Slashdot Mirror
Five Years of KDE
Jacek Fedorynski writes: "Looks like KDE is five years old. Five years seems like a lot of time but just look how much they've achieved in this time." I think the hard part is just beginning - KDE has got all the basics down, and now they have to resist adding too much more crap.
Or, rather, to use the same 5 year timespan, in 5 years, Microsoft went from Windows 95 to WindowsXP. That is a huge leap in terms of stability and security (both up) and boot time (down).
Well, that's not exactly true. The Windows NT (from which XP hails) and WinDOS (3.1, 9x, ME) families were completely different operating systems, being worked on simultaneously. It would be more accurate to say they went from Windows NT 3.1 to XP, which is still impressive of course. But the Windows NT kernel was essentially just VMS force-fitted to DOS-style conventions. In fact, WNT = VMS with all the letters incremented. The "New Technology" line was force-fitted later for marketing :-)
Loneliness is a power that we possess to give or take away forever
"compared to a product like OSX"....
Umm.. sorry, but no. KDE does not have
1)proper Drag-n-Drop everywhere.
2) integrated voice activation
3) An easy way to script out application action (like AppleScript)
4) XML for everything, and a VERY organized file structure (This is more of a linux thing).
5) display pdf (or postscript) which makes making PDFs trvially easy
6) for that matter, a 4th generation display engine
7) A proper user interface (workflow reads like a page, except for tools that you "pick up" from teh bottom/dock)
8) Lots of properly integrated apps
9) A proper application structure that reduces clutter yet is more powerful than any current structure.
9) A lot of other little things that OSX has in plentitude (miscellaneous coolnesses).
yes, KDE and Linux can do a lot of things, and it can superficially LOOK like OSX, but let's not deceive ourselves that KDE is the end-all-be-all in GUI design. It is a far cry from what most professional users would call useable.
OSX, too, has a long way to go to mature, but the ways in which it will mature are pretty obvious and very exciting (XML-RPC and SOAP integrated in AppleScript, AppleScriptable events in the GUI, more Voice integration, better integration of powerful UNIX tools, better keyboard integration, etc. etc.)
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, but after playing around with MacOSX 10.1, Linux has a LOOOONG way to go before it will best Apple's new OS.
The BETTER comparison is Win2k or XP, where KDE is pretty much on par or better.
KDE has its place in the world--something for people who think Windows is easy to use and want a similar environment for Linux/UNIX. I'm not sure it can compete with Windows, because Windows isn't really about quality, it's about complete, detailed compatibility. But that's for others to decide.
I just hope KDE won't become the predominant Linux/UNIX desktop. In fact, I hope no single desktop will become "predominant" on Linux/UNIX--the strength of Linux/UNIX has been its diversity and flexibility. And I hope the KDE developers are smart enough to realize that they can't produce something that satisfies everybody--that would be the same trap Microsoft has fallen into.
In regards to the alledged "crap" I can only agree. Apps like KPaint is not worthy of being in the standard base of KDE. In fact I can't believe someone would willingly have their name on the list of authors to that program. The program's a joke! When was the last time you saw a paintbrush that sprays in a square and not in a circle?!
This is just an example of one of the crappy apps in KDE tha has to go.
fear my zig!
Konqueror absolutely sucks. A lot of websites won't even render. Getting plugins to work is difficult to impossible for the regular user. Rendering speed is horrible.
The only thing worse is Mozilla. Two horrid browsers.
I'd love to see Internet Explorer on Linux. It might be an oxymoron to the purists, but it still is the best browser out there.