Slashdot Mirror


KDE 4 Promises Large Changes

HatofPig writes "As the dust settles from aKademy 2005, the annual KDE conference, it's a good time to take a look at what the KDE developers are working on. Though KDE 3.5 isn't even out yet, developers are already working on KDE 4. Plenty of work has already gone into porting existing code to Qt4, the GUI toolkit upon which KDE is based, and KDE developers are working on projects that could radically change how the world's most popular free desktop looks and works."

401 comments

  1. Stability, ease of use and speed by gilesjuk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These need to be the main focus of KDE now. There's tons of features but it needs to be faster and more rock solid.

    It's a nuisance when Windows Explorer on an average Athlon is slightly more responsive than Linux and KDE on an AMD64 x2. Also Konqueror struggles with some pages, rendering them really slowly.

    1. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Ganniterix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think that it is a major killer for KDE to be slightly less responsive. I think if linux wants to be taken more seriously by non-geek people, it has to drastically imporve the artwork in the GUI. Even the hard-core developers and internet geeks, as soon as screen shots are out... they hammer down servers to look out for the eye candy. A generic user does not even notice the slightly slower response time, but he will notice if Windows Vista looks better than KDE 4. So ... my two c.. I think KDE is taking a very good direction. Better art-work, means better eye-candy, and more attracting generic users. (I am making an enormous assumption that a generic user will still be able to run popular household applications on the Linux box ...)

    2. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by FudRucker · · Score: 3, Informative

      i agree, Konquerer makes for a great file manager, but as a web browser it needs work, i think i will stick with Firefox or Opera for web browsers...

      there is a project called SimleKDE i am going to keep an eye on- http://www.simplekde.org/ i hope SimpleKDE makes a good fork (little brother) of KDE...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    3. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Nasarius · · Score: 4, Informative
      It's a nuisance when Windows Explorer on an average Athlon is slightly more responsive than Linux and KDE

      Interesting. I've found the opposite to be true, especially with the Start/K menu. If you want to speed up Konqueror's file browsing features, turn off stuff like document previews.

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
    4. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should check your linux or try a different distribution, for example I don't like Suse because it is much slower than for example SimpleMEPIS.

      KDE 3.4.2 on my Athlon XP 1800 feels faster than Windows XP on my P4 3,2 Mhz HT....

    5. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by m50d · · Score: 3, Informative
      I have an 800mhz duron and KDE on it is faster than any windows I've ever seen (including the same system). It's got a lot of ram though, that might be the difference.

      As for web page rendering, if you look at the benchmarks konqueror is the fastest Free browser, beating all the gecko-based ones hands down. Where it does get slow is running javascript, that needs to be improved.

      --
      I am trolling
    6. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by carl0ski · · Score: 1

      Well considering Athlon X2 is bleeding edge , and you probably have an older distro with an older kernel which doesnt have support for you System (causing it to emulate things such as IDE Sata which makes any computer extremely slow.

      Also in many cases a new kernel or even a recompile may be needed to enable the full potential of dual cores.

      I had the same problem with Windows XP It did support my SIS180 Sata controller so my maxtor 16m cache hdd was transfering slower than a cd could.

      Konqueror isn't a dedicated web browser so it's expected to be slower at web pages.

      I found KDE 3.4.1 extremely fast on my Athlon XP 1.4gz (1700+) with 512m ram , however my duron 1.0ghz with 512m ram crawls along.

      but that should be expected duron has a much smaller cache.

    7. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by molarmass192 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a nuisance when Windows Explorer on an average Athlon is slightly more responsive than Linux and KDE on an AMD64 x2.

      Let's be honest here, you're really comparing apples to oranges when you compare completely different hardware like that. KDE and Win overall performance *as a desktop on the same hardware* is similar. KDE certainly isn't perfect, particularly it's task bar, but I'd be hard pressed to say Windows is so much better. On a side note, for a desktop, I think dual CPU boxes simply aren't worth the fractional performance gain they offer vs. their added cost. However, from a geek-cred standpoint, they do offer bragging rights that single unit systems don't.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    8. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by ciroknight · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's got a lot of ram though, that might be the difference.

      That's the entire difference. Most modern operating systems (and I'll exclude OS X here) don't rely heavily on the processor to do work, and thus, aren't optimised for one platform, and just use the processor as they see fit. As most DEs don't do work that's that processor intense, it's not a problem (although, I will have to admit that there is currently a bug/feature/something wrong with Nautilus that causes older computers to have a heart attack when viewing media folders; either something is wrong with the VFS not caching thumbnails, or Nautilus is improperly threaded to deal with the issue).

      To the point, I have a Pentium Pro machine at home that I have loaded with 256 megs of EDO. The desktop is every bit as responsive and quick on it, as it is my Pentium II 450 here at work with 256MB of SDRAM, (of course, except for the media bug *shakes fist at GNOME developers*), but feels absolutely sluggish compared to my Pentium 4 (2.8) in my kitchen at home with 2GBs of DDR (of course, these are just my desktop machines, all running GNOME).

      As for the browser, Konq is excellent, and as testimate Apple uses much of the code in WebCore (horray gpl). But it also shows how adamant KDE developers are to do things their own way, and not make consessions to anyone, so there are always drawbacks to every situation (open source would benefit a lot if the desktop environments ratified Firefox as their official browser, simply because it would simplify the amount of knowledge a user has to have to use Linux. Not that there's anything wrong with Konq; it's great, it's just severely outnumbered).

      It's the little things about attitude and situational awareness that really keeps the Linux community at a constant holy war with itself, and IMO it's the reason they don't innovate and simply copy their role models (see GNOME and OS X, KDE and Windows). While I love choice, the problem is that someone has to choose, and the uninformed is as clueless as most people would be going to shop for a car (even though this is a bad analogy; cars at least have a standard interface, and the largest choice is based on the look, power and features, verses how easy it is to use).

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    9. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by sathia · · Score: 1

      ...anyway, i bought ram to use it. never had a swap from Kde

      --
      one bug, one crash
    10. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by nutshell42 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Also Konqueror struggles with some pages, rendering them really slowly.

      echo "KDE_NO_IPV6=true" >> /etc/environment

      But I think they did something about it anyway; I've recently installed SuSE again and at first forgot to set the variable but I've yet to find a page with the painfully slow rendering that was caused by the ipv6 lookup lags in earlier versions.

      Also SuSE (well their performance enhanced version; get it here) has the fastest KDE I've ever seen.

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    11. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by praseodym · · Score: 1

      AMD64 X2 is dual core, not dual CPU.

    12. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What kind of crappy KDE releases are you guys using? KDE has been consistently faster for me on both my current system, AthlonXP 1800 with 1GB, and my last system, Athlon 1400 (thunderbird) with 512MB. And that is both in actual operation and in perceptable response time.

      And I'm not exactly sure how more "eye-candy" is going to attract anyone, since windows is already the ugliest desktop around. I think being pre-installed on 99% of hardware wouldn't hurt the chances of people using Linux. But until it is they're just going to go "I won't want Linux, I just want something that's easy to use for email and web and ebay." Which Linux is already far better for than windows since you don't need to know ANYTHING about it do to those things (if the system is pre-installed) and it'll definitely run a lot smoother, and at least for the time being more securely.

    13. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Elm+Tree · · Score: 1

      Ditto for me. I'm running KDE on a Pentium 3 866MHz and it runs so smoothly I don't see the need to upgrade. In fact, I've had an athlon 1.8GHz chip and board sitting in a closet for over a year now and there just hasn't been a compelling reason to switch.

    14. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by IdleTime · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Interesting.

      I use KDE but not Konquerer, but I would be very interested in hearing what the background for your bombastic statement is? What work exactly is needed?

      I'm sick and tired of people who throw out unsubstantiated claims like this without a single example to back it up. Most of the time I feel these claims are made by anti-KDE people since such a claim without further information only has one purpose, to make KDE look bad. If you have one or more examples of what work is needed, I expect that you have either:

      a) Created bugs or enhancement report on the issue or at least checked that it is in the pipeline.
      b) Used any other means to make sure that the right developers knows about the flaws you claim.

      If not, then I understand that you are just trying to be a troll.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    15. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Otter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Let's be honest here, you're really comparing apples to oranges when you compare completely different hardware like that. KDE and Win overall performance *as a desktop on the same hardware* is similar.

      Huh? His point (its validity aside) is that Windows is faster on slow hardware than Linux/KDE is on faster hardware! It's not apples and oranges, it's a fortiori.

    16. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by eille-la · · Score: 1

      I think the same as you, but I stopped posting on slashdot about how a piece of software should be the default one. It would be ideal.
      When a software is developed since a long time, and the involved guys continue to make it evolve because its base design is not bad, they are not going to let the code down to go on something else. I would not say thats a holy war, just that if you get very involved in a project, it is tough to scrap it, and even more when you did it mostly in your spare time just because you loved to work on it.

      At the moment I rather try to encourage people to use and promote free and open standards. Who care if you use one or another application, if you can very easily make them understand the same format? The standard is a big part of the software itself and efforts must be made to improve the free desktop one.

      When I switched my desktop to linux, I dreamed that KDE and Gnome efforts would merge. For the very reason I wrote above, I see it will not happen. Now I think it is really important to make every software designed for these both desktop environment being fully compatible with a common platform of standards.

      In a perfect free desktop world, one codebase would exists for all your needs. Everything the user could see and touch would be scripted/scriptable. Free softwares allows ideas to be shared and modified, I agree then that no one needs to develop more than a unique app for a precise goal. If the app UI is not what you needed, edit it. People say that choice is good? Don't waste your time coding a new app from scratch! All the possible choices should be built-in the app, letting the user modify the default script. Just make it as modular as possible, and GPL it.

      What have the most successful and well known softwares that emerged from the F/OSS community in common? They are all deeply modularized. To give some examples: Linux(the kernel), GCC, apache, mozilla firefox.
      (Here is a informative paper I found when googling to verify I did not just wrote absurd things)
      http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/narduzzorossi.pdf

      At the moment I see KDE being the nearest from those ideas. But I don't see much of inter-desktop compatibility efforts.

      Sorry for the bad english and some half-explained ideas

      Pierre

    17. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I've found the opposite to be true, especially with the Start/K menu.

      Your Start menu isn't responsive? I didn't even realise that the responsiveness was under discussion on a somewhat modern system. I'm running an "1800+", and it's just instant, doesn't get more responsive than that. Programs submenu isn't quite instant, but very close.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    18. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by pembo13 · · Score: 1

      You must have very interesting hardware to achieve those results.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    19. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by tzanger · · Score: 1

      I agree; I can't believe how bad the whole audio player "subsystem" of KDE is, and I've been using KDE since the early 3.x stages. noatun seems to be MIA. juk is nice but can't read SMB shares directly (I have to mount the fs or it tries to copy every song locally to play). amarok seems to work with SMB shares (with gstreamer) but it has odd little glitches. kaffeine can kind of do it too... I mean christ... PICK ONE... each has features I like, why can't the features be made into plugins for ONE xmms or winamp-like player?

      web/file browsing seems rock-solid. Konqueror kicks serious ass. It'd be amazing if it could take firefox plugins. The ioslaves model is pure heaven, IMO. IM seems to work well, office stuff (I use openoffice but koffice is using the same formats now), email/PIM is handled (Kontact rocks)... why such a fucking mess with the media players?

    20. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      it is all a matter of personal preference in web browsers, like i said before IMHO konquerer is a great file manager but i dont like it as a web browser - it has lots of features -- too many features maybe, what i like about firefox is it seems to have the right features for customizing to my personal taste...

      you use konqueror as your main web browser? fine, use it and be happy :^P

      if it was not for other family members & friends wanting to use my computer i would not even have KDE installed and only use fvwm or an older version of xfce as a WM...

      _HappyTrails:)

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    21. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by shiftless · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What an ass. I happen to have used Konqueror extensively, and for a while switched to it exclusively, but ended up switching back to Firefox when I was tired of some pages not rendering correctly, etc. No, I haven't filed any bug reports or enhancement reports or even at least checked that it's in the pipeline, or used any other means to inform the developers about a damn thing, because [b]I've got better shit to do and it's not my God damn job.[/b] My computer is a tool to get work done. I don't run Linux because I want to help others beta test software, I run Linux because it's fast, powerful, and free. I'm sorry that you feel that this makes me a troll. I guess I'm just a lesser human being than you. Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to go do some engineering homework.

    22. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Zrith · · Score: 1

      No, I haven't filed any bug reports or enhancement reports or even at least checked that it's in the pipeline, or used any other means to inform the developers about a damn thing, because [b]I've got better shit to do and it's not my God damn job.[/b]

      No, what makes you a troll (or troll-like) is that you seem to think that the developers should be able to fix something they may not know about. Since you seem to be a student, let me put it this way: expecting developers to fix bugs if people don't report them is akin to your professor or teaching assistants giving you a low grade on a project then refusing to tell you what you did wrong, but expecting you to fix everything.
      The key to making things work better is taking five minutes to figure out what went wrong and tell the person who can fix it about the problem. I'm not saying you don't have a right to complain if you don't do this, however, you complaints are going to look a lot less valid if you refuse to even try to explain them.

    23. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by michrech · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't run Gentoo. :)

      --
      telnet://sinep.gotdns.com -- LORD, TW2002, and Usurper registered!

      --
      bork bork bork!
    24. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Punboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to fear. We're going to implement a system where KDE detects what eye-candy can be shown without severely impacting performance. We're not ignoring speed, or stability... we're aiming to incorporate all of these.

      Also, our "eye-candy"'s main point is to make it easier to use. All our eye-candy has a function, its not just for show.

      --
      If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
    25. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by shiftless · · Score: 1

      The developers have access to the Internet, don't they? This isn't one single guy developing a little browser, this is KONQUEROR. There are tons of developers and tons of testers. Surely at least a few of them use this browser on a regular basis and can see the huge rendering flaws just like anyone else can. And no, I can't think of any specific examples because it's been several months since I quit using Konqueror. Don't blame me because I didn't report these huge, obvious flaws. Blame the developers for not testing their software enough. I'm sure the folks behind Konqueror are constantly improving their browser, and that's good for them, but I'll stick with Firefox -- a browser that already works well.

    26. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to go do some engineering homework.
      OMFG YOU'RE SOOO COOL!

    27. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Punboy · · Score: 1

      -blinks at you- Um, well so far I have yet to see us copy Gnome... or OS X. KDE-Themes does offer some "copies" of their respective UI's, but that isn't KDE, thats KDE's users. You see the same thing for Windows XP at Windows XP theme sites. I even saw a Windows XP theme based on Keramik from KDE!

      Also, where have we copied windows? Do you mean we've copied something that in reality is just good common sense? If so, then obviously we would 'copy' this, and every good DE out there would want to too.

      If I'm mistaken and we have copied things directly, that are not just good common sense, please tell me. And provide examples.

      --
      If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
    28. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by m50d · · Score: 1
      But it also shows how adamant KDE developers are to do things their own way, and not make consessions to anyone, so there are always drawbacks to every situation (open source would benefit a lot if the desktop environments ratified Firefox as their official browser, simply because it would simplify the amount of knowledge a user has to have to use Linux. Not that there's anything wrong with Konq; it's great, it's just severely outnumbered).

      Firefox just wouldn't fit in, it looks horrible under KDE. I suppose an alternative gecko wrapper like epiphany/galeon would do, but it might hurt kde's platform-independence.

      --
      I am trolling
    29. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by legirons · · Score: 1

      "I don't think that it is a major killer for KDE to be slightly less responsive."

      Except that KDE isn't just slightly less responsive.

      It's an order of magnitude less responsive. As in, 30 seconds to load KDE compared to 1.5 seconds to load WindowMaker

      It's responsive as in, you can start KMail and xchat loading at the same time, and be some way into a conversation in xchat before kmail even displays its window

      I've had programs like KMail pause for 10-20 seconds just after moving one or two emails from one folder to another. When editing a mail filters with 8 rules, it can take 10 seconds just to redraw the list. And it's basically just KDE that's so slow; everything else runs normally.

      So yeah, while I agree with you that while artwork can be nice (K3B is probably the best example of that), a bit more speed would be most welcome. After all, people will have plenty of spare time to notice/critisize the graphics while they're waiting for Konqueror to load...

    30. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      And for those of us who don't want eye candy? I don't want animations, 3d drawings, backgrounds, shadows, or anything else. I want a plain desktop with icons and a taskbar. Thats pretty much it. Even when I play video games, the first thing I do is turn off all the graphics options to minimal. If the eye candy isn't configurable to be entirely off, KDE will chase me to windowmaker or something similar.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    31. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Punboy · · Score: 1

      We plan on it being possible to turn off all eye-candy features. Don't worry, you'll still have your plain-jane desktop. But, we hope that once we're finished you won't want to turn off the eye-candy.

      --
      If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
    32. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      internet geeks, as soon as screen shots are out... they hammer down servers to look out for the eye candy.

      I used Linux exclusively as my desktop OS at work for about 2 years. Then I had to do some MS stuff (C# accessing Active Directory and MS SQL Server) which took a couple of weeks in all, so I was mostly running XP Pro.

      I went back to Linux and it just seemed so flat and dull in comparison. What really did it for me in the end was the lack of a drop shadow on the mouse cursor. A tiny, stupid little thing, but it was the final straw. I rebooted to Windows and haven't used Linux at work since. My home install of Linux was wiped during my next upgrade. I installed a couple of different distros on a spare disk I had a while later, but never really used it and so ditched it again.

      I've not used Linux (as a desktop OS) for a good couple of years now; before that, I'd been using it at least in a dual-boot config for about 4 years.

      Call me shallow, but eye candy matters to me. If I'm going to spend so much of my time every day staring at a monitor, I had better like what I see on it.

    33. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by JohnFluxx · · Score: 2, Informative

      KDE 4 will greatly simplify this. Basically we will drop artsd (which nobody ever liked) and instead have a simple API that apps will use. The API will use gstreamer underneath (you can change this if you want).
      Apps which require more complex use from a multimedia engine will have to support gstreamer directly.

    34. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by tyrione · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've always been able to disable the eye-candy and use a minimalist theme.

      If you aesthetically don't find any of those themes appealing them visit kde-look.org and make your own.

    35. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Jambon · · Score: 1
      Call me shallow, but eye candy matters to me.

      Which is why I've been pulling for Enlightenment all this time. Sure they don't have the following of KDE, but what they've done so far is pretty damn amazing.

    36. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Arandir · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I did a comparison once a couple of years ago. On a dual-boot system at work I timed booting from poweroff to a finished Slashdot render in a browser. FreeBSD+KDE+Konqueror was ten to fifteen seconds quicker than WindowsXP+IExplorer.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    37. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by arose · · Score: 1
      What really did it for me in the end was the lack of a drop shadow on the mouse cursor.
      Tiny thing indeed, can be had by changing the X cursor theme...
      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    38. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by legirons · · Score: 1

      I use KDE but not Konquerer, but I would be very interested in hearing what the background for your bombastic statement is? What work exactly is needed?

      The obvious difference between KDE and more popular web-browsers is the level of filtering required to reduce some WWW pages to tolerable levels. For example, in Firefox, people turn off animated images, block images by site name, regular expression, or meta-info, block flash with some optional overrides, block IFRAMES, turn off various javascript elements, use the "No page style" to read pages with badly-designed CSS, enforce a minimum font size, have a global CSS file to turn off blinking text, change certain bits of HTML, they add extensions to download websites, do intelligent things with image galleries, lists of downloads, obscured links, etc.

      Basically, Konqueror is great for websites that you trust, but the rest of the tools have been developed for Firefox, and KDE will eventually integrate some of the best ones.

      I'm very impressed with Konqueror in general though. Being able to rip a CD just by dragging files from the audiocd:/ folder, using FTP and SSH connections as if they were local files, being able to rotate images from the right-click menu and all the rest of the features (most of the good bits seem to come from the ioslaves paradigm or whatever it's called)

    39. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by woobieman29 · · Score: 1
      30 seconds to open KDE? You either have: A) A broken install or...B) a 386.

      KDE 3.4 takes a couple of seconds to start for me, the apps start damn near instantaneously.

      --
      \/\/oobie
    40. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by joeljkp · · Score: 1

      Or if you're using an nVIDIA card, cursor drop-shadows are only an xorg.conf config switch away.

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
    41. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      Well I have used konqueror as my main browser for about 3 years now and I have not run into almost any major rendering flaws when viewing webpages in about a year or two. I actually write some fairly complex web based apps and I don't run into problems with that either. I rarely run into any problems rendering pages with gecko,khtml or opera based browers except ones that use IE only extensions.

      However I probably don't go to the same places on the net as you do and I don't see these "massive" problems that you run into. The problems I have found I report but they where fairly advanced css stuff that gecko and opera have also had wrong.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    42. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by debest · · Score: 1

      KDE and Win overall performance *as a desktop on the same hardware* is similar.

      Sorry, but I don't find that to be the case on my (admitted slowish) hardware. I have dual boots of XP and Kubuntu 5.04 on both my machines (1 GHz Athlon & 450 MHz K6-2, both with 512MB SDRAM), and XP is far faster on both machines in every way imaginable. I've done all the tweaks I can think of, and there's just no comparison, especially on the old K6-2.

      Maybe KDE works faster on a loaded-up new machine. I hope it does. It also doesn't keep me from using Linux as my primary OS. I'm just letting you know that your statement is demonstratably incorrect on at least two computers that I know of.

      --
      Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
    43. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by HeroreV · · Score: 1

      Konqueror can already use the Gecko layout engine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konqueror#Web_browser

    44. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may seem odd to you, but I think KDE with Keramik widgets and borders looks better then anyother GUI I have seen in a long time. Windows is ugly, and has too few GUI options.

      It might help that I like to use the command line as much as possible.

    45. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Enahs · · Score: 1

      Indeed. And KDE-Look.org even has a section devoted just to X11 mouse themes. Ook.

      --
      Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
    46. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 1

      Wow - I absolutely disagree with you. "I don't think that it is a major killer for KDE to be slightly less responsive". Its poor responsiveness is the top reason I won't use it now, and the overeleborate, hot-potch desktop, icon and menu systems are a very poor compensation.

      Enlightenment won the screenshot wars ten years ago and it counted for nothing. It seems that all OSs are (and have for some time been) heading in the direction of glossy, expensive UI while neglecting responsiveness and focussing on providing function. This is a bad direction to be headed. Responsiveness is important, and I struggle to identify anything in favour of eye-candy. I find glossy UI distracting. Further, it's never quite to my taste - and that's probably because eye-candy is - by definition - non-functional. I found the ideal UI to be that of the BeOS in versions 4 through to 5. It was really simple, clean and just damn fast. Even descendents of that have abandoned that advantage now for a less, responsive choice of ugly themes and reduced functionality (eg: can no longer move the bar around at the top of frames).

      Generally, Windows has done quite well. Windows XP is quite responsive, and they are good on other things as well. For example - making it easier to get around the system with only hotkeys (although you have to turn off that stupid new menu theme and go back to classic start menu - not sure what drugs the marketing department were on when they switched that classic menu out for that awful new thing). I wish it was as easy and quick to reliably launch applications via hotkey from my Apple or from gnome as it is from Windows (and as it has been since Win98 and IE4 upgrade for NT when the start+r combination were introduced).

      I think we will come to look back at this time in user interfaces much as we look back at 1970s fasion now. Remember kids - brown suits are *not cool*.

      --


      Believe with me, my saplings.
    47. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      If you don't want the eyecandy, why are you using KDE anyway? Fluxbox, Enlightenment, WindowMaker, etc. are much faster and more functional (at least IMO...I love Fluxbox with a scroll wheel...try it and see ;)).

    48. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by m50d · · Score: 1

      It was alpha code the last I looked, and certainly isn't in the 3.4 release or (AFAIK) the 3.5 changelog.

      --
      I am trolling
    49. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by legirons · · Score: 1

      "30 seconds to open KDE? You either have: A) A broken install or...B) a 386."

      (a) KUbuntu standard installation
      (b) PentiumIII 700MHz

      Or to put it another way, KDE has a splash screen - someone must have decided that it was slow enough to need one....

    50. Re:Stability, ease of use and speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and then Apple isn't using KHTML for their webbrowser, nor is KHTML the first rendering engine who renders the ACID2 test correctly....

  2. I hope its not bloated by geo_2677 · · Score: 0

    I would really love(not that i don't now) a KDE thats lightweight and as functional. Not the memory hog that it is now..

    1. Re:I hope its not bloated by Pienjo · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the past, I've successfully made myself a "KDE lite" by getting rid of the biggest resource hog: the desktop and the window manager. OpenBox (At least: version 2, I assume version 3 is just the same) honours the same windowmanager hints, and can (could?) offer a system tray as well.

      In a nutshell:

      * Make a .xinitrc (or an .xsession, I usually have a symlink from the first to the second), which starts openbox at the end
      * Start docker (The OpenBox system tray replacement), kicker, klipper, and whatever other kde components you want to launch.

      Tadaa. Done. KDE-lite.

    2. Re:I hope its not bloated by zootm · · Score: 3, Informative

      Surely you're looking for XFCE? I'm not convinced that making the software more "lightweight" is a good argument, that's clearly not what they're aiming for. Although if there's actual structural problems, or bugs, causing the OTT memory usage, yes, those should be dealt with.

    3. Re:I hope its not bloated by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      Surely you've realized that some people don't like the GTK toolkit?

      I'm one of them when it comes to coding for it, but I really like the look of it, and use GNOME on my own desktop (I just deal with the painful slowness of it). But there exists a large community of people who like the Qt toolkit, but don't like Qt apps and KDE because they tend to over-inflate every feature they have available to the point that it makes Windows look featureless.

      The fact is, there really isn't a catch all solution for what people want, and that's why KDE, GNOME, XFCE, etc. exist in the first place. It would be nice if the community could get together, iron out some standards on how some future version of GNOME and Qts APIs would drive the same engine, look the same, and feel the same to the user, thus letting them have the ultimate choice of what they want to program with, but people will even find problems with this approach, and the people from both sides are so locked in this Holy Desktop War that I'd personally be willing to bet Israel and Palestine will work out their differences first.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    4. Re:I hope its not bloated by MROD · · Score: 1, Interesting

      KDE Version 1 was nice, lean, clean and fast. It worked wonderfully on old kit such as Sun SPARCstation 2s etc.

      KDE version 2 started eating memory and resources because it added a whole lot of underlying engineering, most of which a technical user who doesn't use it as just a desktop to manage xterms and other X programs doesn't use. You needed at least a Sun Ultra 1 with 256MB of RAM for it to be useful.

      KDE version 3 increased the overhead quite a bit and increased the disk usage a lot. Unless you had a 440MHz Sun Ultra 10 with half a gig of RAM it's painful.

      I'm guessing that KDE 4 won't even run on platforms which don't use an X server without the new Xorg server extensions and a gigahertz processor or two.

      You may ask yourself why I'm not talking about the power of PC's running Linux as a comparison against which to judge the different versions.. well, firstly, KDE is supposed to be fully cross (unix-like) platform. Secondly, we're a mostly Sun shop for the research side of things here, with Linux increasing in number, but because of the extended nature of machine replacement in academia I still have to support and run 8-10 year old machines. To me, being able to run a reasonably modern desktop for my users is important. KDE used to be the ideal replacement for the really increadibly crummy CDE which comes with Solaris.. it's getting harder and harder to keep it running on the old hardware.

      --

      Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
    5. Re:I hope its not bloated by zootm · · Score: 1

      I agree. I use GNOME on my Linux machines, and whenever I have to use a KDE-based app I feel as though I'm somehow missing out, like when I'd run GTK-based apps on my KDE (on BSD) install in the past. The community is clearly divided, and although this is, as much as anything, an advantage of the OSS way of doing things, the resources have been split up in a fairly weakening way. Nobody wants to introduce "better integration" of the other toolkit because it's both a concession to the "other side", and a very technically-difficult task. It's a pretty strange situation in general.

    6. Re:I hope its not bloated by SonOfSengaya · · Score: 1

      There is a distribution called pocketlinux that contains a "KDE light": http://gnulinux.de/pocketlinux/

      --
      My spirit takes a journey through my mind...
    7. Re:I hope its not bloated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm happily running GNOME 2.12 on my Solaris boxes here (SunBlade 1500 as my main box, but I also use Ultra60's and Ultra5's). The latest GNOME seems to be less of a memory hog than KDE 3.4 that I also tried. And it works better than the slow GNOME 2.6 and 2.8 that I tried before.

      On the Ultra5's, GNOME is much more responsive than KDE. I use Sylpheed instead of the default Evolution as my mail client, but other than that I use most GNOME apps happily.

    8. Re:I hope its not bloated by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      KDE version 3 increased the overhead quite a bit and increased the disk usage a lot. Unless you had a 440MHz Sun Ultra 10 with half a gig of RAM it's painful.

      I guess this is telling us more about the Sparc performance than it is about KDE.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    9. Re:I hope its not bloated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My preference is to use this as my .xsession:

      source /etc/profile
      export KDEWM=fluxbox
      exec startkde

      : things I want disabled (drawing of the desktop) I do from inside of KDE.

  3. Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If there are any KDE devs reading this:

    PLEASE PLEASE OPTIMIZE FOR MEMORY USAGE!

    Its really sad that Windows with all its services and stuff uses 1/2 the RAM of KDE alone.

    --
    LL
    1. Re:Speed and memory consumption by gowen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Amen brother. Gnome people -- that goes for you, too.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    2. Re:Speed and memory consumption by beforewisdom · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is a true story ( I am sad to say ) though many will not want to believe it.

      I met a very attractive woman( hot blond ). As amazing fortune would have it, she was a reader in her spare time, of similar politics, was very witty and loved joking around. As if that could not get any better she was a linux users and attended linux meetup groups.

      She recently switched to windows xp. I was shocked and I asked her about it. She told me that she wanted to use a remote client to work on her work machine from home. She told me that windows xp did it so significantly faster that she dumped linux because she could not stand the wait.

      Then she proved it to me with a demonstration.

      I could not argue with her.

      It is truly sad that windows xp out performs the premier linux desktop.

      I am with every one else. I have most of the features I want.

      I could wait a year for new features if the good folks at the KDE wanted to spend a year working on performance and stability.

      It could become a marketing strength, similar to the firefox people being able to brag about being able to patch holes light years faster than microsoft.

      They can brag about taking a year to optimize their code..."who else will do that? Enjoy a product that was perfected over the course of a year ".

    3. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Nasarius · · Score: 5, Informative

      The slowness of remote access has absolutely nothing to do with "outperforming the premier Linux desktop". Such things work on a much lower level. VNC does suck compared to RDP, but look at NX.

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
    4. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Rapsey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The overall memory usage is not that high. On my system a huge part of the used memory is cache. Even if it shows that my memory is almost full I can easely run a game that takes up atleast half of my RAM without problems.
      I can run alot more applications at the same time on my machine when im in KDE, than I can when im in winxp.

    5. Re:Speed and memory consumption by slashzin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's only fair to compare KDE 4 to Windows Vista when they come out.

      I for one have been folowing the progress of KDE since its 2.0 days and all I can say is they do an amazing job. Yeah, I agree, it always used a lot more memory than the Windows Explorer shell but I bet you would never notice that if you were not with you eyes on the memory gauge. And I can bet you that in the unlikely event some component in KDE crashes, you don't need to restart.

      I run KDE 3.5_beta1 on Gentoo right now and have had no issues with it in 3 days usage. This includes desktop, file manager, instant messaging, mail, address book, calendar etc.

      All I can say: KDE developers, keep up the good work!

    6. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I met a very attractive woman( hot blond )

      You're right, man. We don't believe you.

    7. Re:Speed and memory consumption by JonXP · · Score: 1

      OSS seems to have a really hard time with memory consumption. I don't know if it is poor planning, the (supposed) fact that all the programmers are volunteers, or whatever, but I always have memory problems with Open Source stuff. I really ire of having to wait for the swapping to finish before I can use a open program. On a side note, why is it "sad" that software with millions of dollars of R&D behind it outperforms a community developed piece of software?

    8. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      I am talking about real resource usage, not cache or swap usage or shared RSS.
      Real memory usage and the number of pagefaults made by KDE is extremely high.

      --
      LL
    9. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      I say its sad because I much prefer working in KDE, and I do whenever I am at a beefy machine. Sadly, I am not always at a beefy machine and I would still like to be able to use KDE, but I am forced to suffer very sluggish performance, or use Windows instead.

      --
      LL
    10. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      I do notice it everytime my disk starts spinning and my cursor turns into an hourglass while I wait to launch a program.
      Granted, Kopete may have more features than MSN messenger, but why does it take 12 seconds to start up when MSN messenger under windows takes less than 2?

      This is even worse on my laptop where the disk needs to spin up to use the swap partition.

      --
      LL
    11. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Rapsey · · Score: 1

      extremely high is a relative term. Gnomes memory usage isnt that much better, neither is winxps or macs.

    12. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      Windows does not cause my disks to thrash with swap usage, KDE often does.

      If the KDE developers could just reduce the memory footprint of KDE down to the same level as Windows, I would not need to have Windows installed at all.

      --
      LL
    13. Re:Speed and memory consumption by ciroknight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's only fair to compare KDE 4 to Windows Vista when they come out.

      Wait.. what? In that case what is it only fair to compare GNOME to? Let me try my best to explain something to you; in the computer world, the only thing a version number tells you, is how new the product is (now pay attention to this part) in relation to itself. That's right. KDE 4 means that it's the 4th iteration of KDE. Thus, if you want fair comparisons, you have to go to features.

      Now, since a feature set hasn't been frozen for KDE 4 yet, any comparison is simply "speculation", and thus, it's completely and totally fair to compare KDE 4 to KDE 16 to Aqua circa OS X 10(.0). Of course, these comparisons don't mean jack, because you can only speculate on what's going into it, whereas on the other side of the equation, you have a list of what's there, and what isn't.

      As for the current generation of desktops, comparisons are completely valid there too (imagine that)! Simply take a list of features that both desktops have, and look at both of them, noting what's the same, and what's different. This is what we call "comparison". Thus, if I want to compare or contrast KDE to the look and feel of Windows 95, that's perfectly valid. My conclusions based on that comparison may or may not be correct, and you may or may not like them, but the point remains that the comparison is completely and totally valid.

      The Open Source world needs to be apt to be compared if they refuse to innovate. The reason why so many Apple products are awe inspiring is simply because there is nothing available yet to compare them to, and that's what drives a lot of appeal and dislike of Apple; people have to build their conclusions as they see it, as they use it for the first time, instead of drawing the knowledge from what functionality already exists. (Of course, I'm simply using Apple as an example here, there are a lot of companies out there that are perfect drop in replacements for them, but they're the easiest to think about, and Slashdot readers can probably relate better to a computer company than a speed boat company).

      Now, lastly, the points that you make about KDE can be made about practically any modern desktop environment, that's right, every single point you made (well, perhaps not the Windows Explorer one, but then again..) can be used to describe practically any DE existant right now. I can't tell you the last time I installed a DE that didn't come with a desktop, file manager, instant messaging, mail, address book, calendar etc. But I can tell you the features which exist within those applications, and I can tell which ones are exclusive to which DE/Application.

      Please, comments in praise are great, but you really need to give reason why that praise belongs there, and draw valid conclusions with your arguments, or else you're just talking out of your ass like 98% of slashdotters.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    14. Re:Speed and memory consumption by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      Seconded. My laptop has 512MB RAM and currently KDE (2 Konsoles, Konqueror, KMail, KOrganizer, KPilot), Gaim, & daemons are using 145 MB, with the rest cached. top reveals that my three biggest memory users are Konqueror, KMail, and X, taking up about 25% of my total memory.

      Windows, OTOH, maxes out my memory as soon as it starts up, all the while dumping everything into the paging file.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    15. Re:Speed and memory consumption by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      On how much RAM should it work then? 256MB is the absolute minimium these days, with 512MB being the standard on computers. On my machine, KDE with bunch of apps (Konqueror, Kontact, Konsole at least) takes about 140-170MB of RAM. With 256MB it should work just fine, with 512MB being great.

      Why are people so concerned with KDE's memory-consumption? So what if Windows eats slightly less RAM than KDE does? KDE also does a lot more than Windows does. Even if KDE eats a bit more RAM, it will run comfortably on any decent machine. If you wanted to use KDE with 128MB of RAM, then mem-consumption might become an issue. But since nobody uses 128MB of RAM these days, the point is moot.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    16. Re:Speed and memory consumption by mw · · Score: 1

      Are you sure about this? This is from my machine with 1GB RAM:
      Mem: 1032660k total, 996000k used, 36660k free, 54888k buffers
      Swap: 1959888k total, 280k used, 1959608k free, 648904k cached

      Actually this means that 312 (996-648-36) MB memory are used, this includes:
      * a running Postgresql Server (using 86040576 SHM bytes for Caching)
      * a locally started KDE session
      * another remote KDE session via NX
      * a running Spam-Asssassin Server

      312 - (86+8)MB (for PostgreSQL) - 39MB (for the NX server) - 21MB (Spam-Assassin) makes 158 MB for 2 concurrently running KDE sessions. I did not even subtact things like nscd, cron or such.

      Currently running KDE Applications:
      3 konsole
      2 konqueror
      1 kontact
      1 knode
      1 SuperKaramba

      Compared to the memory of the windows computer I'm currently working on, this is a lot less IMO.

    17. Re:Speed and memory consumption by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      Maybe Messenger gets preloaded in Windows? My KDE starts up in about 5-7 seconds, whereas XP on my company-machine takes about 15-20 seconds to load (by "load", I mean "started up, and ready to he used". Simply displaying the desktop but loading bunch of stuff in the background is not "started up"), so Windows is apparently loading bunch of stuff when it starts up, whereas KDE does not.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    18. Re:Speed and memory consumption by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 1

      That may be you. I'm running amarok and I see two amarokapp processes each one eating ~ 44 MB of RSS. From those, only 23 MB are shared...

      Then I use kopete, 36 MB of RSS and 25 shared.

      Akregator, a app whose objective is manipulating fucikng text and rendering it in a preview via khtml kpart, 28 MB with 18 shared

      KDE eats LOTS of memory man. I'm wasting lots of ram on caches etc. but KDE eats its share...

    19. Re:Speed and memory consumption by slashzin · · Score: 1

      Hey, man, easy on the coffee.

      I suggested comparing it to Vista because i guess they will be out about the same time and therefore can be considered in direct competition.

      Sure you can compare Gnome to Vista as well, but people were arguing that KDE uses twice the memory Windows uses.

      I didn't bring Apple and OSX in because I never had the chance to try it out.

      The enumeration of features in KDE 3.5 beta1 was just to point out that I had been using all that with absolutely no issues during the past 3 days.

    20. Re:Speed and memory consumption by InsaneGeek · · Score: 1

      Well if that's the case, what does that say about Windows using half the ram while still being able to preload those programs?

      Doesn't really matter to me as I run some Java based management software that takes up >500mb of ram to run on either OS, so I'm screwed either way.

    21. Re:Speed and memory consumption by beforewisdom · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

      I think it is already too late, but I will pass this info on to her.

    22. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is a true story ( I am sad to say ) though many will not want to believe it.

      I met a very attractive woman( hot blond ). As amazing fortune would have it...


      You're damn right you should be sad to say. You pick up some hot chick and then play Computer with her. What a geek!
    23. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Miffe · · Score: 1

      The gnome devs are working on it. http://live.gnome.org/MemoryReduction

    24. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      Why can't KDE load things lazily then?
      It seems to work great for Windows.

      I would love to be able to use KDE everywhere, but its simply too bloated for some of my machines, on which I am forced to use Windows or endure very sluggish performance.

      I don't really care why Windows appears fast. People always claim its cheating by pre-loading stuff, but why can't KDE do the same?

      --
      LL
    25. Re:Speed and memory consumption by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Well if that's the case, what does that say about Windows using half the ram while still being able to preload those programs?


      Like I said elsewhere, Windows does less. KDE has a lot more features and functionality than Windows does. And eos Windows REALLY take "half the RAM"? Does Windows really consume just 70MB of RAM? In my case, with KDE running, the mem-consumption is about 150MB. Most of that is KDE and related apps, but not all. Windows should then consume about 60-70MB of RAM, by your acount.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    26. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No need for hacks like that.. X has remote access built in at the protocol level. I never saw the point of VNC on a Unix machine.. it's a Windows thing really.

      On a LAN with X remote you can't tell you're not working on the local machine, it's that good.

    27. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The Gnome devs are working on KDE memory reduction?

    28. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      With Vista needing 1GB minimum I wouldn't worry about memory optimisation to compete with it :)

    29. Re:Speed and memory consumption by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Why can't KDE load things lazily then?


      you can preload Konqueror if you like. But usually preloading just does something that may or may not be used.

      would love to be able to use KDE everywhere, but its simply too bloated for some of my machines


      What "bloat" are you referring to here? "Bloat" is something that is heavier and slower than it needs to be. And looking at the functionality of KDE, I don't see much "bloat" there. And what kind of machines are you using? KDE is somewhat slow on my 300Mhz laptop with 320MB of RAM, but that's due to uber-slow HD, which makes Windows crawl on it as well.

      on which I am forced to use Windows or endure very sluggish performance.


      Well, you CAN use something else besides KDE. How about XFCE for example? And what Windows are you talking about? XP? W2K? W2K is ancient when compared to recent KDE, and XP is pretty old as well. If you compared XP to Win98, I guarantee, that you would notice Win98 to be a lot faster.

      And if you want, you could always cut back on KDE's features and eye-candy to make it faster.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    30. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Fourier · · Score: 1

      No need for hacks like that... on a LAN with X remote you can't tell you're not working on the local machine, it's that good.

      What if you're not on a LAN? High-latency links absolutely kill X performance, due to a large number of round-trips. The NX "hacks" are designed to address this issue (and provide more efficient compression, etc.).

    31. Re:Speed and memory consumption by swillden · · Score: 1

      I never saw the point of VNC on a Unix machine.. it's a Windows thing really. On a LAN with X remote you can't tell you're not working on the local machine, it's that good.

      How about over a slow DSL connection? Or dialup? VNC works well over DSL. Microsoft's RDP actually works reasonably well over dialup. I'm an anti-Microsoft zealot, but I have to admit that their remote desktop stuff works really well, better than VNC and much better than remote X. I have to give this NX stuff a try.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    32. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think some of you are making a mistake. Its not kde that takes up all the ram, is X11 (X.org/Xfree86). The new modularized version of X.org (7.0) which will be released within the next month or two will help cut down cpu/ram usage.

    33. Re:Speed and memory consumption by digidave · · Score: 1

      The problem comes from Windows users who don't understand how to read memory usage on Linux. For example, Evolution is reported as using about 200MB (vmSize), if I recall correctly. Right now Xorg is 416MB! I only have 512MB of RAM yet vmSize is reported as over 1.5GB! Better check my swap usage... hey, no swapping at all (let's see you get Windows to use zero swap no matter how much RAM you have, without disabling swap altogether).

      Most people quote the app size in RAM including shared libraries, so most of my apps include KDE and QT libraries and a few include GTK2 and other Gnome stuff. Not to mention a whole host of other small libraries.

      What you want to do is measure how often and how much your system swaps. If it doesn't swap, you don't have anything to worry about even if you constantly have 4MB free RAM.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    34. Re:Speed and memory consumption by XMyth · · Score: 1

      Personally I haven't noticed that problem with Linux, but I did have a gig of ram so and I'm overly conscious about keeping my memory usage in check...I no longer run Linux so I can't do a real comparison at the moment...

      But, what I find interesting is that Windows will use my pagefile WAY sooner and more frequently than Linux (or FreeBSD for that matter) does. And it's not cause I'm out of physical memory in Windows...From just a cursory glance this would make it seem like Windows is more intelligent about putting infrequently used portions of memory into the pagefile while Linux just uses physical memory until it runs out and then switch to the swap space.

      I'm sure that's a gross oversimplification, but is it even right somewhat I wonder? I honestly don't know. I'm sure there's some kernel tweak to modify that behavior though.

    35. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      Yesm but the way RDP and VNC work is totally different. RDP has so much less information to send over the network because you can only use it on other Windows comps, so all the GUI stuff is available on the local machine. VNC is cross-platform and so doesn't necessarily have the remote GUI on the local machine, all of it has to be sent over the network. Which is slower, but you gain cross-platform ability. I regularly use VNC from Windows to Gnome, Gnome to Gnome, Gnome to Windows, and Windows to Gnome. RDP would only allow one of those scenarios.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    36. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly enough, too, I find that rdesktop for Linux to connect to Windows machines via RDP seems to be at least twice as fast as using a Windows machine to connect to another Windows machine via RDP. The guy(s) who put together rdesktop really did an amazing job of it. Connecting to my Linux box on the other hand has always been slow. I'm going to see what I can get out of NX as well.

    37. Re:Speed and memory consumption by pherthyl · · Score: 1

      Not in my experience. Hold on I wrote this down somewhere..
      Mar 21, 2005 KDE 3.4 Boot into KDE, no apps started 63MB used (with JPG wallpaper)
      (yeah I'm a nerd) But anyway, by your metric Windows fully booted uses 21.5 MB of RAM? I somehow doubt it.

      By the way, above measurements were on Debian unstable.

    38. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      The vm.swappiness sysctl is the closest thing I found.

      --
      LL
    39. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Seli · · Score: 1

      > Its really sad that Windows with all its services and stuff uses 1/2 the RAM of KDE alone.

      Does it? How do you know? Sorry, but this looks exactly like a yet another clueless post from somebody who doesn't even know how to actually measure memory usage on Linux (http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/1445). Your claim lacks some important numbers, Windows version to start with (ok, XP is not exactly a number) or the memory usage numbers themselves.

    40. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your theory about the speed differences of RDP and VNC is interesting, but wrong.

      --> VNC sends the complete pixmap of the screen, pixel by pixel: the complete image, if you want.
      --> RDP sends the screen drawing commands to the client: the instructions how to draw the sceen.

      And because it is done in a clever way, RDP is faster.

      The reason why X11 over the network so such a pain is because the X11 applications send too many roundtrips. An interesting article about this can be found at LinuxJournal.com.

      BTW, NX and FreeNX do also send drawing commands instead of pixmaps -- and they are even faster than RDP. Plus, they do work cross plattform too:

      I regularly use NX and FreeNX from Windows to KDE, from KDE to Windows, from Mac OS X to KDE, from KDE to Mac OS X, from KDE to KDE, from Windows to Windows, and from Mac OS X to Windows (oddly, it doesnt work from Windows to Max OS X) (yes, the bad part of my self tried to suppress the info "from KDE to Gnome, and from Gnome to KDE" -- which I do not use as often, but which is possible too).

      You know what? I also can print across these sessions, to my local printer (whereever "local" might be in each case). And I can also copy and paste from local window to remote window and from remote window to local window. VNC would do none of these in any one of those scenarios.

      It's your turn again, dear Gnome friend!

    41. Re:Speed and memory consumption by labratuk · · Score: 1

      Its really sad that Windows with all its services and stuff uses 1/2 the RAM of KDE alone.

      I'd really like to know how you were measuring KDE's memory usage, because 99% of the time when people measure process memory under unix, they do it completely wrong.

      (In real life it's actually quite hard to get accurate memory usage numbers for a complex set of processes under Linux, but that's another story.)

      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    42. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Torne · · Score: 1

      But, what I find interesting is that Windows will use my pagefile WAY sooner and more frequently than Linux (or FreeBSD for that matter) does. And it's not cause I'm out of physical memory in Windows...From just a cursory glance this would make it seem like Windows is more intelligent about putting infrequently used portions of memory into the pagefile while Linux just uses physical memory until it runs out and then switch to the swap space.

      Yes, the theory is exactly this. Any NT-based Windows swaps stuff early in order to make room for as big a disk cache as it can manage - it's tunable behaviour, though don't ask me which thousand bajillion obscure registry settings it is ;)

      The tradeoff between keeping stuff paged in, and enlarging the disk cache, is a hard one to calculate, and Linux and Windows can both be tuned to behave differently. The defaults (and in fact algorithms) differ wildly, which results in the difference you see. Which is 'better' depends on too many factors to give a straight answer - it's probably too hard to directly compare the relevant metrics (page faults vs disk cache misses) because it's hard to reproduce the same load across different OSes.

      I've looked into which pages are resident and which aren't in Windows (though I've not done the same in Linux) using the kernel debugger, and it doesn't seem to be making too many stupid choices - my system, under either OS, has quite a lot of stuff loaded that I'm not actually using right this minute. Starting various desktop apps to get the total memory consumption to be vaguely similar, and then seeing how much gets swapped out while I use it (an extremely unscientific test, but hey) shows Windows using a much larger disk cache, i.e. making do with less resident pages, and neither were significantly slow to respond. But, this doesn't really say much, as the conditions were totally uncontrolled.

      So, err, what you describe is more or less the defaults, but whether changing it will help or not, or which strategy is superior, I have no idea ;)

    43. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Da+Twink+Daddy · · Score: 1

      I don't know WTF you are talking about. I'm running a bunch of KDE crap:

      $ ps -u bss03
      PID TTY TIME CMD
      23839 ? 00:00:00 startkde
      23879 ? 00:00:00 kdeinit
      23882 ? 00:00:00 dcopserver
      23884 ? 00:00:00 klauncher
      23887 ? 00:00:01 kded
      23910 ? 00:00:11 artsd
      23912 ? 00:00:00 kaccess
      23913 ? 00:00:00 kwrapper
      23915 ? 00:00:00 ksmserver
      23916 ? 00:00:01 kwin
      23918 ? 00:00:00 knotify
      23920 ? 00:00:00 kdesktop
      23922 ? 00:00:06 kicker
      23924 ? 00:00:00 kbluetoothd
      23926 ? 00:00:00 klipper
      23927 ? 00:00:00 kio_file
      23939 ? 00:00:00 kwalletmanager
      23941 ? 00:00:00 kget
      23942 ? 00:00:00 korgac
      23943 ? 00:00:00 ksysguardd
      23946 ? 00:00:00 kmix
      23949 ? 00:00:00 konqueror
      23968 ? 00:00:00 konsole

      and I'm hardly using any memory!

      $ cat /proc/meminfo
      MemTotal: 904844 kB
      MemFree: 206568 kB
      Buffers: 71668 kB
      Cached: 465304 kB
      SwapCached: 0 kB
      Active: 350560 kB
      Inactive: 313576 kB
      HighTotal: 0 kB
      HighFree: 0 kB
      LowTotal: 904844 kB
      LowFree: 206568 kB
      SwapTotal: 2000052 kB
      SwapFree: 2000052 kB
      Dirty: 476 kB
      Writeback: 0 kB
      Mapped: 201864 kB
      Slab: 22156 kB
      CommitLimit: 2452472 kB
      Committed_AS: 340664 kB
      PageTables: 2692 kB
      VmallocTotal: 122804 kB
      VmallocUsed: 7604 kB
      VmallocChunk: 115072 kB

      Now when I reboot over to windows, that's when my laptop really feels the hurt of only 1G of memory.

      The lameness filter is the worst part about /. Here I am trying to just post some statistics and it gripes abou the number of characters I have per line, I mean really, does it expect everyone to have nice big screens that are wider than 19.4 characters on average. That ludicris! Really, I've been caught by the lameness filter way to many times when my post would be accetable is the vast majority of forums. Instead of using a lameness filter, why not just give out more mod points?

      Now, here's some lorem ipsum, copyright (c) 2005 www.lipsum.com

      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. In elit. Quisque accumsan. Cras elementum. Curabitur condimentum placerat ante. Cras auctor quam quis ante. Sed sed risus. Suspendisse vulputate, mi at rhoncus rhoncus, massa lectus congue ante, eu aliquet arcu nunc non elit. Mauris tempus. Etiam rhoncus. Quisque et lacus non est imperdiet pretium. Sed aliquet quam ut lacus. Proin varius viverra enim. Duis a mauris nec quam consectetuer suscipit. Sed arcu est, sodales eget, suscipit sed, elementum ac, quam.

      Maecenas enim dui, venenatis vitae, mattis vitae, auctor eu, diam. Suspendisse potenti. Aenean sed leo. Nullam tempus, diam non facilisis semper, purus magna semper nisl, ac facilisis lectus nisi et massa. Nunc vel metus sed ligula lobortis viverra. Vestibulum leo lectus, gravida non, luctus in, congue nec, nunc. Vestibulum interdum dui vestibulum risus. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Nam justo ligula, viverra a, volutpat eu, vulputate sed, orci. Cras risus lectus, suscipit vitae, blandit non, facilisis at, eros. Proin ac nisi ut justo hendrerit convallis. Suspendisse potenti. Sed viverra dolor id ante. Donec at diam. Integer porttitor aliquam enim. Suspendisse vitae tellus sit amet dui porttitor eleifend.

      Fusce posuere. Nunc eget risus. Praesent vitae lacus aliquam neque semper porttitor. Nullam id justo. Suspendisse purus nisi, imperdiet a, sodales vel, faucibus sed, metus. Vivamus ultricies, tellus et molestie mollis, libero mi luctus arcu, vitae pharetra dui nibh sed tortor. Quisque sagittis suscipit lectus. Mauris id massa in erat commodo ultricies. Aliquam risus lorem, porttitor ac, pulvinar sed, sollicitudin pulvinar, ipsum. Vestibulum velit. Nullam rhoncus, eros at lobortis vulputate, la

    44. Re:Speed and memory consumption by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Not a fair comparison. Windows uses less RAM, but always has a pagefile (swap) greater than 100 MB for me. That said, a friend of mine was plagued by severe memory leaks in 3.3 (they may have been fixed in 3.4, i don't know).

    45. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (...) many will not want to believe it. I met a very attractive woman( hot blond )."

      Yeay, you're right. We don't believe you.

      As amazing fortune would have it, she was a reader in her spare time, of similar politics, was very witty

      Now we've got you. Liar, Liar! Liar -- pants on fire!

      As if that could not get any better she was a linux users and attended linux meetup groups.

      And now you proof it.

    46. Re:Speed and memory consumption by scotch · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes. By running Gnome instead of KDE, the Gnome team has achieved the amazing result of reducing KDE memory consumption to 0. Quite amazing.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    47. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      Wow. I was wrong. Thank you. That makes me feel stupid.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    48. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Arandir · · Score: 1

      Huh? There's no difference in performance ssh'ing into a Unix or a Windows machine. In fact, sometimes I will have the Unix apps running on my Windows desktop be MORE responsive than the native WindowsSP apps.

      If you aquaintance found a "premier" Linux to be much slower, then she either had a badly misconfigured system or was using the wrong remote client. Don't blame the hammer because it won't saw wood.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    49. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Arandir · · Score: 1

      Every system deals with memory differently. For example, FreeBSD will not allocate swap unless it actually needs to, Linux will allocate swap because it might need to swap in the future, and Windows will allocate swap because it will swap whether it needs to or not.

      I've got one Gig of RAM on my system. FreeBSD+KDE has never once touched swap in over two years (the last time it did was because of a memory leak). Yet on the same system running Windows I can hear the drive seek to swap everytime I switch between windows on two running applications. It's almost like Windows uses swap for paging.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    50. Re:Speed and memory consumption by PlasticMetal · · Score: 1

      How about amiga workbench, 3.0 IIRC was boxed in ROM of size 0.5MB, all it needed to run was about 2kb app called loadwb. And on the contrary of current desktop features, huge BPP sizes, multiple image formats, it just worked. Why? Because it was consistent yet quite extendable by datatypes, MUI among others like compression libraries. It was well thought from the beginning! Current multitude of platforms and interoperability requirements are not helping here but hey, think... almost every file format, every compression algorithm is developed by standalone library (libpng, libjpeg, libbz2 etc) which requires every end solution programmer to learn, program and test how it works on every one of these library dependencies. To say more, when all linux console tools, servers (although this post is not only about linux) use command line and text file argument/configuration interface, it must be programmed - this takes time and is bug prone. Windows staff sees this problem and Vista console would surprise you. But it can be done on FOSS too, look for example at kernel crypto modules. Think about including dynamic, binary, scripting configuration format in linking process, accessed using a pointer to one and linked when loading program. And some IDE tools for creating such configuration, namely database of predefined as in windows registry data formats or custom ones, which may be configured runtime using command line, text gui or KDE/GNOME (replacing damn slow xml and faster yet slow text configs). Think about httpd virtual host configuration or ls settings with argument command line names or GUI description edited in IDE and compiled to config.bin. If anybody follows the idea, pls respond here.

      --
      Plastic & Metal. Is this sh*t worth livin' 4?
      Is diz sh*t worth dyin' 4?
    51. Re:Speed and memory consumption by instagib · · Score: 1

      Your observations definitely make sense when considering the heritage of the kernels: Windows optimized for the desktop ("free RAM early so new apps/media/stuff loads fast when clicked"), and Linux/BSD/Unix optimized for server operation ("keep as much as possible in RAM so things get served fast"). So I would not say it's a question of intelligence.

    52. Re:Speed and memory consumption by arodland · · Score: 1

      The problem might actually be Linux, not KDE, especially if you run 2.6; the swappiness controls are pretty well b0rken sometimes. In fact, you can argue that the vm's been out of whack since 2.2. You might see whether Con Kolivas' patches can improve your performance.

    53. Re:Speed and memory consumption by maelstrom · · Score: 1

      You think windows pages better? WTF? I have a gig of RAM and XP decides that once I minimize Firefox I must be "done" with it and starts paging the sucker out, even though I have hundres of megabytes of free RAM. I don't consider this very smart at all.

      --
      The more you know, the less you understand.
    54. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paragraphs.

    55. Re:Speed and memory consumption by LLuthor · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I will try with the latest CK kernel.
      Any idea how stable this might be?

      --
      LL
    56. Re:Speed and memory consumption by arodland · · Score: 1

      Pretty stable, lately; Con's been pretty conservative. Things that are more "out there" tend to land in -mm.

    57. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's an about:config parameter that you can use to control whether Firefox tells Windows that its memory should be reclaimed.

    58. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Krach42 · · Score: 1

      This shouldn't be something that Firefox should have to tell Windows. Windows shouldn't be swapping memory out unless it needs more memory. Swapping stuff out just so you have more room for stream caches is not ideal.

      You need something to *use* those streams.

      With 1~2GiB of RAM, I've started up Windows raw (nothing else loaded, just a simple boot up) and it's already swapped out parts of the kernel. It can't have any need for stream cache, and it has hundreds and hundreds, if not more than a gigabyte of memory free. Why has it paged kernel space like that? It's moronic.

      --

      I am unamerican, and proud of it!
    59. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Firefox follows Windows application guidelines and does advise the OS when it won't be needed its pages. It doesn't have to do this.

      Mature OSes can take application hints like this and do useful things.

      For instance, if the OS is idle the application's pages can be written to disk and the pages placed on the free list. Then either other processes can use those free pages without having to wait for paging disk I/O or the original process can reclaim the pages (and their contents) from the free list if it wakes up before they have been reused.

    60. Re:Speed and memory consumption by Lucractius · · Score: 1

      im pretty sure it does, its also notouriously stingy with ram, when it has plenty it likes to "hold on" to it and use the swap incase something more important needs the ram, problem is it doesnt do it right.

      --
      XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.
  4. Re:Yes! by HatofPig · · Score: 1

    Nice try... but the last article even close to this was here, which just introduced the concept of KDE plasma and plugged SimpleKDE.

    --
    Silicon & Charybdis McLuhan Kildall Papert Kay
  5. TODO: Clone Spotlight by mccalli · · Score: 1, Interesting
    From the article:
    "The most obvious application of Tenor would be desktop search, giving KDE an analog to GNOME's brilliant search tool Beagle. But the Tenor project's chief architect, Scott Wheeler, wants to go further, asking, "how can we make it easier to work with the data we accumulate on the desktop?" So rather than just making it easier for users to search for documents, Tenor will provide application developers with data that can transform their interfaces. For example, the KDE Control Center, which currently organizes the configuration modules into a confusing hierarchy, may provide a search interface with results that show related items and learn from usage patterns."

    ...can all be distilled into "clone Spotlight, with a bit of Launchbar in there too (the 'learn from usage patterns' bit).

    Cheers,
    Ian

    1. Re:TODO: Clone Spotlight by ScriptedReplay · · Score: 1

      Oh, it would have been unpossible for them not to clone Apple. After all, everybody on apple.slashdot.com knows everything noteworthy on the desktop was done by Apple first; the rest of the world is just a little slow in seeing this obvious fact. And woe unto those saying that 'learn from usage patterns' existed before in the XP start menu! or anywhere else, for that matter! And if there's any other 'new' feature they plan on implementing, it will be proven in short order that Apple had it first!

      And no, combining various ideas is not innovation - unless Apple does it, of course, in which case it's combining various ideas in a new and exciting way, as Steve Jobs would have shown the world.

      So you, there! stop bitching and get a Mac, now! (there, mods, this line alone is worthy of a +5 Distilled Wisdom)

    2. Re:TODO: Clone Spotlight by mccalli · · Score: 1
      Oh, it would have been unpossible for them not to clone Apple. After all, everybody on apple.slashdot.com knows everything noteworthy on the desktop was done by Apple first...

      Misdirected rant. I'm not praising Apple to the rooftops, actually I dislike Spotlight intensely, or more accurately the Finder's use of it. No, my point was that the language of the article painted the idea as the far-sighted KDE developers coming up with something marvellously new and unique. It isn't. Neither is Spotlight, come to that, as you will no doubt point out. Point of my post wasn't to praise Apple, it was more an objection to the language of the article in trying to dress a cloning catch-up exercise with futurism.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    3. Re:TODO: Clone Spotlight by zander · · Score: 1

      But, but. It works wonders for Apple, so why do you feel its a bad thing? Have you considered the language is chosen for this purpose?

    4. Re:TODO: Clone Spotlight by mccalli · · Score: 1
      But, but. It works wonders for Apple, so why do you feel its a bad thing? Have you considered the language is chosen for this purpose?

      Perhaps so, but that doesn't mean to say I have to go along with it. I'm a happy OS X user here, but I certainly don't swallow all the marketing-driven bumph the comes out of Apple, with the recent Might Mouse spiel being a stand-out example of that.

      No, I just felt that the article was little disingenuous with its language and credit-claiming, that was all. I don't even know if that extends to the developers, since I don't know what they'd say on the matter. I was specifically referring to the language used to try and convince people of KDE's far-sighted vision, when it seems to me that in fact they're catching up with at least two environments (OS X, Gnome) and possibly even a third (Vista, all depends on release date of course).

      Cheers,
      Ian

  6. Re:why not... by SimilarityEngine · · Score: 1

    Erm, aren't they changing to Qt 4? Which, from a review I read in a mag just yesterday, promises to be quite a major upgrade from the Qt 3.x line.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  7. Re:Changes? by Slashdot_Gandhi · · Score: 0

    KDE 4 Promises Large Changes

    And what about quick changes and spare changes?

    Gandhi loses karma here, but its a cool read: I think change is a good thing. I am told, though I don't rightly recall, that I was seeking change just about an hour after being born and have been on a quest for it ever since. Change is good, if it is good change. But not all change is good change. Some change is spare change, or short change or quick change. Rodney is trying to sell us his quick change version of improvement with the spare change he's found in Maria's cushins and we are being short changed by the effort. Everyone loses but Rod! He even discusses that his change is substandard and too fast when he says, "although it may seem that we are "changing the tires while the car is moving."

  8. I can't wait for the beta versions by HatofPig · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Imagine that... Superkarumba support built right into the desktop, RuDI will mean more compatibility for KDE widget sets and libraries for all applications, KHotNewStuff (snicker) will get kool and new applikations from the web...

    It'll be like a second Christmas!

    --
    Silicon & Charybdis McLuhan Kildall Papert Kay
    1. Re:I can't wait for the beta versions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't that be "Kristmas"?

  9. *Notice* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Parent Is a copy/paste troll .. Incase anyone missed that fact and moderates it insightful again.

  10. Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by CRC'99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What linux needs for the desktop market is an easy to use, and simple desktop. The problem with this on current installs is the lack of communication between desktop and kernel etc.

    For example, Sometimes, sound on linux can be an absolute bitch to get going. Even something as trivial as playing an AVI caused me *way* too much drama. Not that I couldn't get it to work, but then if I wanted sound to work with other things, I need to use a sound daemon. Fair enough, thats not too hard - but then the audio/video sync was out because of the latency in the sound daemon.

    The point is, that as long as simple issues like playing a video become mammoth tasks, then the average person will just stick with something simpler. Hell, 90% of the time I can just install Windows and everything will work right out of the box.

    This is what needs to be worked on. While all the technical side of things on Linux just rocks, I doubt that many people have worked on the 'end user experiance' because at the moment, it just sucks.

    There is a reason Apple is gaining market share - as well as mind share - and it's the OS that does it. I can do the majority of things I can do on a linux system (console and X side), and have a nice, pretty and *FUNCTIONAL* GUI for everything else. The end user experiance is second to none. This is what Linux should be looking at - not making 'sweeping changes' that you still need to spend a week on getting to run just right :|

    --
    Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
    1. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by zenmojodaddy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I currently use XFCE on top of Slackware. It's slim enough to work on old hardware, GTK based for eye-candy purposes, and configurable almost entirely by mouse. Much more pleasant to use than either GNOME or KDE, but less stark and more integrated than a desktop patched together with Fluxbox et al.

    2. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Vanders · · Score: 1

      What linux needs for the desktop market is an easy to use, and simple desktop. The problem with this on current installs is the lack of communication between desktop and kernel etc.

      Perhaps Linux isn't the answer, but something like Syllable might be able to deliver what you and many others are looking for. It's a complete Operating System, which means that implementing features that span from the GUI all the way down to the kernel is very easy.

    3. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by seguso · · Score: 2, Informative
      For example, Sometimes, sound on linux can be an absolute bitch to get going."
      What does this have to do with the desktop?
      The point is, that as long as simple issues like playing a video become mammoth tasks,
      What does this have to do with the desktop?
      Excuse me, aren't multimedia capabilities essential for a desktop OS?
    4. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by corneliusagain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you're right. It's important to realise though that the problems are not the obvious ones - basic UI consistency and so on is not that disastrously bad. Rather, it's the "user experience" that is the problem - the number of FAQs, the number of different utilities for the same "user purpose" , and the general need to have specialist knowledge to get item X working with item Y. For my money, a good comparison is with iTunes/iPod and windows based DRM MP3 players - iTunes/iPod just works, and does so in a trustworthy way. At the moment, in this analogy, it's Windows which wins. A good example is hardware. Why can't linux boxes automatically search for & install drivers for me? If compiling kernel extensions as as simple as every website claims it is, why not do it automatically with 1 click and make all hardware stuff transparent?... /End-rant.

    5. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Ayende+Rahien · · Score: 1

      You think that audio/video syncing being hard isn't directly related to desktop?

      --

      --
      Two witches watched two watches.
      Which witch watched which watch?
    6. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      It's to do with the desktop because the sound daemon is part of the desktop - esd or arts. It's required as a hack to get round the problem of only one process being able to output to /dev/dsp at once. It's not really related to drivers and it is generally recognised as being a major problem on the Free software desktop. Latency and syncing issues are a big problem with the current daemons, in my experience, plus they make it more difficult to use apps which need to play sounds but don't use your sound daemon of choice.

      Things like dmix present a solution, but I have yet to see a distro that comes with that properly configured and stable out of the box. And figuring out the arcane configuration files required to get them working is not much fun for an average desktop user.

    7. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by m50d · · Score: 1
      For example, Sometimes, sound on linux can be an absolute bitch to get going. Even something as trivial as playing an AVI caused me *way* too much drama. Not that I couldn't get it to work, but then if I wanted sound to work with other things, I need to use a sound daemon. Fair enough, thats not too hard - but then the audio/video sync was out because of the latency in the sound daemon.

      If you stick with KDE, you will be fine. You run artsd as the sound daemon - KDE will start it up for you - and since arts handles both the video and the audio (provided you use a KDE media player, such as noatun), there are no sync issues. The problems come when you try and use non-KDE applications (though I have had zero latency issues when outputting to arts with xine, mplayer and vlc) and get them working together.

      What linux needs for the desktop market is an easy to use, and simple desktop. The problem with this on current installs is the lack of communication between desktop and kernel etc.

      KDE is not linux, and is not part of linux. KDE cannot be integrated more closely with linux because KDE aims to be platform-independent. In fact, it aims to be the platform. You run kde on top of linux, bsd, solaris, mac, and pretty soon windows. Then, you run KDE applications on your kde. Yes, it means kde is less well-integrated with "native" applications on these platforms, but it can't be more integrated with them because that would make it tied to that platform. Just see KDE as your OS, use KDE programs when running KDE, and you'll have far less issues.

      --
      I am trolling
    8. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by ardor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wrong. The desktop should provide easy access to sound configuration. It should NOT involve some config file editing as root.

      As for videos, desktop linux distros should play them flawlessly, shouldn't they? As the parent poster correctly stated this is not the case. mplayer crashes often, gxine is fine, but is often installed with little codec support (because of the damn licences). gstreamer works, but usually comes with very few plugins installed. O.K., its a license thing with gstreamer too, thats why the USER has to install the ffmpeg plugin, but wouldn't a messagebox with a "you have to agree to take responsibility blabla...." and an OK button to start the install be adequate? Instead the user has to install the package through synaptic or a terminal. And no, it is NOT intuitive that one has to search for the ffmpeg gst plugin just to watch some AVIs!

      But your comment on the Macs really pulls the last straw. There are problems with linux desktops, so - don't correct them but use Macs. Brilliant!

      And Gnome is no alternative. Its big, has some serious latency problems sometimes (especially with Nautilus), has some screwed understanding of DPI usage, its very easy to screw it up....

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    9. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE is not a "desktop OS", it's only the desktop.

    10. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. There should be kernel abstraction layer for software mixing, similar to directsound. Current solution, dmix, isn't really that. It doesn't work transparently with everything, including older (oss) sound apps, and it expects a degree of cooperation from all apps. So lazy or lame programmers can code their app to be very unfriendly with others on cheap sound cards which don't support hardware mixing (or support it but not in alsa drivers).

      For that problem, IMO, alsa will have to be re-engineered. Perhaps a new core, similar in some ways to DRI, to include support for OpenAL and other high-level hardware-supported functionallity (again similar to DirectSound).Open AL should be implemented on top of it, like Mesa is on top of DRI. I just don't see the intiative for such progress yet. Alsa was, it seems, rushed to linux scene for addressing OSS problems, but was still in some ways short-sighted.

      Other areas, like X-org composite acceleration, HAL system, gstreamer etc. are showing good progress in desktop area.

    11. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by strider44 · · Score: 1

      We're talking about KDE here and no multimedia capabilities like having the right codec or having ALSA set up properly for the sound card has pretty much *nothing* to do with KDE. KDE is not an operating system, it is a desktop environment. The grandparent's point was totally valid.

    12. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by rufty_tufty · · Score: 1

      This sounds then like a disto and IP issue, not any particular technical issue with the os or desktop itself.

      Still I know it takes me longer to get my linux desktop to the required functionality (sound, video, office, IMs, sound video and photo editing software) after a re-install than it used to for my windows desktop.
      Ok the Ubuntu system does this for me for free, but I think most people new to linux don't care if it's a desktop issue or an OS issue, or an app issue or whatever. They just want something that will let them get on with their life.

      So it's a many pronged effort, some people will improve the desktop itself, others will improve the OS, others will improve the distro. When people work for free they will do what interests them, and if that's "pointless" twiddles in the windowing system then hey it's their life! We just need to keep saying what we need so that together the package gets to where it needs to go.

      Man this has gone offtopic and lecture-y :-)

      --
      "The weirdest thing about a mind, is that every answer that you find, is the basis of a brand new cliche" -
    13. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by DFJA · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The point is, that as long as simple issues like playing a video become mammoth tasks, then the average person will just stick with something simpler. Hell, 90% of the time I can just install Windows and everything will work right out of the box.

      You are blaming this on KDE, whereas primarily you should be blaming the hardware manufacturers for not providing support for their hardware, on people who ship their media in proprietary formats, and on the peddlers of those proprietary formats for not providing decoding software for Linux (OK, some do, I know). I have found that these issues aside, KDE just works, with very few exceptions. The exceptions that I do find are no more common than the exceptions that I find with MS Windows which, contrary to popular opinion, is not a "just works" OS. I haven't yet found a "just works" operating system, but the issues I have with my KDE-based GNU/Linux systems are on the same level as with MS Windows.

      This is what needs to be worked on. While all the technical side of things on Linux just rocks, I doubt that many people have worked on the 'end user experiance' because at the moment, it just sucks.

      You've obviously not used KDE for at least a year then, as if you had you would realise that a whole load of effort has been put into making KDE more usable recently. 3.4.2 and 3.5 beta knock the pants off even 3.3 in terms of polish and usability. There is still work to be done but I already find it far more usable than WinXP. Actually, I am better off when I have a problem with KDE, because at least I stand a chance of fixing it myself. With MS Windows, I am totally at the mercy of Microsoft to fix them for me, which they may or not do according to whether it suits their finances. Even if I don't fix the issues myself, usually someone else does according to their own needs, and lets me have the fix via whatever route.

      --
      43 - For those who require slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything.
    14. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by ardor · · Score: 1

      Of course it does has something to do with KDE. You do know what arts is? And how does a user configure his sound card? With vi editing some alsa config files? No, he wants to configure it USING THE DESKTOP. Multimedia streaming capabilities are part of a desktop, too. The codecs aren't, thats correct, but they should be easy to install; if they aren't in synaptic, things get really hard for an average user. And installing a codec from source using configure, make & make install is neither easy nor pleasant, since the user has to install a lot of dev libs first (and gcc of course). Not user friendly at all. Easy-to-install binary codecs are rare.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    15. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wrong. The desktop should provide easy access to sound configuration. It should NOT involve some config file editing as root.

      Excellent point!

      But why did you have to ruin your post with an undeserved flame against Macs and Gnome?

      And Gnome is no alternative. Its big, has some serious latency problems sometimes (especially with Nautilus), has some screwed understanding of DPI usage, its very easy to screw it up....

      Are these statements based on any recent version of Gnome? I doubt it.

      It may depend on your distro, configuration and other variables, but in general Gnome uses less memory than KDE. Try it with a default installation of both desktops: start your session, open a couple of Nautilus or Konqueror windows for viewing local or remote files, and then check the total memory usage. You will find that Gnome 2.12 (or even 2.10 if you have an old version) uses less memory than KDE 3.5 beta (or 3.4).

      I use both destkops from time to time, and each one has its good and bad points. I don't want to start flames against one or the other and I should not reply to a troll, but please check your facts before posting...

      Note: if you compare KDE and Gnome, make sure that you are not using SuSE Linux. Unfortunately, most versions of SuSE since 8.x have a sad tendency to cripple the Gnome installation so that it does not look nor behave like any other distribution of Gnome. Major gripes against SuSE: gtk+ applications modified to use a broken Qt theme and to use of the arts sound daemon, differences in the printing backend, etc.

    16. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by strider44 · · Score: 1

      I think you're getting confused with what each module of Linux actually handles. Linux layers one thing on top of another, and no alsa sound support is not part of the desktop environment, that is part of the kernal and alsa daemon apps, nor is streaming capabilities, again the job of an app. Nor is installation, that is the job of the distribution applications. Configuration maybe, a module or two for the control centre of the desktop environment couldn't hurt, I'll give you that one. Again though, it's not the job of KDE to set things up.

      Lets see, perhaps we'll start with aRts. aRts is a sound server. KDE programs use sound through aRts. Other programs generally do not. If the whole system is lacking in sound then that's not the fault of aRts. Most sound problems don't involve aRts. I'm not sure what the hell aRts has to do with this topic! It's being phased out anyway!

      Now then lets look at multimedia streaming capabilities (I'm assuming you mean remote streaming). Again what's that got to do with KDE? Perhaps allowing for a module in Konqueror, but it's still just an app or a plugin.

      Thirdly with installing codecs, I'm not sure that that's the fault of KDE. In fact I'm quite sure that's not. KDE is supposed to be independant of the platform that it runs on so by its nature it doesn't include any program for installation that the distro managers can't handle themselves. Again since distro packages (whether on Linux or an alternate system such as *BSD) may have totally different file systems so how can KDE handle installation without comprimising its architecture independence?

    17. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by delire · · Score: 1



      Where ease of use is concerned OSX is enjoyed more by full-time owner-operators than casual users. This stands out in a class-room situation where (in my experience) students coming from Windows take some two-weeks of guided support getting used to OSX, whereas KDE takes them little more than a day. As a teacher that has to work with both platforms from time to time, OSX lags heavily in this area, whereas KDE really gains.

      I don't know about the 'market share' you talk of, but Linux, for whatever reason, is still the fastest growing operating system and this is certainly visible in the arts/educational sector.

      Where feature-creep is concerned I would certainly not want to see KDE's amazing 'customiseability' compromised - this really gets the kids excited. On a multi-user system they'll do whatever they can to make it their own.

    18. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by KayosIII · · Score: 1

      Well no strictly speaking this is not the job of the desktop. It is the job of the operating system. The Desktop in this case is not tied particularly to one operating system (currently it is tied to xwindows but that dependecy will be going in the next version)... what would be really smashing though would be a KDE-Linux Project aimed at making KDE+Linux an easy combination to use.

      Xine works good for me as far as video usage goes. The main issue is that not everything is installed by default. The two big ones that aren't included are the Win32 codecs and the dvd decryption libraries. The windows libraries are just that - they come directly from a windows installation - the code needed to use these objects has been reverse engineered. Users who have a windows license are currently entitled to use these libraries. It would be extremely foolish to ship systems with this package as you open yourself to a lot of legal nasties. It would be possible to license the libraries but it wouldn't make sense to do that then give away the product for free would it. A much better LONG TERM solution is to encourage providers of video content to provide Linux friendly formats - I am sure that many of them already do this for Mac

    19. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      No - a message box wouldn't be adequate. The distributor of the patented codec would still be liable for patent infringement.

      Granted, the installation process should be *easier* - and Autopackage is addressing that. Perhaps there is room for someone to make a "Fedora Core 4 (Non-US)" (or Ubuntu Non-US or whatever) version with all the stuff covered by US patents added in the base distro, but the distro is only distributed outside of the US (of course, copies would leak through).

    20. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Mishura · · Score: 1

      The reason for your AVI (and other multimedia problems) is because practically every single Linux distro is skiddish of software patents and proprietary codecs.
      (Some of these codecs are Windows .dlls that are emulated through Xine/Mplayer! Definately can't ship those.)

      Some distros now aren't even shipping with MP3 support "out of the box". Sure, the encoder (lame) and decoders are GPL, but they still won't ship due to fear of being sued into oblivion.

      The only way you are going to get a Linux desktop with everything like this working, is if you pay for it. I'd suggest Linspire or something. If you aren't going to pay for Linux, then you're going to pay for your time in setting it up.

      It's sad, but thats why you pay a premium for Windows and Mac OS X, while I get Linux on Bittorrent (legally). I'm cool with it.

      -- Free Software fan and Kubuntu Linux user.

      Now back to your regularly scheduled Gnome vs. KDE flamefest. (You know its bound to happen.)

    21. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by steeviant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      " What linux needs for the desktop market is an easy to use, and simple desktop."

      Yea, it's called Gnome.


      Gnome is getting pretty good, but compared to Windows or OS X the point at which the windows-icons-mouse-pointer paradigm falls down still comes much sooner than in Windows or OS X

      Linux is nice, and serves me as a Unix zealot quite well for a home desktop, but I still haven't seen a Linux distribution in which it is as easy to install an application as in the mainstream OSes.

      "For example, Sometimes, sound on linux can be an absolute bitch to get going."

      What does this have to do with the desktop?


      I (like most people with computers) have a large collection of music on my computer, because it's so much easier to manage than a giant pile of CDs. Listening to music from one's computer is a common use for desktop machines these days. There's no way in hell a consumer or non-power-user is going to knowingly choose an OS with such weak audio abilities that it can only play one sound at once without the assistance of some program which makes the sound choppy and/or laggy on certain hardware. I have set up dmixer on my computer which should mean that I should be able do away with those awful sound daemons, and some people have those new fangled cards with a hardware mixer, but the obsolete sound daemons have become so entrenched that they're still required for the respective desktop environments and their applications to function properly.

      There is no stable ABI for vendors to create hardware drivers to, the ABI is in a constant state of flux along with the rest of the kernel and drivers compiled for a certain version are progressively more unlikely to work with each successive minor version of the kernel. The situation is nearly as bad for open source drivers which need regular maintenance to remain in sync with the audio API. It's no wonder most hardware vendors don't want to touch Linux with a stick.

      The situation with sound in Linux is confusing, fragmented and in many ways just plain broken. I don't know what you do with your desktop, but it's obviously not typical if you don't consider sound to be important.

      "The point is, that as long as simple issues like playing a video become mammoth tasks,"

      What does this have to do with the desktop?


      You don't suppose all those millions of ATA DVD drives being sold are finding their way into servers do you?

      Wake up Buck, you've arrived in the 21st century. Playing videos and listening to sounds is actually commonplace nowadays, in fact a nice screen for playing videos was why I chose a midsize laptop instead of a subnotebook, and last I looked there are increasing numbers of wide screens coming onto the market. I'm pretty sure sales of wide screen laptops and monitors isn't booming because of people wanting to put 6 xterms on screen at once.

      None of your complaints have anything to do with the desktop. You are wanting applications and drivers.

      None of his complaints have very much to do with the GUI but they are certainly related to the experience of trying to use a Linux machine as a desktop operating system.

      Few people (except those like me whose brains seem to be running some variant of Unix in muscle memory) are going to choose a desktop that limits their computers abilities. Everything seems pretty straightforward to me and I feel empowered rather than limited by Linux, but I'm a wee bit of a nerd and few of my non-nerd friends who've sampled Linux have kept at it even with remote tech support at their bidding.

    22. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by ardor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are right with aRts. Unfortunately, there are little alternatives. esd has serious sync problems (just ask the Ubuntu devs). dmix is nowhere near stable. I hope something better comes, like a new sound daemon, or a stable dmix.

      About streaming capabilities: a desktop absolutely NEEDS a multimedia infrastructure like gstreamer. OK, its not KDEs job to install it, nor handling the infrastructe (after all, gstreamer already exists). It doesn't even have to be an integral part of the desktop.

      But what is actually needed? A way to configure the damn thing! I mean something like an easy way to change the sources & sinks with the control center, having a list of all installed codecs, maybe with an "Install new codec" button for easy install and so on. This would actually be a BIG advantage of a Linux desktop over Windows, since DirectShow isn't easy to configure, and if it gets messed up with broken codecs, you better get prepared for a full Windows reinstall. gstreamer is in many ways better than DirectShow (except seeking, this works more reliable with DShow), so we shouldn't miss the chance of using this advantage.
      In a Nutshell: KDE shouldn't require gstreamer, but it should include optional support, with autodetection for gstreamer presence, thus enabling all gstreamer-related stuff when its there.

      Why gstreamer? Why not xine or mplayer? gxine is very nice, and xine-based Kaffeine rocks, yeah. But there are legal problems. Anybody remembers the MPEG-4 license problems? gstreamer is much safer, since the plugins can be binary, closed-source (useful! for example, DivX could exist as a binary codec, and Cyberlink could create a DVD decoder - finally, watching DVDs without cracking them).

      The problem with most package managers is that its not easy to find out what codecs are needed. Hell, most users don't even know what a codec is. In Windows, the media player automatically tries to download a suitable codec, and if there isn't any, it prints out an error message (which is not very helpful :) ). What I would like to see: for example, User X gets a MPEG-4 AVI. gstreamer doesn't know how to handle this, so it starts to look for a codec with the matching FOURCC. It doesn't find one. Result: gstreamer-based Kaffeine shows a message box "couldn't play video because playback software is missing." And then, under "Details": "no installed codec is able to play video with the FOURCC 'DIVX'." Yes, thats Kaffeine and not KDE itself, but Kaffeine is often bundled with KDE desktops, so this setup would be very nice.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    23. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, a core install of windows would only play wmf,old avis, and maybe a couple other formats. Linux core installs usually place xvid, divx, omg, and about 52 other formats right out of the box. If your soundcard isn't installed correctly, that's not for the desktop to figure out, that should have been done when the os was installed. No matter which desktop you run under, if you soundcard doesn't work, then it won't work. Improving the desktop can't help that.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    24. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by rm69990 · · Score: 1

      Ummm duh, it does on most distros. I popped a TV Tuner card in my PC the other day, turned it back on, and TVTime worked right away. Just because a fancy box doesnt pop up doesnt mean it isnt doing it.

    25. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Asphixiat · · Score: 1

      quite simply arts is dead

      http://www.arts-project.org/doc/arts-maintenance.h tml

      It was good - but now even the maintainer has jumped ship.

      If you have audio syncing issues, use kaffeine ( http://kaffeine.sourceforge.net/ - it a really nice kde wrapper for xine, you can easily record streams, minimize to the tray, it has a real nice OSD, I really can't give enough props to the kaffeine project ), configure the xine engine's audio output to be either ALSA or OSS (ie direct to the audio card), right click on the video that is playing go down to Video Settings, there are 5 sliders.
      One of those sliders is Audio/Video Offset, this is a xine feature, you can slide it to make the audio and video perfect.

      Persoanlly I dont use arts at all - I have an NFORCE2 sound card and while it's features rock, the intel drivers in alsa seriously suck, the closed source nvidia ones are very good, but arts just wont work with it. So I rename the artsd binary (so it can't be used at all) and for system notifications I use a script I wrote called playsound.sh:
      -------------
      #!/bin/sh /usr/bin/mplayer -ao oss $1

      -------------

      Hope I helped you and any others out - arts is dead, but thanks to the massive configurability of the KDE project, you don't really need it anyways :)

    26. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Asphixiat · · Score: 1

      oops, that script again:

      #!/bin/sh
      /usr/bin/mplayer -ao oss $1

      damn slashcode formatting

    27. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by blonde+rser · · Score: 1

      The program you want to use is called "discover" or "hotplug." Does exactly what you want.

    28. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't even need a script. You should just make an alias='mplayer -ao oss' and put that in your ~/.bashrc, no muss no fuss.

    29. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Otter · · Score: 1
      If you stick with KDE, you will be fine. You run artsd as the sound daemon - KDE will start it up for you - and since arts handles both the video and the audio (provided you use a KDE media player, such as noatun), there are no sync issues. The problems come when you try and use non-KDE applications (though I have had zero latency issues when outputting to arts with xine, mplayer and vlc) and get them working together.

      Well, yeah. That's the point. It is simply insane that in 2005, Linux users still have to know that sound servers exist, let alone that they have to manually resolve conflicts between them.

    30. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Giggles+Of+Doom · · Score: 1

      Amen to that. I still have yet to get sound working on my box, though part of that is my fault for using ATi's onboard sound. Still, VLC plays sound, but Flash doesn't, so I can't listen to Strong Bad. :(

      --
      "A coward dies a thousand deaths, the brave but one."
    31. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What linux needs for the desktop market is an easy to use, and simple desktop."

      I'm sorry but I think you have no idea what "linux needs". I'm not even going to enter into an argument of what "linux needs" I'm kind of sick and tired of posts like "I am the only one who knows what Linux needs, you all the rest are stupid zealots who don't have a clue".

    32. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by molnarcs · · Score: 1
      One of the main problems with what you wrote is that it is really really difficult to tell who is to blame for those crashes. Very few linux distributions ship unmodified mplayer - and sometimes one customization or another will be the cause of bugs, and neither kde, nor mplayer developers can be responsilbe for those. Package maintainers on the other hand... Also, mplayer depends on a lot of supporting libraries, and depending on your needs, the problem might lie in one of those (x264, xvid, live.com, realplayer, etc.)

      I only say this because mplayer on my FreeBSD 5-STABLE desktop works flawlessly. I know how frustrating is when someone comes up with a "works perfectly on my install" kinda reply, but you need to supply more info. Is mplayer buggy on Debian Linux? SuSe? Fedora? All of those? (I doubt it!). Solution is to find a distro that is most suitable for desktop use. There are a lot of problems with our current concepts of "Desktop friendly Linux." We tend to think of Mandrake, Ubuntu, SuSE and others that offer easy installation and GUI configuration tools. But whether or not a distro is desktop friendly depends more on the quality of the packages they maintain. Writing GUI tools or simplifying things is really not that difficult. PC-BSD comes to mind, that has 1/10 of the resources that popular Desktop Linux distroes have at their disposal, yet arguably, in about a year, they become as close to a user friendly *nix like desktop as any of the big names.

      Actually, that is why the KDE project is exemplary, and is one of the best managed open source projects out there. They do things in the right order: they make sure that the supporting infrastructure (QT4 in this case) is solid. Then they build developer-friendly tools (and artists/usability guys and girls friendly) like klik. They do workshops all around the world now (New Delhi is the next station) - familiarizing developers with their tools (oh, and don't forget the excellent documentation of QT). And once that infrastructure is in place, maintainability of the code base is assured. That is how a user friendly linux distro should be built. Take a small but solid base (slackware would be a good candidate) and make sure every single package works as expected (that is not the case with Debian unfortunately). Build the whole damn thing slowly from the ground up, make it easy, make it low-barrier for future contributors (Document every aspect!). Organize a quality assurance team! And as a final step, build a user friendly installer/gui config tools.

      Again, look at pc-bsd for an example of this. What they inherit from FreeBSD is a sense of integration. PC-BSD is a misnomer - it should be named KDE/PC-BSD (just like gnu linux). They use every configuration tool that is already available in kcontrolcenter. What is missing is written in QT (including the installer). In mandrake (as far as memory servers) you could manage users in both kcontrolcenter and mandrake's own control center - which is understandable as long as desktop linux efforts are shackled by the perception that they must be desktop agnostic. That is why Ubuntu was a great success imho (of course, I know that now we have Kubuntu).

      Anyhow, my choice of FreeBSD is based on my personal preferences - but what primarily drove me to it is the problem you describe. What should a non-techie user do when mplayer crashes? Complain to ... whom? Finally, I found myself switching distroes (rh 7.3 >> Mandrake 9.0/9.1 >> Debian Woody >> Unstable - where half the packages had some quirks) until I realized I was looking for exactly what FreeBSD had to offer. My current problem with linux distroes is that I can't find any that is relatively flawless or comes close to Free~'s quality. Well, maybe slackware - or arch (I have the former installed, and I have heard good things about the latter). But as long as there is no distro that has quality and simplicity (that is where slackware is excellent) as their first and foremost

    33. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by shiftless · · Score: 1

      You are blaming this on KDE, whereas primarily you should be blaming the hardware manufacturers for not providing support for their hardware, on people who ship their media in proprietary formats, and on the peddlers of those proprietary formats for not providing decoding software for Linux (OK, some do, I know).

      What? The problem here has nothing to do with hardware manufacturers or proprietary formats. The problem is that he can't load up the KDE control panel, go to Drivers, click Search for New Hardware, and have it autodetect and install his sound card. That's the kind of functionality that he's talking about, and more people should work on implementing if Linux is to become a truly viable desktop OS in this day and age.

    34. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by DFJA · · Score: 1
      But you can do exactly this type of thing with most of the main distributions. OK the functionality is not strictly a part of the KDE Desktop, but the integration into KDE is as good as the distribution vendor makes it. With SUSE the integration is pretty good. With Kubuntu everything on my system was just detected automatically and configured, without any intervention. With Gentoo it's similar. If I add new hardware to my Suse system, a box pops up asking if I want to configure it. I click Yes, and 90% of the time it configures it without any further user intervention.

      I dreaded it when I moved my Suse-loaded hard drive into a new PC with new motherboard as the hardware was totally different. After clicking maybe a dozen such buttons (one for each item that was different) it all worked, the only intervention I needed was to tell it which of the two network cards was the external one. It's a hell of a lot harder than this on MS Windows.

      --
      43 - For those who require slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything.
    35. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by shiftless · · Score: 1

      It's been a while since I used Suse, but I do remember that it was pretty good about hardware and stuff compared to others I've used. I have used Ubuntu recently and it was basically junk as far as that type of functionality goes. Hell, at one point all I wanted to do was set up X for a multihead display, but I could find no configuration options anywhere for multiple screens. I edited the X config file and still couldn't get it to work. So I just said screw it and re-installed Gentoo.

      I guess what I'm driving at here is the desktop needs to be consistent. With Gentoo, it's understood that everything is text based and that's the primary way of configuring stuff. When you're running something like Ubuntu however, where it goes directly into the GUI, *everything* should be configurable from the GUI.

    36. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by drew · · Score: 1
      What linux distribution are you using and how old is it? Every Linux Distro I've installed in the last year or two, everything, including sound, "just worked". The only things that didn't work out of the box are proprietary media formats, and that can be quickly solved by downloading the binary codecs from the mplayer website and dropping them in /usr/lib/win32 (no, i don't expect a casual user to know that, and I'm surprised that there aren't more distro's that automate that step.) AFAIK, pretty much all recent distros use ALSA which doesn't require a sound server, and even if you do need a sound server, KDE and Gnome take care of that for you automatically.

      The point is, that as long as simple issues like playing a video become mammoth tasks, then the average person will just stick with something simpler. Hell, 90% of the time I can just install Windows and everything will work right out of the box.

      In my experience, Linux is actually far superior to Windows in this area. With Linux, it takes an hour or so to run through the installer and get everything set up. (plus or minus, depending on distro, how much software you are installing, cd vs network, etc.) Once that's finished, run your distro's autoupdate program once to pick up all the latest updates, and you're set.

      With windows (and I just installed WinXP on my wife's laptop a few days ago, so this is fresh in my memory)

      Run through the install. Piece of cake. Then you have six iterations of windows update, each of which requires a reboot after completing.
      1. update windows updater and install windows genuine advantage tool
      2. install some random patches
      3. install service pack 2 (for some reason it wouldn't let me do this until after I had done #2, even though SP2 superceded most if not all of the patches installed in #2.)
      4. update media player or some other program that must be updated separately from all other upgrades.
      5. install various post SP2 security updates and addons.
      6. install updates to the updates in #5 (no, i'm not kidding)


      Of course, once you get this far, you still have no useful software except windows media player and internet explorer (at least XP finally has the built in ability to handle .zip files and preview images). So now you spend another two hours downloading or installing from CD:
      • anti-virus
      • anti-spyware
      • X instant messenger
      • adobe acrobat
      • microsoft office, or some other office suite, or some form of office file viewer
      • mail program (unless you use a webmail service or the email program included with your office software)
      • whatever programs you have to use to actually get work done.
      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    37. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by m50d · · Score: 1
      Well, yeah. That's the point. It is simply insane that in 2005, Linux users still have to know that sound servers exist, let alone that they have to manually resolve conflicts between them.

      But you don't. Forget you're running linux, just use KDE and KDE programs. The sound servers will be invisible to you.

      --
      I am trolling
    38. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by Explo · · Score: 1

      Not that I couldn't get it to work, but then if I wanted sound to work with other things, I need to use a sound daemon. Fair enough, thats not too hard - but then the audio/video sync was out because of the latency in the sound daemon.


      Well, I've been happily using SB Live! for quite a few years. Both the OSS and ALSA support hardware mixing without any need for likes of ESD, artsd and friends. No pain at all; I can happily play music with xmms and am still able to hear any game sounds etc. at the same time. I don't know which other sound card drivers for Linux support this, but I'd be suprised if emu10k1 driver would be the only one...

      --
      Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
    39. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      This will be fixed in KDE4. We will dump artsd and use gstreamer + dmix. (probably - the user/distro can change that).

    40. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by mkro · · Score: 1
      gstreamer is in many ways better than DirectShow (except seeking, this works more reliable with DShow)
      I've used several players on Linux (xine and different frontends, mplayer and different frontends, gstreamer, VLC, RealPlayer) and Windows (WMP, Media Player Classic, VLC, BSPlayer), and have encountered only two players where seeking doesn't suck: gmplayer on Linux and XBMC on Xbox (though backwards seeking is a bit broken). In XBMC I can use several methods of seeking (trigger, dpad, thumbstick) to navigate to exact places in movies, and on gmplayer I can use the scrollwheel to move quite smoothly backwards and forwards. Similar functions in other media players (even those with scroll wheel support for back/forwards) seems to make large uncontrolled jumps, possibly just going for the keyframes. Can anyone please point me to an alternative for Windows that works as smooth as gmplayer? This is an honest request, not a "Win sux Lin rulz" flame. I need one before I go insane!
      In Windows, the media player automatically tries to download a suitable codec, and if there isn't any, it prints out an error message (which is not very helpful :)
      Have anyone actually seen a codec getting downloaded this way? I've seen it fail so many times I'm starting to suspect Windows Media Player just displays the text without contacting the net at all.
      --
      I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    41. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      KDE4 will help a lot with this. We will use gstreamer (sorta - the user/distro can change it, but it's fairly safe to just say "kde will use gstreamer" even if not technically correct).
      Artsd will be dropped.

      The GetHotNewStuff codec idea is good, but I'm not sure we want to touch that from a legal point of view :/

    42. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      You were right up to the point about paying for it. You can't pay and legally be able to use all those codecs in linux.

    43. Re:Linux needs a good, easy desktop. by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "Gnome is getting pretty good, but compared to Windows or OS X the point at which the windows-icons-mouse-pointer paradigm falls down still comes much sooner than in Windows or OS X"

      Ok then use the mac. I don't give a shit which you like better and I bet most other people don't either. I don't care what you like, I don't care what you use. I use gnome and I like it.

      "Linux is nice, and serves me as a Unix zealot quite well for a home desktop, but I still haven't seen a Linux distribution in which it is as easy to install an application as in the mainstream OSes."

      I think it goes without saying that everybody who uses unix is a zealot. There is no appreciable difference between somebody who uses unix and a terrorist who flies planes into a building.

      "I (like most people with computers) have a large collection of music on my computer, because it's so much easier to manage than a giant pile of CDs. Listening to music from one's computer is a common use for desktop machines these days. There's no way in hell a consumer or non-power-user is going to knowingly choose an OS with such weak audio abilities"

      Once again what does this have to do with KDE or Gnome or the desktop? You are severely confused about which parts of the opering system do what.

      "There is no stable ABI for vendors to create hardware drivers to, the ABI is in a constant state of flux along with the rest of the kernel and drivers compiled for a certain version are progressively more unlikely to work with each successive minor version of the kernel. The situation is nearly as bad for open source drivers which need regular maintenance to remain in sync with the audio API. It's no wonder most hardware vendors don't want to touch Linux with a stick."

      What does this have to do with the desktop? That does this have to do with KDE or Gnome?

      "You don't suppose all those millions of ATA DVD drives being sold are finding their way into servers do you?"

      What does this have to do with KDE or GNOME?

      "None of his complaints have very much to do with the GUI but they are certainly related to the experience of trying to use a Linux machine as a desktop operating system."

      Aah I see, every single one of your comments is offtopic when discussing KDE. You were just FUDing.

      "feel empowered rather than limited by Linux, but I'm a wee bit of a nerd and few of my non-nerd friends who've sampled Linux have kept at it even with remote tech support at their bidding."

      It sounds like you hate linux. If you use linux then you are one of the zealots you hate so much aren't you. Your friends should use windows though.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  11. Re:C? by ardor · · Score: 1

    No! For christs sake, no! KDE is nice being C++- and Qt-based. Switching to GTK, that would be horrible....

    --
    This sig does not contain any SCO code.
  12. Re:C? by zootm · · Score: 1

    I don't think there'd be much point in switching to C at this point, they'd only have to rig an object model on top of it. They'd probably be better off switching to C# or Java, something which would actually bring tangible benefits.

  13. Re:Most popular!? by HatofPig · · Score: 4, Insightful
    When you have got a product, and you want it to get marketshare (even if it is free), then you have to push it and advertise! It has got to be in peoples faces, because for every one person like you who already knows that it's a good product and yet is sick of the advertising there are 100 who have never heard of it.

    Albeit, Slashdot isn't quite the place to be pushing KDE and *nix if you want it to get seen by Joe Sixpack.

    Actually, a friend at school was messing around on my laptop, and was amazed with all the stuff that KDE 3.4 could do and it's bundled apps. His jaw dropped at Amarok (auto lyric downloading, Wiki entry on the band, smart playlist, native iPod support, etc.) and was even more amazed when I told him about stuff like K3b's built in DVD ripping, KAudioCreator CD ripping, Kopete supporting all those protocals in one window, and plenty of other stuff. It's worth showing to people.

    -Clinton

    --
    Silicon & Charybdis McLuhan Kildall Papert Kay
  14. Re:C? by ftsf · · Score: 1

    if KDE had a C interface we could code KDE applications in C which is the defacto standard programming language on unix so it would get a lot more use. And it could maintain the current C++ interface as a wrapper around the C interface so there wouldnt be a problem with compatibility.

  15. Waste of all the progress! by Bralkein · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because, unless I am very much mistaken, it would require that almost all of the project be re-written or thrown away and started on again. You can still have a radical change without having to throw away all of the code that's already been written. Also, they are porting the whole of the KDE project from the Qt3 toolkit to Qt4, since Qt4 is not backward-compatible with Qt3, so in a sense, they are changing the toolkit - but they are porting to one that is very, very similar to the one they use now. ;) What's wrong with Qt anyway that might make you want to port away from it? You might say that it's GPL and not LGPL, which might discourage proprietary developers who don't want to fork out for the alternative license, but that's about it, anything else is really just a matter of preference.

    The write-up also seemed rather sparse in details, so while I am writing this post I may as well chuck in a few links:

    Interesting interview with Aaron Seigo
    Another good interview with Zack Rusin
    Official site for KDE Plasma, the KDE4 desktop.

    1. Re:Waste of all the progress! by idlake · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Because, unless I am very much mistaken, it would require that almost all of the project be re-written or thrown away and started on again.

      You are mistaken. You can pull off tightly integrated backwards compatibility and still migrate to a new toolkit and language. Apple has demonstrated this.

      What's wrong with Qt anyway that might make you want to port away from it? [...] anything else is really just a matter of preference.

      KDE4 has specific goals, and one has to ask the question whether Qt and C++ are the best platforms to support those goals. I believe they aren't. But, of course, since most KDE programmers are heavily invested in Qt and C++, they wouldn't agree.

      In the end, the market will decide. I suspect that around the time KDE4 comes out, you are going to see other mainstream Linux desktops that are more user friendly and easier to develop for.

      You might say that it's GPL and not LGPL, which might discourage proprietary developers who don't want to fork out for the alternative license, but that's about it

      Yes, that's another problem, and that's exactly the problem the LGPL was intended to address. Putting a GPL license on software that has less restrictive substitutes discourages its use. Most of the software I develop is open source, but I'd still have to pay for Qt if I ever only want to temporarily distribute a single copy in binary form only.

    2. Re:Waste of all the progress! by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Official site for KDE Plasma, the KDE4 desktop.

      Man... that Jessica Hall girl is hot!
      Makes me wish to become a KDE developer =o)

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    3. Re:Waste of all the progress! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just another armchair coder. Shaddap.

    4. Re:Waste of all the progress! by Bralkein · · Score: 1

      You are mistaken. You can pull off tightly integrated backwards compatibility and still migrate to a new toolkit and language. Apple has demonstrated this.

      I'm not quite sure I understand you, if you are switching to using a new language and toolkit, don't you have to rewrite all of your existing codebase in this new language, keeping the old stuff around for backwards compatibility? Or do you suggest that any new program to be developed in the new language/toolkit/whatever, with bindings to integrate it with the older stuff? If you mean the latter, is this really switching, or is it just changing your policy about how new stuff is made? Please clarify further on this interesting point.

      KDE4 has specific goals, and one has to ask the question whether Qt and C++ are the best platforms to support those goals. I believe they aren't. But, of course, since most KDE programmers are heavily invested in Qt and C++, they wouldn't agree.

      Now I don't want to be nasty here, but this statement seems incredibly vague. What goals in specific are you referring to? I thought that the goal of KDE was to create a good-looking, useable desktop environment. Please explain how C++ and Qt in particular prevent the KDE team from achieving their goals. Are you saying that C++ is too low-level to be used for desktop development, and as Qt is a C++ toolkit, it too is affected by this? Would you suggest a Java-based desktop, or maybe a C#-based one? It's an interesting idea, and I could talk for quite a while about it, but I wouldn't want to waste my time if it's not what you mean.

      Yes, that's another problem, and that's exactly the problem the LGPL was intended to address. Putting a GPL license on software that has less restrictive substitutes discourages its use. Most of the software I develop is open source, but I'd still have to pay for Qt if I ever only want to temporarily distribute a single copy in binary form only.

      A GPL toolkit is really not a problem for the many open source developers who would be releasing their software under the GPL anyway, and if you want to use the non-GPL Qt license, then you must pay Trolltech for it. Commercial software developers should be able to easily underwrite this cost. You say that a more restrictive license discourages use of that software in favour of less restrictive alternatives, but then by your logic, we would all be using *BSD because the license there is less restrictive that Linux's GPL license, which is obviously not the case.

      Although I disagree with you, interesting points! I'm sorry you were modded flamebait.

    5. Re:Waste of all the progress! by idlake · · Score: 1

      Or do you suggest that any new program to be developed in the new language/toolkit/whatever, with bindings to integrate it with the older stuff? If you mean the latter, is this really switching, or is it just changing your policy about how new stuff is made? Please clarify further on this interesting point.

      Yes, that's what I mean. It's like Carbon/Cocoa on Macintosh: Cocoa is the preferred new API and it's arguably a lot easier to code for, but lots of applications are still written in Carbon.

      Please explain how C++ and Qt in particular prevent the KDE team from achieving their goals.

      I didn't say "prevent"; you can write a high quality application in assembly language if you invest enough time in it and are persistent enough (and people did, on Macintosh). But it's just not a wise thing to do.

      Are you saying that C++ is too low-level to be used for desktop development, and as Qt is a C++ toolkit, it too is affected by this? Would you suggest a Java-based desktop, or maybe a C#-based one? It's an interesting idea, and I could talk for quite a while about it, but I wouldn't want to waste my time if it's not what you mean.

      I think the entire approach of developing applications by writing code in a general purpose language and a toolkit is flawed. If usability is a goal, and given that resources are limited, it's important to make it easy for people with expertise in that area to design not just the GUI, but the entire interaction. But C++/Qt is aimed at experienced programmers, and exploring different GUI and interaction ideas is laborious even for them.

      The solution? A VHLL GUI language with occasional native code components. Kind of like VB/ActiveX (only it shouldn't suck) or Tcl/Tk or xulrunner; each of those got something wrong, but it's clearly the way things are going, and for good reason.

      Commercial software developers should be able to easily underwrite this cost

      As a commercial product, Qt is not attractive except in niche markets. It is a really expensive software product (for less money, Microsoft gives you not just a toolkit, but a complete enterprise development environment). Also, its future is determined by a small company in Norway; it is prudent to avoid such dependencies. That's probably also why companies like Sun and IBM didn't pick KDE when it came to picking a Linux desktop, even though KDE (at the time) looked more mature.

      But it's also wrong to divide the world into commercial and open source developers; most open source developers are both, so they all end up paying Troll Tech anyway. Furthermore, even fully open source projects may have the need to distribute closed source binaries during some stages of development; the Qt license prohibits that.

      You say that a more restrictive license discourages use of that software in favour of less restrictive alternatives, but then by your logic, we would all be using *BSD because the license there is less restrictive that Linux's

      I was merely making a point about the GPL versus the LGPL. (FWIW, we are all using BSD-licensed code: it's in Windows, MacOS X, and Linux. You can get an LGPL-free OS, but you can't get a BSD-free OS. I don't want to argue, though, that that is necessarily good. I think the LGPL is the right license for a GUI toolkit. GPL is good for most apps and tools. And BSD and X11 licenses useful in some other areas.)

    6. Re:Waste of all the progress! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I usually code on my couch, but same idea.

    7. Re:Waste of all the progress! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As a commercial product, Qt is not attractive except in niche markets...Also, its future is determined by a small company in Norway; it is prudent to avoid such dependencies.

      In the event that TrollTech stops developing QT, it will convert (see sections 2 and 3) to a BSD license.

  16. fuck you bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *Insert ASCII goatse here*

  17. Bloatware by orangeguru · · Score: 2

    Just getting bigger not better is my first impression. My PC is often faster and more responsive under W2K then under Suse/KDE. It only can get worse with even more gimmicks.

    1. Re:Bloatware by SimilarityEngine · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read about Qt 4 here. If Trolltech are to be believed, we are getting more features and better performance. It's not a case of the two being mutually exclusive.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    2. Re:Bloatware by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      KDE is somewhat modular, if you choose you can get away with only installing KDEbase, KDElibs, KDEartwork, (arts & QT are needed too), all the rest of the packages are optional...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    3. Re:Bloatware by kieltux · · Score: 1

      Do you compare SUSE6.2/KDE1 with W2K (published around the same time) or an actuall release of SUSE/KDE with W2K?

    4. Re:Bloatware by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      So, you are using a modern KDE on modern computer, and compare it to 5 year old Windows on modern computer? Hey, I bet that Windows95 is A LOT faster than KDE is on same hardware, KDE sucks! DOS was even faster!

      Fact is that software tends to get slower over time. You don't really notice it since hardware gets faster. But if you took old piece of software and installed it on modern piece of hardware, it would be very fast indeed. There are several reasons for that slowness. For starters, new software usually looks better, and that eye-candy takes CPU-cycles and RAM. And new software does more than old software does, and that too takes CPU-cycles and RAM.

      Maybe W2K is faster than KDE 3.4 is. But KDE also does A LOT more than Windows does, so it's not really fair to compare the both.

      Why don't you compare Windows XP and KDE 1.1 on same hardware, and see which is faster?

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    5. Re:Bloatware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should checkout the SUPER SUSE project. It is an i686 optimized 10.0 RC1. It is a 1 cd install at http://www.opensuse.org/SUPER . You need the regular 10.0rc1 install cds to get gcc and other needed tools, though.

    6. Re:Bloatware by Arandir · · Score: 1

      Why don't you compare Windows XP and KDE 1.1 on same hardware, and see which is faster?

      I've done this, about a month ago in fact. A machine in our lab has been dual-booting Win98 and Linux for years and it finally got updated to WinXP. I took at look at it and noticed that it had KDE 1.1. Playing around with it, it didn't seem subjectively slower or faster than my current KDE, but then again, this was a 266Mhz machine. Then I tried booting over into the WinXP that just got installed...

      Gaaargh! It was like trying to dog paddle in cold molasses! If KDE 1.1 kicked Windows' butt on this "old" system, I wonder what it would be like on a 4GHz system with 1Gb RAM, 150MHz SATA and AGP video?

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  18. Re:C? by ardor · · Score: 1

    And, where is the problem with writing a wrapper for a C frontend?
    You do know that there are C wrappers for DirectX, for ODE....?
    No need to switch the ENTIRE PROJECT to C.

    --
    This sig does not contain any SCO code.
  19. Re:Most popular!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you feel that they shove it in your face, don't read or use it.

    That's the beauty of open source: nobody is forcing you to do a goddamn thing.

  20. That looks really nice by eneville · · Score: 1

    That looks really nice, but the main problem with kde is the time it takes to do things. Quite often I wonder why I'm loading so much into memory on my precious laptop battery when Window Maker is sufficient.

    You notice how much is going on when dragging a window across the screen.

  21. Ah, but will KBear work? by FishandChips · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I guess the acid test for KDE 4 (as for KDE 3) will be KBear, then - the strangely named fpt client with the strange user interface that seems to come with each release whether you want it or not.

    Will it run this time? Or will it revert to its lovable self and crash shortly after starting up, taking the kicker down with it?

    Madames et Messieurs, faites vos jeux!

    --
    Las qué passoun
    tournoun pas maï
    1. Re:Ah, but will KBear work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did I just miss a joke?

      What is a fpt client? And what is that KBear you speak so lovingly of?

      Sadly I cannot find it in my installation of KDE. I guess my version of KDE did fail your acid test. (Or maybe it did not: What isn't there cannot crash ;-)

    2. Re:Ah, but will KBear work? by FishandChips · · Score: 1

      I do apologize, Mr Coward - my typing, perhaps even my distros (Debian and SuSE). But it still remains a great test for this Q&A-troubled desktop environment.

      --
      Las qué passoun
      tournoun pas maï
    3. Re:Ah, but will KBear work? by thesman · · Score: 3, Informative

      kbear never got into any official KDE release. The instability of the project is full responsability of its author and the project itself seems dead for almost 2 years now.

      Why did you have to mix kbear (as any other independent app) with KDE itself? Just because its made for KDE?

      Would this mean that if I, eventually, developed a nice calculator for windows that says 2+2=69 instantly Windows would be so buggy that 2+2=69?

    4. Re:Ah, but will KBear work? by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      Kbear is a third-party app that is not part of KDE. And it seems to be dead as well. Why do you blame KDE for shortcomings in some third-party app? Wouldn't it be same if I blamed OS X because some obscure app I found on the net is not working properly?

      "Q&A-troubled desktop environment"? But luckily you are rushing to help them with that, right? Q&A is something even you could do. Just run developement-version of the desktop, and report any shortcoming you find. Or do you prefer to sit on your ass and whine when others give you software for free?

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    5. Re:Ah, but will KBear work? by caffeined · · Score: 1

      The plural of "madame" is "mesdames". (This is due to the fact that it's a composite word "ma dame", i.e., "my lady".)

      --
      Sigh. My id isn't prime. 2 2 2 2 2 3 5 313
  22. change by Tom · · Score: 1, Troll

    that could radically change how the world's most popular free desktop looks and works.

    Good! It's about time that they move ahead, and I so hope that they finally abandon the "let's copy everything from windos" meme, which is not a winning strategy. If you want to copy, at least do it from the original (MacOS) and not another already crappy copy (windos).

    #1 reason I'm not using KDE: It looks and works like windos, and windos usability is rock bottom.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:change by ardor · · Score: 1

      Well, Windows Explorer is very unstable, and sucks a lot of memory, but it is VERY usable. It *reacts* quickly, thats a crucial point. With Nautilus, sometimes I select a bunch of files I want to move, and want to drag, and - nothing happens! Then after an eternity the drag&drop icon appears. Annoying stuff like this happens with Explorer too sometimes, but not as often as with Nautilus.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    2. Re:change by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      #1 reason I'm not using KDE: It looks and works like windos

      And yet the #1 reason lots of other people won't use KDE is because it doesn't work exactly like Windows. The KDE developers are stuck in a catch-22 situation - if KDE resembles Windows in any manner, people flame them for just copying a poor desktop, and if they try and do something new, people flame them for doing things differently to Windows. Either way, they can't win. Even the compromise they have now - default to Windows-like and offer the ability to configure it differently - isn't enough for some people.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    3. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And yet the #1 reason lots of other people won't use KDE is because it doesn't work exactly like Windows.

      Yes, you have a point there. If you copy something, then any difference to the real thing will be noticed more, the closer you copy. Essentially, you can make a 100% clone, or you can make your own thing, anything inbetween will be perceived as bad.

      The way KDE does it, nobody is really happy with it. I figure it's "good enough" for a large share of people, and since many of them are ex-windos users and have grown up to live with "good enough" being all they should ever expect - it kinda works.

      5 years ago, there was much hope for the Linux desktop. Today, even I seriously consider buying myself a Mac. And that's after my main machine has been a Linux machine for over 10 years now.

      Either way, they can't win.

      Learn a lesson from the real leader in computer desktop UI. Copy the Mac or come up with your own alternative. Do things because they are good things and not because windos does them.

      Ah crap, I tried convincing the Gnome UI group when it was formed (and I was an early member) and couldn't. Now we have two badly copied windos-like UIs for Linux. And we all pretend to be surprised that it's not making as much progress taking over the desktop world.
      Hello? You can't overtake anyone if all you ever do is drive slipstream.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    4. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 1

      It *reacts* quickly, thats a crucial point.

      You must be using some other windos, or run windos the way it was designed - single tasking. Both on my work NT and my home XP systems explorer is sluggish and sometimes very close to utterly unusable if there is any considerable work being done in the background.

      My bash, on the other hand, is always snappy, no matter how red the CPU usage bar is. ;-)

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    5. Re:change by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      #1 reason I'm not using KDE: It looks and works like windos


      How exactly? They both have a taskbar? Windows? "Start-menu"? Icons? Why is KDE a "copy of Windows", whereas some other desktop is not?
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    6. Re:change by Strixy · · Score: 1

      You can configure KDE to look more like the Mac OS. All except the wonderfully scrolling and animated application bar at the bottom. And let's not forget what OSX runs on top of.

    7. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "My bash, on the other hand, is always snappy, no matter how red the CPU usage bar is. ;-)"

      You're an idiot - I'm sure if I were to browse around Windows (it is spelt with two Ws btw) in Command Prompt it'd be snappy no matter what too.

    8. Re:change by Asphixiat · · Score: 1

      I agree windows UI sucks, I hate it, but you obviously havn't played much with KDE, mine looks - well....nothing like windows - lol

      Some people think it looks a bit like OSX, but really, it's actually I just enable the universal sidebar (on autohide of course), adding a few special entries, such as a URL to my webbased calendar, mediaplayer, home directory, control panel, services folder etc.

      A secondary panel (also on autohide) at the top of the screen, which has the storage media applet weather applet, and a couple of application buttons.

      At the bottom is the main panel - centered but only taking 70% of the screen, so I can always touch the background (I have the mouse wheel enabled to change virtual desktops, or middle click to list all windows, or right click to get the right click menu), it has my little dock applet (systray), clock, and taskbar V2 (on kdeapps). Both my main panel and top panel are transparent (also why I use taskbar v2 - it really is kool ;)

      I hate when ppl say KDE looks like windows - it's default looks a *bit* like windows, but it only looks that way if you leave it set up in the default. And Konq is nothing at all like explorer, although maybe to someone whose already prejudged it, you could write it off as an explorer clone - well....you're simply, and I mean no disrespect, smoking crack :)

    9. Re:change by Asphixiat · · Score: 1

      oh yeah, and I have to share this with the world:

      http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=2 9132

      nokuake - awesome awesome awesome way to get to the Konsole, and it's a kde hack...not like the original kuake, if you ever tried kuake, and thought - gee that's be nice if it wasn't so buggy...check it out :)

    10. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhm... no. Windows usability is far from rock bottom, after not using windows for anything but gaming for a year, I found myself lost while trying to maneuver around crappy usability choices. What you probably feel is yourself getting used to the way windows works, but thats a fallacy. Windows doesn't work properly, and don't pretend that just because you've gotten used to it after using windows for a year or two, that its the best there is. Experiment and you'll find your wrong pretty damn fast.

      My KDE setup (3.4.2) on gentoo was up and running within 30min with my favorite widgets like cpu/ram/network/calendar/note monitors and an desktop amarok widget. translucency, fading windows and 3ddesktop virtual screen interaction. Everything works beautifully and my system _NEVER_ goes down. The only reason I shut it off is because my computer has cheap fans which make a lot of noise.

      Plus, with video games like doom3, unreal, soldier of fortune, and newer titles coming out for linux more often now, I could probably get rid of windows entirely!

    11. Re:change by zsau · · Score: 1

      How un-Windows-like can you make KDE? Can you get rid of menubars (I know you can detatch them, but I prefer uncomplicated applications that only use right-click menus when they have to)? Can you get rid of the start-bar down the bottom? Can you make the filemanager behave like a file-manager should, and the webbrowser like a webbrowser, and act as two separate and distinct programs? (my prefs for webbrowsing are completely the opposite of what I want for file managing, but KDE didn't seem to understand (amongst others) I wanted new-window-on-button-one/ same-window-on-button-two when browsing files, and same-tab-on-button-one/ new-tab-on-button-two). Can you use drag-and-drop to save, instead of using a hard-to-navigate and never-remembering-the-right place file picker? Can you make it use your prefs as soon as you pick them, instead of after you've chosen Apply?

      I'm not trying to say "hah, you can't do this in KDE", I'm trying to say "I've tried to use KDE every now-and-then, and could never find ways to deal with these problems. I'd like to be wrong, but only so I can actually use some of the world of KDE, not because I'm frustrated with what I have". (Also, there's nothing inheritely wrong with copying---the desktop I prefer is/started as a copy of another less-well-known one. I just don't like what KDE's chosen to copy.)

      --
      Look out!
    12. Re:change by RoLi · · Score: 1
      And yet the #1 reason lots of other people won't use KDE is because it doesn't work exactly like Windows.

      Nonsense.

      The #1 reason why most people use Windows is because they want to use Win32 software.

      Usability and user-friendlyness have absolutely nothing to do with it.

    13. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 1

      Let's see...

      Taskbar - yes, and a badly abused one, too. Anyone who's working with multiple applications either has it drawn out to 3x the normal size (covering much valuable screen space) or it becomes totally unreadable.
      What exactly is the task bar for? Showing me what apps are running? Why, thanks, I have a really short memory and always forget what I launched 2 minutes ago. Or for switching between apps? As a matter of fact, alt-tab is much, much more convenient for that, even though it's a pretty crappy way.
      System tray - that's probably the only useful portion of the taskbar.

      Start/K Menu - the abomination. The worst thing ever to hit computer UIs. It sucks so hard, and is so counter-intuitive, that even M$ had to add the animated "press here to start" thing days before Win95 launched, because the final row of testers (who had not been subject to the slow evolution of it all) simply missed it altogether.
      And when it opens, things become worse. Unsorted crap pile of every dung shit that ever hit the machine. A good portion of the software out there doesn't remove itself properly from it, and the majority of it can not remove itself if you change (i.e. sort, order) its location in the start menu.

      And I didn't say "some other desktop is not". I was speaking only about KDE. But yes, Gnome isn't much better. I personally use XFCE4 (it's not perfect, but ok).

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    14. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot

      But at least I have some humour and know what a smiley is. ,)

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    15. Re:change by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      Before you declare my comment nonsense, try reading it. I'm talking about the opinions of lots of people. You misread that as the opinions of most people. I didn't say that. I wouldn't say that.

      Furthermore, I said nothing about usability or user-friendliness, merely its similarity to Windows. I suggest you work on your English comprehension skills.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    16. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 1

      Good point there.

      Yes, KDE has one major advantage over windos, and that is that it is configurable.

      So, you got any strings you can pull in the KDE dev team? Because if you do, I'd like to suggest they ship at least two default setups that one can choose from. Maybe windos-like and OSX-like. And if you want to please me, also NeXT-like.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    17. Re:change by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      Can you get rid of menubars (I know you can detatch them, but I prefer uncomplicated applications that only use right-click menus when they have to)?

      Given that only a minority of X applications expose their entire functionality through right-click menus, such an option would be useless for virtually everyone, surely? You have the choice between Windows-style menubars (inside each window) and Mac OS X-style menubars (a single menu at the top of the screen).

      Can you get rid of the start-bar down the bottom?

      Yes, remove it from Autostart (rm /usr/kde/3.4/share/autostart/panel.desktop here, it should be simpler though).

      Can you make the filemanager behave like a file-manager should, and the webbrowser like a webbrowser, and act as two separate and distinct programs?

      No, that bugs me too.

      Can you use drag-and-drop to save

      I haven't got a clue what you mean by that. I mean, I understand what drag-and-drop is, and I understand what saving is, obviously, but I don't see how you want them combined. If I have an unsaved word document open, where am I going to drag it from? It's open, not a saved file you can drag from one location to another.

      instead of using a hard-to-navigate and never-remembering-the-right place file picker?

      Try out the save dialog that's been there since 3.0 (IIRC). You can add frequently used locations to the sidebar (and it defaults to $HOME anyway, so for average users who only ever save one step away from $HOME, if not in $HOME itself, there's no difficulty).

      Can you make it use your prefs as soon as you pick them, instead of after you've chosen Apply?

      No.

      I'm not trying to say "hah, you can't do this in KDE", I'm trying to say "I've tried to use KDE every now-and-then, and could never find ways to deal with these problems.

      Well there's nothing wrong with saying that, of course, but please bear in mind the distinction between KDE doesn't differ from Windows in the way that I want and KDE doesn't differ from Windows at all. There are plenty of options to make KDE unlike Windows (Mac-style menus, multiple desktops, tabbed file manager, ioslaves, focus-follows-mouse, multiple taskbars of varying sizes, SuperKaramba, etc), it's just that those aren't the options you want.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    18. Re:change by RoLi · · Score: 1
      The point is that compatibility is the most important thing.

      It doesn't matter wether KDE is similar to Windows or is more user-friendly or whatever if you need a program that doesn't run on it.

      Actually without Wine, I wouldn't be able to run KDE at all. We need better Win32-compatibility. That's the single most important thing that is needed on Linux.

    19. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ive tried. windows console is crap. its just a 5 minute hack. end of story

    20. Re:change by Remillard · · Score: 1
      The way KDE does it, nobody is really happy with it. I figure it's "good enough" for a large share of people, and since many of them are ex-windos users and have grown up to live with "good enough" being all they should ever expect - it kinda works.


      This is a ridiculous assertion. I personally am really happy with KDE 3.4 and am looking forward to 3.5 and KDE 4. ALL window concept GUI's are pretty much the same, Apple's OSX included. You have a box, there's stuff in it, and there are ways to make the box do things like get bigger, get smaller, and go away. KDE at 3.4 has an awesome amount of control for every little widget on the desktop, icon sizes, fonts, toolbars, taskbars, etc. On top of that, KDE's infrastructure goes way past that with enhancements to file access that cover everything that uses it's libraries for file access making local, ftp, scp, etc nearly transparent. There is a vast chasm between KDE today and "it kinda works". KDE works beautifully, and it really doesn't matter if you're an ex-Windows user, an ex-Gnome user, an ex-Mac user or someone else entirely.
    21. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly are not capable of perceiving the massive differences between KDE and OS X gui-wise. That's fine for you, but please don't assume everyone has exactly the same perceptions of GUI behavior as you.

      The perception that other people have the same ideas about GUI's as you yourself is what has made so many FOSS programs so horrible to use. Developers create interfaces for themselves, and end up alienating a sizeable chunk of their potential userbase.

      I personally gave up on linux solely based on the interface. It could do anything I needed it to, but it all took me too much damn effort to get set up and employ.

    22. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then focus on bringing more developers into GNUstep, it copies OSX's ancestor; NeXTSTEP.
      From there one could build a desktop environment using GNUstep and let it evolve on it's own, but with a great foundation.

      I hope PyObjC will be more mature for GNUstep soon, I don't feel like learning ObjC

    23. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "With Nautilus, sometimes I select a bunch of files I want to move, and want to drag, and - nothing happens!"

      Nautilus and Konqueror have improved a great deal in usability and are great for browsing files, but when it comes to actual management of large numbers of files I find it hard to beat the Midnight Commander/Gnome Commander/EmelFM way of doing things.

      Personally I end up doing lots of my copy/move operations from the command line:

      mv
      cp
      cp -a

      : most commonly.

      Gnome Commander seems to be a bit under developed and at least in Debian requires Fam when everything else seems happy to use Gamin.

      I have not used EmelFM much yet, but I tried Damn Small Linux on an older laptop which uses EmelFM and it looks like it might be a good replacement.

    24. Re:change by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      We already do that. When you run KDE for the first time it runs a program (kpersonalizer) that asks if you want it to look like windows, mac osx, kde-own, motif or something, and so on. That then sets the defaults for everything (style, single/double click mode etc) and lets you modify it if you want.

      Run kpersonalizer manually again if you want.

    25. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 1

      It changes a few minor details, yes. But it does not give me an OSX-like dock instead of the taskbar, or a NeXT-like wharf/dock instead of the taskbar. It just sets a theme and a mouse-click behaviour.

      That's a far cry from what I've asked for.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    26. Re:change by legirons · · Score: 1

      "The KDE developers are stuck in a catch-22 situation - if KDE resembles Windows in any manner, people flame them for just copying a poor desktop, and if they try and do something new, people flame them for doing things differently to Windows"

      They could at least have changed the "desktop colour selector" panel so that it's not as awful as the identical Windows one, or changed the "sound events" configuration window so that it doesn't have the same usability bugs as the identical Windows one...

      OK, lots of people will recognise them and feel that they know it. But these things change in every version of Windows anyway, so it's not like people are unused to having their interface change every year.

      (e.g. what's with the Windows start menu, and why does every single version of Windows put the icons in a different place? People complain about the K-menu being unfamiliar, but Windows 2003 server has moved the shutdown icon to the middle of the screen, hidden the old start menu in a submenu, tripled the size of all the icons, split it into two columns, and made it appear more slowly. And this is just comparing it to Windows 2000, nevermind the older versions)

    27. Re:change by KayosIII · · Score: 1

      Would you care to give concrete examples.

      Personally I found that OSX in a lot of cases employs one or two options too few. I have yet to find out - how to change the default workgroup, remove a user account or figure out why the hell the system help keeps crashing when it opens or why the mouse just feels too slow. The launcher bar works well but gets very cumbersome if you use more than a few programs

      Don't get me wrong. There are a lot of good things about OSX and it does look very cool. But from experience users often say bad interface when they mean something else

    28. Re:change by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Taskbar: GNOME has one as well. OS X has one in Dock, but it's downright crappy. Why is KDE a Windows-clone, whereas GNOME (or OS X) is not?

      What exactly is the task bar for? Showing me what apps are running?


      To show you what apps you have running, and access them easily. If I minimize an app, the taskbar is the quickest way to access it.

      As a matter of fact, alt-tab is much, much more convenient for that


      For you perhaps, but different people like different things. I for one use taskbar routinely, instead of Alt-Tab. my hand is on the mouse all the time, why should I move my hand to the keyboard if I simply want to access my apps? And about 98% of people I have seen prefer the taskbar instead of Alt-Tab. Taskbar has the advantage of being visible, whereas the user doesn't know by default that Alt-Tab even exists. Someone has to point it out for them. But with taskbar they instantly see that "Aha! When I launch an app, it goes to this thingy at the bottom of the screen!".

      Start-menu: GNOME has one as well. Why is KDE a Windows-clone, whereas GNOME is not?

      It sucks so hard, and is so counter-intuitive


      How exactly? What's so un-intuitive about it? The default start-menu on XP does suck, but that doesn't mean that the whole concept sucks. What makes Kmenu "un-intuitive", whereas right-click menu (as found on Fluxbox and the like) is not? Only difference is that they are accessed in different way, but other than that, they serve the same function.

      And when it opens, things become worse. Unsorted crap pile of every dung shit that ever hit the machine.


      What do you mean by "unsorted"? On my KDE-machine, all the apps are nicely sorted to descriptive categories. And you CAN remove the apps from the menu if you want to.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    29. Re:change by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      It does to the limitations of the taskbar. For example if you chose OSX like it does indeed give you the icons that grow when you hover over them. I don't really see the point in mimiking exactly though.

    30. Re:change by Tom · · Score: 1

      Having a dock at the right-hand side of the screen, for example, is a major point for me.

      Why? I find it more convenient, and horizontal resolution is higher than vertical, so losing space on the right doesn't hurt as much as losing space at the top or bottom.

      Plus there are many notebooks with 16:9 displays on the market already, which makes the ratio even higher.

      It's not about eye-candy (I don't care for growing symbols), but about usability. Where the dock is, if it covers the entire space or not, if it can be covered by windows or not - that kind of things.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    31. Re:change by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      I have a 16:9 display, and I also like the dock on the side. So click and hold on the dock, and drag it to the side. Nice and easy ;) You can also configure it in the options if you don't like dragging.

    32. Re:change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could at least have changed the "desktop colour selector" panel so that it's not as awful as the identical Windows one... these things change in every version of Windows anyway

      Nonsense. The colour panel hasn't changed since Windows 95 for definite, and I'm pretty sure it was either the same or substantially similar in Windows 3.11 as well.

      or changed the "sound events" configuration window so that it doesn't have the same usability bugs as the identical Windows one...

      Er, they aren't similar at all.

  23. Re:C? by m50d · · Score: 2, Insightful

    KDE has C bindings which are just a wrapper around the C++ interface, which accomplishes the same thing as what you're suggesting. Guess what, no-one uses them, because C++ is far nicer to program in than C. If you really want to, you can program a KDE application in C. On the saner side the API also has bindings for perl, python and java, and probably more.

    --
    I am trolling
  24. Re:Big deal. Its still not grandma-friendly by KayosIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Man have you seen a real new user try to use a windows installation package. They get to about the second or third next and freeze... You would be suprised at how many times I get asked to do this task or how many (real) mum and dad users don't install because it is too complicated. The interface for most Linux installers is way too intimidating.. I use synaptic and its great for experts but I would not put in front of a new user. From an interface perspective its hard to go past klik (or the MacOSX disk image packages) It is a very promising technology that I am sure will catch on in the near future. Also the Khotstuff mentioned in the article is very cool... As for QuakeIII: I seriously don't remember having to do any of this when I installed Quake3... Except for making the installer executable. But you have identified a few key issues. I would go a little further and say what is natural and easy to Windows users is definately not what regular people concider easy and natural. Its probably easier and more natural than linux but it is not easy and natural by any stretch of the imagination. It's something that most users have difficulty realising you were taught windows at school or from friends. Yes I am a linux zealot. I also take teach people who have had NO contact with computers before.

  25. poorly chosen name by dJOEK · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or does 'Appeal' sound a whole lot like 'Apple' ?

    --
    Exercise caution when modding this message up: the author acts like a jerk when his karma is excellent.
    1. Re:poorly chosen name by kieltux · · Score: 1

      Really?
      Apple \Ap"ple\ ([a^]p"p'l), n. [OE. appel, eppel, AS. [ae]ppel,
            [ae]pl; akin to Fries. & D. appel, OHG, aphul, aphol, G.
            apfel, Icel. epli, Sw. [aum]ple, Dan. [ae]ble, Gael. ubhall,
            W. afal, Arm. aval, Lith. ob[*u]lys, Russ. iabloko; of
            unknown origin.]
            1. The fleshy pome or fruit of a rosaceous tree (Pyrus
                  malus) cultivated in numberless varieties in the
                  temperate zones.
                  [1913 Webster]
      Appeal \Ap*peal"\, v. t.
            1. (Law) To apply for the removal of a cause from an inferior
                  to a superior judge or court for the purpose of
                  re["e]xamination of for decision. --Tomlins.
                  [1913 Webster]

    2. Re:poorly chosen name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All five letters in "Apple" appear in "Appeal," and the first three are even in the same positions. "Appeal" was clearly chosen to evoke "Apple" in the minds of computer users.

      Then again, this is Slashdot, where Microsoft is derided for producing a word processor called "Word" but "KIllustrator" is seen as a perfectly original name by comparison.

  26. Re:C? by LLuthor · · Score: 1

    Qt is written in C++ - not C#. KDE is built on top of Qt. Changing that is akin to re-writing all of KDE.

    --
    LL
  27. Re:C? by ftsf · · Score: 1

    thanks for the informative post, but where can these bindings be found? http://developer.kde.org/language-bindings/ does not list any C bindings

  28. Re:Big deal. Its still not grandma-friendly by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny
    Linux is *not* user friendly, and until it is linux will stay with >1% marketshare.

    In other words, if you want to prevent Linux marketshare from dropping to below 1%, make it as unusable as possible.

    I don't quite understand why this should work, but hey, I've got some great ideas on how to decrease the usability of Linux!
    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  29. Two letters: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    NX (or maybe 6, as in FreeNX, but I digress...)

  30. Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by ardor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In Windows I use TortoiseCVS/SVN. It absolutely rocks. Using Cervisia after using Tortoise is anything but pleasant. I don't want to offend the Cervisia devs with this, but I would be glad if a new Cervisia release would integrate in Konqueror like Tortoise does with Explorer.

    --
    This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    1. Re:Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by Muramasa · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Konq really needs more crap shoehorned onto it.

    2. Re:Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by moonbender · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Konquerer doesn't need anything shoehorned into it by default. But they should offer an easy-to-use and easy-to-develop-for plugin architecture. It should be made really easy to extend Konquerer in the way TortoiseSVN and WinRAR (etc.) extend Explorer. Of course, for all I know such a plugin architecture already exists... (But is it used a lot? If not, why?)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    3. Re:Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's already done, both CVS and SVN are integreted to Konqueror when you install cervisia and kdesvn

    4. Re:Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by Arandir · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course, for all I know such a plugin architecture already exists...

      It DOES exist. And it's used. Everything in Konqueror is a plugin, so it is used a lot. When you install Cervisia, for example, it automatically integrates with Konqueror. I don't know what the grandparent's problem is, because I'm always hassling with turning that *OFF* because I don't want it.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    5. Re:Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by horza · · Score: 1

      In Windows I use TortoiseCVS/SVN. It absolutely rocks. Using Cervisia after using Tortoise is anything but pleasant.

      I agree absolutely. I used TortoiseSVN under Windows and it's truly excellent. Cervisia was a huge disapointment but then I found RapidSVN and life is good again in Linux-land.

      Phillip.

    6. Re:Include CVS/SVN stuff in Konqueror! by dcapel · · Score: 0

      Konsidering KDE has a KIO Slave for just about everything, I'm sure Konqueror has a good chance of kapitalizing on the oportunity, and integrating it.

      --
      DYWYPI?
  31. SimpleKDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Have a look at www.simplekde.org

  32. Re:Big deal. Its still not grandma-friendly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fedora's installer is just as good as Windows', from what I remember. Most of it's pretty much the same - select "Desktop installation" or whatever (we were talking about beginner users, yes?), provide the same network settings and a root password, and click "Go". Swap a few CDs, reboot (ONCE!), et voila!

    Now installing applications, that's a different matter...

  33. summary of the goods by digitalderbs · · Score: 1
    From TFA :
    • Appeal - "The Appeal project is a mechanism for bringing artists, usability experts, programmers, and enthusiasts together in the earliest stages of development by holding in-person meetings and maintaining ongoing communication over mailing lists, wikis, and Web-based forums"
    • Tenor - "a contextual linkage engine. Tenor will gather contextual data -- such as the metadata stored in MP3s, the contents of text files, and relationships between a file and the application that created it -- and present it to applications via another KDE framework. This will allow applications to provide more useful ways of searching files for users."
    • Plasma - "design and implement an entirely new desktop shell, combining the desktop (including wallpaper and icons), the panel and its applets, and desktop applets like SuperKaramba into a coherent and innovative vision"
    • RuDI - "a compatibility layer in between KDE and Qt that would allow developers to write pure Qt applications that can take advantage of KDE's powerful features"
    1. Re:summary of the goods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      so instead of using the already existing framework of beagle, they are creating something completely new and redundant, so that users now will have to index their drives 2 times for each application.

      sounds retarded to me.

    2. Re:summary of the goods by Narchie+Troll · · Score: 1

      Anything that results in not having to use Beagle is a win. I hate that piece of shit. A local search apparatus should not delete files under any circumstances.

  34. Re:Yes! by flibble-san · · Score: 1

    Why not just be honest and say "Hey, guys! I just ripped this news off from NewsForge and submitted it to slashdot"

    The original post was made by Tom Chance one of the members of the NewsForge team here: http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/19/16 16206.shtml?tid=130

    Clinton, next time try and credit the original writers...

    --
    My other sig is crap too
  35. Re:C? by zootm · · Score: 1

    I'm aware of this. Did something I say seem to contradict that?

  36. Repeated ten times already... by aug24 · · Score: 1
    ...give it up you sad individual.

    List

    Wonder if he's being paid for this or if he's just a dick.

    Justin.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    1. Re:Repeated ten times already... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, but the millions of posts here crapping on Windows are not useless, rehashed comments?

  37. Re:C? by nonmaskable · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That would be unbelievably stupid. Gnome is in the middle of culture wars over trying to move into this century's technology - either Java or C#/mono, because most on the project realize how high the costs of sticking with C are.

  38. My suggestions by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful
    1) Consolidate and halve the number of pref panels. There's too many, they're all over the place and they contain advanced & seldom used features mixed in with the common features. Throw that crap out of the window and pursue something more minimalist and therefore easier to use. If Apple (and to some extent GNOME) can do it, then so can KDE.

    2) Work with GNOME, Trolltech and Free Desktop and produce a common widget theme engine. I don't care if an app runs QT or GTK, I don't care if it's part of KDE or GNOME. I do care that the average Linux desktop looks severely schizophrenic and unpredictable from one app to the next.

    1. Re:My suggestions by ardor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1) is correct, but also pretty ironic, given that there are so much zealots who say exactly this (too much prefs stuff in the control center) and then say "edit bla.conf" when anyone asks how to get sound working (provided the zealots don't quit with a "RTFM"). The advanced options shouldn't disappear completely (like GNOME did). Instead, they should be hidden behind an "Advanced options...." button. For example, the Windows desktop settings behave this way; the most common options are visible immediately, but for editing graphics driver options or setting the monitor refresh rate etc. one has to go to the Advanced Options part.

      2) There is already something for GNOME/KDE integration: a GTK theme engine based on Qt. Thus, GTK apps look like Qt/KDE ones. Of course, its only useful if you use KDE...

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    2. Re:My suggestions by paulicat · · Score: 1, Informative

      You could also use a unified theme such as QtCurve which supports gtk/gtk2/kde all in one shot...http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?co ntent=5065

      --
      This is not a sig.
    3. Re:My suggestions by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If Apple (and to some extent GNOME) can do it, then so can KDE.

      Apple didn't do it. They use the Model T paintjob approach: They just don't let you tweak a lot of stuff that you should be able to tweak.

      I use a lot of the obscure preferences in KDE. There are plenty of dumbed down alternatives out there already; KDE doesn't need to try to be another one of those.

    4. Re:My suggestions by Beefslaya · · Score: 0
      I agree, KDE needs to be streamlined. I've used it for most of my *nix installs that I want a desktop, but it just got too damned packed full of stuff I never use.

      Take a survey of the top 25 or 30 system apps that are used and put those into a nice slim package. Then add the extras

      I've always liked the look and feel of KDE better then Gnome, but I have to say that the new RHEL and Fedora Gnome's are just laid out better.

    5. Re:My suggestions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) My suggestion would be to use an "advanced options... " twisty (i.e. unhide a section in the current panel) instead of a button. I don't need more modal popup windows that keep me for adjusting the non-advanced settings.

    6. Re:My suggestions by big_groo · · Score: 1
    7. Re:My suggestions by squoozer · · Score: 1

      I would rather see a unified sound system rather than a unified look and feel. The half dozen different look and feels that are widely used all work in (baiscally) the same way - a buttons a button whatever tool kit you use. Sound on the other hand is a disaster. esd and arts duke it out over who is going to get control of the sound card while some other app that doesn't understand either nips in and addresses alsa directly making the whole thing moot. That's if you can get the sound working at all.

      About the only thing I ever have problems with in Linux is getting sound to work properly. It looks like things are only going to get worse in the future with everyone and their uncle writting a next generation sound server. Deep joy.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    8. Re:My suggestions by DrXym · · Score: 1
      2) There is already something for GNOME/KDE integration: a GTK theme engine based on Qt. Thus, GTK apps look like Qt/KDE ones. Of course, its only useful if you use KDE...

      That's better than nothing, but really the API to the theme engine should be a simple set of C APIs that can be implemented very easily and loaded against GTK and QT. This API and its headers would be specified by freedesktop and authors just have to implement their themes against the API. When GTK / QT loads the engine, it enumerates all themes, loads the user's selected engine and calls the functions to draw buttons, get metrics, get system colours and everything else that the theme should do.

      It shouldn't be necessary for GTK to piggyback over QT or vice versa - just define a nice spec which allows both widget sets to call a well defined API.

    9. Re:My suggestions by gothfox · · Score: 1

      Average Windows desktop usually looks like all programs use their own toolkits, usually horribly skinned. Average OSX desktop is no better with Aqua/Metal separation. Now that I think about it, my Gnome (or just GTK+FVWM) desktop have been more UI-consistent than Windows or OSX for years now. Funny, huh? Mixing KDE and GTK apps brings some inconsistency, that's true, but calling Linux desktop schizofrenic is just trolling. It is already better than one of rival offerings (Windows) and no worse than the other (OSX) in terms of consistency.

    10. Re:My suggestions by Arandir · · Score: 1

      It shouldn't be necessary for GTK to piggyback over QT or vice versa - just define a nice spec which allows both widget sets to call a well defined API.

      You are expecting the impossible. First of all you need to get the Qt and GTK+ developers to agree to a common API. That ain't going to happen. One library is standard C++ and the other is C with non-standard OO constructs. In order to get a common API both sides would have to revert to an archaic motif/win32-like API.

      Second, even if you do manage this, you still need to convince KDE and GNOME (and lots of other people) *NOT* to fork off the old versions. Some people like the Qt API and some like the GTK+ API, and nothing you can do short of holding a gun to their heads will make them behave according to your dictates.

      Third, that still won't result in an absolutely uniform look and feel. Windows has its Win32 API yet even Microsoft itself can't manage to get uniformity in its own set of applications. Or what about Apple, who can't decide if they want an aluminum or jelly look?

      Finally, this is a non-issue. Real people in the real world don't care about this. People aren't crapping their pants about Quicktime not looking like MediaPlayer, so what makes you think they're crapping their pants over K3B not looking like Evolution?

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    11. Re:My suggestions by legirons · · Score: 1

      "The advanced options shouldn't disappear completely (like GNOME did). Instead, they should be hidden behind an "Advanced options...." button"

      That's one of the most annoying features of Windows programs that I wouldn't want to see copied.

      I'm sure everyone here has been annoyed at some time by how long it takes to reach those advanced options. "Control panel", select something, "Properties", "Edit", "Advanced", select a tab, press a button, scroll to the bottom of the list, select something, right click, "Properties", "Preferences" and make the change you want.

      Grouping options logically, either by related functions, or in workflow-order, makes a lot more sense than grouping them by the intended expertise of the person expected to use that option.

      How are the users supposed to know in advance whether the option they're looking for is in "Advanced user options" rather than "Power-user options", "Moderately-awake user options" or even "PHB options"

      I agree with you though, that the GNOME approach of removing options is just as bad (although hopefully it forced them to put more intelligence into making the computer choose)

    12. Re:My suggestions by njchick · · Score: 1

      I think common API would be XML + SVG. Themes don't need to draw anything themselves - they should only describe the widgets and their behavior, leaving the implementation to the toolkits.

    13. Re:My suggestions by Arandir · · Score: 1

      No good. First, without a massive bureacratic spec, every toolkit is going to interpret your XML differently. Do you know how many years it took just to get webpages looking somewhat similar when viewed on two different browsers? And that's with a spec!

      Second, your XML is going to presuppose a widget and drawing model. For just one example: are widgets going to be created through inheritance or composition?

      Third, what do you do when SVG goes out of style? Really! Currently it's popular because it has a different look from other styles, and so seems "fresh". But it won't last forever.

      Finally, what's the fricking problem with having different toolkits? If this really is a problem for people, and we really do need a totalitarian dictatator, wouldn't it be easier just to mandate a single toolkit than to mandate a single standard?

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  39. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please not. GTK is horrible. Right now, I am writing some classes that astract the same behaviour for GTK and KDE

    Here is the KDE version for adding the columns to a table widget:

            table->insertColumns(0,cols.size());
            QStringList names;
            for(size_t i=0;isetColumnLabels(names);

    Short,nice,readable,whatever you want. If I make a mistake, the compiler will tell me.

    Here is the GTK version:

            for(size_t i=0;icols.size();i++){
                GtkTreeViewColumn *col=0;
                GtkCellRenderer *ren;
                switch(cols[i].type){
                case ListBox::ColumnDef::StaticText:
            col=gtk_tree_view_column_new_with_attributes
                (cols[i].name.c_str(),ren=gtk_cell_renderer_text_n ew(),"text", i,NULL);
            break;
                case ListBox::ColumnDef::CheckBox:
            col=gtk_tree_view_column_new_with_attributes
                (cols[i].name.c_str(),ren=gtk_cell_renderer_toggle _new(),"active", i,NULL);
            g_object_set_data(G_OBJECT(ren),columnkey,(void *)i); //Dangerous cast!
            g_signal_connect(ren,"toggled",G_CALLBACK(toggleCh eckBox),this);
            break;
                }
                gtk_tree_view_append_column (treeview,col);
            }

    It is twice as long, is not type safe, checkboxes won't toggle aunless you add a callback, and the documentation is very twisted: Look at example for "active": "active" gboolean : Read / Write
    The toggle state of the button.
    Default value: FALSE
    If you read that, do you understand that you have to set "active" to the column number of the checkbox column? On the PARENT of the cellrenderer object?

    Notice how the KDE version does not mention what the column contains. The GTK version does. In both cases, I have to specify it later, when I set the column data. Why do I need to tell it twice to GTK?

    And this is not an unfortunate choice, but the general case. FOr QT/KDE, I read the docs, and I implement. For GTK, I read the docs, delve trough examples until I find something similar, crash atthe first trys because all the casts make compiler typechecking useless, and the resulting code is in general twice as long.

    Please, kill the ugly beast that is GTK.

  40. Re:here we go by Trestop · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Well, the fact is that KDE has a larger user base then GNOME. I wonder why ? maybe because GNOME ("we-what-preferences-you-want") just sucks ?

  41. Re:Big deal. Its still not grandma-friendly by aug24 · · Score: 1

    Please don't feed the troll. He's been cut-and-pasting that exact script anywhere vaguely relevent for a while now.

    Cheers,
    Justin.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  42. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess what, no-one uses them, because C++ is far nicer to program in than C

    No it's not. For a C++ programmer, C++ is nicer, but for a C programmer, learning C++ just to write KDE programs is a waste of time.

    Guess why noone uses them. No, not because C++ is nicer, but because C programmers *avoid* KDE. Why? Because noone knows that there are C-bindings for KDE. When the choice is between learning C++ or not writing ones program to run on KDE, the program won't be running on KDE.

    Why does Gnome have so many people working hard to make it the best desktop? Because of the license? No, that's been solved years ago. Because they are *C* programmers, and as long as they think that KDE means being forced to learn/use C++, they will go with Gnome rather than KDE.

    If more people knew about those C-bindings, more applications would be written for KDE.

  43. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bugger, the forum mangled the code, even in 'plain old text' mode. Imagine some lesser than's etc in it, and fill in the missing blanks. Even then, the comment stays valid.

  44. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Word of warning: KDE adovcates claim all kinds of things and are rarely even in the ballpark of the truth. Language bindings are a good exmaple -- few language bindings for KDE are fully-functional (C++ makes it hard work that breaks every ten minutes). The C bindings are a long-standing legend among KDE mouthpieces... their existence is dragged out everytime this argument comes up, but no-one uses them because they don't work... not because they all prefer the magical properties of C++.

    FACT: Using KDE/QT restricts your choice of language to C++... unless you like experimenting all the time and constantly rewriting your app.

  45. MOD PARENT UP by seguso · · Score: 1

    The parent made a very important point: anything has to do with the desktop, because the desktop must provide an interface for it. So, the filesystem has to do with the desktop. The font system has to do with the desktop. And so on.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, any problems I have with the filesystem, I can blame on the desktop?

  46. Tenor and kat by imr · · Score: 1

    What is called tenor here is already existing albeit in a very rough state as kate.
    It isnt really very functionnal yet, but it will be included in Mandriva 2006, which you can think of as a mistake from mandriva or as a gesture of trust and commitment toward that application and what it will become:
    http://kat.mandriva.com/

    Personnally, I removed it, but I'm also glad my favorite distribution is doing this kind of choices. After all, they included KDE by default when it wasnt very popular to do so, and it was quite a good choice in the long run.
    When I see the kind of interactions that will be done later with a good data miner engine behind the desktop, i understand why they did that.

    1. Re:Tenor and kat by imr · · Score: 1

      existing as kat, not kate, sorry.

    2. Re:Tenor and kat by Narishma · · Score: 1

      Tenor is a contextual linking engine. Kat is an indexing engine and desktop search tool like Beagle or Spotlight. As it happens, the two teams are working together and Tenor will be built on top of Kat in KDE4.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
  47. I just hope ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They final get rid of 'artsd'. It has been a huge wart on KDE since the day it was inserted. Let's face, sound support in your typical freenix distro already has some fundemental limitations http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=200 50901024119 and artsd only makes things worse (much worse).

  48. Re:TODO: Clone Beagle by delire · · Score: 1


    I think you'll find that the desktop search tool Beagle, was in development long before Spotlight was even announced. So, if at all, it would appear both Spotlight and Tenor took their cues from Beagle.. not that it matters at all, of course.

  49. Re:C? by m50d · · Score: 1

    They're generated by kalyptus which is the only thing you'll find in cvs but I think releases include a generated set in kdebindings/kdec, kdebindings/qtc and kdebindings/dcopc

    --
    I am trolling
  50. Re:C? by m50d · · Score: 1
    No it's not. For a C++ programmer, C++ is nicer, but for a C programmer, learning C++ just to write KDE programs is a waste of time.

    You don't need to learn C++ if you don't want to, you can just write C and classes - and learning c++ classes is no harder than learning gtk's object system. KDE isn't a particularly big user of templates etc., there are template and stl-compatible classes if you want them but you don't have to. I can't talk about other differences between c and c++ because I simply don't know about them - the only things I've learnt are classes and templates, and these are ample to write kde programs with no difficulty.

    Why does Gnome have so many people working hard to make it the best desktop? Because of the license? No, that's been solved years ago.

    Gnome is still spreading FUD about it, if you look at kde stories here you will still find people claiming kde is non-free. In general, I think the main reason people write gnome programs is because they use gnome themselves, that's what makes the difference. Also, gnome makes it hard to write kde programs (no kde support in anjuta for example) but the reverse isn't true.

    --
    I am trolling
  51. Re:C? by abdulla · · Score: 1

    A good programmer knows how to program in more than one language. Saying that you're a C programmer and not willing to try out another platform simply because of the language it is written in is just a giant cop out. Often as a programmer you'll be forced to write things in languages you don't prefer, but these languages teach you more about how to write good flexible code in different paradigms and styles. Also there exists the gtkmm C++ bindings which are popular enough to be used by VMware and many other GTK/Gnome based projects.

  52. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What tangible benefits? No, really, I can't think of any tangible benefit that switching to either C# or Java would net.

  53. Speed vs distribution by Reemi · · Score: 1

    I've been running KDE on Fedora 4 for a while where it was rather slow.

    Recently I changed to the beta/rc from Suse and can't complain anymore on the speed/responsiveness of KDE. This improvement is definately not caused by the 'later' version (3.4.0 vs 3.4.2) on Suse.

    Note that in Fedora I disabled all eye candy, while on Suse I'm using the default settings.

    My machine is an 800 MHz AMD with 300MB mem.

    1. Re:Speed vs distribution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saw much the same thing with Mandriva. I had to use IceWM to get my computer (1.7 P4 with 256 megs of RAM) usable. Switched to Ubuntu, and KDE is as fast as IceWM used to be, with eye-candy and everything else enabled. KDE on Ubuntu puts Windows to shame, but Mandriva made XP look fast.

  54. Yeah, sorry. by ardor · · Score: 1

    I was a little frustrated with Gnome when I saw the "use Gnome"-answer from the gp poster. Gnome is nice sometimes, and sometimes it sucks. Which desktop doesn't? However, my experience with GNOME and KDE always led me to prefer KDE in the past. Maybe its because of the work I do (I browse often with a file manager in my fileserver, and so far Konqueror always outperformed Nautilus). Also, I always felt Gnome to be more sluggish than KDE, as if the latency was higher. But yeah, I should have written an "IMO" there.

    --
    This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    1. Re:Yeah, sorry. by killjoe · · Score: 1

      I said gnome because gnome is the default desktop for every major distribution. SUSE, Red Hat/fedora, debian, ubuntu all default to gnome.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  55. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right on target... if you are going to use GTK+, it's best to use one of the wrapper libraries (GTKMM or GTK#). GTK from C code is a total pain.

  56. Re:TODO: Clone Beagle by mccalli · · Score: 1
    I think you'll find that the desktop search tool Beagle...

    But Spotlight is more than a desktop search tool, and that's what's being hinted at in the KDE descriptions. You could also use it to search through control panels, for example. Or music libraries - iTunes uses it. That's the point.

    It's not to knock Beagle that I made the post, it's more to point at the lack of creativity in the KDE plan dressed up in "but our developers are already thinking further"-type language. They're not thinking further. They're cloning Spotlight. A bit more honesty about that from the article wouldn't have gone amiss.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  57. how did they measure by xutopia · · Score: 1

    that it was the most popular? No this isn't a troll I'm just finding it funny how so many people start saying things like that. On what basis do they deem they are the most popular?

    1. Re:how did they measure by angrykeyboarder · · Score: 1

      I've seen this statistic all over the web for quite some time now. I don't know the exact number, but I recall it was between 40% and 50% of the X desktop market. It's been that way for years. Just look at the bigger names in Linux distros. Most of them ship with KDE as the default desktop (SuSE, Mandriva, Slackware, Xandros....).

      GNOME has alwyas been #2, although I'd not be surprised if they have gained in market share in recent years.

      Personally, I like (and alternate between) both.

      --
      Scott

      ©20014 angrykeyboarder & Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
    2. Re:how did they measure by eldacan · · Score: 1

      What's the install base of Slackware compared to Red Hat/Fedora or Ubuntu? GNOME seems very popular in large installations such as schools, which are not well accounted for in those polls. I think there are more geek desktops with KDE than with GNOME currently, but this doesn't mean KDE is the most used/popular... Anyone knows of some reliable statistics about this?

    3. Re:how did they measure by KayosIII · · Score: 1

      Online and Magazine polls of there readership. I Think Linux Magazine had a big one recently. Not a thoroughly accurate method of measuring mind you - but I am pretty sure that is where these claims come from.

  58. Re:C? by jcupitt65 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Heh, it did get mangled pretty bad, it's hard to see what's going on there. I've not used gtk_cell_renderer_toggle(), maybe it is very odd like you say. The times I've used other parts of the TreeView widget, it's been fine: a bit wordy, but quite logical and easy to use.


    You're right in general that Qt is higher-level than GTK+, since Qt is a C++ API. Of course this has disadvantages too; for example language bindings for Qt are much harder. Gtkmm is worth a look: it's at the same level at Qt (in terms of abstration), but doesn't need MOC. And it plays nice with the STL too.

  59. Re:C? by Klivian · · Score: 1

    Switching to C# or Java makes nearly as little sense as switching to C. When you combine C++ with Qt the difference to C# or Java become minimal, and the most noticeable thing you gain are the need of a VM. A telling sign are the Java bindings for KDE/Qt, they have been actively maintained and considered stable since something like KDE 2.2. And nearly no one are using them. On the other hand even more high level language bindings are much more popular, like Ruby and Python.

  60. Re:C? by bmalia · · Score: 1

    What tangible benefits? No, really, I can't think of any tangible benefit that switching to either C# or Java would net.

    Vast array of common libraries, multi-platform compilation, better API documentation, automatic garbage collection, more developers, ... I'm sure theres more but I got to get back to work.

    --
    There's no place like ~/
  61. Great work guys! by Xerp · · Score: 1

    Looks like we're in for some treats in a years time then! Having tried many desktops (such as Mac OS X, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Gnome, etc) KDE is by far the best in every aspect. It is much faster, more stable, easier to use and basically a joy to work on. Rather than becoming annoyed and aggrivated with something like, say, the Microsoft Windows desktop, using KDE is just a much richer and more pleasurable experience.

    Innovative and intuitive window management, a wealth of icons and themes to allow customisation to the way I like things. Tabbed applications extended beyond the browser bring a more complete integration of the way things work. A wealth of applications such as Kword and Korganizer extend KDE beyond any other desktop available. Its all there and its all great!

    I'm really looking forward to KDE4 - as I'm sure many of you are!

  62. Could we assume this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That this is basically the development model for Linux and _some_ it's desktop enviroments and applications -> Add features, add features, some innovation, add features, some optimization and bug fixes and then add more features...?

    I use GNOME on top of GNU/Linux (Debian/Ubuntu) everyday and GNOME 2.12 is such a delight to use, but I would rather see more integration of bugfixes of the different frameworks such as gstreamer rather than more half-worked features.

    Let's get the basics out of they way, first. I do not have many problems with my install and user experience, but let's make it easier for normal users to do things such as mounting and using hardware (video cards, USB drives/mp3 players, USB mice/keyboards/cameras, and )

    It seems to me that we reinvent the wheel and reproduce too much effort in the FLOSS community.. there needs to be more sharing on security and bugfixes across the platform. Thanks!

  63. Re:C? by zootm · · Score: 1

    That was kind of my point, in some ways. People were arguing towards porting it to C, but I think it would be fair to say that the actual real-world benefits would be fairly minimal (desktop apps – the things that would use the framework – really do not benefit from the efficiency of C, and suffer from its shortcomings). Since Qt4 is considered fairly stable, there'd be little benefit, although the benefit of using C#/Java when developing it as new would be to reduce development time, and the potential for memory bugs and problems.

    The main point, though, was that porting to C serves little purpose.

  64. Linux loser can't take the criticism.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All they can do is mod down dissenting voices. Read the article linked in parent, and then comment. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they're a troll.

  65. Re:C? by zootm · · Score: 1

    Thanks for that, you saved me a bit of explanation. Now I better get back to work.

  66. Re:C? by Relative · · Score: 1
    If more people knew about those C-bindings, more applications would be written for KDE.
    Or even less if they would know the quality and usability of that C bindings ;)
  67. Memory? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add some mem, 512 meg is OK, 1 gig is better.

  68. Site appears slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Read the article linked in parent, and then comment.

    I would read the article, but site appears slashdotted right now. All is get is Connection refused.

  69. All their dev cycle have they looked away... by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    to the future, to the next version. Never their mind on where they were. Hmm? What they were releasing. Hmph. Bells. Heh. Whistles. Heh. A Guru craves not these things. You are feature driven.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  70. Re:Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you had read the article, you would know that the link you just posted was the same link that was submitted as news here.

  71. Can't wait by KayosIII · · Score: 1
    Things that I am interested in / hope will make it into KDE4
    • Although the KDE project has had usability people for a while KDE 4 will be the first time they have had a chance to work on the bigger usability issues.
    • First movements away from traditional file managing system. I personally Think this is a very good move - This is a very difficult concept to teach new users especially casual users who always forget what they called a file or where they put it. I am confident at least that the KDE people working on this know the issue and am very interested to see what comes out. Now if they could just figure out how to run all applications without the need to manually save files
    • maybe the potential for GPU accelerated graphics on the desktop. I don't know how far this one will go but it seems a shame to let all that power go untapped.
    • Reworking of the sound system. The latest is that arts will still be used by default but will be totally replacable. A simple API for KDE apps will be built on top. IMHO this is the single most annoying part of KDE
  72. My pet hate about KDE developers? by Raithmir · · Score: 1

    Stop naming every new application with a 'K'!!! Open the task bar menu, oh look 20 separate application items all beginning with 'K'. Kan't they thing of anything better??

    1. Re:My pet hate about KDE developers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup...

      Kompletely Konfusing Krap.

    2. Re:My pet hate about KDE developers? by chill · · Score: 1

      It's called "branding" and is quite effecting in letting the masses know that the so-named apps were designed with KDE in mind. No, not every app that begins with a "K" is for KDE, but it is a good chunk in the *IX world.

        -Charles

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    3. Re:My pet hate about KDE developers? by KayosIII · · Score: 1

      The desision to move away from the k's was made recently. I am not sure that existing components will be renamed but new components will have a different naming methodology. Examples of new components are Oxygen & Plasma.

    4. Re:My pet hate about KDE developers? by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      'gi' 'gdont' 'gnow'. 'iWho' 'iWould' 'iEver' 'openDo' 'openSuch' 'openA' 'Microsoft Thing' 'Microsoft By' 'Microsoft Naming' 'xtheir' 'xapps' 'xin' 'esuch' 'ea' 'eway'?

      (i dont know, who would ever do such a thing, by naming their apps in such a way?)

  73. Gnustep - OS X compatible by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    http://www.gnustep.org/

    Write code which should pretty much just port to OS X without too much trouble.

    I've always wondered why KDE and Gnome get so much attention.

    --
    Deleted
  74. Bah!!! Too damn bulky by tacocat · · Score: 1

    Every time I've tried to use KDE it swaps out my 512MB workstation. And I run a basic workstation with nothing that should be considered out of the ordinary for some home development. But to use up that much RAM is just crap. I don't care who you are or how F/OSS you are or how fanatical your supporters are. That's crap.

    When they come out with something that doesn't take minutes to load and wipe out all my RAM then I'll be interested in it. It sure does have a lot of eye-candy and twiddly features, but the cost in performance is prohibitive.

    Sure hope they can actually improve this in KDE4. They sure haven't done that in the last 5 years. On the contrary, they have made it progressively worse.

  75. Dual is definitly worth it even for desktops by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    But only if you ever had a program "freeze" on you. I hate that. When one app having to do a bit of work brings the entire system to a crawl. Cue dual CPU. No more of that since now you will always have a second CPU to run the other stuff while say your java app is running wild.

    On both windows (only ever tried it at home with XP) and of course linux it makes a huge difference. Neither does it have to break the bank. You will be suprised how many old dell P3's are are dual ready. Just buy 2 of them second hand, canabalize them and voila, high mem, big HD, dual CPU desktop that is far more responive than the fastest single cpu machine.

    I do now only use linux on my dual machines, since I only keep windows for games and that is mostly single CPU until recently, but I tried XP for about a month and found it amazing stable. XP on a far faster P4 was far less stable, having those all to familiar freezes when explorer hangs on something and takes the entire desktop with it.

    I think the most important elements of a good desktop are dual cpu, lots of memory, fast HD and only then the speed of the actual cpu. Lets face it, the days when your cpu wasn't fast enough to handle that mp3 are long gone.

    Dare to buy second hand and enjoy stable, low heat dual cpu goodness.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Dual is definitly worth it even for desktops by mrbcs · · Score: 1
      I've found windows to be incredibly stable since win2k. You have to have quality harware though. 95% of windows problems (in my experience) are lousy ram or board.

      My only remaining complaint with linux is the speed. I've used things like Slax that are very fast, but don't have the features of Gnome or KDE. I would like a linux that looks and acts like windows, but outperforms it. (since i can't program, i keep searching distro watch looking for one).

      My users are so familiar with Windows, it's damn near impossible to get them off it.

      --
      I'm not anti-social, I'm anti-idiot.
  76. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perl would allow the ultimate in tangible benefits, especially when drunk.

    presents

  77. Re:C? by vurian · · Score: 1

    Whether language bindings are harder or not, is not important to you, as a language bindings user. (It's not true that bindings are harder for C++, but let that rest). So, if you want, you can code your application in Python, Ruby, Perl or Java -- and the Java can be compiled to native code or run on a jvm. I only mention these bindings because they are complete: there exist other bindings, but those are not complete -- just like most of the bindings to GTK are not complete.

    Actually, the bindings maintainers for Qt and KDE are a bit surprised at the amount of manual work the GTK bindings people seem to have to do.

  78. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PyGTK makes it abit more of a snap.. heh.. although its Python not C/C++

    irritant

  79. Re:here we go by Stevyn · · Score: 1

    What about SuSE? Novell seems like a big commercial company.

  80. Re:Bah!!! Too damn bulky by ledow · · Score: 1

    Eh? WTF?

    Sitting here, now at a 512Mb (actually 448Mb after the onboard graphics steals it's RAM) 1.2GHz machine with a PCI (PCI, for god's sake, there's no even an AGP slot on it) graphics card. Absolutely no swapping. Some apps take a little while to load but the only thing that actually MAKES my computer swap is if I run Word through Crossover Office.

    This is the same computer that swaps like mad whenever I run XP on it, only other OS that doesn't swap too badly on it is 98.

    I dunno what you are doing to make your machine swap but I'd point the finger at the machine or the config, not KDE. For reference, Slackware 10.2 plain install with KDE 3.4 (previously 10.1 with 3.3 and no problems then either), default settings except for the NVidia driver.

    This is my primary desktop, runs Dreamweaver MX, Word etc. on top of Crossover plus all the OS-goodness I can find and still swapping doesn't get in my way. I have an extremely loud ATA66 hard drive that I could hear any swapping and a big red light for drive activity and yet most of the time, once a program is loaded, that's it. Maybe a small twitch when switching between tasks. Dunno what you're doing wrong but there's nothing there that's specifically KDE's fault.

  81. Improvements I want: de-bloat by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Lovely article, that doesn't say huge amounts of anything other than marketspeak.

    One of the main points I use when talking about Linux to non-techies is that you don't need to buy new hardware for each new release, the way you do for WinDoze. What are they doing about size and speed (e.g. the Firefox model)?

    Further, how much of what they're doing is anything more than eye candy - what actual *functionality* does it need, when at least 75% of everyone uses their computer to email, Websurf, and maybe text message or play games?

    Why does it need still more crap?

                  mark

  82. Pass her the contact data of the FreeNX devs too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, pass her ("hot, blonde") the contact data of the FreeNX developers too, will you? See here:

    FreeNX Project Members

    These guys have achieved brilliant things. They deserve some female distraction. Especially pipitas, I think.

  83. Re:here we go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it isn't. Just as Mandriva isn't, nor is Knoppix or Kubuntu worthy of mentioning. At least in GNOME fanboy's mind.

    Seesh.

    Don't try to reason with GNOME fanboys. They're just like GNOME developers - no work, just running around and trying to convince everyone that GNOME is the only politically correct choice, without even bothering to check the facts first. And badmouthing KDE every chance they get.

  84. Re:C? by Fourier · · Score: 1

    Vast array of common libraries

    OK. But Qt is already very extensive, and has the advantage that Trolltech's implementation is GPL'd. Only a small percentage of Java/C# libraries have Free implementations.

    multi-platform compilation,

    Qt does multi-platform at least as well as Java. C# is only sorta cross-platform, if you stick to the Mono project's supported API, and if you trust that Microsoft will never sue Novell over their C# implementation.

    better API documentation

    Qt's documentation is exceedingly good.

    automatic garbage collection

    OK. But Qt child widgets automatically get cleaned up when the parent is destroyed, so there is not a lot of fussing around with memory management in a typical Qt application.

    more developers

    More developers than C++? Questionable.

    So why should KDE switch to C# or Java again? Is it for the increased memory usage? Or perhaps it's the desire to run on a non-Free VM with patent-encumbered libraries? Maybe it's just the masochistic desire to rewrite millions of lines of perfectly functional code?

    STOP DRINKING MS AND SUN'S KOOL-AID.

  85. KDE swapping at 512 MB?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No way! This is my machine running KDE + firefox + a few things in the background.

                 total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
    Mem:        514728     165464     349264          0       7344      84360
    -/+ buffers/cache:      73760     440968
    Swap:            0          0          0

  86. Re:TODO: Clone Beagle by unapersson · · Score: 1

    How does dashboard compare? http://www.nat.org/dashboard/

    That's being reimplemented as part of Beagle.

  87. LOAD "SIG",8,1 by RealProgrammer · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... would load a Commodore 64 binary file named SIG from device 8, the first 1541 drive.

    Completely non-portable, you insensitive clod. Still, those of us reading Slashdot from a C64 might be tempted to load and run your binary SIG, thus potentially spreading a virus.

    At least you could do:
    10 DOPEN#1,"SIG"
    20 INPUT#1,S$
    30 DCLOSE#1
    40 PRINT S$

    Just as non-portable, but would actually work and not cause a security nightmare from running untrusted binaries. We 64 users have enough trouble with CSS not to have security issues on top of everything else.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  88. Re:C? by eldacan · · Score: 1

    This may be interesting as an example, but not insightful.

    Actually, I find it rather stupid, to ask for the death of GTK because you have problems implementing this in C. What's stupid is not to have chosen a bad case as example (this is, at worst, unfair), but to stick with C if you don't like the consequences. Just use C++, C#, python...

    GTK is a wonderful toolkit, which lets you choose whether you prefer C++, C#, etc. and the syntax simplicity that comes with these languages, or C which has its own advantages (compilation speed, portability...).

  89. Re:C? by bmalia · · Score: 1

    Only a small percentage of Java/C# libraries have Free implementations.

    What are you talking about? You're free to use all of the standard java libraries without paying a dime. There are 3rd parties that sell libraries, but thats not limited to Java by any means.

    Qt does multi-platform at least as well as Java. I think its the other way around

    ROFLMAO! Good one!

    Maybe it's just the masochistic desire to rewrite millions of lines of perfectly functional code?

    re-writing code is #1 reason not to convert it over. But I wasn't answering that question.

    STOP DRINKING MS AND SUN'S KOOL-AID.

    SUN's Kool-Aid is great! Drink up!

    --
    There's no place like ~/
  90. Re:C? by eldacan · · Score: 1

    It seems to me the problems GNOME devs have with the Java/mono stuff are rather:

    Should we allow Java apps in the official distribution although Java is not Free and there is no complete Free replacement (yet)?
    AND
    Should we allow mono apps in the official distribution although our beloved Havoc Pennington says there are concerns which prevent Red Hat from shipping mono?

    If there was no such problem, I guess you would have both Java and Mono, just like you have Python now. Most devs agree that the foundation (GTK, GLib, core libraries) stay in C. The question is which language to allow for official end-user applications.

  91. Like you, the KDE folks have tunnel vision. by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

    On how much RAM should it work then? 256MB is the absolute minimium these days, with 512MB being the standard on computers.

    True for folks who have newer hardware, but not true for everyone. Not at all.

    Case in point: my largest box at home (out of seven boxes) is a 256MB PPro, but the rest of my machines vary between 64MB and 192MB, with most of them still sitting at 64MB.

    The *only* platform I use that has a desktop which seems to require more RAM than I have on many of my machines is Linux.

    On 64MB hardware, OS/2 Warp 4 absolutely flies, Windows 95B/98/NT4/2k varies from very fast (95B) to fast enough to not cause impatience issues (2K), and BeOS 5 Pro flies. Solaris 7 and 8 are also fairly fast (tho I hate CDE). My current Linux distros using lighter window managers (or older versions of KDE such as 2.2) are also quite fast.

    A 64MB PPro box running any of the above platforms is perfectly capable of running a browser like FireFox 1.0.7 very quickly, can listen to/burn/rip CDs, can run graphics programs, play low-res videos, and run just almost any general application you care to name including the latest incarnations of OpenOffice (though some swapping will occur depending on platform), and it can also run a number of interesting games including a fair number of once fairly popular titles (UT, Tribes 1, Quake 1/2/3A, SC, TA, AOE I/II, Homeworld, NFS 2/3/4, Madden 2001, etc.).

    Because of the above, I've really seen very little reason to upgrade my desktop boxes except for playing newer games, and I'll be doing that on a separate game system when I finally get around to building one.

    Newer versions of KDE seem to growing (in terms of resource usage) at a very fast rate, and the desktop looks like it's gaining all kinds of visual candy, but I still can't get as much functionality out of KDE as I could out of OS/2, and its WorkPlace Shell was quite usable on a 16MB machine!!! One wonders, quite frankly, where all that space is going. Eye candy?

    --
    Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
    1. Re:Like you, the KDE folks have tunnel vision. by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Case in point: my largest box at home (out of seven boxes) is a 256MB PPro, but the rest of my machines vary between 64MB and 192MB, with most of them still sitting at 64MB.


      I'm sorry, but your machines are yesterdays hardware. You should not try to run today's software on yesterdays hardware. Like you said, your hardware runs bunch of obsolete OS'es just fine. I bet it would run DOS REALLY well. And your point is?

      A 64MB PPro box running any of the above platforms is perfectly capable of running a browser like FireFox 1.0.7 very quickly


      So, because it runs a web-browser well, you then expect it to run a full-blown modern desktop-environment with all the bells and whistles? Uh, OK....

      Newer versions of KDE seem to growing (in terms of resource usage) at a very fast rate, and the desktop looks like it's gaining all kinds of visual candy, but I still can't get as much functionality out of KDE as I could out of OS/2, and its WorkPlace Shell was quite usable on a 16MB machine!!! One wonders, quite frankly, where all that space is going. Eye candy?


      Of course old OS'es require less resources! Hell, I bet that back in OS/2-times, 16MB was A LOT! You simply can't compare an ancient OS to something as modern as KDE, and then proclaim that KDE "wastes resources". Is OS X a pig, because the original Mac OS worked in machines that had only tiny fraction of modern Macs performance?

      What consumes performance? Well, resolutions have increased, widgets have gotten better-looking, systems have more functionality built-in (KDE for example has a system-wide spell-checker), color-depths have increased, icons looks better etc. etc. Systems have simply progressed. It is absolutely pointless to compare some obsolete OS to modern system and proclaim "this system ran just fine on 16MB of RAM, the modern system is bloated!".

      Instead of complaining about how slow KDE (or any other system for that matter) is, get on with the times and buy at least semi-modern computer. They are not that expensive these days.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    2. Re:Like you, the KDE folks have tunnel vision. by baadger · · Score: 1
      "What consumes performance? Well, resolutions have increased"

      Speaking of which, I wish somebody could explain how Windows 2000 manages 24 bit depth at 1280x1024 resolution and 75 Hz on my ATI AGP 4MB (you read right) video card and yet xorg flakes out complaining of not enough memory at 24 bit (I've got it at 16 bit atm).

      This is the impact optimisation can have. It can be all the difference between high quality porn and poorly dithered porn.
    3. Re:Like you, the KDE folks have tunnel vision. by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but your machines are yesterdays hardware. You should not try to run today's software on yesterdays hardware. Like you said, your hardware runs bunch of obsolete OS'es just fine. I bet it would run DOS REALLY well. And your point is?

      If those "obsolete OSes" are able to connect to modern networks and run modern applications, then perhaps they aren't so obsolete after all. DOS doesn't run Firefox, Seamonkey, or Open Office, while OS/2 and Windows 95 OSR2 do.

      So, because it runs a web-browser well, you then expect it to run a full-blown modern desktop-environment with all the bells and whistles? Uh, OK....

      Here's a little homework for ya: try comparing the feature lists of the WorkPlace Shell and the KDE desktop, and then get back to me about KDE being a "full-blown" version of anything.

      Yeah, it's better than Windows, but so was PC/GEOS back in 1989. Bee Eff Dee.

      Of course old OS'es require less resources! Hell, I bet that back in OS/2-times, 16MB was A LOT! You simply can't compare an ancient OS to something as modern as KDE, and then proclaim that KDE "wastes resources". Is OS X a pig, because the original Mac OS worked in machines that had only tiny fraction of modern Macs performance?

      How do you explain the fact that OS/2 is able to do far more in that space than KDE?

      The fact that OS/2 is an old system chronologically (a fallacy, BTW, as eComStation 1.2 is less than a year old and still flies on a 32MB machine) has nothing at all to do with the fact that its desktop is able to do more functionally at the same resolutions than KDE.

      To me, less functionality in more space equals coade bloat regardless of the age of the software being discussed. The fact that the two systems are of roughly the same vintage makes the situation even MORE unacceptable.

      What consumes performance? Well, resolutions have increased, widgets have gotten better-looking, systems have more functionality built-in (KDE for example has a system-wide spell-checker), color-depths have increased, icons looks better etc. etc. Systems have simply progressed. It is absolutely pointless to compare some obsolete OS to modern system and proclaim "this system ran just fine on 16MB of RAM, the modern system is bloated!".

      I was talking about performance in 64MB, not 16MB. Video resolutions, icons, and anti-aliasing simply do not explain that kind of resource usage (OS/2 will run in 2048x1536 @ 32-bit color if you have a card that supports it, BTW, and anti-aliasing is available and works just fine on much smaller machines).

      While some of your reasons are valid, my entire fscking point is that no regard is being given to folks who might not give a rats ass about transparent windows or anti-aliased fonts and would rather have a WORKING BOX that can use KDE's basic desktop without the extraneous eye candy.

      I could point out that I'm aware of several businesses who are happily using hardware of the same vintage as my current LAN setup, and that the KDE folks are effectively alienating them as well, but your solution seems to be to upgrade the hardware for no other reason than to support prettier folders.

      Isn't that Microsoft's message, too?

      What ever happened to Linux as a small/flexible/lightweight platform??

      Folks like you make me ill...

      --
      Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
      The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
  92. Here we go again... by sultanoslack · · Score: 1

    I end up saying this every time this comes up on Slashdot, but...

    I submitted my first talk on this topic a couple weeks before Spotlight was announced. I'm not sure that Beagle had ceased to be part of Dashboard at that time and become Beagle, but at the very least it was far from functional.

    And standard mantra -- Tenor is more about relationships between data than content. "Contextual Linkage" vs. "Searching", so to say. Granted, at this point both Beagle and Spotlight are looking in that direction, but they're building context on top of indexing rather than indexing on top of context.

  93. Re:Bah!!! Too damn bulky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess that he's either trolling or had the system on forever and doesn't know how swap is used in linux.

  94. Re:TODO: Clone Beagle by mccalli · · Score: 1
    Interesting. From that link, Dashboard seems a little in advance of Spotlight, or more accurately in advance 9of current Spotlight usage, as it reacts in real time, as opposed to changed search criteria. Spotlight does have the search-as-you-type thing, so it could be used that way, but I'm not aware of anything that's doing it. I'm also not aware of Spotlight being used outside of its own applications, eg. a search in Finder causing Preview to update the PDF it's displaying etc. That sounds implicit in the Dashboard description I've just read.

    Good link - thanks.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  95. who modded this insightful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    users now will have to index their drives 2 times for each application.

    Who do you mean by "users"? People who run more than one GUI? This is a big part of why Linux isn't mainstream. Technogeeks can't look at things from the perspective of the mainstream computer user who isn't going to use multiple GUIs and just wants to use e-mail, write documents, browse the internet, and have new applications install with a simple click.
  96. Simpler Design by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

    They need simpler design, I look at a standard application like this, and I think, "WTF" I have one that looks just like the shutdown button in windows, a blue arrow pointing right, and a bunch of other stuff that I'd have to look at a tooltip to just try and figure out what all those things do! Everything seems bulky with big boarders too, I like Win2k where everything was thin and space efficient. The taskbar at the bottom sucks too, why do you need so many buttons there, a launcher menu and a clock will suffice, and why is it so tall with big square buttons? Why can't it have have one row of applications, and be less intrusive? I'm not trying to nag here, and I'm sure someone will say, "Get used to it", but before I move from OS X, I'm going to want a little more zen in my applications. KDE always seemed to attempt to make things easy too, but when it gives detailed instructions on how to click something, "click this for the internet!", but then asks you for parameters for your dialup account, and IRQ's, etc, it just gets frustrating. We need tighter integration between the OS and the WM. Like WIndows and MacOS X

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
    1. Re:Simpler Design by DJCacophony · · Score: 1

      They need simpler design, I look at a standard application like this, and I think, "WTF" I have one that looks just like the shutdown button in windows, a blue arrow pointing right, and a bunch of other stuff that I'd have to look at a tooltip to just try and figure out what all those things do!
      You could right click it and select "customize toolbar", and tell it to put the button meanings in text beside them (something that is standard in almost all kde applications).

      Everything seems bulky with big boarders too, I like Win2k where everything was thin and space efficient.
      This is customizable in window decorations.

      The taskbar at the bottom sucks too, why do you need so many buttons there, a launcher menu and a clock will suffice, and why is it so tall with big square buttons? Why can't it have have one row of applications, and be less intrusive?
      You can add or remove buttons, as well as any applets in the taskbar. You can also adjust the size of the taskbar (both width and height) and the number of rows of applications in it.

      --
      Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
  97. Re:C? by labratuk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well that's not quite fair. At the same time, you're also comparing two different programming languages.

    If you want to compare c++ interface with c++ interface, you could look at gtkmm.

    --
    Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
  98. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    GTK Troll...

    Ofcourse it is easier to work with objects than the old way. QT is just a nice toolkit for C++ programming. I still prefere something more highlevel, like Delphi or C#, but that is just my problem...

  99. Re:C? by Klivian · · Score: 1

    Perhaps I should have spelled it out more clearly in my above post. The fact is C#/Java will not give any, or minimal reduction of development time compared to C++ with Qt(It's with Qt, not pure C++). The difference in lines of code will be minimal, the biggest difference will most possibly be reduction of compiletimes(aka very little real world gain). And use of the Qt memory model helps reduce the problem of memory bugs too. If you are interested in reducing development time with KDE/Qt use Ruby or Python where you get real measureable reductions. And in most cases not any significant performance hit either. As most of the heavy lifting are done by the C++ libs.

  100. Re:C? by zootm · · Score: 1

    Well, yes, you seem to be largely agreeing with me. I mentioned C#/Java simply because they are more suitable languages for the job than C, and yet it seems strange to most people to switch to them. From this it can be seen that switching to C probably isn't the wisest of moves.

  101. Re:Big deal. Its still not grandma-friendly by slashflood · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Always the same post: The guy is called ClintJCL: one of his posts. You can find the same post in his blog, but he says, that he just copied it from /.. Some research at Google reveals a lot about this guy.
  102. Re:C? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem here isn't Gtk+. It's C.

    And you cheated by writing the Qt example in C++, but the Gtk+ example in C. If you want to make them equal, write the Qt example in C, too -- oh, wait, you can't even use Qt from C!

    Everybody I know writing GUI apps uses a higher-level language. Why you'd write a GUI app in C or C++ is beyond me.

    Take Python, for example. Try writing the same code in PyQt and PyGTK -- both of which are very popular for writing apps these days. PyGTK is very Pythonic; PyQt requires you to write C++ method signatures to bind any events.

    The first step in writing a program is to write it at the appropriate abstraction level. Writing a GUI app in C is just dumb; use something like Python. Of course, the Qt folks seem to think C++ is correct for *everything*, so even if you use Python you have to use C++.

    Gtk+: You can use any programming language you want, and it feels like a native library anywhere.

    Qt: You can use any programming language you want, except C, and it feels like a C++ library anywhere.

  103. Re:change is not good! by mpapet · · Score: 1

    There are desktops trying to do their own thing and you know, all of them are quite unpopular because it's not familiar.

    Poke around the Internet for Gnustep based applications/environments. There's another guy doing a mozilla-based desktop environment where he's stuffing menus in the corners of the screen.

    Things that humans must re-learn mean change, and change is not something most people thrive on.

    I can be very critical of KDE on a detailed level. But overall, it's very good. What I grow most tired of is people that lament a lack of innovation while they don't do much to experiment or contribute to innovative things.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  104. Re:here we go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Novell is GNOME company, or hadn't you realised that? All their business development is with GNOME.... perhaps you should do some checking. As for the other posters hilarious claims about Kubuntu and Knoppix... bwhaha. Ok, commercial... yeah... if you say so. And Mandriva is a near-bankrupt dead duck.

  105. not quite true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Those stats are usually user polls, and asking the power geeks what they like most has almost no bearing on actual usage considering that there are now millions of non-geek users at libraries, schools and offices.

    to counter your list:

    - Suse is on its way out as a desktop, these days Novel is pushing Novel Linux Desktop, which is a gnome centric distro.

    - Sun uses gnome in JDS.

    - Ubuntu uses gnome only.

    - Fedora and Redhat are both default to gnome.

    so yeah, its a tossup which is really "in the lead"... which make such claims like in this story laughable and basically FUD.

    1. Re:not quite true by angrykeyboarder · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how they are "FUD".

      When it comes right down to it, who cares who's in the lead? Everybody has their fave and that's what matters. I like both GNOME and KDE. I can't pick a favorite. There are features GNOME has that I wish KDE did and vice-versa.

      But as far as "who's in the lead" goes, does it really matter?

      I'm sorry I dared mentione that I'd read (several times, a year or so ago) that KDE was ahead. I didn't know it would incite a riot....

      --
      Scott

      ©20014 angrykeyboarder & Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
  106. Fedora is problematic. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    Compared to SuSE or Debian, Fedora is a lousy distro. I ran into numerous problems with it, too. Indeed, as you found, things often run far better under SuSE, Debian, or basically any other non-RedHat/non-Fedora distro. While your machine isn't the most powerful beast, it should be more than sufficient for a decent KDE experience. It's unfortunate that RedHat/Fedora failed you so badly. At least you were able to get a solid SuSE installation working.

    It bothers me that Fedora is often recommended to new Linux users, yet it is often nothing but problematic. Its low quality probably does more to turn users off of Linux than anything else, which is awful because most other distros are far superior to Fedora.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  107. that's why kde sucks so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    people want a fast, simple and reliable desktop, not an ugly and slow one.

  108. Re:C? by Fourier · · Score: 1

    ]]Only a small percentage of Java/C# libraries have Free implementations.

    What are you talking about? You're free to use all of the standard java libraries without paying a dime.


    This kind of free. (Don't read Slashdot much, do you?) Kinda lame to spend thousands of man-hours building a Free desktop only to have it depend on non-Free software, no?

    ]]Qt does multi-platform at least as well as Java.

    ROFLMAO! Good one!


    Glad I gave you a laugh, but I was actually serious. Java is riddled with platform- and VM-specific issues that pretty well kill the "write once, run anywhere" mantra. Qt generally ports pretty well.

    ]]STOP DRINKING MS AND SUN'S KOOL-AID.

    SUN's Kool-Aid is great! Drink up!


    For philosophical reasons, I only drink Free beer.

    (Also, Sun is clinging to a failed business model and would be dead already if it didn't have so much cash in the bank. If it's board had any sense, they'd dissolve the company, sell off the assets, and return the money to investors. Their kool-aid sucks.)

  109. Re:Public relations improvements are recommended. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What makes you think hes a KDE developer and not a troll? Nothing I read there made him look like he was really a KDE developer.

  110. Re:Bah!!! Too damn bulky by segedunum · · Score: 1

    Every time I've tried to use KDE it swaps out my 512MB workstation.

    Not it doesn't so stop lying. That's just a lame anti-OSS troll.

  111. Smart design and ease-of-use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use both Slackware/KDE and Mac OS-X.

    Eye candy is always nice, but I think the most important things are smart design and ease-of-use.

    As an adaptation:
    Easy things should be very easy. Difficult things should be smartly convenient.

  112. Re:KDE still trailing miles behind Microsoft by Eideewt · · Score: 1

    I'm not seeing much reason to go with their findings over my own. Are you thinking that most of us who prefer Linux haven't used both Linux and Microsoft Windows enough to make informed decisions?

  113. Re:C? by eldacan · · Score: 1

    Why do you, AC, call this a GTK troll?
    I think GTK is a nice toolkit for C++ programming. I think it's a nice toolkit for C# programming. So I think it's just a nice toolkit. So I think it doesn't deserve death.

  114. Re:C? by bmalia · · Score: 1

    Java is under the Sun Community Source Licensing (SCSL)

    Executive Summary

    Community Source creates a community of widely available software source code just as does the Open Source model, but with two significant differences requested by our licensees, as follows:

    * compatibility among deployed versions of the software is required and enforced through testing
    * proprietary modifications and extensions including performance improvements are allowed

    These important differences and other details make Community Source a powerful combination of the best of the proprietary licensing and the more contemporary open source technology licensing models.
    Java source code is available. Ok, so you can't take the source code for java.. re-work it.. and release it again as a brand new programming language. (Although a certain company tried that once.. *cough*MICROSOFT*cough*) But you are welcome to tweak up the code and submit it for possible integration.

    Java is riddled with platform- and VM-specific issues that pretty well kill the "write once, run anywhere" mantra. Qt generally ports pretty well.

    Tell me.. How exactly is Java platform specific? I can take a java source file. Compile it on a Windows machine. Take that compiled class file, and run it on a Linux machine. it already is capable of handling different widgets, different file systems, etc. The reason being, of course, because it is not running on linux or windows...its running on a VM. Sure, you may have to deal with 1.5. code not running on a 1.2 VM..But thats like trying to compile source code with new QT calls using an old QT library.

    QT(C++), on the other hand, runs natively. This means, of course, that it must be compiled seperately for each platform it is to run and not only that, the source might need to be updated to handle platform specific issues. (AKA "Porting") I am well aware QT applications are available on both KDE and Windows. So it is definately do-able. But saying its just as easy or even easier just makes me laugh. You have 1) different source and 2) a different executable.

    For philosophical reasons, I only drink Free beer.

    You're free to drink all the Free beer you want. In my world, beer costs $$$'s, so I'll have to write code in what ever language my employeer wants me to. In addition, until Madden 2006 will run on Linux, I'll have to keep my home machine a dual boot.

    (Also, Sun is clinging to a failed business model and would be dead already if it didn't have so much cash in the bank. If it's board had any sense, they'd dissolve the company, sell off the assets, and return the money to investors. Their kool-aid sucks.)

    I'd put my money on SUN staying around longer than Trolltech.

    --
    There's no place like ~/
  115. Qt and trolltech by johansalk · · Score: 1

    Everytime I see all the work that's happening on KDE I wonder what's the point of having an OSS desktop thta relies on the proprietary Qt from trolltech. What a shame. I wish all the effort would've gone on something truly free like Gnome.

    1. Re:Qt and trolltech by sergio.garcia · · Score: 1

      QT is distributed under the GPL. I can't believe that people still believe QT is propietary software. Who modded this up?

      --
      "Agree with them now, it will save so much time."
    2. Re:Qt and trolltech by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      QT isn't proprietary - its GPL.

      They also have a contract with the kde devs, that if they dont release a new qt release within 12 months of the last, qt is automatically relicensed under a public domain license, or something like that.


      <sarcasm>
      I wish people wouldn't use that propriatry linux kernel - its GPL, which is obviously just as propriatry as windows.
      </sarcasm>

    3. Re:Qt and trolltech by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      GPL isn't free enough for you?

  116. KDE is freer (as in speech) than Gnome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Qt is GPL -- it provides more guaranteed freedoms than Gtk+, which is under the Lesser GPL! In fact, a major complaint in the Gnome camp seems to be "damn them for choosing a toolkit [Qt] with a viral license!". Makes one wonder who actually cares more about freedom...

  117. FreeNX -- blazingly fast over dialup! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    "On a LAN with X remote you can't tell you're not working on the local machine, it's that good."

    Oh, dude!

    I'll read it to you:

    "She told me that she wanted to use a remote client to work on her work machine from home."

    Does this sound like "LAN" to you??

    And I'll read you some more:

    "She told me that windows xp did it so significantly faster that she dumped linux because she could not stand the wait."

    And I tell you one more thing, from experience: She is right. She's absolutely fscking right! Repeat after me, three times:

    Remote X over a DSL dialup link is unusable for work. Remote X over a DSL dialup link is unusable for work. Remote X over a DSL dialup link is unusable for work.

    And FreeNX over the same DSL link is blazingly fast. You can hardly tell the difference of FreeNX-over-DSL from a local session. And it is nearly as fast over a dialup modem or dialup ISDN link.

    FreeNX beats Windows RDP out of its pants.

  118. Re:TODO: Clone Beagle by osi79 · · Score: 1

    Well, Beagle might be a nice and working implementation (I never used it much and haven't read the code, so I can't tell), but it is not exactly what tenor aims to be. Tenor's primary goal is not about search, but about linking related desktop resources (a resource can be a file, a website, an email, a post-it note, an abstract idea, a person in your address book). So you get a "web of context" which makes it possible to present the user the information is actually interested in in his current context. This is beyond what beagle does: collect metadata, build an index, search it via search string. That is not rocket science, and was there on the web for a decade now. Also, it's limited, it can't find the picture my friend sent me via IM yesterday. Beagle is good because it already works, and tenor is still a concept, but from the idea behind it, Tenor is more compelling IMO. And it's not a Beagle clone by no means.

  119. Not quite. by poofyhairguy82 · · Score: 1
    O.K., its a license thing with gstreamer too, thats why the USER has to install the ffmpeg plugin, but wouldn't a messagebox with a "you have to agree to take responsibility blabla...." and an OK button to start the install be adequate?

    No. In many nations that would make the developers an accessory to a crime:

    An accessory to a crime is any individual who knowingly and voluntarily participates in the commission of a crime.

    If all it takes is a disclaimer to make legal troubles go away, many of my favorite NES rom sites would still exist!

  120. What I want by poofyhairguy82 · · Score: 1
    I want what Vista will have- GPU acceration. KDE 3.4's Kwin has a compmgr now that speeds things up and allows for neat GUI tricks (with an Nvidia card) but its as buggy as can be. I want a straight copy of everything Vista has- thumbnails of taskbared programs, fading Windows, drop shadows, etc. Thats is where you get users. On the "wow" factor.

    2005 is about to end and the best GPU work done on Linux (xcompmgr) is over a year old with no development. People with old computer have options like XFCE, but those that want a stable/accerated high end Linux desktop have none! Xorg is ready. Nvidia has the drivers. And no one wants to pick up the ball....

    (Sorry if I sound like Mr. Smirl, but often I think he is correct!).

    1. Re:What I want by yfkar · · Score: 1

      >> And no one wants to pick up the ball....

      Ever heard of EXA, the new acceleration architecture for Xorg?

  121. C++ is insecure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Now I don't want to be nasty here, but this statement seems incredibly vague. What goals in specific are you referring to?

    One of the most common and most severe security holes is buffer overflows. C++ is one of the few languages that does not make buffer overflows impossible. When open source developers start to take security seriously, they will have to rewrite all of their code in another language any way.

    I realize there are plenty of developers in denial that switching to another language will help. Yet the simple fact remains that buffer overflow errors result from common bugs that developers generally never even see when they are testing. We are not going to eliminate the very frequent buffer overflow exploits until we stop using C and C++.

    And to those who complain that checking bounds all the time is too slow, you're part of the problem. Buffer overflows exist because people don't check their bounds! In order to stop buffer overflows, software needs to incur the overhead of checking bounds anyway.

    Finally, those who complain that switching to another language is pointless because there are plenty of other security holes, those security holes are rarely as significant and they are far less common. Buffer overflows account for nearly half of all security holes. A move away from C and C++ would instantly make your desktop twice as secure. Furthermore, another language could take measures to reduce the likelihood of other security holes at the same time.

    Switching away from C and C++ may not instantly make your desktop secure, but it is certainly an absolute requirement on the road to achieving that goal.

  122. Re:Public relations improvements are recommended. by CyricZ · · Score: 1

    Indeed, he may very well be a troll.

    --
    Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
  123. That depends by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    I have been using mandrake since shortly after it started. I have nothing but fast response time on it from konqi. In addition, this is where I did all of my development, until about 1 year ago, where I took a job that required both Linux and Windows. When I started, I was on Xp with MSIE. It was dog slow compared to konqi on Mandrake. But recently, I have gotten tired of Mandrakes lousy quality, and then they switched to doing a .x rev back (i.e., they installed 3.3, when 3.4.2 was current). So I finally switched to Suse and was shocked. The system is overall more stable. I see far less bugs. In addition, I have the newer KDE that I wanted. But it runs a great deal slower. In fact, I assumed that 3.4 was slow. But I upgraded one of my mandrake systems (not all are converted yet) to 3.4.1. And the speeds are much faster than Suse. Much faster. And much less memory. And yes, it does run faster than MSIE, while the suse version does not. Sadly, the Suse system is my biggest system.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  124. Re:C? by Lucractius · · Score: 1

    Number one. As a gentoo on sparc user for some time if notcied what he means about java. Java works on Solaris/OpenSolaris on sparc and x86, but java only works on Linux on x86, java on linux sparc is very questionable. Proof point.

    And as for suns buisness model yeah its so loosing money. Sun is a good company as is Trolltech. if i had moeny id invest it in sun. but thats my choise not yours.

    And as for the freeness... open source is not always "open source"

    CCDL != GPL

    and personaly im just happy their both open soruce OSI aprooved :)

    --
    XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.