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.
Konqeuror, while perhaps not the best browser on the planet, DOES give you much better control over cookies than IE. The new IE6 privacy mgr stuff is, imo, just horrendous.
creation science book
is here.
There are a few screenshots of kde 1.2.x there, but very little on the kde 2.X port.
Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
Not KDE, though if you like Afterstep, this is an alternative to the Lose9x shell at least. http://www.litestep.net/
Karma whorin' since 1999
The point is that companies developing in-house software don't care about the GPL one bit. They could care less whether they have to give the source to their own employees. There's nothing in the GPL that says you have to make the source available to everyone who asks. You only have to make the source available to people who have the program. In-house programs never are distributed outside the company so the source isn't distributed outside either. Why do you think TrollTech has not yet released QT/Windows as GPL if they are not worried?
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Does this company have a policy against using anything other than windows? If they do, I doubt that the poster will be permitted to run KDE even if it is win32.
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.
Please don't kid yourself otherwise.
It's a unix desktop, not a computer desktop
Why can't it be a computer desktop? Pretty much all the programs except the control center are not unix specific. When you say "I sure won't be taking care to make it portable to Win32" is that implying you are a KDE developer/contributer? I wasn't implying that every developer would have to ensure their code will work on Win32. I was figuring a small porting team would work on that and make their commits and build binaries, etc, since after the project as a whole is ported, it shouldn't be too difficult to maintain new additions, maybe do nightly/weekly builds from cvs to see what (if anything) needs some work to keep it Win32 compatible.
I think it would be nice to offer the KDE desktop as an alternative to the standard Win32 desktop, or at the very least offer the KDE applications as native Win32 apps (kinda like how the Gimp works, but it's GTK+).
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
TrollTech didn't do this out of charity, they did it to popularize a toolkit that otherwise wouldn't have had a chance in the market: at the time Qt came out, there were already several established commercial toolkits out there, with better tool support and much better documentation. The only gimmick Qt had was the QPL, and the adoption by KDE the popularized it.
I hope they don't do this. If they do, they will just discourage companies from GPLing their products.
The GPL is a two-way street. TrollTech has profited handsomely from the adoption of Qt by the open source community. If they didn't like the deal, they didn't have to take it--they were under no obligation to put Qt under the GPL. I hope any other company will take notice and think carefully about putting software under the GPL.
i haven't really delved into the KDE sources quite so much yet...but is there any real X dependant code in there? I mean it is based on QT which is multi-platform, so as long as they use QT for everything then it should as simple as a recompile to use it in windows, you could probably even use it to replace explorer.exe. The only thing i can think of off hand that might be a prob is the different directory structure, but that should be a big deal