KDE 3.2: A User's Perspective
Karma Sucks writes "In KDE 3.2 - A User's Perspective (mirror), W. Kendrick gives an incredible visual overview of some of the lesser known features of KDE. Together with a recent article on GNOME, it's become clear that the Linux desktop has all but surpassed proprietary alternatives."
has all but surpassed proprietary alternatives.
Comment 1: Haven't we been here for years, now? "Linux is almost ready", "We've all but surpassed windows", etc.
Comment 2: We won't have a desktop that can compete with windows until we still fix the stupid things that are inherent to x-windows WM's. All I want in life is to be able to cut-and-paste reliably between applications. Text, and pictures, mind you, and in a perfect world, spreadsheet data. You know what else would be nice? If it were faster - i.e. didn't have to go through unix sockets to do anything. Or if it didn't have to render all image files into bitmaps offscreen to display them.
No, we've still got a long way to go. I do really like a good gnome desktop running ximian, it's true, and it's getting better. But, sorry, we're no where near the "it just works" of apple / winxp.
~Will
sig?
I write in my journal
>Linux has been desktop-ready since 1991, it's just that the majority of users haven't been ready for it.
Thats a great attitude. "Its not confusing, you just don't understand it."
Do you also think that the mouse is a lazy's mans crutch?
Users are where they want to be. Software is the part that needs to go to the users, not the other way around.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Really there isn't just one question to ask. You could ask any of the following.
1. The one that usually gets asked: "Will Windows users who switch find Linux easier to use than windows?" This is obviously a loaded question. making this the standard pretty much ensures that Windows come out ahead.
2. A little better: "If first time users are plunked down in front of a bunch of desktops, which one will they find easiest to use?" This is at least a fair comparison, but given that few users are first time users, the answer isn't very interesting (and I think OS X wins).
3. Better still: "After users have learned to use a bunch of different desktops, which one do they find easiest to use, and most useful?" This is a fair questions, and the answer actually matters. I use Windows, OS X, and Linux (Gnome usually) on a daily basis and I think Linux wins this one.
4. Best: "Which desktop combines a managable learning curve, and is most useful onced learned." This is really where Linux runs into problems. For some people the learning curve on Linux is still too steep. If they learned how to use it they would find it more useful, and even easier to use, but getting to that point is still too hard for some people.
Linux has been desktop-ready since 1991, it's just that the majority of users haven't been ready for it.
God, how I hate reading this. It's people like you with arrogant statements like your's above that give the OpenSource community a bad reputation.
Face it: What is revolutionary about GNU/Linux is its model of development and distributuion. Technically speaking, for a typical Joe User there is little or nothing new. Regarding the GUI, we mostly take the best (or what we perceive to be best) from other OS, like Windows, MacOS, Irix, AmigaOS etc. Nothing wrong with this approach, but it's not that the Linux GUI is constantly 5 years ahaed of what users can grasp.
Excellence: Moderate (mostly affected by comments on your karma)
1. UNINSTALL! Maybe I am a moron, but I find it impossible to cleanly and completely uninstall non-packaged stuff. 2. Build interface. That is, I can build most non-packaged software with configure, make, make install, but of course I am too lazy to check where the stuff ends up by default and to pass the appropriate configure parameters. KDE is for lazy people like me, so where is the mechanism that keeps my machine clean even for non-packaged software? 3. While we are at it, I am tired of recursively finding out from configure what the dependency chain is. If I want to install something, I want to install the dependencies as well. And no, I don't want to RTFM. 4. A complete equivalent to M$ Money. 5. I shouldn't have to care whether an app is a GNOME app or a KDE app. 6. Other than that: looks great, when is it out packaged for Fedora?
wtf is a sig?
Let me play the devil's advocate... I feel strongly about the opensource philosophy that someone would be able to label me a "zealot."
/etc/fstab, change all hda's to hde's, chroot to that partition, run lilo, and reboot. This would be a nightmare for someone that is not familiar with the details of linux.
However, I think there are some things that are still not "there yet" with linux. Here is something that happenned to me yesterday. I added a new disk on my dell optiplex, moved the primary IDE cable to secondary (long set of wrong experimentation to get the bios to recognize the disk). The windows (xp) side booted off fine and said new devices were added, blah blah...
