KDE Frameworks 5.0 In Development

An anonymous reader writes "In addition to bringing up the plans for KDE on Wayland, Aaron Seigo just announced at the 2011 Desktop Summit that the KDE 5.0 Frameworks libraries are being planned for development. This central code will be developed in parallel to future KDE SC 4.x releases until it is ready, as to not cause another KDE 4.0 mistake. When the code is ready, key applications will be ported to the new interfaces." (There's another article at IT World.)

Comments

KDE can suck it

[Anonymous Coward]

Gnome3 rocks.

Re:KDE can suck it

[jonahbron]

While I agree to some degree, that's hardly the way to put it.

Re:KDE can suck it

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot your sarcasm tag cockhole.

Re:KDE can suck it

[Anonymous Coward]

Gnome 3 is a turd... at the bottom of the ocean... covered in little fishy turds...

Re:KDE can suck it

[halivar]

Gnome's mom always posts AC.

Re:KDE can suck it

[morgauxo]

Wayland can suck it.

Re:KDE can suck it

[Grishnakh]

Go back to your smartphone and leave the rest of us adults alone.

Feels early

[Windwraith]

Feels actually very very early. After 4.6 being almost identical to 4.5 regarding workflow, bugs left unpatched, and all the little issues KDE4 still has, moving to 5?
Is there a new, breaking release of Qt to catch up with like with KDE4?

Re:Feels early

[Windwraith]

Just to note, I know they are being "planned". Just makes me wonder how much brainpower will be left for KDE4.

Re:Feels early

[KTheorem]

That's it exactly. From what I have read Qt 5 will not have the backwards compatibility for Qt 3 that Qt 4 does. Too many KDE applications still use those compatibility features and so they need to rewrite it so that it no longer does to be able to use Qt 5. Since that will break programs that rely on those compatibility features it is deserving of a version change.

Re:Feels early

[Anonymous Coward]

All brainpower will be on KDE SC 4.

This story is about breaking kde's current libraries into smaller modular pieces, it is not about:
1. KDE SC 5
2. About developing new libraries

Ivan
KDE developer

Re:Feels early

[Windwraith]

Oh, that's a relief, sorry for misunderstanding.

Re:Feels early

[chill]

How about 4.7? I haven't installed it yet, but the release announcement lists many bugs fixed.

Re:Feels early

[Enderandrew]

I think the issue is that Trolltech/Nokia is moving past Qt 4 series into Qt 5.

KDE has maintained that kdelibs can't break binary compatibility between major versions. If there is a significant change with Qt, and thusly major changes for kdelibs, then they have major release number.

That doesn't mean a massive rewrite and change necessarily like we saw with KDE 4.

Re:Feels early

[Anonymous Coward]

You didnt misunderstand, the phoronoix "article" is misleading. ... as often .;.

Re:Feels early

[JabberWokky]

You didnt misunderstand, the phoronoix "article" is misleading. ... as often .;.

Seems pretty straightforward to me:

"Application development will not be pausing as we do this: releases every six months of application improvements will continue based on the 4.x codebase. When Frameworks gets to the point where it is ready for serious banging on, then we will start repurposing our highlight applications to the new codebase," Seigo wrote. "We don't want application development to be held up by the library development, and we don't want the library development to create much, if any, need for 'porting' application code. We want 'just recompile and test' to be the common case, with whatever changes do become necessary to be of the simple and even automatable sort.

"If this sounds rather different from how we approached 4.0, that's because it is. The requirements, needs and context for this release are utterly different. We're after evolutionary improvement and broadening our developer ecosystem, and our plans therefore need to, and in our opinion do, reflect that," Seigo added.

KDE 5, then, will not be the paradigm-shifting platform that happened with KDE 4, a move that caused many Linux desktop fans to throw up their hands and complain that KDE 4 should never have been released in its initial state. Criticism of the KDE 4 desktop still exists (this is, after all, the Linux fanbase we're talking about), but it has moved well past the "immature" and "too much change" arguments that once plagued the inboxes of KDE developers.

Re:Feels early

[suy]

Qt 5 will be binary incompatible with Qt 4 because they will reorder libraries and modularize them. KDE will do the same with their Frameworks. However...

Qt 4 will require very few changes in the source code. Yes, they will drop the Qt3 support, but very few KDE apps use the Qt3 classes support (of the apps that I use, only JuK to my knowledge).

KDE 5 and Qt 5 will be mostly a major version bump because of the binary incompatibily that can't happen without a change in the major number. Some applications might not need any source code changes, or very few.

Re:Feels early

[Anonymous Coward]

They all do, because KDElibs do. As a dev, I can say there is a -lot- of KDE3 and Qt3 code left

Re:Feels early

[devent]

Why can't I install Qt3 and using the old applications?

Re:Feels early

[Anonymous Coward]

As a Microsoft Marketing dev paid to spread FUD, I have been instructed to say there is a -lot- of KDE3 and Qt3 code left

FTFY.

Re:Feels early

[ocularsinister]

That's as maybe, but we should be replacing that old Qt3 code anyway - and its something we can do now on the KDE4 frameworks. Do so may even give benefits and improvements to KDE4 beyond removing dependencies on obsolete libraries - the obvious one being less packages (think small form factor) once QT3Support is removed completely.

As far as I am aware, there is some activity to gradually work through the remaining QT3 dependencies and remove them.

Re:Feels early

[Grishnakh]

Criticism of the KDE 4 desktop still exists (this is, after all, the Linux fanbase we're talking about), but it has moved well past the "immature" and "too much change" arguments that once plagued the inboxes of KDE developers.

Wrong. What I read from other Linux users is that they didn't like KDE4 when it first came out, because of all the bugginess and lack of features, and that's it. So now, 3 years later, they still refuse to ever take another look at KDE, because they think either that it's somehow unchanged since then, or because they "were betrayed" or somesuch so they refuse to go back, but then they bitch and complain about Gnome3 and Unity dumbing down their interfaces so much.

I also read posts from many Linux users who complain KDE along with Gnome and Unity have dumbed things down too much, even though they apparently have never even tried KDE, they just lump it in with the others.

Re:Feels early

[janisozaur]

Qt 5 will be binary incompatible with Qt 4

Not quite, at least as far as I understand it. See this for example: https://bugreports.qt.nokia.com/browse/QTBUG-397. There are more planned changes that break ABI.
Qt only guarantees ABI compatibility between point (e.g. 4.6.1 to 4.6.2) releases; they sometimes manage to retain ABI between minor (e.g. 4.6 to 4.7) releases, you can read about it somewhere in the docs.

Re:Feels early

[suy]

Qt is binary compatible across minor releases, not just bugfix releases (that is the Y in X.Y.Z, not just Z). Right now we have 4.7.3, but you can replace it with 4.8.0 (is in beta, IIRC) without recompiling any application. If this doesn't work, is a bug, and should be fixed. I am pretty sure of this for several reasons:

• First, because I use Debian unstable, and each time a new Qt minor version is uploaded, the whole bunch of packages that depend on it are not recompiled.
• Second, because this would not be acceptable for proprietary applications that can not recompile third party stuff.
• Third, because Symbian^3 devices, like my Nokia C7 (won in a Qt contest, BTW), had 4.6 by default, but now you can upgrade to 4.7, and no application requires a recompile (in general, you can't recompile apps from the Ovi Store, of course).

If you look closely at that bugreport, you will see that is clearly stated: "Fix Version/s: 5.0.0 (Next Major Release)", at the same time that mentions that can't be done due to binary compatibility. If the ABI could be broken in minor releases, that could be fixed in 4.7 or 4.8. Not necessary to wait till 5.0.

I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer windows. It's more supported commercially and let's face it -- if you prefer a PAYCHECK, you will go this route. Solid.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Windwraith]

Not everyone using Linux works in IT.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Anonymous Coward]

Obvious, ignorant and retarded troll is obvious, ignorant and retarded.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Anonymous Coward]

douchey AC is douchey

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[copb.phoenix]

If you have a schedule to keep and need a reliable build system, Windows is a nightmare. Not that it can't be configured, but the amount of upkeep and virus scanners and security vulnerabilities to plug in Windows to have a safe environment for a corporate system doesn't compare well to installing the latest long term support version of Ubuntu, popping open the terminal, and typing "sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade && sudo apt-get install build-essential" In most cases with a machine that's not more than a few years old, it's about an hour to a respectable and stable platform that you can more-or-less trust completely.

And Microsoft is/was the fifth largest contributor to Linux not too long ago, if you want to keep the Microsoft ego when you migrate ;)

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Osgeld]

no the vast majority of them are in their mums basement wondering why they cant find love or friendship, but just spent 8 months tweaking the most ultimate KDE4 desktop ever! and now it doesn't matter

HA HA

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Osgeld]

Ya know 99% of the time all you have to do is a system restore and your back and running in less time than a smoke break, I just love it when people make out this HUGE deal with windows, like 90% of the world hasn't been using it for the last couple decades or anything.

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[yourmommycalled]

The real question is what happens to everybodies work when you do "a system restore" and you must have some sort of miracle network and hardware that can shove an entire image down to the disk, write it to the disk and restart in under 10 minutes. Yeah we know that 90% of the world uses windows and that's why we have so many problems with spam, ddos, virus etc, Please go back to restoring you systems in under ten minutes MULTIPLE TIMES a day because the average time that windows system remain uncompromised is about 10 minutes ( http://isc.sans.edu/survivaltime.html)

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Osgeld]

um I had to do it maybe once a month, and hey fucktard system restore doesn't wipe your work or your emails, you would know that if you got off your podium for a moment and I dunno tried it?

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[yourmommycalled]

Two points: Once, obvously you are still living in your mothers basement with your "dolls" given your use of foul language and likely don't have much experience dealing with hundreds of systems. Yes I mostly administer AIX/HPUX/Solaris/*BSD systems, but the MBA lusers insist on "real workstations" that run a "RealOS" Yes I have to restore these systems nearly daily because the "RealOS" is borken that they rarely get through a week without being so corrupted that I cann't let them on the network. These "real workstations" are new Dell Precision T3500's with the"latest RealOS" so don't try the get better hardware bovine excrement. Read what I wrote, "you must have some sort of miracle network and hardware that can shove an entire image down to the disk, write it to the disk and restart in under 10 minutes." Ask your System Administrator and the people that manage the network your toy sits what that means. That's what has to be done to "real workstations" running a "RealOS"

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[Osgeld]

only 3 fucking days late, and you accuse me of living in mommy's basement fuck off

I am so glad you administer HPUX you must be stupid or old, are those "real worstations" some 1980's dec crap, oh no those "real" workstations are shit stain dells, I bow to your glory I really do

and when you decide to join us in year 2011 you will know there is ZERO reason to shove a full fucking disk down a network when the application is installed ON THE CLIENT already, unless your some mac fag who has to have the new X, you click 2 buttons and your horrible broken windows system unfucks itself in less than 10 min

people like you are quickly being replaced by scripts, and I thank every fucking day for that knowing there is some snide asshat self righteous sys admin looking for a fucking real job in the real world where you might get a clue

Re:I've used both KDE and GNOME for years.

[yourmommycalled]

Yet another childish rant. Given that your sysadmin skill level is approaching that of a script-kidde, one day we'll meet when you and precious scripts screwup so badly I get hired to clean up your mess. Considering I get calls like that mutliple times a day from companies who's MCSA only knows a couple of buttons to press before panicing and really screwing the pooch, it won't be long

Time for a new API

[Chemisor]

It is clearly time for yet another major API change. People have been writing way too many applications for KDE 4 and this must not be allowed to continue! Having millions of apps is such a waste of effort - we're the Linux Desktop, for heaven's sake, not some lame appstore. Surely everyone can agree that having KDE developers write all the key apps is the way to go. We are the most experienced and the most knowledgeable in using the KDE API, and dammit, WHY WON'T YOU LET US HELP YOU?

Re:Time for a new API

[jonahbron]

Why can't I mod funny and insightful?

Re:Time for a new API

[Anonymous Coward]

I would seriously consider KDE if they rewrote their frameworks into C#. Mono is clearly on the rise towards becoming the standard development environment on Linux and making KDE available in the .NET world would make it interesting not only to geeks but to the entire business sector.

Re:Time for a new API

[smash]

The old bush "mission accomplished" JPEG springs to mind (with regards to moving to KDE5, KDE4 is finished, or something).

Re:Time for a new API

[Anonymous Coward]

There must be features that are impractical to shoehorn into the old API. Either it is too inefficient, or UI design philosophy is radically different, and there isn't enough consideration built into old apps in order to interpret them. Or both. Anyone have any insight?

Re:Time for a new API

[Danious]

Congratulations on your sterling efforts to keep up the great Slashdot tradition of not RTFA and getting it completely wrong as a result.

Both Qt5 and KDE Frameworks 5 will be mostly source compatible, it's binary compatability we're breaking, for many apps it will be a simple recompile. The aim is simply to modularise our libraries, clean up the deprecated API, and remove unnecessary dependencies. Your typical KDE app compiled against K5 will look exactly the same as the version compiled against kdelibs 4.7.

Re:Time for a new API

[Danious]

Because it's neither?

Re:Time for a new API

[gottabeme]

Mono apps are S-L-O-W and bloated. What's wrong with C? It's served Linux well for many years.

I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Lode]

It would be awesome if 5.0 were more like 3.5 again (its behaviour and settings), but with the modern graphics features of 4.0 :)

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[zixxt]

I just don't get the love for the 3.5 series. I liked 3.5.x and used almost everyday, but 4.x series is sooo much better in terms of speed, looks and apps. The KDE 4 series is IMHO right behind the Mac OS X in terms of goodness.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think most people who long for the past truly forgot what it really was like. I never thought kde 3.5 was all that great, but think 4.5 was great.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Enderandrew]

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

You can revert to a "classic" desktop with icons, a classic Start Menu, and you can configure the task bar to work just like KDE 3. As far as I know, the only feature I recall from KDE 3 that I haven't really seen in 4 is the optional feature of Mac-like application menus.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[ripdajacker]

I think it's a reaction to a series of bad 4.0 - 4.5/6 releases. KDE 3.5 was the pinnacle of a very long development, and at the time it was, at least for me, vastly more compelling than the alternatives. KDE4x runs faster indeed, and the looks are a welcome change, but then again I do enjoy the occasional 3.5 session.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Kano]

I think most people who long for the past truly forgot what it really was like. I never thought kde 3.5 was all that great, but think 4.5 was great.

Clearly, our opinions differ but I haven't forgotten anything about what the past was like. I still use Trinity KDE 3.5.x on my linux machines. I despise KDE4.x.

LK

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Kano]

I just don't get the love for the 3.5 series. I liked 3.5.x and used almost everyday, but 4.x series is sooo much better in terms of speed, looks and apps. The KDE 4 series is IMHO right behind the Mac OS X in terms of goodness.

I think that may be why you like KDE 4.x. I am a former Mac user, just like former smokers, there are fewer harsher critics of Apple than their former users. I lost interest in the direction they were taking the UI back in the original OSX days. I haven't looked back since. I feel the same way about KDE 4.x, I find it less usable than KDE 3.5.x. I don't want the UI to get in my way and that's how it feels to me when I try to use KDE 4.x.

LK

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Kano]

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

I can't speak for the others, but even when it's setup to mimic KDE 3.5.x, KDE 4.x still feels wrong. It's difficult to explain but if it's a problem for you, you know what I mean.

LK

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Rhapsody Scarlet]

It would be awesome if 5.0 were more like 3.5 again (its behaviour and settings), but with the modern graphics features of 4.0 :)

In a way, it might be.

From my understanding (and from having used both KDE 3.5 and 4.2 through to 4.6) the main problem with KDE 4.x was that it was a complete rewrite from the 3.x series, and to say the transition was rough would be an understatement.

But if what I heard earlier is correct, KDE 5 will be more like KDE 3 in that it will extend from the KDE 4 codebase rather than dumping everything and starting from scratch. Hopefully resulting in a smoother transition and less crippling bugs.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[oddiofile]

KDE 4.6.5, the version I just updated to, has the one last annoying thing fixed that I could do in KDE 3.5: Drag and drop files and folders into the desktop. The "Show Folders" Desktop Widget is finally a proper drop target, and that makes my KDE4 desktop work more like KDE3.5 did.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Ruie]

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

You can revert to a "classic" desktop with icons, a classic Start Menu, and you can configure the task bar to work just like KDE 3. As far as I know, the only feature I recall from KDE 3 that I haven't really seen in 4 is the optional feature of Mac-like application menus.

Speed. Especially if your desktop is 1920x1200 or larger.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Enderandrew]

The OP was asking for the behavior of 3.5 with the graphic features of 4.0.

I imagine if you did an apples-to-apples comparison of speed of KDE 3.5 with Compiz and Kerry vs KDE 4.7 with Plasma and Nepomuk/Strigi, you'll find them pretty close.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[fast turtle]

Multiple Individually configured Desktops - Up to 20 of them. I'm sorry but the KDE devs lost me when the insisted on switching to the MS way of doing things instead of keeping the multiple desktop feature. That ensured I wouldn't have anything to do with KDE 4 because I had multiple desktops configured with various apps/tools on each desktop and you simply can't do that anymore - just like MS never allowed you to have that option. Yes the taskbar is nice but I'd much rather be able to not use the taskbar and simply hit ctrl# to switch to my desired desktop/app while still have the KDE frameworks. A major issue I have is that you can't find an inexpensive standard 4:3 resolution monitor anymore. Everything has gone to widescreen and with 3+ I at least could use some of that real estate by configuring some desktop items to the sides.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Enderandrew]

You can accomplish this today with the usual virtual desktop option, and with activities, which is even more robust.

I'm not sure where you got the idea they ditched virtual desktops, other than the complaints at the 4.0 launch that you couldn't have a unique wallpaper on each virtual desktop. I'm not sure if this ever changed, because I don't use virtual desktops.

Some people prefer the ability to quickly switch to a desktop with a series of applications already open for a certain workflow without having to open those apps/windows again. I personally prefer not to leave a bunch of apps open in the background (especially for 20 virtual desktops as you describe) unless I need them running.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[RobbieThe1st]

This. With 4.5/4.6, kwin is just slow. It'll freeze display output for a fraction of a second whenever any program updates the titlebar(so anything displaying FPS that way just lags horribly). I ended up swiching to /non-composited/ metacity for my WM... now I have a fast, usable system.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[marcosdumay]

Well, at 3.5 the plasma environment didn't segfault one or twice when I start my laptop (sometimes locking the X). Also, its applications did have a more sane reaction to keyboard orders (like, if it opens a window, let it have the focus). Also, I could have more than one KDE session without windows appearing clamming that it couldn't lock a file and closing the application I'm using (and if I don't press the "proceed" button, I can keep using the app, no problem, except for the window that stay above it). The possibility of having more than one session open at the same time was the dealbreaker that let me out of Gnome at KDE3/Gnome2 time (before that I didn't give a dam about what DE I was using).

But ok, that second problem appears on a kind of interaction that simply didn't exist at the 3.5 time.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[PuercoPop]

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

You can revert to a "classic" desktop with icons, a classic Start Menu, and you can configure the task bar to work just like KDE 3. As far as I know, the only feature I recall from KDE 3 that I haven't really seen in 4 is the optional feature of Mac-like application menus.

For starters you can't Ctrl-Esc for the 'skull of death' ...
Also at least for me, a semi-n00b user, dbus seems like an emasculated dcop.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

This. That.

That. This.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[wrook]

I've only tried briefly, but I think Compiz works fine on KDE4.5/4.6. I think it might run faster in the situations you are talking about. I've noticed the speed of kwin is heavily dependent up on the theme you choose. On my ridiculously underpowered netbook (which I like using for some reason) it can be unusably slow with some themes, but reasonable with others. Compiz seems to have more consistent performance.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Zarhan]

Konsole does not let you name tabs and titles separately. There's plenty of screen estate in title and I don't mind applications setting window title however it likes via xterm. However, I'd like to have my tab title remain static.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Zarhan]

For starters you can't Ctrl-Esc for the 'skull of death' ...

Use Ctrl-Alt-Esc (or rebind the key).

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

Dynamically expanding panels.
KDE 3.5 did this VERY well. KDE4, not so much. In KDE I have my main panel (similar to Mac OSX, with 'K' menu, app shortcuts and systray) centered on the bottom and to change size depending on what's on it. I also have my taskbar on the bottom-left, expanding upwards. KDE 3.5 would expand and contract perfectly on it's own with whatever was added/removed in the panel. KDE4, well, the panel dimensions STILL don't expand/contract properly on their own (so items on the edges are cut off), I always have to resize the panels manually. This is particularly a problem with the taskbar. As I start more tasks, the panel won't get larger, so the window icons buttons just get squished. If I make it higher, then as I quit tasks, the window icon buttons get really large (to fill the entire panel).
I haven't had a chance to try 4.6 yet, but it's been an issue up through 4.5, so I expect it to still be a problem.
I stayed on 3.5 until around 4.3, then made the switch. Suffice it to say, I don't use linux very much anymore as a desktop OS (I may just go back to Xfce).

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Ruie]

Even better - I did an apples-to-apples comparison by disabling as much as I can in 4.6 (starting with turning off compositing). It is still way slower. The most annoying part is multiple second freeze every time I switch to a desktop which has lots of applications open (or just konsole with lots of tabs). To really see this keep your session running for a week or so.

For reference, my computer is a dual core 2.66 Ghz, 8GB of RAM, Quadro NVS 160M for graphics.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

It would be awesome if 5.0 were more like 3.5 again (its behaviour and settings), but with the modern graphics features of 4.0 :)

You're right! Please let me know what KDE 4.7 is missing for you so that can happen. It's been a good three releases since all my itches have been scratched, but if something is still missing for you I need to know.

Thanks.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[EsbenMoseHansen]

Clearly, our opinions differ but I haven't forgotten anything about what the past was like. I still use Trinity KDE 3.5.x on my linux machines. I despise KDE4.x.

LK

Fair enough, but could you clarify what exactly you are dissatisfied with? What features are missing? Or is it some usability issue? Or something else?

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

> Well, at 3.5 the plasma environment didn't segfault one or twice when I start my laptop (sometimes locking the X).

Does that still happen? Did you file a bug? It can't get fixed if you don't file it.

> Also, its applications did have a more sane reaction to keyboard orders (like, if it opens a window, let it have the focus).

Can you give an example? I'd like to resolve this.

> Also, I could have more than one KDE session without windows appearing clamming that it couldn't lock a file and closing
> the application I'm using (and if I don't press the "proceed" button, I can keep using the app, no problem, except for the window
> that stay above it). The possibility of having more than one session open at the same time was the dealbreaker that let me out
> of Gnome at KDE3/Gnome2 time (before that I didn't give a dam about what DE I was using).

Again, can you give a usage example? I'm sure that this esoteric usage scenario is not well-tested, so if you are using it then we need to know how it behaves.

Thanks.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

> I can't speak for the others, but even when it's setup to mimic KDE 3.5.x, KDE 4.x still feels wrong. It's difficult
> to explain but if it's a problem for you, you know what I mean.

You don't mention an issue that can be fixed. At the exact moment that you feel something is wrong, try to identify what it is. If you do, then post back here or reach me from this form:
http://dotancohen.com/eng/message.php

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

The usage scenario that you describe is possible in KDE 4. You can have multiple desktops and configure a keyboard shortcut to switch them. You can configure a keybaord shortcut to switch to any particular virtual desktop. By default, it is Ctrl-FX for virtual desktop X, up to 12. If you have more Function keys on your keyboard, then there is nothing stopping you from going up to 20. You could configure them to be any shortcut you like.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

The freeze you describe is likely to be caused by OS, which brings back the swapped out pages. The KDE can not do much for that (except perhaps poll apps periodically to keep them out of swap, but that wastes CPU and RAM).

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[EsbenMoseHansen]

Also at least for me, a semi-n00b user, dbus seems like an emasculated dcop.

Use qdbus, and it's not that different.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Lode]

I'll tell you what I find wrong about KDE 4.x:
-you can't drag a box around files in the file manager
-the tree of the file manager constantly auto-scrolls left and right (once you manage to discover the setting to actually get a tree in it)
-in kate the search for text has its case sensitivity independent per file, and hidden behind something on which you must click first
-in kate, the search term is independent per file
-it is not possible to get two rows of the "panel" at the bottom, while I want that and it is perfectly possible in all KDE's before 4, all gnomes, etc...
-it is not very stable. For example last time I tried it, which is a year ago, after two weeks it crashed and then had reset all desktop settings, so that I needed to do all this frustrating stuff like getting the panels the way I want, the launcher buttons, etc... again from start. KDE 3.5 remembers its settings for years and years
-KDE 4 has this weather widget, but it's impossible to set it to a european city, at least last year it was, it always said something like it couldn't connect to the server, and had a terribly bad interface to change the server
-it has graphics glitches
-most dev effort goes to an application suite instead of the desktop, and despite all that effort, they never fix the kate search I mentioned above
-by default everything is huge and there don't fit many open window buttons in the panel
-it is extremely frustrating to create a launcher for a program in the taskbar. There are at least 3 systems, and all 3 are annoying, sometimes involving having to manually create a desktop file somewhere. How it should be: a single drag and drop movement
-etc...
-KDE 3.5 is much more pleasant to use.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[IrquiM]

4.x won't segfault either.

Question; which distro are you using?

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Lode]

-Oh wait, I forgot to mention how bad the unzip etc... integration in the file manager is. In KDE 3.5, you can just browse zip (and other compressed) files like as if they're folders, and use drag with your mouse to unzip it to any destination. In KDE 4, it uses a buggy program, where you can't drag and drop, and that often gives an error instead of unzipping something, so that using the console is easier.
-And it has the ability to integrate a terminal with the file manager, but the feature is useless because it fills your history with "cd" commands.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[sourcerror]

Swapping should only occur when you activate a particular window, not when swithcing desktops.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to do some separation of concerns and refactor the code accordingly. Performance will not be a problem since even embedded platforms will run on multi-core chips.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

And how, exactly, is that a problem with KDE, rather than your sucky graphics drivers?

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[qbast]

Let's see:
1) Speed - open dolphin window, start resizing. Watch the contents trying to keep up and failing, each part of window moving at different speed
2) In dolphin go to home directory. Wait 15s until *anything* shows up then 5s more until dolphin is actually usable
3) Memory usage: in kde3 kmail took about 50-80MB ram. In kde4 it is several hundred MB for kmail itself, next several hundred for mysql, akonadi server and pop3 resource. After that I switched to Thunderbird.
4) Even more memory usage: run kmail with nepomuk enabled. Now you have 2 full database servers running (mysql and virtuoso). OMG.
5) Others mentioned it already: zip/tar.gz integration. In KDE3 it rocked, now you have to use crappy Ark.
6) Try using KDE4 application remotely. Works much slower than stuff from KDE3.

KDE4 was supposed to be revolutionary for user. It introduced several "pillars" that were supposed to make it years ahead of competition. Too bad almost all of them failed miserably.
1) Nepomuk - so much promise, so little delivered. Semantic engine, associations, new ways to combine data from different sources - damn, this actually had potential to be a revolution. And what users actually got from all this? Full text search, tagging and rating - none of them really integrated with UI. And in return we sacrifice performance and memory usage.
2) Akonadi - another middleware/unification effort. Was supposed to rewrite everything PIM-related in clean way, deliver high performance, add compatibility with non-KDE world. And what we got? Memory usage of KMail+Akonadi now goes to gigabyte or more if use are unlucky. Performance is way worse and getting GNOME guys on board was never anything more than pipe dream (come one, gnome devs using piece of software that came from KDE? Never happened, never will happen).
3) Plasma. Well, Aaron Seigo is good when it comes to marketing buzzwords - paradigm shifts, new way of using UI, yadda, yadda. And what user got is way to put widgets on desktop. Woohoo, I could do the same in KDE3 with superkaramba.
4) Solid - this one actually turned out ok. Stays out of the way, does its job.

To be clear - I still use KDE4 as my main desktop. Gnome was, is and will be crap. KDE3 is long unsupported. However I am moving piece by piece to non-KDE technologies - replaced Konqueror (after years of using it as my main browser) with Firefox, KMail with Thunderbird.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Digit Machine]

I don't see what people think is so great about Mac OS. I think the dock is stupid and annoying and the default theme looks like junk. KDE 4 is way ahead of Mac OS in terms of looks and usability.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

Which graphic drivers are you running there? KWin slowness is almost always hardware dependent.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[cp.tar]

I don't see what people think is so great about Mac OS. I think the dock is stupid and annoying and the default theme looks like junk. KDE 4 is way ahead of Mac OS in terms of looks and usability.

I don’t see what’s so stupid and annoying about the dock, apart from the one stupid and annoying change in Lion: click-and-hold on an app icon will no longer present all its windows. Admittedly, the new replacement for Exposé takes a little getting used to, but it’s not all bad, even though it now ignores minimized windows. After all, if enough people complain, maybe they’ll fix it.

As for the default theme... well, true, the first thing I did after the upgrade was get my icon theme back. Other than that, there is not much in the way of customization that can be done, nor do I really care; OS X has some very sane defaults, a superbly consistent interface (back when I bought my Mac some four years ago, I was delighted to find that pressing Enter on a file in Finder won’t run it – that’s what Cmd+O is for, because it opens a file), and best of all, the interface doesn’t get in your way. Or at least, it doesn’t get into my way.

While I kind of like the way Ubuntu is taking with the new interface, I still prefer the new KDE to GTK-based interfaces. Then again, I prefer Enlightenment to both. (And it is a shame, because GTK has always looked better. It’s just that ever since Gnome 2 it hasn’t worked better.)

Oh, yeah. If you hate the OS X dock, I guess you hate the Windows 7 interface, too: it’s a combination of the Apple dock and KDE menu.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[DF5JT]

I am fed up reporting bugs to KDE4, because the general attitude is that nothing is broken and that as a user one should adapt to KDE4's behaviour.

The most annoying thing for me is the total nonsense of system monitoring, which was perfect in KDE3, where you could adapt values, drag&drop sensors, adapt individual colors and select every imaginable sensor and put it into the panel.

These days you have very, very limited options, no chance to integrate a remote host via ssh, have a sensible readout of stuff like network throughput. These graphic representations are no more than estimates and basically useless for true monitoring.

Oh, yes, I reported this as a bug and the resulting "discussion" was what put me off KDE4 for good:

http://old.nabble.com/-Bug-216002--New%3A-Useless-display-of-system-load-%28and-network-usage%29-in-widget-td26502388.html

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[stilborne]

* you can rubber band in the file manager
* weather works just fine with European cities. i live in one, so i know.
* graphics glitches are usually driver related, but we've also fixed a lot of issues (small and large) in the least couple of years
* creating a launcher -> drag it from the file manager, the launcher, from a search in krunner, ... yeah, not hard.

i realize that reality often does not come into play much when people create and then post again and again these kinds of lists. really it comes down to your last point, doesn't it: you have a highly personal preference for 3.5 (which is fine) and you work backwards from that to justify it. your points, however, are outdated or were never correct.

but that's alright. one can't please everyone all the time, of course. we do have many users who are quite happy, and both sides of that (number of users and average satisfaction) appears to be growing with each release. perhaps not amazingly, it is those people, not those who generate lists for re-posting on every article they can find, who get developer focus.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Lode]

"graphics glitches are usually driver related, but we've also fixed a lot of issues (small and large) in the least couple of years"

That's not a good excuse imho. If the drivers work a certain way, don't expect the makers of these drivers to suddenly do a fix because KDE is stubborn to work around it. I can play the most graphics intense computer games with these NVidia drivers, so whatever KDE wants to do should also be possible with them. And Beryl proves it can, it has no glitches whatsoever. Besides, the glitches are things like the clock showing only half and stuff. What kind of esoteric thing is being used to draw a simple clock, that it exposes driver glitches?

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[RobbieThe1st]

I used to use compiz, back on Kubuntu 9.10, and it was great.
More recent versions, however... for me, compiz just stopped working right - it'd end up with a framerate of around 10fps, though enabling the benchmark would bring it up where it should be.
But now, after using Metacity... I think I'll stay with it. Sure, the cube was shiny... but this is quicker, and doesn't degrade gaming performance while still allowing multiple virtual desktops.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

Operating without small display bugs and things like the start menu or device notifier popping up at random locations on the screen, stuff like that. KDE 3.5 was a marvelous, almost bug-free piece of software, KDE 4.5 does not even come close to it in terms of stability. And what did we get in place? An architecture for widgets noone uses, I still use gkrellm as system monitor for one.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[kayoshiii]

> Also, I could have more than one KDE session without windows appearing clamming that it couldn't lock a file and closing

There are some KDE apps which are single instance only (off the top of my head, KDevelop and Kontact come to mind). Most of these apps (the ones that I use) have gotten a lot better about this over recent releases. They will still complain (if they weren't shutdown properly) but will give you the option to remove the lock file.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[kayoshiii]

The taskbar sizing controls lets you set minimum and maximum sizing by default both these sliders are in the same position. Panels will auto expand from the minimum size(indicated by a _) to the maximum size (indicated by a V). Next time you try to set up the panel mouse over the sizing controls to see what they do.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[kayoshiii]

Ammendment to previous post ... Minimums are set my the arrows pointing towards the center of the panel. Maximums by the arrows pointing towards the screen edges. Alignment is set using "More settings" in your case you will want to align center.
The configuration gives you more control than KDE 3.5 but is a little bit harder to figure out.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[marcosdumay]

"> Well, at 3.5 the plasma environment didn't segfault one or twice when I start my laptop (sometimes locking the X).

Does that still happen? Did you file a bug? It can't get fixed if you don't file it."

I have no idea on how to report that. Do you get Debian's bugs? What data should I report with a plasma segfault? (any log file? There is a core dump somewhere?)

"Also, its applications did have a more sane reaction to keyboard orders (like, if it opens a window, let it have the focus)."

That specific problem happens on the qalculate plasmoid. If you use a keyboard shortucut to activate it you'll still have to click on the window to change focus. I don't know if the problem is on plasma or that specific application. I've seen similarly bad interactions on other apps, but I don't remeber specificaly what. And yes, you are right, I should be reporting more bugs.

About that third scenario. It happens on Debian squeeze. If you open a KDE session on more than one computer (with a shared home), and opens Kmail on one of them, the error dialog appears. Again I don't know if it's a bug in kmail, or nepumuk (the dialog is from nepomuk). Again, do you get bugs from Debian's reportubug? Should I file it elsewhere?

And thanks a lot for the attention.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[kayoshiii]

-the tree of the file manager constantly auto-scrolls left and right (once you manage to discover the setting to actually get a tree in it)

Tree is largely surplanted by the column view mode and view splitting. I used view splitting rather than tree even in 3.5 so I guess I missed that one. Try column view mode though.

-in kate the search for text has its case sensitivity independent per file, and hidden behind something on which you must click first

this option is not hidden in the current version of kate, is still independent per file. down arrow gets you the last search term from any document however and there is a find in files command for searching in multiple documents at the same time.

-by default everything is huge and there don't fit many open window buttons in the panel

This was true of early versions of KDE is much less true now.

-it is extremely frustrating to create a launcher for a program in the taskbar. There are at least 3 systems, and all 3 are annoying, sometimes involving having to manually create a desktop file somewhere. How it should be: a single drag and drop movement

this can be done with drag and drop in the current version of KDE.

   

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[goarilla]

huh ? this isn't windows, swapping aka moving pages to the swap.
Is usually only done on linux when it makes sense eg if the ram is getting full according to sysctl parameters iirc.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Daniel Phillips]

4.5 is fine for me, it got to the point long ago where I don't think about it much. The biggest annoyance is not really a kde issue, it is dbus, which does not seem to be designed well at all, it is a single point of failure where any app leaking dbus connections can stuff up the whole desktop so applications and asynchronous tasks won't start and dbus starts eating 100% cpu. The old ICE transport used in 3.5 seemed a lot more robust. It seems to me that dbus needs a major rethink, it is just wrong that it should be able to fail the way it does.

The next most annoying thing for me after dbus is losing the ability to slide my task bar out of the way to the side. If the KDE 4 component model is really great it should be easy to re-implement that nice feature, no? Or maybe I'm the only one who misses it. Anyway, taskbar sliding is getting well into niggle territory, that is a good sign.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Enderandrew]

Actually, in KDE 3.5, errors popped up in random locations on the screen.

KDE 4.x has a nice notification area where all notifications reside.

KDE 4 was very stable from 4.2 on.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Grishnakh]

I'll tell you what's worse: configuration. KDE4 is still highly configurable like 3.5, but it's nowhere near as easy. 3.5 had an excellent "system settings" app that let you configure everything in one place. With 4, it's all scattered all over, and the config app is itself a mess.

The other thing that's worse: Amarok. It's only a shadow of its former self.

Yes, KDE4 definitely looks a lot nicer than the old versions, but they really need to fix these issues, and figure out how to stop expending all their effort on chasing the always-changing Qt libraries. It seems to me like they're spending more time just trying to keep up with Qt than with actually building anything new or fixing anything.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Daniel Phillips]

Kate has always been a mess in terms of bus and interface mistakes, failing to share the search context between tabs being a good example. There must be a design factoring reason for that, which needs revisiting. That said, I would not judge KDE by the quality of Kate. Use gedit if you like, these days it's hard to tell with a casual glance that it's not a KDE app. And having also said that, I still just use Kate and suffer through the oddities, they are bearable, they gradually improve over time, and the price is right.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Uncle Warthog]

Out of curiosity, what behavior from KDE 3 is not possible in KDE 4?

Konsole window cannot be set to a fixed size in rows and columns.

Konsole and Kate can no longer be scripted using a shell.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[horza]

KDE 3.5 made me move to Gnome. KDE4 made me move back. I *much* prefer KDE 4.5. However I agree with both yourself and qbast below. Dolphin is the worst pile of crap I have used in living memory. After I drag and drop it randomly starts a drag box around files, it's incredibly slow, buggy, crashes a lot, for some reason 1-click launches files by default (so everybody that installs it ends up starting 2 movies, opening 2 Word documents, etc), you can't browse archives transparently, the preview only seems to work for images for me and even then it won't do it by default.

Of course I use Firefox instead of Konq, Thunderbird instead of Kmail, Geany instead of Kate, etc. As an actual OS though it's not bad at all.

Phillip.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Grishnakh]

What the hell are you talking about? Multiple desktops never went away in KDE. Maybe they were taken away in your distro; when I installed Linux Mint KDE, I found that the multiple desktop feature was missing there, so I had to add it back in (which I'll admit was a bit of a PITA; one area KDE4 is seriously deficient in is the configuration menus).

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Grishnakh]

This sounds just like me. I used to use Konqueror too, but finally gave up and switched to Firefox some time ago because they never really fixed Konq to work acceptably on all websites, and these days it seems to have been abandoned. And like someone else mentioned, I use gkrellm for system monitoring because the KDE ones all suck; nothing comes close to matching gkrellm for packing a lot of information into a single tiny vertical bar.

And I agree, Nepomuk and Akonadi were never really very useful, and just memory hogs. Instead of wasting time on these things, they should have concentrated on the basics. They could have planned for these to be done later, after everything else was working great.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Grishnakh]

Here's something for you:

VPN.

KDE's network manager either doesn't work or barely works with VPN connections. The facility for them is there, and looks nice, but it simply doesn't work with the Cisco VPN I use at work. I had to resort to just calling vpnc from the command line.

There's another KDE app called kvpnc that's supposed to handle all kinds of different VPN connections, but it too couldn't handle my Cisco VPN without constantly dropping out. Plus, it's not well integrated into KDE4, and looks like a holdover from KDE3. This functionality should be integrated into KDE's network manager; it shouldn't be a separate application. VPNs are very common with laptops used for work these days.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Grishnakh]

On every system I've used since the KDE 1.x days, it's been Ctrtl-Alt-Esc, and that still works for me in Kubuntu with KDE4.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Lode]

I switched from Kate to Geany by the way. It does everything that Kate does without such stupid design mistakes.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Daniel Phillips]

I switched from Kate to Geany by the way. It does everything that Kate does without such stupid design mistakes.

Other stupid design mistakes, most probably. I followed your suggestion, installed Geany, and tried a few simple things. My immediate impression: not bad for a GTK program. The file open/save dialog is light years beyond that dire old thing where you needed to know magic tricks to enter the name of a file you already know instead of clicking your way through a file tree. It's curious that the name entry field for "open" is called "location" whereas for "save as" it is "name" as I would expect. Oh well. I was a little surprised to find the dynamic line wrap setting under "document" instead of "view". It may be true that Geany remembers this per document but it still seems like "foolish consistency" to me. I find the main settings under "edit/preferences", an odd stylistic affectation that really irritates me. I wish that would die quietly along with Netscape Navigator. A top level "settings" menu just seems so much more sensible, easier to find and a significant time saver. Just cosmetic things... again, not bad for a GTK program. The first really obviously wrong behavior I noticed is, this editor insists on adding a line feed at the end of a file, whether I type it or not. Suppose I don't want that line feed for some reason? Another irritation: with line wrap on, the "end" key takes you to the end of wrapped line, not the end of the displayed line. There might be cases where that is in fact what you want, for example recording a keyboard macro, but it interferes with keyboard navigation. No obvious way to turn that off. I really do not appreciate an editor inventing text that I did not type.

Well, I barely scratched the surface and I promise to give Geany a fair trial on some real project, but I am pretty sure that "other stupid design mistakes" is exactly what I will hit. It's nice to see there isn't just one serious, active editor project on the go. There is a lot more right than wrong with both these projects. It's too bad Geany is coded in C. I took a quick surf into the (Git) source repo and sure enough, preprocessor macros out the yinyang. The "real men can OOP without a compiler" mindset. That can't be good in the long run, however I must say the work looks more than competent so far. Not entirely to my taste, but solid. Thanks for the tip.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[tzanger]

I'm with you here. I really, really want to love KDE. I've been with it since the early 3.x if not earlier (hard to remember). Gnome's got everything ass-backward and, to coin a phrase, idiocized. I feel you have to think like an idiot to "get" Gnome. KDE 3.5 was VERY well integrated, I loved dcop. Shit just worked.

I too am slowly moving off of KDE technologies. I hate to do it, but I'm tired of the bugs. Konqueror was really good, both as a web browser and a file manager. Dolphin is awful. Rekonq feels broken whenever I try to use it. I've been using Chrome for the last year. Kontact is an app I have married to for a long, long time. When the basket thing came out I really got into it. Now however kontact can't deal with an 11k-mail maildir without choking most of the time. viewing a new message takes sometimes 5-10s to actually show up (and it's not an HTML email, either). Akgregator can't handle large databases. Calendaring is so brittle that it has a 70% chance of crashing after editing any entry in my remote (caldav) calendar. Accepting a meeting from email is guaranteed to crash kontact within 10 minutes. I've actually got Evolution running right now and am trying it out. Thunderbird is like Firefox: bloated, heavy and slow. I guess I'll file a feature request for Evolution to allow me to edit the From: line (a feature I've used for close to a decade now for mailing lists and any kind of registration system so I can track where my spam comes from).

Plasma-desktop was probably one of the bigger mistakes KDE brought in. I admire what it is capable of doing, but at the cost of stability of the ENTIRE DESKTOP? sorry, that was a bad choice.

Konsole, Kate and Kopete are my mainstays, but Kopete will be the next to go. Whose idiot idea was it to store Kopete history in XML files? I keep history of all my IM just like I do with email and some private newsfeeds. No seamless, searchable archive support means that these things *chug*.

I really, really want to keep using KDE. I love the integration and I love the way it's SUPPOSED to work. KDE 4.x was a real let down, even in 4.6.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[tzanger]

As long as there are idiots like you who say "performance will not be a problem since even embedded platforms will run on multi-core chips" there will be slow, bloated interfaces. Not caring about performance because we have cheap fast hardware doesn't mean you'll get decent performance. It just means you'll suck more juice to get an approximation of what the hardware can actually do.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

Usually when Plasma segfaults a crash-reporting dialogue pops up. That would be the best way to report the crash. The dialogue will even help you install debug symbols if you don't have them. That would then be reported right to KDE.

> That specific problem happens on the qalculate plasmoid. If you use a keyboard shortucut to activate
> it you'll still have to click on the window to change focus.

In KDE 4.7 I added Qalculate to the panel and set a keyboard shortcut to it from within Qalulate's settings dialogue. Now, typing in Firefox I press the shortcut and Qalculate slides open with the text box focused. I enter my calculation and press enter, getting the result. I now press Esc and Qalculate closes, returning focus to Firefox. I never touched the rodent.

By the way, thanks for introducing me to Qalculate! That is a great plasmoid, I'm leaving it on the panel!

> About that third scenario. It happens on Debian squeeze. If you open a KDE session on more than
> one computer (with a shared home), and opens Kmail on one of them, the error dialog appears. Again
> I don't know if it's a bug in kmail, or nepumuk (the dialog is from nepomuk). Again, do you get bugs from
> Debian's reportubug? Should I file it elsewhere?

Go ahead and file it here:
http://bugs.kde.org/

I see that another commenter made a similar observation. I can't triage that but somebody should take a look. Thanks.

> And thanks a lot for the attention.

Thank you for bringing it to my attention!

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

> I am fed up reporting bugs to KDE4, because the general attitude is that nothing is broken and that
> as a user one should adapt to KDE4's behaviour.

That was the reaction by a particular prominent KDE dev when people told him to make KDE 4 like KDE 3 without quantifying and issues or actionable items. Whenever something concrete is mentioned, people like myself jump on it, triage, and file bug reports. Of course, filing a bug report or feature request should have been the first point of contact for the unsatisfied user.

> The most annoying thing for me is the total nonsense of system monitoring, which was perfect
> in KDE3, where you could adapt values, drag&drop sensors, adapt individual colors and select
> every imaginable sensor and put it into the panel.

Please speak up here:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172312

> These days you have very, very limited options, no chance to integrate a remote host via
> ssh, have a sensible readout of stuff like network throughput. These graphic representations
> are no more than estimates and basically useless for true monitoring.

> Oh, yes, I reported this as a bug and the resulting "discussion" was what put me off KDE4 for good:
> http://old.nabble.com/-Bug-216002--New%3A-Useless-display-of-system-load-(and-network-usage)-in-widget-td26502388.html

That looks like productive discussion. Why would that put you off? The devs were very helpful.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

I agree with most of your sentiments, and I think that you will find this Thunderbird extension great for editing the From line of your emails automatically:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addon/virtual-identity/

I've been trying to get this functionality in Kmail for years:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72926
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159251
Please comment in support of those two bugs. Thanks!

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

Thanks. If this is related, then please comment on it (it looks Cisco related):
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=264189

I looked at 54 VPN bugs and that looked the closest, so if that's not the bug then please file a new one. Thanks!

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Lord Lode]

I'm not sure about your particular nits, but Geany has quite a lot of settings. Look in its preferences under Files and Editor. It has settings about auto-adding newlines at the end of the file, smart home key (not sure if this is related to the end key you mentioned), indentation style, etc... Also, enable the File Browser plugin in the Tools->Plugins setting to have one similar to Kate's. And to make its integrated terminal better I enable the Override Geany keybindings setting in the Preferences under Terminal.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[PenisLands]

I don't like the fact that it has animation effects that can't be disabled (sliding animations when you alt+tab), i don't like that the panel and desktop stuff have their own looks that don't follow the selected widget theme. Dunno if that's been changed since the version available in debian stable, but i want everything to look like something old and simple like windows 98. i don't want transparency or rounded window edges or animation effects.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[tzanger]

um... kmail/kontact has had this feature for a LONG time... I was complaining that I am going to miss it if I really do have to move off of kontact for my email/calendaring app.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, we are talking about KDE here..

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

Kmail does have the ability to edit the From field. Those two bugs are for:

1) Store "From" address for particular contact in Address book. This means that if you have a catchall email address at tzanger.com, then when you open a new message to dotan@gmail.com Kmail would automatically use "dotan@tzanger.com" (or something else that you've chosen) as your From address. Likewise, when you write to ety@yahoo.com Kmail would automatically use "ety@tzanger.com" (or something else that you've chosen) as your From address.

2) Kmail would automatically use the To address of incoming mail as the From address of replies. So if you sign up to SomeSite.com with the email address "somesite@tzanger.com" and click reply to the mail they sent you, your From address would automatically be "somesite@tzanger.com".

The Thunderbird extension that I linked to does this automatically in Thunderbird. It's terrific, I cannot imagine using a catchall address without it.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[tzanger]

Oh I see. my mistake for not even clicking the links. Sorry.

I installed the 4.7 ppa for Ubuntu 11.04 last night. You are right, 4.7 cleaned up a lot of little things that were bugging me in 4.6. I have not moved to the 4.7 kdepim yet (that's in the experimental ppa) but 4.7 so far offers considerable relief from 4.6 (at least on Ubuntu).

I want to thank you for managing all the comments in this story. I really, really do love KDE and I want to use it for a good long time to come. I think it's obvious from the comments that there are a LOT of other people like me who want to see KDE succeed but we're very concerned over the way development seems to be more concerned over bells and whistles instead of speed and stability.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[dotancohen]

I'm also not using the new KDEPIM, though I really should get in there and file bugs already. Make sure to file them or let me know if you do find any:
http://dotancohen.com/eng/message.php

Enjoy!

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[ugglybabee]

I could write a book on this topic, and maybe i should. I gave up on KDE finally and forever about a week ago after using KDE4, up to 4.6, for a year and a half. I'm using XFCE with Slackware and Ubuntu, and live CDs (Slax and Porteous) that use KDE3 and Trinity) Look, I'll admit it, the problem I had with KDE4 is my own human brain. I know it's not fair, since that makes it my fault, but it doesn't matter whose fault it is. I'm staying. The Desktop is the one that had to go. The problem is that once I start adjusting KDE4 to restore a semblance of the desktop metaphor that I understand , I will never stop adjusting. If KDE had only made the more familiar folderview the default (see Aptosid, PC Liinux OS, and Mepis) and allow me to work out from there, I wouldn't have had a problem. Turning the Desktop display into a widget by default shouldn't mess with my head so much, but it does. Admit it, KDE, you did that BECAUSE you wanted to disrupt the desktop metaphor. To put it another way, what KDE3 can do that KDE4 cannot do is permit me to not think about the fucking desktop all the time, and get some fucking work done . And to put it still another way, KDE4 wasn't a disaster, it was an important leap forward. Losing KDE3 would be a disaster, but that's not going to happen.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[ugglybabee]

The panel in KDE4 is still clunkier than 3, and with far less options.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[Enderandrew]

It takes all of 5 seconds to make folderview the default.

You're saying that you can't use something because you disagree with an easily configurable default?

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[ugglybabee]

Yes I am. I used KDE4 from .3 to .6, and that's what I'm saying. Strange, isn't it?

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[ugglybabee]

I repeat: Look, I'll admit it, the problem I had with KDE4 is my own human brain. I know it's not fair, since that makes it my fault, but it doesn't matter whose fault it is. I'm staying. The Desktop is the one that had to go. Turns out, you poke one big hole in the Desktop metaphor, make everything configurable, and it all unravels for me. I will be reconfiguring and adjusting on my deathbed. It just doesn't work for me. I tried it again and again and again and again for more than a year.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[ugglybabee]

The main thing that happened that made me chuck KDE4 after swearing that I loved it for a year was that one of my older computers stopped reading from the hard drive, and it couldn't boot from a USB device, so I could only run it from a live CD, and I chose Slax, which still uses KDE3. It was just a huge relief not to have think about the Desktop all the time, and after that going back to KDE4 would have been living a lie. These days, you can run Linux as a substitute for Windows, but if what you really want is Windows, it's just not going to be as good. I think Linux is better, but one thing it's not better at is being Windows. Well, KDE4 is better at a lot of things, but it's not better at being KDE3. You can run KDE4 as if it was KDE3, but it feels like second best.

Re:I hope they make it like 3.5!

[pxc]

Resizing a terminal causes hard lockups with version 270.* drivers on my machine. It happens not only on Konsole, but also on Gnome Terminal. Apparently drivers, especially newer drivers for newer cards, can do some very strange/bad things in response to normal API calls. It happens, and it's not the KDE or Gnome developers' job to work around it, mostly because it's not even their job to own Nvidia hardware. That said, ordinary users and developers of these desktop environments do work hard to (a) provide workarounds and explanations to ordinary users and (b) determine the precise nature of the problem and work with upstream driver developers to resolve issues. Many an Nvidia driver bug has been hunted down by developers on downstream projects like KWin.

In any case, simply working around non-compliant behavior on the part of upstream libraries and drivers is never the right thing to do. All that creates is some kind of bizarre shadow-API that developers have to then learn by trial and error. Another important point to consider here is that much of the time all it takes to solve the problem is simply to revert to an older version of the very same drivers. When a new version of an Nvidia driver introduces problematic behavior during typical application use that was previously benign (as in my case, with the terminal resize hard freeze), it's absurd to hold downstream developers responsible for that.

What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[QCompson]

I thought Aaron Seigo was still insisting that there was no mistake with the release of 4.0, but that everything went perfectly according to plan?

When should these actually be considered stable by the average person... 5.6, 5.7? Also, are these 5.x releases also going to be termed SCs or Software Compendiums or whatever they are called, or has the wondrous KDE marketing team thought of a new catchy term? My suggestion: Kickass Release of Awesome Power, or KRAP. "Dude, I just dumped KDE KRAP 5.2 on my system! It doesn't have a functioning taskbar yet, but the rotating twitter desktop widget is sweet!"

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Enderandrew]

It depends on perception.

I read dot.kde.org regularly, and Planet KDE. Every single KDE dev was quite clear that KDE 4.0 wasn't for everyone on day one, and it wouldn't have feature parity with KDE 3.5 on day one.

