Slashdot Mirror
KDE 3.2-beta2 - Towards a Better KDE?
JigSaw writes "KDE 3.2-beta2 was released last week for general testing and OSNews offers a preview of what's expected from the 'popular X11 desktop environment' early next year upon its release. The article mentions KDE's new features (faster loading times, Konqueror's Service Menus, Kontact, KPDF, Plastik theme etc), the problems that still plague it (cluttered Kmenu and Konqueror menus, too many disorganized kontrol center modules) and some constructive suggestions on how to get over the bloat without losing the functionality."
constructive suggestions on how to get over the bloat without losing the functionality :)
I think shortcuts are definetly the way forward, for example pressing ctrl+? opens fsck or whatever
Much faster, easier, and makes desktops less clutered (as you don't need icons etc on desktop)
When anger rises, think of the consequences.
Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
I liked the review, but in the end they misspelled "Konclusion".
Karma: SELECT `karma` FROM `users` WHERE `userid`=138474;
KDE is (gulp) >faster> than Gnome? There goes one myth. Take away the Eugenia standard carping over the UI and you have a pretty good review.
This guy is way out there
I installed KDE 3.2 last week, and while it's just a beta I give it two thumbs up easily. The tabs in Konqueror are fixed to more like what I'm used to in Firebird, and theres some nifty new features in the file browser mode. Not to mention there seems like a lot of new configuration options and everything seems even more solid and snappier than 3.1.4. The new theme, Plastik, has really grown on me as well.
If my brain was an eyeball it would be bleeding! Why do geeks think prefixing K (or G) to everything is witty? It's not; it's just annoying and confusing.
--
Power to the Peaceful
Not to mention... Kommander's Editor (kmdr-editor) is by no means a bloddy text editor.
As someone on dot.kde.org pointed out (and I fully agree with) the ability to customize thing SHOULD not be messed with, because otherwise you go the GNOME/Windows way. KDE can act like almost any other DE if people want it to, and set it to do so.
Eugenia has in my experence not done very good review, and assumes that less choice = better, which I find fundamentally flawed.
Having used KDE since 1.x (and others for a long time) and currently KDE cvs (built every couple of days), KDE has been for some time in my opinion the best DE of all (including MacOS, CDE, Windows, and GNOME) And the 3.2 just got a big speed boost. (on a cable connection (~300KB/sec max) slashdot load in under 3 seconds, as does just about any webpage except /.ed ones, and el reg (that is throughout the cable company, so something is messed up there, and it has gotten better, so even that is .) Koffice is much better since the last time I used it, and it is faster than openoffice, and quite stable. Juk is just great. Kontact should import kopete as well if it wants to be complete, and the talked about kopete-address book integration... if that's what Eugenia calls integration (essentially a link) then no wonder everyone thinks windows and gnome are decent. (Kopete-address book integration is at this point substandard for KDE.) kgpg is also included.
Why do geeks think prefixing K (or G) to everything is witty? It's not; it's just annoying and confusing.
I wrote an app in Java to change all the names because I hate that annoying style too. It's called Jrenamer.
I have to say that if Linux isn't ready for the Desktop, that it is VERY close with KDE 3.x and OpenOffice. I can't speak for Gnome, I haven't used it in a long time.
For office environments, I think Linux is pretty much there. The only real missing thing IMHO is the expectation that you can plug in random USB things and that they'll work. This is probably a problem for grandma and grandpa, but I don't think it's a problem for your average corporate secretary.
I suppose Outlook calendars are another issue...
I used KDE for many many years. It was my desktop of choice. It was the only environment which had all the features I wanted. I didn't even use konqueror or anything. I liked the KDE panel most of all, but I also really really like kwrite, kmail and the konsole. I still really like kmail and kwrite.
Recently I got a new pc. I replace my Pentium 3 450 with my Athlon-XP 2500+. Now I knew that KDE was bloated, but I wanted the features and the programs that came in it. I did an XP/Gentoo dual boot on my new boxen and emerged kde. It worked, much faster than previous. But the response on a lot of things was still slow. Keep in mind this was whatever kde version was out a month or two ago.
Every time I remember KDE getting updated they made major changes that were always for the better. The dramatic difference between KDE1 and 2 was outstanding. In the days of 2 I couldn't imagine better, but KDE3 lived up to everything it promised and 2 couldn't even compare. I'm sure KDE 3.2 will do just the same.
Eventually though, the bloat got to me. I was running an optimized gentoo install and my desktop environment was slowing me down. And it was only because I wanted to use the mail client, panel and text editor that came with it. That's when I discovered XFCE-4. It didn't have all the features I needed, but XFCE4 works perfectly with all kinds of software. If I want screensavers I just emerge xscreensavers. If I want keybindings I emerge xbindkeys. If I want cpu monitoring I can get xfce-extras or gkrellm and bubblefishymon.
What really sealed the deal was the fact that I replaced Kmail with thunderbird, konsole with xterm, and kwrite... I still haven't replaced that. But I sure as heck wasn't going to keep using the big slow desktop just for the text editor. If you absolutely need to get all the stuff KDE has to offer, stick with it. If you actually use all of that stuff then it is so worth it and nobody does it better. If you want to trim down and increase the performance, try out XFCE4. I see it becoming a serious competitor with Gnome and KDE in the near future.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
There is one constant in the universe: Eugenia "I'm an UI expert" Loli-Queru" beating the same old "too many features" drum.
/. I was surprised to see how many people hated konqueror (well, all GNOME users of course) - IMHO konqi is the pinnacle of UI design and consistency. An application flamework, that comes as close to the power of CLI as gui-wise is possible. You can mold Konqueror into anything - and this seems to impress even OS X users: check out this review.
... talking about clutter...) but I want to say this: Keep up the good work KDE developers! And listen to your users (as I know you do) not these so called UI "experts" who think GNOME (don't take me wrong, I like some aspects of GNOME) has the leading edge in usability, despite overwhelming odds (if it is more usable, why do more newbies stay with KDE???)
Yes, she might be right on certain points (Cervisia in context menus by default?), but saying the KDE has no HIG and GNOME has one is just plain BS. Of course, we were witness to her flamefest fith mosfet over UI issues a while back... Anyhow, I just finished reading the comments when I saw the review posted on
Anyhow, I don't expect osnews to change its bias towards (but I was surprised at the review, it was more level headed than usually it is) - and I'm not going to point out every flaw in the criticism (well, I shall point out only two: 1) its the same old argument on part of eugenia 2) check out the screenshots - and tell me: how many of the applications in the menus were KDE specific?
Actually, ideas like this have been tossed around in UI literature for as long as the area has existed. The problem with these kinds of adaptive UIs is that they can be confusing to a user.
Example: Imagine, I'm Joe Sixpack and, three weeks ago, I fired up The GIMP. But now, I look in the menu, and it's missing... so I look around. Oooh, found it. So, he closes The GIMP. Oh, just one more thing... click on the menu. And it's moved again!
The point is that users rely a great deal on UI consistency in order to remember where things are and how they work. As a result, things like dynamic menus go a long way to making the UI *less* useable, rather than more, since you can no longer rely on your memory. Now, yes, careful design can minimize some of these problems, but the fundamental point is the same: the user expects the UI to behave in a deterministic manner.
Yeah, but I like KDE better. Should I switch to GNOME because it's got more companies behind it? Following your advocacy, shouldn't I then just switch to Windows?
FYI, Mandrake primarily supports KDE, so does Lindows, and now it seems that Debian and KDE are doing their own Desktop thingy.
There's room enough for both DEs. Enough with the flamewars already...
Reminder: find a new sig
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm really a Gnome fan.
I was thinking that KDE was a bit bloated, a bit ofuscated..
I explain my choice in this Perfect Desktop text
But I must agree that KDE 3.2 seems to be really on the good way and I think I will try it the day of the release. Good Job KDE people. I really like the plastic theme. IMHO, keramik was "fat".
Well, I find this screenshot really interesting.
Don't you think that Gnumeric is more "easy " than Kspread ? There's two rows of icons in Gnumeric : File icons and actions icons.
In Kspread is not so easy, you have icons anywhere.. that's really the bad point of KDE for me and why I prefer Gnome for beginners. Think about it.
Anyway.. Good job guys !
PS : anyway, gnome and KDE aren't anything ! I can't live without FVWM .
Ploum.net.
Gnome was faster. Then they released GTK+ v2, which is a lot slower. Have you ever run Konsole from KDE 3.1 side-by-side with GnomeTerminal from Gnome 2.4? I have. One is fast, the other is Gnometerminal. I have an Athlon 1700+ with 768mb of DDR RAM and a Radeon 8500, why can I type faster than Gnome 2.4 can draw on my screen? KDE can't.
No, I'm not a retard who can't find his own ass with both his hands. I'm using the Slackware distribution (versions 9 and 9.1 have Gnome 2.x, the slow Gnome, in them).
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
If I take my Slackware 9 CD and install it onto a box, I can install without Konquerer. If I take a Windows XP CD and install it onto a box, I can't choose to not install IE. It's welded in. Konquerer is only integrated into KDE. Windows has so such separation of window manager/session management/library environment and kernel/base install that Linux has.
Plus, I have absolutely no problem using Thunderbird and Firebird for email and web stuff in Konquerer. It (KDE) respects my choice to use those applications as default, rather than forcing me to use KMail or Konquerer. I've yet to see such respect in Windows.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
What I really do not understand: why are so many people bitching about how terrible KDE is when they have a wonderful *choice* of alternatives? Most of them free? If you think KDE is bloated and Gnome is not, fine, use Gnome. Or use TWM. Whatever.
...And I don't mean horrible for KDE, I mean it is horribly done and poorly researched.
.doc link and zip and email it?)
For the mistakes under "The KDE Solution":
- KDialog and Service Menus have been in KDE since 3.0, they are nowhere near a new feature. KRDC for connecting to windows machines has been around for a long time as well, since 3.1.
Under "The KDE Problem"
- She says "Konqueror's context menu is a mess, why would I want to zip a web page or use Cervicia with it, is beyond me". She obviously does not grasp that KDE is totally network transparent, and that indeed all these options can be used with any media on any device. There is no need to restrict their ability while browsing a web site (in fact who is to say that you wouldnt* ever want to, say, right click on a
- She then goes on about how the KDE menu is too bloated, and posts a screenshot as an example. However, in the screenshot, which contains 32 applications, only 7 are KDE applications! You can't claim the KDE menu is too blated because of all the other junk on the system.
- She then advocates putting all the "Configure" options under one menu entry under "Edit" instead of "Settings". Not onnly would this violate the KDE Style Guide which has been agreed upon by usability experts, it just seems foolish. In no OS does "Edit" imply "Settings". Edit is for Editing the active document.
Namely this is one of the poorer reviews I have read on OSNews, and that is saying ALOT since they are normally quite bad.
GNOME has always been the commerical desktop of choice. It has long been focussed on getting the basics right and building from there... as opposed to the KDE Project, which is entirely aimed at pleasing the slashdot peanut gallery with pointless eye-candy. KDE features are thrown into the mix with little or no regard for usability, or even good taste. The end result is disasterous, as can be seen by anyone unforunate enough to be forced into using it.
The KDE architecture is a lot further on than GNOME. Whatever the eye-candy, the engine that drives KDE does appear to be more advanced and better put together than GNOME. KDE is very well put together, and like the article says, once you've got that down, it's not too hard to streamline. GNOME will have a harder job getting to KDE's standards then KDE would have imitating GNOME's ease of use. If it even wants to. It's not like there has to be only one desktop for everyone.
KDE is extremely expensive to develop for, unless you intend to produce GPL software. TrollTech, the owners of KDE and Qt, license the X11 version of their Qt toolkit under the GPL. This forces anyone wanting to develop software built on top of it (including KDE), to be (L)GPL licensed -- or pay TrollTech $3000 for every developer you have working on the application to purchase a commercial license.
As opposed to GTK, which is fully LGPL, with no proprietry license. What was your point again?
TrollTech is also vulnerable to takeover by companies hostile to Free software and good corporate lawyers who can blow holes in the laughable FreeQt agreements.
Huh? The current copy of Qt is GPLed. TrollTech cannot retract that, even if they wanted to. If TrollTech stopped developing GPL Qt, then the KDE project would just fork the codebase. As others have said, the GPL is very legally secure.
As for all the other points, whilst I could argue that KDE has made headway into the business environment as well (Lindows, SuSE 9, and so forth), I don't see why I should bother. Open Source software does not need corperate funding to continue. If it did, Linux would never have gotten off the ground. Commercial backing can't hurt, but it's not necessary for a project, either.
Nor does a project die if another overtakes it. KDE is technologically ahead of GNOME, and has been ever since GNOME's creation. Does that stop people working on GNOME? Nope. Because the Linux desktop is a varied thing. Just because Windows gained a monopoly, doesn't mean that there has to be a desktop monopoly. I'd like greater inter-compatability between the two systems, but I don't see a need for there to be only one.
Personally, I don't think desktop users will notice it's missing, except for a small niche. Most people working in a company or using it at home for email and web browsing won't notice, and simply won't care.
I'm really looking forward to having alpha blending, but I don't believe it to be a necessary or even wanted feature by most people.
How so? Which distros are GNOME-centric? Well, there's Red Hat and.... That's about it. Sure, there's Fedora, but their KDE-support is alot better than Red Hat's was. Then there is Sun, but we'll have to see how that pans aout. They don't even call their desktop GNOME though.
If we look at KDE, there's SUSE, Mandrake, Lycoris, Lindows, Xandros, Knoppix and Conectiva. I bet I missed few though. Rest (Debian, Gentoo, Slackware etc.) are more or less desktop-agnostic.
To me it seems that KDE is the "desktop of choice"
So, let me get this straight: Before, GNOME-fanboys whined because Qt was not 100% free (as in speech). Now that it is, they whine because Qt does not allow them to write closed and proprietary software for free? How's that for hypocrisy!? "I support open source and free software! I want others to give me free tools so I could write proprietary software for profit with them!"
Trolltech does not own KDE.
Examples please?
I have seen similar fake translucency on GNOME as well, so what's your point?
Those "Fine Sun engineers" that are now working on GNOME used to work on CDE. A ringing endorsement, don't you think?
Over 60% of TT's shares are owned by the emplyees of TT. The shares are not publicly listed. So how exactly are they "vulnerable"? And even if they were taken over and GPL'ed Qt was eliminated, Qt would be automatically released under a BSD-style license. Do some research, OK?
And they are working on integraring it with KDE as well, so what's your point?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.