The linux partition made me go crazy. It decided that the original hda is now hde (the disk was a SATA disk, so the ide cabling change shouldn't have messed the configuration badly). Anyway, the system "paniced" and the only way to get it back was to use a linux boot disk, run rescue, mount the partitions, edit
It is not just a question of "are windows users ready". It is a question of, "do things fail gracefully"? Or, "do simple things get reconfigured automatically in a decent manner?"
Same thing with CD/DVD burning. The options are a bit un-intuitive, and I couldn't get a DVD burned on linux to mount on any other system (though it is an ISO9660 -- may be a problem with the options I provided, but as a person that dragged a bunch of files and burned onto the DVD, I would expect that the program defaults are going to be decent).
Anyway, the system I have is Mandrake 9.2, and 10.0 beta. DVD issues were with 9.2 version.
S
"After users have learned to use a bunch of different desktops, which one do they find easiest to use, and most useful?" This is a fair questions, and the answer actually matters. I use Windows, OS X, and Linux (Gnome usually) on a daily basis and I think Linux wins this one.
I think, while this may be the case, it's actually the applications we should look on. To me, a desktop on you computer is like the physical desktop at work: Sure, some come with nice drawers and others com with tables that can be lifted electrically, rather than by cranking. But it's the tools you use for work that matter, not how neatly they are sorted.
To me, any improvement on Gimp, OpenOffice, (etc) is more important than some new feature in KDE or Gnome. Because the desktop is just a way to get to the applications I do my work in.
Excellence: Moderate (mostly affected by comments on your karma)
I think the (valid, somewhat) point he makes is that Linux as such is a very viable desktop OS. However, most people don't want a desktop OS, they want to use what they know - MS Windows. People are trained to use Windows, and other desktops, while good alternatives, are still different.
I wish reviewers would choose a nice theme before making screenshots. Antialiased fonts have been available for at least a couple of years! I know, I know, this review is for showing off the functionality, not the looks, but newbies looking at it might get the wrong idea... Its definitely difficult for new users to grasp the level of configurability of the UI. My LUG did a "linux demo day" a while back, and one of the questions a visitor asked me was "all these desktops seem look different. what does linux look like by default"? I didn't have much luck telling him there wasn't one, and that it was distro and even version specific. So again, it would be nice if reviewers paid attention to these little things.
Key points being...
Until those things become standard across all distros, Linux taking over the desktop will be a sad joke.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
Do you also think that the mouse is a lazy's mans crutch?
My personal opinion about keyboard and mouse is that they are arcane ways to communicate with. I know quite a few people for which these HID devices are either physical (slightly) unusable, or plain difficult to grasp (talking about the mouse here).
Where have you been? The KDE developers have been doing a YEAR of usabillity studies and have activley cleaned up the menus for good defaults. See the kde usabillity mailing lists and see that they have cared, but they can't satisfy everyone.You can send your complaints to the KDE developers. Or, you can click Settings, Configure toolbars and configure things to your liking.
AND REMEMBER! Microsoft is so big because of the monopoly! My brother has difficulty reading, yet he figured KDE out before windows because of the easy to under stand colorful icons that KDE uses.
GNOME 2.6, which you OBVIOUSLY haven't used has a lot of device management intergration. KDE as well with the Kinfocenter program.
Either get informarmed or modded troll!
Better documentation can fix that learning curve better than ignoring the docs and adding new features as fast as possible, IMO. As soon as a new learner has to go hunt something down on the net to fix some problem or to help them get to speed in using whatever app is bothering them, it starts to blow chunks big time for them. If the built in help system was way more extensive and written in non geek and used very little arcane acronyms, it would help. And the format needs to be such it's easily transferred to dead tree copies for reference.
I'd like to see an (obvious to newbies) automatic update for documentation for the successful bug fixes and patches, click a button, all the latest fixes in clear precise language get updated to the on machine data base. A fix won't work if even one step is non clear, and can actually make it worse if the newbie tries to implement the fix. Don't leave new adopters hanging is the message I am saying. And it needs to be realised that traditional man pages aren't enough, too cryptic for new learners mostly, they were designed for experienced sys admins and developers, and are swell for that purpose, but for other people - the other 99.999% of the people out there- they create a big "WTF does this mean?" in their minds.
