes so much more sense to me than a lot of GNOME stuff, the code seems to be easier to write and easier to keep free of errors if you write your C++ well
I realize most people dont but, I have always loved Qt, even if you have to pay for it in windows (the only disadvantage) I think its really great.
You wanna port stuff to windows? Your a large development house, Qt is the way to go
You can write cross platform stuff pretty easy, its awesome, anyways
Enough rambling, these are just my own warped opinons..
Jeremy
KDE can claim 70% of the desktops (where do they get this figure anyway), in the end they're yet another desktop, and people are welcome to use it.
For me, until there are bindings for Perl (their Web site claims there are, but only Qt is supported, and it's 6 months old) or C, I'll stay away from developing for it. To the rest of you who choose KDE: good for you! At least we've moved beyond the day of Motif/CDE and other such crap. KDE is much more of a modern desktop which earns my respect if not use.
That was fairly harsh. Considering the $ was used, and the author's English was perfect, it seems perfectly reasonable to assume that other standards of English were being followed, such as the '.' representing a decimal and the ',' separating thousands.
In that light, a single deviation from those standards could cause confusion, which is the original poster's point.
I agree that people who are not interested in computers will probably never convert to a better operating system than the one they first learned, unless forced to do so.
However, if Linux becomes the system of choice for schools, universities and large organizations, Linux will win the desktop battle regardless of the wishes of non-geeks (who will benefit in spite of themselves).
AnhZone
Patriotism is the conviction that your country is superior to all others because you were born there. (GBS)
Short answer: Money talks!
Long answer:
As more and more people realize that you can get a complete DE for free, more people will go for GNOME/KDE/Whatever that fits them. It will not happen overnight, but as the DE's matures it will get more and more attractive. The PC manufactures will also be tempted til dump Windows, so they don't have to pay the "MS Tax".
The GNOME/KDE DE's are not quite ready yet - they are close, but there are a few things which is not there yet. Installing new apps is one of them - it isn't easy enough, but Helixcode's Red Carpet looks like a killer!.
Greetings Joergen
That is all about taste...
Some people like GNOME, some people find KDE more pleasing - nothing strange in that. It's just like there are many different cars because people have different taste.
Greetings Joergen
I have a friend who commented that application developemnt was more difficult and took longer in Linux than it did in Windows. Currently GNOME makes this much easier and KDE has a long way to go in bringing rapid-development technologies (in Windows: COM, DCOM, OLE, ActiveX) into their desktop. I think that if KDE is to be successful, it will need to come up with its own way of doing this.
This is simply not true!I'm absolutely no expert in either DE, but KDE2 has very powerful alternatives to COM. Take a look around on the KDE homepage. From what I have read it should be very easy to create components under KDE2. Furthermore Qt should be pretty easy to develop in and there is a nice IDE called KDevelop.
Also read the other comment (from an AC) to your post.
Greetings Joergen
But this can't be true, because every 2 years Microsoft releases a brand new "look & feel" for Windows, and the tech writers lap it up like the capitalist lackey dogs that they are.
I believe this is so users feel they are actually getting something for their upgrade money. Something tangible. New DirectX drivers alone doesn't quite cut it.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Because of the cost to commercial developers of the underlying toolkit, Qt, I think the future of KDE on non-Linux desktops is not too bright. OS vendors have little interest in putting their own customers at the mercy of a third party vendor.
The only way I see that change is if either someone buys Troll Tech outright and re-releases the toolkit for free, or if individual vendors make deals similar to Motif licenses, where the Motif stuff was simply included with the OS, free even for commercial development. But do we really want to go back to those days?
But I find the KDE "mission statement" unacceptable:
To me, free software is about diversity, the ability to try things out, and the ability to customize software to everybody's needs. It's the notion of a "standard" that bothers me about Windows, a "standard" that, in the case of Windows is enforced through closed source releases. But KDE can just as effectively "enforce" standards in the open source world--there are plenty of mechanisms. Open source software is meaningless if it results in the same kind of dull standardization that the closed source world has suffered under.
If it is true that KDE is already on 70% of the Linux desktops, as the KDE League claims, I can only conclude that it is time to stop installing it, promoting it, and recommending it, and to work on something else. And if KDE really succeeds at marginalizing other Linux desktops, I'd just switch to Windows. I really don't see a difference between being forced to use a "standard" system from Microsoft or from KDE.
Fortunately, the UNIX and X11 architecture still makes that possibility fairly remote on the desktop. But on palmtops, Troll Tech really does want to take over with Qt/Embedded, which would not seem to allow non-Qt applications to co-exist on the same screen.
If KDE succeeds at its mission, it will have failed.
But you got to remember, those tech columnists/"the average desktop user" doesn't want choice, they want everything to work together like some sci-fi fantasy world. Where you can check your email from a snack machine or a bus station that looks and works exactly the same way as your home computer.
For geeks, differences are good. We try out different DE's and OSes to try to find what we individually feel is "best". They think differences are bad. They learn one interface, and that's what they stick with. Generally they just want to check their email, chat with friends, surf the web, write a document, etc. To switch from Windows to GNOME, KDE, AfterStep or whatever wouldn't be worth it to them. They don't want to take the time or effort to learn something new, when they have something that works fine for them.
That's probably the biggest reason Linux/(Any desktop env.) doesn't take users away from Windows. You could show them the greatest Linux setup, with all sorts of bells and whistles, show them that it's stable as a rock, never crashes, runs everything that they're going to want to do, etc. Unless they are incredibly impressed, they're probably going to say something like "Why? I have something that works for me. So what if it crashes occasionally? If I install this new stuff, I have to take the time to learn it, to install it in the first place, install everything, etc."
To the average person, it's about ease of use. Something they already know how to use is automatically easier for them to use.
Someday, maybe that will change. People may start realizing that there are better alternatives, and that really, learning to use them IS beneficial. But until the general populace thinks that way, it may be awhile before Windows (desktop) users switch to something else. For now, we can only hope and dream.
As for me, I'm going after the KDEssian Federation.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
What is the future of Gnome and KDE on non-Linux desktops? It seems to me that both have strong Linux and BSD support including compiled binaries but neglect broad support for commercial UNIXes with the exception of Solaris. I would hope that one of them overtakes CDE since I've begun using a Solaris box recently and find that CDE is way behind the times on usability features. Is IBM, HP, Compaq, and SUN proposing this and helping implement for GNOME or KDE? Also, I think this would further help the adoption of Linux since it would be a common environment above and beyond the UNIX-like shell that we have today. Thoiw would help make switching environments, a hell of a lot easiert.
Don't read this sig cause it's not worth it.
I am not pro-KDE. I am stating what I saw from my observations. And my observations say that more than 60% of users choose KDE as main interface. However only 10-20 persons among 4500 choose Gnome. Meanwhile most people use programs based on Gnome/Gtk, more than KDE ones. Anyway, here, the difference is not os big, probably 60 to 30. But one fact remains nearly EVERYONE doesn't like Gnome as an interface.
And probably this is what makes Gnome/Gtk generally better than KDE ones. However I keep noting. Gnome's interface IS A FRANKENSTEIN. And it is those same average users are saying. Those same Windows which KDE wanna take over. I have thousands of them here and I asked them what do they think about the interfaces. And they said KDE & WindowMaker are good. And Gnome got even worse than BlackBox. So why Gnome&RMS fans FUD so acidly here?
Ok lay me down! Flamebait! Unberrated! Troll! Neanderthal! Go Fish! There is something else more than stupid half-brained soft wars. Remember that Linux, in its hearth, has NOTHING to do with Gnome/KDE. And that there is also: WindowMaker, BlackBox, AfterStep, ICEwm and many others. And whoever comes here demonstrating his intelligence by FUDding his neighbor, he is a M$ lawyer...
As I read it, he said they want more 'mindshare', not 'marketshare'. I.e., convincing more kids to joining the fun of making mud pies ( or even only throwing them in each other face :-).
Ciao
----
FB
The KDE League, from their secret base in the dormant volcano, uses all the technology at their disposal to defeat the minions of GNOME....
I would think that Aquaman, Batman, Wonderwoman, The Green Lantern, and Superman would be a good start for the KDE League. You need them to oppose the supervillans of the Gnome Foundation like Lex Luthor, Solomon Grundy, Scarecrow, and Bizzaro. It should be quite entertaining and I look forward to watching the titanic battles of good versus evil!
If I hear another "Stability" argument I think I'll scream. I've had many problems with the stability of Xfree86, and I've had it lock the system quite hard.
But even if it doesn't lock my system, my work is still lost.
Even if I got X working solidly, Netscape is more stable under Windows than under Linux. And IE is more stable under Windows than Netscape.
Ditto for Wordperfect under Linux, all Wine applications etcetrea. And I've tried Staroffice, I was not impressed... the import filters are as limited as import filters have ever been. You basically have to re-write any complex documents. Useless for document interchange, and the UI is definately lacking.
My NT system at work is running a 67 day uptime, and this is not uncommon. The last reboot was due to an upgrade of the JRE. OTOH, my Linux box last rebooted about 80 days ago... there was a power outage.
Linux has its strengths, but I just don't see them on the desktop. In addition to "stability" not being a desktop argument, think about 3d support, printing, cut-and-paste, keyboard based usage (yes, I could conceivably do everything without X, but that's comparing apples and oranges.)
