KDE 3.0 Alpha1 Available for Developers

Dre writes: "Just a few weeks after the release of the rock-solid KDE 2.2.1, the KDE Project today announced the release of KDE 3.0 Alpha1. Targeted at developers who want to get a head start on porting or writing applications to KDE 3, the release is pretty much a straight port of the KDE 2.2 branch to Qt 3. However, for developers this brings an impressive array of new features to KDE, including new database classes, new data-aware widgets, improved RAD development with a much-enhanced Qt Designer, a new powerful regular expression class (with full Unicode support), improved internationalization support (including the ability to mix different character sets in the same text), bi-directional language support (for languages such as Arabic and Hebrew), multi-monitor (Xinerama and multi-screen) support, better integration of pure Qt applications into KDE, and hardware-accelerated alpha blending. With the Qt port out of the way, the KDE developers can now focus on the planned KDE improvements. Read the full announcement here, or go straight to the source (alternative link)."

Comments

The planned features list

[Henry V .009]

The planned features list seems a little unambitious to me. I know that many of the programmers working on KDE are top-notch, but there needs to be some other talent in there as well. In my opinion the KDE developers need to be concentrating on productivity features. They have the opportunity to be at the forefront of that kind of thing. Microsoft wastes plenty of money in researching that kind of thing, but they lack the flexibility to be cutting edge.

Re:The planned features list

[Arandir]

KDE is a *desktop*, not a productivity suite. Microsoft may be attempting to add everything but the kitchen sink into their desktop, but that's not the way we do things in Unix land.

In my never humble opinion, keep KDE a desktop and infrastructure, and spin off the extra stuff into their own projects (like they did with KOffice).

Re:The planned features list

[jilles]

By definition, infrastructure should encapsulate every feature that is common to the applications that use it. The problem with UNIX is that such infrastructure is lacking. This has lead to a situation where in order to be able to compete with ms windows (which does have such infrastructure), applications have to include everything and the kitchen sink. Look at star office, it comes with its own widgets, its own printing subsystem, its own way of embedding components and until the recent beta it even came with its own desktop. Sure it is integrated with Gnome/KDE to some extent but since it also needs to be portable across the two it contains a lot of duplicated functionality.

KDE developers have understood this and are currently working to deliver such an infrastructure. Ignorant critics complain about konquerors ability to be both a browser and a file manager. However, once you understand what infrastructure is supposed to be you recognize that same ability as a good working infrastructure. File managers and browsers have a lot in common and therefore you might as well integrate them so that you don't have to invent the light twice.

The UNIX philosophy is to make something small and only once. Most unix applications only meet the first part of that philosophy and have to duplicate everything and the kitchensink because it is either not present in the infrastructure or not consistent enough to allow for easy integration (this should also be facilitated by the infrastructure).

Are there no new speed enhancements...

[nusuth]

Or did they just not made into press release? Kde 2.2.1 rocks but a bit more speed & responsiveness would be nice. I hope kde guys can achive something like the speed change from 2.1 to 2.2.1.

Re:Qt is 9/10ths commercial

[jonathan_ingram]

No, Qt have never artifically inflated their version number. The first number changes with major binary incompatible changes to the library, the second with additional features that keep binary compatibility, and the third with bug-fixes. KDE uses this numbering scheme as well.

Just because you might be used to other projects (such as the Linux kernel) completely changing interfaces within minor version revisions, doesn't mean that is how a properly managed piece of software is versioned.

Re: kpf - web server applet: please don't

[SuiteSisterMary]

So Microsoft throws in IIS, and it's a huge security hole. KDE does it, and it's a 'fine thing to do.'

Re:it seems KDE is falling behind

[mikael]

The most important thing that Java has over C++ is a comprehensive set of user-friendly yet powerful APIs. But in return, C++ as templates and STL, allowing for elegant generic software systems.

The thing is for normal application development you'll need the normal APIs provided by Java. Take for instance the way of creating a socket. In C++ you'll have to use the C-Unix API. This does not look good and is definately not OO. With Java, you'll just create a new DatagramSocket. But with QT that is changing. QSocket provides a TCP-socket.

I think that QT is providing some of the missing features to C++.

Mikael

Re:it seems KDE is falling behind

[mj6798]

Let me just counter a few of your misconceptions:

• The purpose of garbage collection isn't to eliminate memory leaks, it is to enable runtime safety (important when building software from lots of components).
• Destructors or reference counting in C++ are not substitutes for garbage collection because they don't accomplish the two things garbage collection accomplishes: runtime safety and factoring resource management out of interfaces.
• Reference counting or manual storage management are neither cheap nor predictable.
• The similarity between Java and C++ is mostly syntax; in terms of semantics, the languages are very different.
• C/C++ lack reflection and runtime safety, both of which are very important features for building large, reliable software systems from components. You can emulate reflection and try to substitute testing for runtime safety, but it's a lot more work.

I should note that I have used C++ since before cfront was released to the public, and I think C++ is a great language a number of specific purposes. Smart people can craft very efficient software and debug it in C++. But for getting a job done quickly, for working in large groups with people with different kinds of backgrounds, and for building reliable software from lots of components that are composed at runtime, Java and languages like it are simply better in my experience. And Microsoft, Apple, and many other companies seem to have drawn the same conclusion.