KDE needs to stop calling non-KDE apps "legacy" applications. This word used to be an euphemism for "old" (thus, "worse") and due to overuse, the word itself has become derogatory.
To this day I have not seen a KDE editor that is better than GVim.
The word "legacy" embeds some negative attitudes you don't really want to associate yourself with - so grow up - just call them what they really are: "non-KDE" applications.
Looking at those KDE screenshots reminds me a lot of this old cartoon.
Showing off pictures like this or this just shows that people don't quite get it -- it like they just managed to reinvent Windows 95 plus a couple extra features.
Meanwhile the modern Windows user is used to looking at stuff like this. Totally different user experience to what you see on 'last generation' desktops. (Of course, all the Windows users on slashdot turn off this fluff, but after watching a totally new user play around with XP a bit, you realize that "task-oriented" features are actually helpful.)
I'm not saying that KDE isn't a good "power user" desktop, but the proprietary folks keep raising the bar, and having a "Start Menu" isn't enough to cut it anymore.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
I think you're right, improvements to OpenOffice have a much more powerful ability to bring users to the platform. Getting some big accounting software makers to create a linux version would also help a lot. Right now the average user has no reason to switch to Linux because the software they know runs on Windows.
So Linux needs two approaches to successfully gain steam on the desktop. The first approach being a continued evolution for existing desktop products. I'm sorry to say but the Gimp still can't compared with Photoshop. Then the second approach, I still can't get Avid for Linux, or DreamweaverWhen you can install an application with out spending hours or days tracking down various RPMs, wrestling with dependencies and conflicts, or having to update gtk2.0+-0.2.2.1 or some other "obscure" thing, then it'll be ready. It's fine for people who like to do this kind of thing, but all people in the "real world" want is to be able to install an application and have it work correctly the first time. When you can download a file and install it in one click... then linux will be ready for the average user's desktop. All the rest of this stuff is just eye candy. Pretty, but not what's really needed.
Insert witty
Huh? What are you talking about?
> 1. Start gedit.
> 2. Type in something. Select all and click Copy.
> 3. Start kedit.
> 4. Click Paste. It works.
Ok, that works, but what about:
1. Start gnumeric
2. Type in something. Create a chart. Select the chart and click Copy.
3. Start OOo Writer.
4. Click Paste. It works *not*!
Copy and paste of "Text" is trivial. But there is more to copy and paste than unformatted "Text".
Let's face reality.
I suppose I'll be modded down for this, but I have karma to burn.
... but guys, take a look at MacOS X to see how it should really be done.
There's something about those screenshots - maybe it's the font, or perhaps it's that gloomy gus gray look that should have gone out the door with Windows 2000 - that practically screams "amateurish"!
I'm not saying that the KDE folks haven't done a pretty cool job on the guts, and I'm not saying that a lot of hard work hasn't gone into what I saw in the screen shots
Yes, I know you can't copy MacOS X, but you might think about using colours that strike a nice balance between Gloomy Gus of Windows 2000 and the Clippy-style forced cheer of XP.
And get rid of that awful wanna-be Helvetica font. The first time I saw it, I knew it wasn't love. Now that I've sat through several pages of screen shots with it, I darn well know it's not love, and I know why a really good font designer is well worth his paycheck.
You're getting a lot closer than you were a year or two ago, and that's great. But don't say you've surpassed the commercial alternatives until you can beat 'em for looks, because that's what we're staring at 10 hours a day.
It's a lot less trivial than it, well, looks.
D
When will Windows get such full featured scanning/ocr software by default? How about a decent cd burner app?
Er... isn't it true that when Microsoft included a full-featured browser by default, there was a terrible outcry? Isn't it true that when they included a full-featured A/V package, there was a terrible outcry? Ditto the hard drive defrag?
I thought the big thing here was to decry Microsoft's tendency to put good software in the package with its OS!
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
hey, I think that Linux makes a sucky desktop for normal users.
Does your distro detect 5-button mice? Mine doesn't either. Can't choose one during install. I have to manually edit xfree config files to get it working. That's not user-friendly, I think.
Can't copy/paste pictures or even a lot of text, because X's crappy clipboard only does ASCII. That's kinda gay, but I live with it because I know it will someday work, and my OS is free. Normal users don't seem to care about whether things will work 'someday' - they want them right away. I think Windows has had a working clipboard since 1995.