There's little I can do in Gnome which I couldn't do in fvwm, and there's a lot I can't do in Gnome which I could do with Windows on 4MB of Ram and a 386 since 1993.
As a server, linux makes the impossible possible and every-day tasks easy. As a desktop, Linux makes the possible impossible and everyday tasks difficult.
Hello, statistics people. Five people does not a representative sample make. Especially when they all know each other. Your post is basically 100% content-free.
I disagree. I personally find that Gnome (I don't use KDE) is at least as useful as a desktop environment as any version of Windows or MacOS that I've used. I personally find that the degree of customizability allows me to get it working the way that I want it to work. I can set up just the features that I want and eliminate ones that I don't. There are some things that aren't handled as well (notably configuring the underlying system) but those are more issues with the underlying system than the suitability as a desktop environment.
Furthermore, the competetion can be quite useful even if you don't consider them to be equal to Win/Mac yet. Part of their differences are about underlying programming issues rather than direct desktop usability features, and that's going to have a big impact on their long-term development potential. Nothing could more certainly guarantee that they could never catch up to Win/Mac than following a dead end in the underlying technology which would break compatibility to fix. By following two different models of the programming underpinnings, Free Software is protected against that kind of mistake.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
Can we please keep Solaris out of the discussion just because KDE happens to run on it?
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
But this can't be true, because every 2 years Microsoft releases a brand new "look & feel" for Windows, and the tech writers lap it up like the capitalist lackey dogs that they are.
I think what they really don't want is choice which involves choosing between Microsoft and non-Microsoft. When it's Microsoft Windows 3.1 or Microsoft Windows 95 or Microsoft Windows 2000 or Microsoft Windows Whistler (which are all so completely different as to be entirely alien to each other) why THEN it's fine.
>The idea of promoting KDE to a non-Linux audience is a worthwhile one
GNOME didn't do that in its begining....the code was very linux-centric. Only with repeated beatings with a clue-by-4 did they stop writing linux code and start writing portable Unix code.
Look at the comment by Chris Schlaeger:
So promoting KDE is almost as important as working on KDE. Recent studies show that KDE is used on more the 70% of all Linux desktops. We could fight for those remaining 30% but given that Linux has less than 5% of the overall desktop market we should rather target the 95% of desktop users than compete with our friends from the GNOME project.
Yea. Lets stop feuding with our GNOME friends.
What about making your code work with your UNIX relatives, instead of acting that the only desktop that matters is Linux? GNOME now has an decided to stop thinking 'we are a linux project' to 'we are a Unix project' GNOME can now shoot for the claim of 'BSD/HURD/Linux/SCO/Solaris/QNX' we work with them all.
A lead developer with KDE only talks about Linux. Way to build credibility.
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
I'm getting really fed up with this notion that all Open Source software is Linux software. I hate Linux. It's pretty good, but it's not as good as, say, Solaris.
I run KDE on Solaris. It runs just fine. It's great. Everything works just like it does on Linux, only better because, frankly Solaris 2.7 on Sparc is simply more powerful than Linux on anything.
Come to that, I run Apache, Perl, Mailman, and about 20 other well known Open Source packages on Solaris. Gosh! they all work!
So, frankly, I don't give a damn about the Linux desktop and who has control over it. Nor do I care how Linux fares in the eyes of anyone at all.
All I care about is KDE and whether it continues to be considerably better than CDE, which is a pile of crap.
So can we PLEASE keep Linux OUT of every f***ing discussion about software which JUST HAPPENS to run on Linux because Linux JUST HAPPENS to be a clone workalike of Unix.
Thanks,
Jon
-----
A ZDNet comentary critiques the GNOME Foundation and KDE League, and compares it to the infighting among brands of UNIXes. The commentary postulates that forking of DEs will occur, and further fork OSS OSes.
The Windows community and Tech press don't seem to get it, choice is good. Microsoft has dominated so completely, for so long, that people have forgotton that, choice is good and drives competition. Just my $0.02 FWIW.
"Open code, in other words, can be a check on state power." -Lawrence Lessig
On the other hand, Gtk, the Gnome toolkit, isn't remarkably good. Just so-so, reminds me of Motif.
I would be absolutely neutral in the window manager wars, if it weren't for Kdevelop and Qt. For a C/C++ programmer these rock, man, gimme KDE anytime!
However different the different DE's are, they're still the same windows-mouse-menu-panel metaphor that everybody knows how to use.
Perhaps the following is a bad analogy, but think about this:
There are hundreds of different car panel designs, also there are some that have manual transmition and others with automatic transmission... and of these last ones, some have the changes in the floor and others behind the steering wheel... yet people can drive all those different types with minimal hassle, because the basic controls (steering wheel, pedals, etc) are the same.
What do you guys think? --I rather have a discussion than moderation--
No sig for the moment.
"The one disturbing thing I found about the letter was the paragraph where he talks about not competing with GNOME. I don't know if its just me, but it seemed like he was saying that they weren't trying to compete with GNOME only because there weren't many GNOME users, and that if there were more, they'd do everything possible to steal them away. As I said, its probably just me, but that paragraph still sounds somewhat odd."
What I got out of reading that, was that KDE would rather expand their userbase by pulling new users from present Windows users. KDE has essentially defined their competition as Microsoft, rather than GNOME. I'd rather see M$ userbase get smaller, than GNOME's. Seems to me they are compeeting against the right opponent. Just my $0.02 FWIW, YMMV
"Open code, in other words, can be a check on state power." -Lawrence Lessig
Not inconsistent. There is a difference between what a program does and the front end of it. For example a program plays mp3's. Buttons, windows, menus and pictures are the front end. But the main function of the program is to play music.
If take a VERY GOOD LOOK at Gnome than you will see that there's a big difference here. In quality most programs are better to KDE's. On interface, just take a very good look at the debug dumps...
So don't talk me here that I'm fudding. I'm stating things I see and not crying "M$ RULEZ EVERYONE ELSE SUUUUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX!!!!!"
Either way you look at it, it is a laudable effort to convert more Windows users. As a happy Gnome user I think the 70% marketshare among Linux desktop users is a bit of a bold claim, but nonetheless I think the KDE project is a laudable effort. And it is definitely true that there is much more to be gained by converting Windows users than by competing for a relative minority. Not that this competition hasn't been fruitful after all, it is to be doubted that either Gnome or KDE would have gotten this far without this competition. It is good to have a bit of choice.
-- Spelling and grammar errors tend to be a sign of erroneous thinking.
A very good writeup indeed. It seems to address all the major issues in a very balanced fashion. I'm not a KDE user myself (I can't stand some of the interface elements), but I think that publicity will be good for the project. Especially since KDE (from what I've used of it) seems similar enough to Windows to attract Windows users but doesn't replicate too many of the little things that makes Windows so irritating to use (yes, almost every Windows user I've talked to has found something, and often many things, about the interface to be almost painful). Hopefully, the KDE League and the GNOME Foundation will be able to work together on promotion and such, to inform people that the world outside of Windows has options other than the command-line.
The one disturbing thing I found about the letter was the paragraph where he talks about not competing with GNOME. I don't know if its just me, but it seemed like he was saying that they weren't trying to compete with GNOME only because there weren't many GNOME users, and that if there were more, they'd do everything possible to steal them away. As I said, its probably just me, but that paragraph still sounds somewhat odd.
Anyway, that's really a small detail. Good move on the part of the KDE guys, and hopefully this will alert people to the number of interface options available to Linux (and other Unix-style OSes, of course). And more options are always good.
-RickHunter
or macos X (which does have what you propose, an /Applications directory, a /Settings directory - which i think are just symlinks to /bin and /etc anyway - but that's macos, a graphical OS)
:) Mac OS X has an /Applications directory for the graphical apps, and a separate /bin directory for the command line tools like cat, cp, tcsh, mv.
/net, /startup, /dns. Calling the startup directory "rc" is just ridiculous. Here's a novel idea: how about files and directories are named something that makes their purpose intuitively obvious to the user? Maybe then normal people can actually navigate the filesystem without having to buy a book. Note: for broader acceptance, you will need these people.
Where are you getting this information? The good 'ol "I'll take a guess and just hope it's right" farm?
what would you rather type in, day after day after day, Applications or bin?
Since we're talking about GUIs, let's approach it from "what would you rather click on day after day." It doesn't matter, right? It takes a single click regardless of how long the directory name is. Besides why are you typing "/bin" everyday? You think after the first 86,400 times you'd put it in your path. And then there's file name completion.
There really seems to be this perception in some parts of the Linux community that the people will come to unix (the culture, not the OS), rather than unix coming to the people. In my opinion, it's that mentality that will slow progress. The people aren't going to change, unix will have to (as Mac OS X is already illustrating).
etc, you know what that means? 'etcetera'.. and that's exactly what all those little files in that directory are.
There's way too much stuff in there for it all to be considered "etcetera." How about a "/sysconfig" directory, perhaps even with subdirectories like
un*x has evolved into this state to make hackers lives easier. it isn't wrong, far from it. its taken 20, 30, years to get to this stage. if people haven't got half a brain to read and understand, then they shouldn't be using it in the first place!
I have never really understood where this culture's elitist attitude comes from. As if it took us 5-20 years to learn all this stuff, so why should anybody else get off easy? Maybe unix has evolved to make hackers' lives easier, but guess what? It's time for it to evolve again. That is, unless you don't actually want choice outside of Windows.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas