KDE 4.1 Released, Reviewed

StoneLion writes "After months of development and controversy, the KDE project announced the release of KDE 4.1 today. Linux.com (a Slashdot sister site) took a hands-on look at the new code, and reviewer Jeremy LaCroix says, 'KDE 4.1 simply rocks.'" Bruce Byfield's review is quite positive, as well.

Comments

I love Linux but...

[LWATCDR]

Sorry but Linux.com and Bruce Byfield praising KDE is like PC Magazine praising Vista.
I would like to some more critical reviews.

KDE 4.0 was always more of a test release

[Random BedHead Ed]

After months of development and controversy

I've never been sure why there was much controversy. The various announcements around the time of the 4.0 release and in advance made it clear that KDE 4 was the entire new desktop (in all its future versions) with new core technologies like Phonon and Plasma, whereas KDE 4.0 was the very first release of said desktop, wherein the underlying technologies were frozen so that developers could start using them, but the apps and desktop were incomplete.

I tried it as a LiveCD and the desktop experience was lukewarm, so I went back to 3.5. But I never wrote off KDE 4. No one should have, and there never should have been any controversy, considering what 4.0 was. The 4.1 release is the one people have actually been waiting for, since the apps and desktop components have had time to adjust to the new libaries, so if you adopted 4.0 thinking it would be your new desktop and you hated it, you probably jumped the gun. Have another look.

Re:KDE 4.0 was always more of a test release

[Random BedHead Ed]

It only occurred to me today, but I actually think KDE should do it again for KDE 5. If consistently used, there's nothing wrong with the following version numbering

I agree. I actually like the KDE 4 scheme better than the usual one. Partly I like it because terms like "alpha" and "beta" are used inconsistently nowadays, and are often abused. The so-called controversy with KDE 4 erupted mainly because KDE didn't go the easy route and call it 3.99 or beta. The complainers didn't pay attention to what they were getting and had false expectations as a result. However, the paradigm that .0 would be a library freeze to build a platform foundation was very sound, IMHO.

Complaint about this review

[Lord Byron II]

I'm bugged by something he says in this review and I see reviewers doing it all the time: "everything ran fast and smooth, even when I had six plasmoids in use and desktop effects turned on, even on a modest 1.6GHz laptop." He's using the old megahertz myth. If he's using a 1.6GHz Centrino 2, I doubt that I'll see the same performance on my 1.8GHz Sempron that's four years old.

Re:Remember folks

[halivar]

Do they need you? Do they have an obligation to do anything for you?

From my perspective, they're Santa Claus: they may not give me all the free gifts I want or asked for ("I want the entire GI Joe collection"), but they give me a helluva lot of free gifts regardless.

Re:Why does anyone care about the 'desktop'?

[FrozenFOXX]

Um, not sure what the problem is. KDE 4 allows you to put icons on your desktop. Even better it goes beyond the functionality of KDE 3 in this respect since you could make several containers in different areas of your desktop and put different icons in each one, thereby giving you even more spatial control cleanly and efficiently.

What can't you do for KDE 4.x that you can do in KDE 3.x that's a show-stopper for you?

Re:Why does anyone care about the 'desktop'?

[Hijacked Public]

I don't think you understand.

The parent poster is complaining on behalf of users who don't really have a solid handle on any aspect of the computer other than means to launch and use the few applications they care about. I have known many of them who are afraid to delete shortcuts from their desktop or Start Menu. They are afraid to move them around. They are afraid to rename them. I try to explain the difference between a shortcut and an executable. They do not understand.

And those of us who do understand usually just want to do some work with our computer, not get constantly bogged down with administrative tasks and upkeep. And the free-for-all Windows allows application installers results in just that kind of bogging down.

Install something new:

1. delete its desktop shortcut(s)
2. open Start Menu -> drag executable shortcut to All Programs -> delete vendor named folder containing the uninstall link and the link to the vendor's web site
3. check Start -> All Programs -> Startup to see if anything stupid has been added, delete if so
4. Start -> Run -> regedit. Check the two or three places in the Registry to see if anything stupid has been set to start at boot
5. Check Services...whatever menu based rigamaroll you have to go through these days to do that...disable any automatic services that are stupid
6. Open up My Documents, sort past all the various "My..." folders to find and delete the various stupidities your new app created there