Another thing: automounting sucks. It doesn't even work in Mandrake, WhiteBox or Libranet (my three standards) so I'm guessing it doesn't work right in most other distros either. Show me one that does, and that has five-button support, and that's got a universal clipboard that's not toolkit-dependent, and I'll agree with you that Linux is desktop-ready.
Until then, no dice. It's ready for me, but not for the masses.
Is this man insane?
Not to be advocating any particular OS (I've used Win and Linux for years, Mac recently), but this guy tries to prove the superiority of Gnome by saying that a lack of options equals a good GUI design. This is clearly untrue, a good GUI should only show the NEEDED options, but ommitting half of the functionality only means simplifying the design obstacles for the developers.
As an example, he shows screenshots comparing the 'save as' dialogs, where the Gnome version is missing current directory contents, then says this is a 'cleaner' interface. Sure, but it also misses the main advantage of having a GUI; contextual views. Then he compares the Epiphany settings screen with that of IE. The first has only the 'home page' option, where the latter has some more. But that's a functionality choice, not a usability one! Maybe Epiphany users never need to manage their history and cookies, but these would seem to be the only other periodical actions for browser settings, so their placement in the IE screen would actually be a better choice. Finally, he calls the iTunes screen bloated and shows it, displaying a 30+ songs playlist and with additional equalizer screen (who uses that?) besides Muine, sporting a playlist of... 5 songs!
Wow, well, that's indeed much smaller, congrats. He states that iTunes has an inconsistent GUI and non-standard widgets. Which ones, exactly? Does he mean the play, stop and shuffle widgets? Very non-standard indeed. He muses about Muines ability to scan folders and whack everything in one giant playlist, which iTunes also does, apart from providing 'smart' playlists and album/artist/style browsing. Really, simply ommitting functionality does not equal good GUI design, it's just easier.
[Just a little warning...this post has nothing to do with the author's theme, so it's not on-topic with this sub-thread. It is, however, on topic with the article..it's about a rather cool feature of KDE that the author didn't mention]
Posting my above post csused me to remember another cool feature of KDE that I don't recall seeing in the screenshots: the ability to force the titlebar button order the way you want to regardless of the current window decoration.
For example, I used to use Laptop window decorations. It had an esoteric button order that I grew to really like--IMO, it was very intuitive (for one, the close button was on the far left, not the right). Then, I switched to Glow, which had the common Windows-like button order, which I now dislike. What did I do? I set KDE to force the titlebar buttons into the same order as Laptop.
It worked seamlessly--I'm still using the forced button order, and there's no way to tell it's not the normal button order for my window decoration.
Can I do this in any other GUI, even other Linux GUIs? I don't think so. I like my close button on the far left--in KDE, if it's on the right, I can just shunt it over to the left and it'll act like that's the way it was always supposed to be. Can I do that in Gnome? In Windows? Don't make me laugh.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
> People are trained to use Windows
Most people don't know how to use Windows. And what they do know can be directly applied to most windowmanagers for Linux today. They doubleclick an icon, use a start menu, click on the file menu or click toolbars, they enter data into text fields or use drop down boxes, click the X to close the window, resize windows. It's all the same really.
It's not what people want really though; it's what they *think* they want. They go into a computer store and say, "I need a computer to run MSWord or MSExcel." Instead, they should say, "I need to do wordprocessing or spreadsheets." Linux can accomplish these tasks quite admirably.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
I've no idea why he has AA turned off (ok, some people don't like it in the 9-14pt range, but you've gotta be insane not to use at the higher pts), and kde supports any fonts that X does, i.e. TTF for example. Personally, I use the microsoft fonts (verdana etc) off my doze games rig, but the free bitstream vera ones are also very nice.
Combine that with the ugly colours, scheme and windeco, it looks like something from mid 90's.
If you want a good example of some kde styles, you've got plastik (included by default in 3.2), style and windeco
baghira, a mac clone
knifty, new, my current favourite
and of course, luna if you just luuurve the windows look.
Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
Well if you use a better theme (the screenshot shows the default theme for KDE) it wont look like a cheap copy of Windows 98. If you enable anti-aliasing the fonts wont look like crap either ;). http://kde.org/screenshots/kde320shots.php
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares