Slashdot Mirror
KDE 2.2.1, On Win32/Cygwin
m_ilya writes: "It looks like KDE 2.2.1 has been ported on Cygwin. More than year ago I was forced to use WinNT at work, and I've been missing the Linux desktop a lot. I hope if I will be ever forced to use Windows again I would be able to have more Unix-friendly desktop :). Here's the announcement.
Kudos to all the KDE hackers." Check out the posting on the Dot for some more links.
Nice, I'd be great to run a few KDE apps on Windows. However, IMHO, many of the same Windows equivalents would be better to use, as they are native. I'd take IE over Konqueror, for example.
And what about KDE 2.2.2? Any plans to port that or are they just going to KDE 3?
I hope they don't do this. If they do, they will just discourage companies from GPLing their products.
TrollTech has been very supportive of KDE's development since the beginning, and has bent over backwards to please Free Software advocates by GPLing their main, high-quality product. They took a risk in doing that. So far it has not come back to bite them, but if the GPL'd QT was ported to Windows against their will, it would be very bad for them. They couldn't stop anyone from doing it, but it would be bad. A lot of TrollTech's revenue comes from companies doing in-house windows apps. In-house apps can be GPL'd easily because the source only has to be distributed where the binaries go. If the program never goes outside the company, the source doesn't have to either. If there is a free, GPL'd QT on windows, all those people will stop paying TrollTech and simply use the free version. There is a reason TrollTech hasn't released a GPL'd QT for windows. There is of course a free as in beer version, but it is not GPL. It has a license forbidding commercial use, for this very reason.
TrollTech has gone very far in its support of free software, but it is still trying to make money. It is trying to be a company that will balance Open Source and profit. Porting a GPL QT to windows would hurt TrollTech, and it would make the GPL look like poison for companies that want to make a profit. It would be more ammunition for Microsoft's "virus" analogy. It is the wrong thing to do.
On the other hand, making XFree on Cygwin "rootless" would be a much better solution. Then there would be a high-quality, useable, Free X-Server for Windows, which would be great. Then you would have the ability to make KDE a shell replacement or whatever. It might still be less than optimal for TrollTech, but I think most companies would still elect to buy the Windows version of QT. Commercial X servers have had this capability for a while now, and it hasn't been a problem so far (that I know of).
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
I don't think a GPL'd port of Qt for Windows would be necessarily bad to TrollTech. People who used this port of Qt would have produce Free (as in Speech) Software anyways. Since most companies could not accept this anways, they'd buy the commercial license anyways.
I don't see many Free Software developers rushing out to buy commercial Qt licenses so they can produce Free Software for Windows. So, basically, TrollTech would not be harmed financially, and would probably gain more users (which could mean more Commercial licenses, if some of the Free Software developers wished to make non-Free Software).
While its true that QT library can't be compiled,
there are some ways to get around that. And while I like the way the Windows shell works, occasionally I find advantage in using other visual shells. I'd use KDE.
HOWEVER, the big problems lie in the conversion.
I love cygwin and use it as my main POSIX environment. I use it much more than Linux, and have added most of the best tools to my version of it.
Icewm and twm have already been ported, and despite the simplicity of the two, both have problems in Windows, making a lot of other programs less workable (this is especially true of Icewm). In addition, configuration is based upon a series of workarounds, and is thoroughly unlike the elegant method used within Linux.
KDE already somewhat slow, buggy, and complex in Linux - while Icewm and TWM are quite simple. There's no way KDE will even be usable considering its complexity. The ability to change the configuration will make it far too difficult to change, and it would be too slow to run on all but the fastest machines since cygwin versions of apps are all slower than their linux counterparts.
In addition, having the Window manager is one thing, but having apps for it is something else entirely. That's what it'd really be good for. I'd love to use kdevelop under cygwin, but its not going to be joining Windows with KDE.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
No company that doesn't want its source to get out is going to GPL its internal projects to avoid paying TrollTech. Too big of a risk. All someone has to do is anonymously post the GPL'd source someplace on the net, and the company's valuable, secret, internal (oooh, aaaah) intellectual property and probably lots about their business practices are revealed to anyone interested with no recourse.
Long term, Troll Tech has to adapt to free software world domination just as much as any other company. If they can't make a good profit on training, consulting, custom development, and other services (see Cygnus), they better learn how.
Didja actually try it? It's perfectly stable. This capability has been in Windows for years, though not exposed through UI. It's a shame that some folks are unable to take off their anti-ms blinders & evaluate technology objectively.
Yeah, they did. The free copy was technically only an evaluation copy for a long time. However, they had to make it totally free in order to compete with IE. There were lots of other channels which Netscape tried to use to make money, including partnerships with solution providers like Sun (Java in the browser - ugh), content providers (remember Netcaster? that thing was fucked up), licensees of the client software etc. They were fucked in almost every area by Microsoft, either because IE was free or because MS used its market power to stop people from entering any business relationship with Netscape. Netscape was also partially at fault because some things they did were really stupid.
If we assume that IE had not existed (Microsoft realizing in 2001 that the Internet may be relevant, or something), Netscape would certainly be a highly profitable company by now, and a very decent web-browser.
I always find Timothy's posts a little odd... Why does he call KDE a "Linux desktop" when it runs on many versions of UNIX? And, how is KDE "Unix-friendly" when it is very much a clone of MS Windows?
You're right though, choice is good, more browsers are good, standards compliance is good.
Bleh!
I think you have missed what he was trying to say.
I think he was generally speaking about KDE and it's associated applications being less stable and slower than their Windows equivalents. And to be honest, they are [at the moment].
We call all talk about how "stable" the Linux kernel is [ignore recent events], but as long as a lot of programs that run on top of it frequently crash it's not that much use - it just means you have to restart the app, instead of the PC. You still in many cases have lost your work.
And by the way, please stop suggesting that KDE is exclusive to Linux, because it isn't. I run it under FreeBSD, as I'm sure many others do. I must admit, [2.2.1] is much more stable, and it's increasingly getting better.
Best wishes to the KDE developers, they've done a great job.
I don't think a GPL'd port of Qt for Windows would be... bad to TrollTech. People who used this port of Qt would have produce Free Software anyways. Since most companies could not accept this anways, they'd buy the commercial license anyways.
I don't see many Free Software developers rushing out to buy commercial Qt licenses so they can produce Free Software for Windows. So, basically, TrollTech would not be harmed financially, and would probably gain more users (which could mean more Commercial licenses, if some of the Free Software developers wished to make non-Free Software).
Amen!
I'd have to hope Troll Tech is confident enough to GPL the native Windows version.
Troll Tech keeps relaxing their licensing according to the successes of GTK and GNOME. Fine, competition is great. I have no doubt the Qt license will change AGAIN in the future...
However the current COST of a Qt license is hurting Linux. By that I mean, they are hurting the small software developer. Troll Tech should have pity on low volume commercial software companies -- including shareware (what I call "mom and pop dot com") -- because the current licensing is way too expensive for the small guy. We want to encourage innovative, small developers... not just cheer and jeer for Oracle, and the latest game port. Qt licensing is like a head tax.. fair for some, but too steep for many.
I'll give you a great example of Qt-like licensing:
I lived in the state of New Hampshire. There in the land of "small government" the distribution of alcohol is a state-run monopoly. In order to have your alcoholic beverage "approved" to go on the wholesalers list, you pay a set tax regardless of the quantities sold. So, whatever Budweiser pays is also paid by Nutfield brewing company, or any outside brewer who wants access to the NH market.
The result is, while the Northeast is a boom region for microbrews, New Hampshire lags the pack with just one midsized microbrew. This is artificial and due to the state tax, because NH consumes more microbrew per capita than anywhere in the northeast. The tax brings in income, but it's miscarried an entire industry.
Anyone who thinks Linux on the desktop will "get there" without "shareware" is deliding themselves. There are just too many varied interests for the free software teams to fill.
Now, you and I probabnly don't care about shareware... but these tiny niche apps will keep THOSE people on Windows forever. These apps COULD be ported to Linux if the right toolkit were available.
Now, GTK gets around this totally by being LGPL. I don't think Troll Tech want to go THERE. So, they should address the vacuum by producing a low-volume commercial license. It will help the platform considerably!
Does this company have a policy against using anything other than windows?
At my former job (a bank), company policy was indeed that windows was mandatory. So those jobs do exists. Funny that anybody would doubt this, I always lived under the impression that most jobs required windows, and that places where you are allowed to run Linux on the desktop (such as my current job) were still the exception.
If they do, I doubt that the poster will be permitted to run KDE even if it is win32.
Good point. Indeed, during the first couple of month, while working on a java project, it was impossible to get permission to install Cygwin. However, after that I got involved in a project with Tcl, and as there is (fortunately) no Visual Tcl, I got permission to install Cygwin, Emacs, the works. Certainly, being good friends with the guy in charge of security helped too, but this experience shows that places which mandate Windows, while still allowing Cygwin do indeed exist.
The fact of the matter is that this guy uses windows at work to be productive as his line of work is in win32 applications no doubt.
Nope. In general such policies exist to make IT support more productive. If they only have to know one operating system, it's easyer for them. Although this may seem backwards (IT are there to support the users, not the other way round), this is unfortunately what happens in many places.
Say no to software patents.
Whatever, don't be a mindless sheep.
The guys has his opinion, if it doesn't match yours don't scream foul.
Has anyone actually tried this and seen how good it is? From my past experience, tools ported on cygwin haven't been very stable, so I'm interested. As for the market for this, I've been trying to approximate multiple desktops on Windows for quite a while (using programs like Cooldesk). If KDE on Windows is stable, I'll switch to it just for this feature.