Yet every single tech blogger says they were lied to in this massive fiasco that KDE 4 would be perfect on day one. Where exactly was that statement? I think the problem is that a few distros were pushing KDE 4 as a default desktop before it was fully ready for primetime, and Kubuntu in particular was shipping really broken packages.

If you got a KDE 4 desktop before you personally wanted it, or if you had a buggy desktop, then KDE 4.0 was a disaster and the devs lied, even if that really isn't the case. So Aaron is justified in saying 4.0 wasn't a disaster from a developer standpoint. They needed to get a base release out there for people to test, and for developers to develop for. That didn't mean every user would be happy with it on day one. But since people did have bad experiences, you're not going to convince any of those users that it wasn't some unmitigated disaster.

Oddly enough, the Gnome devs have sworn that one of their biggest goals of Gnome 3.0 was to avoid the KDE 4.0 disaster, and they wouldn't push a massive change out the door on day one. And yet you can argue that the Gnome 3 shell is a bigger change, and a bigger removal of features than the KDE 4 launch. And with KDE, most of those features returned in time. They just hadn't been ported over yet. Gnome 3's shell removes many basic features as a fundamental design decision.

In the end, users should make informed decisions about what desktop works best for them be it KDE 4, Gnome 3, Unity, XFCE, etc.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[QCompson]

Yet every single tech blogger says they were lied to in this massive fiasco that KDE 4 would be perfect on day one. Where exactly was that statement? I think the problem is that a few distros were pushing KDE 4 as a default desktop before it was fully ready for primetime, and Kubuntu in particular was shipping really broken packages.

Most notably in the 4.0 release announcement. It didn't state it was perfect, but it sure didn't give the impression that it wasn't ready for normal users. see: http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0

In addition, the KDE team had been pimping the 4.0 release for months prior to the actual release date. When the betas were released in a horrifically unfinished state, users were told to keep calm because they were just betas, not the final release. When the final release was released, users were told to keep calm because it was never meant to actually be used by users. When 4.1 was released, users were told to keep calm.... and so on.

I think what actually happened is that the KDE team was very rushed at the end as they neared the release date, and decided to just dump out what they had rather than delay. After all, the google kde4 release party had already been planned and scheduled.

So Aaron is justified in saying 4.0 wasn't a disaster from a developer standpoint.

No, he isn't. After taking a step back and looking at the whole debacle of 4.0, it's simply stubborn to claim that it wasn't a total disaster, or at the very least misguided.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Enderandrew]

Most notably in the 4.0 release announcement. It didn't state it was perfect, but it sure didn't give the impression that it wasn't ready for normal users. see: http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0 [kde.org]

They made countless comments leading up the 4.0 release that it wouldn't have feature parity on day 1, and that it wouldn't be for everyone on day 1. Just because they didn't repeat those statements in the release announcement doesn't mean they lied.

In addition, the KDE team had been pimping the 4.0 release for months prior to the actual release date.

The KDE team was bragging that the 4.0 release would feature a lot of new tools under the hood like Solid, Phonon, Akondi, Nepomuk, Plasma, etc. Those tools would help developers make killer KDE apps. They didn't claim that everyone was already ported over. Claiming otherwise is the lie here.

No, he isn't. After taking a step back and looking at the whole debacle of 4.0, it's simply stubborn to claim that it wasn't a total disaster, or at the very least misguided.

You have to have a release for developers to build off of. Would you have preferred that they didn't release? It would have taken that much longer to reach feature parity then. And it wasn't like KDE 3.5 disappeared overnight. No one forced you to migrate any faster than you wanted to. In fact, KDE 3.x series is still maintained by others.

http://www.trinitydesktop.org/screenshots.php

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[QCompson]

Would you have preferred that they didn't release?

I would have preferred they had waited a few more months and had plasma be *somewhat* ready for day to day use before they crept out of beta stage. There was tons of interest in KDE4 even at beta stages, and there was nothing stopping developers from getting a head start at that point. Six more months of baking in the oven in order to avoid tarnishing KDE's good name would have been well worth it in my opinion.

It was a mistake to rush it so, and frankly the premature release wasn't even as discouraging as the fact that lead developers like A. Seigo are still too stubborn to admit it was poor judgment. That doesn't bode well for design and release planning for the future of the project.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[DiegoBravo]

I don't understand why people is still trying to justify the official release of an unfinished software. If you know your software is unfinished (not ready for the users) you just continue publishing betas.

Do you really believe the users must read every developer blog for each piece of software in a distro upgrade looking for notes about a final release that at some point is no longer "for normal users"?

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Enderandrew]

And then it would have taken that much longer for app developers to start developing for KDE 4.0 if they didn't have a development platform to work off of. Again, they repeatedly stated that KDE 4.0 would serve as a base for developers, and may not be ready for everyday users.

You claim developers would still develop apps while KDE on the whole was in beta, but that just isn't the case. KDE Planet showed the number of commits and new developers, which exploded after the 4.0 release. Many people were holding off for an official standard. If kdelibs, phonon, plasma, etc. hadn't matured to a 4.0 release state, then many developers would hold off, which is precisely what happened.

If you didn't like the Plasma desktop on day 1, you didn't have to use it. KDE 3 was still there. Slowing down the development of applications for KDE 4 wouldn't have improved anything.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Enderandrew]

It wasn't unfinished. It just hadn't reached full feature parity with KDE 3.5 yet. Holding off on that would mean holding off for probably 2 more years, and holding up third-party development.

Kubuntu was the first distro to ship 4.0. Let's assume you're a Kubuntu user, and you upgrade to a new distro without checking out the changes. That in and of itself rarely is wise. But clearly that is the KDE developer's faults. And the Kubuntu forums, mailing list and website have also mentioned repeatedly what a huge change KDE 4.0 is. And everyone reviewing the distro release are mentioning this. But again, you upgraded to a new distro and never read any reviews, or information about your distro specifically.

That distro made the decision to push something exceedingly new and "unfinished" as the default desktop on day 1. Again, that is the fault of the KDE developers, who don't control distros.

In addition, that distro put out exceedingly broken packages (like openSUSE was putting out very stable packages). That too, is the fault of the KDE development team even though they don't control distros.

Your logic is that if you made no effort to find out any information on what you were installing, then someone else intentionally lied to you.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[QCompson]

You claim developers would still develop apps while KDE on the whole was in beta, but that just isn't the case. KDE Planet showed the number of commits and new developers, which exploded after the 4.0 release.

I never said there would the same number of developers working on KDE4 projects at that exact point in time, just that there was still a lot of interest at the beta stages. Exactly what was the massive drawback to waiting a few months until plasma was more mature and usable before release? I think avoiding the entire release debacle would have been far more beneficial in the long run versus being 2-3 months behind in development from where we are now. That's discounting that there may have been developers and users discouraged by the alpha quality of the 4.0 release and turned away from the project.

If kdelibs, phonon, plasma, etc. hadn't matured to a 4.0 release state

Plasma was no where near a release state with 4.0. It wasn't even beta quality.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Kjella]

I'd rather go from a fully patched Windows XP SP3 to release day Vista than from KDE 3.5.x to KDE 4.0.0, perfection has nothing to do with it. When you hit the big release drum you get compared to other big releases like Windows, OS X, Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox and so on, if OpenOffice 3.0 had been as buggy and lacked as many basic features as KDE 4.0 it'd be called a disaster too. Maybe they have the perception that through their blogging their major release should be held to a completely different standard than every other major release, but then their logic is sorely flawed. If you call it a release it will be judged by release standards, something it seems several developers still are in denial about.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[QCompson]

Your logic is that if you made no effort to find out any information on what you were installing, then someone else intentionally lied to you.

Your logic is that KDE wasn't intentionally trying to change the way software releases were labeled (alpha->beta->release) and used. Which they were. They moved out of the "beta" stage to a release that apparently wasn't actually supposed to be used by users. 4.1 either for that matter. Blaming the users for their lack of research on the topic is absurd.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Enderandrew]

You're missing the point.

The devs repeatedly said it wasn't for everyday use for everyone, and that it was mainly for developers to have a base to build from. No one said you had to use it at KDE 4.0.

The problem was Kubuntu shipping 4.0 when users weren't ready for it, and even worse, shipping a particularly poorly built/packaged version of 4.0.

Oddly enough, other distros didn't have that problem.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Narishma]

The guy was referring to the Plasma libraries, not the Plasma desktop.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Enderandrew]

And yet there are plenty of people who specifically suggest the unspoken rule of software is for end users not to use a .0 release and expect stability. I'll also note that I ran 4.0 even before the release, and didn't have issues. A big part of that was my distro. openSUSE was putting out very good KDE packages. There was a huge trend on bugs.kde.org of bugs submitted from Kubuntu that couldn't be reproduced elsewhere, and even the Kubuntu package maintainers admitted they screwed the pooch with their 4.0 packages. Kubuntu shipped a release without testing it much because the Ubuntu world loves pushing the absolute latest and greatest out before anyone else.

And KDE 4.0 did have alpha and beta releases that preceded it.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[QCompson]

The guy was referring to the Plasma libraries, not the Plasma desktop.

Ah ok, my bad. Obviously I'm not a developer (just a finicky hyper-critical desktop linux user!), but doesn't having buggy crash-ridden software like 4.0 plasma make it difficult to develop and test your own add-ons and related software? If I want to develop desktop widgets but plasma itself was continually crashing and burning, doesn't that slow the process as well?

It very well may not if the libraries are "mature", just wondering.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Kjella]

You're missing the point. The devs repeatedly said it wasn't for everyday use for everyone

No, you are missing the point. What they said on their blog is almost irrelevant as long as they call it 4.0, then distros will ship it, users will use it, reviewers will review it as if it's a finished product. And then they go "you should not have shipped it", "you should not use KDE4 yet", "you should not have slaughtered it" when people do and pretend it's everyone's fault but their own. And I think you've drunk too much of the koolaid.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Digit Machine]

This is true. I read the same things and held off switching until around 4.3. By then things were mostly working pretty good. I still think that naming it 4.0 was a terrible idea. Any .0 release should not have to come with disclaimer that it really doesn't work.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Anonymous Coward]

And you're talking out of your ass. Either you've forgotten the initial, what - 16? stages of Gnome2, or the initial phases of OSX, or you're just plain trolling. What the KDE people did was in no way, shape or form unique.

And if you seriously think that how a project numbers their releases in any way absolves the distribution from fucking testing the software they release and to make sure it meets some kind of standard for functionality, you're absolutely retarded.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[Narishma]

You don't need the Plasma desktop to develop and test Plasma widgets, you only need the libraries. The Plasma desktop itself uses those libraries.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[goarilla]

Don't developpers want a stable environment to test their (young and buggy) programs on ?
They want to debug their programs not Kwin !

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[goarilla]

What about slackware, the distro I am using did it push buggy compiles ?
The thing is i know KDE 4.x has a lot of workflow-improvements in store, but show us how to use it properly
have some podcasts set up to convert the dcop experienced guys and some for the people that really only use the bare
because that's what they have been comfortable with

You guys keep chanting the activities mantra over and over instead of virtual desktops well ... show us how to use it

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[goarilla]

The difference is with OS X they had to look for the comparatively subtle faults.
With KDE 4.0 the first release was like a schizophrenic autitistic kid that lost its memory from time to time.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[tzanger]

The devs repeatedly said it wasn't for everyday use for everyone, and that it was mainly for developers to have a base to build from.

As both a developer and a picky user, perhaps the KDE team should NOT have called it a 4.0 release. Perhaps a 4.0-RTD or something (release to developers) -- make it obvious from the name that it's not for users. I know that KDE tried to do that with all the warnings and everything, but let's be honest... most users are stupid. Kubuntu made a hideous mistake by including it. Ubuntu's got this problem at a systemic level (ripping out perfectly good code/apps to try to establish new paradigms before they're ready to be used) so I guess it was inevitable, but perhaps if KDE 4.0 were named KDE-4DEVRELEASE or something...

I don't know. I hope that what happened with 4.x is never again repeated. 4.7 is almost out and it's still not where it was in 3.5. Lord knows software development ain't easy, and trying to write a desktop environment for a large and varied userbase is difficult to put it mildly, but I don't think KDE really helped themselves at all with 4.x. I'm your most loyal fan but even I'm starting to check out alternatives.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[ugglybabee]

That's revisionist. I remember going to the KDE website when 4.0 was released, and the emphasis on KDE4 was all over the place. I was pretty naive about Desktop development, and I was confused about what was going on, and with my level of sophistication at the time, i couldn't find info on KDE3.

Re:What KDE 4.0 "mistake"?

[ugglybabee]

>>I read dot.kde.org regularly, and Planet KDE. Every single KDE dev was quite clear that KDE 4.0 wasn't for everyone on day one, and it wouldn't have feature parity with KDE 3.5 on day one. AHA! Now I get it. Go to dot.kde.org and planet KDE for information. I went to kde.org, and i got public relations hype.

"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[at_slashdot]

So finally somebody admits to the mistake, till now users and distributions have been accused that they didn't understand that 4.0 (or for that matter 4.1, 4.2, 4.3...). didn't mean "stable".

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[Anonymous Coward]

It wasn't a mistake. You don't understand the meaning of "stable" obviously, and the "mistake" in the editorial blurb is just a trick to get the haters going.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[MasterPatricko]

that's the slashdot editors stirring up trouble, not an official kde statement

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[Enderandrew]

The openSUSE packages were quite stable, even before the 4.0 final. I ran the beta packages even before then.

The Kubuntu packages were notoriously bad, and Fedoras packages weren't amazing on day one. In that case, many problems were introduced by package maintainers that didn't understand the new build system or where things moved.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[Anonymous Coward]

till now users and distributions have been accused that they didn't understand that 4.0 (or for that matter 4.1, 4.2, 4.3...). didn't mean "stable".

They didn't. It's really simple: 4.0 was not stable, and people were told. Now, it's probably KDE's fault for not realizing how stupid people are (just like it's, say, freetype's fault for not realizing that idiotic users would use bits of the private API), but anybody with half a brain knew 4.0 was a preview release.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[Anonymous Coward]

You still clinging on to that? I hope everyone in your life remembers every mistake you ever made, even if it was just a misunderstanding, and brings them all up at every opportunity.

Re:"KDE 4.0 mistake"

[IrquiM]

But they didn't!

Documantation

[Anonymous Coward]

After reading the Linus/Gnome3 spat, ans still cant find/use all the funtionality of KDE 4.5
we need some Good Documentation, Overview, Configuration, Startup, Common Flows
Session, Plasma. At above Village idiot level. Every time (say once per moth I have to strace/
grep in the sources I get real annoyed).

We need Documentation more that more me too mobile.

Re:Documantation

[EsbenMoseHansen]

User base. It's a wiki... if there is something missing, and you find out how to do it, add it.

LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, let's use a patent riddled shitty clone of something Microsoft themselves are dumping.

Brilliant!

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, it makes you wander what's not patented these days.

Seriously though, I think that a garbage-collected managed environment like .NET (but not necessarily it) that was treated as a first class citizen on Linux and that would be available by default with every distribution would benefit Linux adoption. I love hacking around with C/C++ but it's not something that I would expect from Big Business. I would love to see more development in this field. Mono is right now the best candidate and personally I think it's a really good one.

Re:LOL

[RobbieThe1st]

Isn't this sort of what Python is? It allows easy to write code, is available most everywhere, and allows for cross-platform apps - an x86 compatible Python app will generally work on ARM as well.
Also, modules for everything.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

It allows easy to write code, is available most everywhere, and allows for cross-platform apps . . .
Also, modules for everything.

Well, why not just use Perl, then? CPAN is awesome, and it's really easy to write. (Reading is a different matter. The "write once read never" language.)

Anti-Gnome bias?

[MrEricSir]

The Desktop Summit 2011 includes both Gnome and KDE developers. Is there some reason Slashdot has posted two stories from KDE talks but none from Gnome?

I'm not trying to start a G vs. K war here, I'd just like to see coverage of both.

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[obarthelemy]

have you tried submitting a story ?

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gnome had nothing to say, as usual.

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[Microlith]

It feels like the Gnome people are holing themselves up in their bunker. Reading Dirk Hohndel's thread on G+ was quite enlightening, especially regarding the behavior of the Gnome community. People who like Gnome 3 actively attack and bash people who don't, and those inside the community are keeping mum for fear of being attacked in a similar manner.

After hearing this I put Fedora 15 with Gnome 3 in a VM, and immediately I'm put off by some of the changes, here's just a few in my experience:

- The desktop itself is no longer yours. It no longer responds to right clicks, and you cannot place anything on it. The "Desktop" folder in your home directory is blithely ignored.
- The Applications menu no longer responds to right clicks, immediately executing the application or, if opening a sub menu, closing the submenu. If you click on a submenu when it is open, it will switch from "hover to open" to "click and hold to open." There are also no configuration options for the menu.
- The panel at the top is unresponsive to right clicks except in certain areas, and elements cannot be moved. There is no configuration for it that is obvious, and as a result it is stuck colored black.
- The system menu is gone completely, and the username menu cannot be removed or altered.
- The concept of altering the theme seems to have been eliminated as well.
- Easy access to language configurations (how do I set my input method editors?) seems to have been hidden. This may be a Fedora thing, but even under F14 with Gnome 2 it was easy.
- Huge amounts of dead space in the title bar, menus, and toolbars.
- Can't drag windows to the edges of the workspace to move it.
- gconf-editor is gone entirely, probably to keep us dirty proles from altering the configuration.

And I'm just getting started. I imagine I could find more infuriating things given time, however the glaring issues and general hostility of the setup would probably push me to switch to KDE or something (unsurprisingly, the work machines I use all run Ubuntu 10.10 at the newest.)

It's one thing to have pared down defaults, but to gut a system's capabilities and deny users the means to regain those options just tears away at the usability of a system. That capability has always been a hallmark of Linux desktop environments, even if the usability needed work. But instead of fixing the usability, they just decided to cripple the system.

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe because no one from GNOME Marketing is attending the summit? Oh well, not exactly no one: check this for a good laugh
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/marketing-list/2011-August/msg00030.html

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[Anonymous Coward]

This video,Hitler is briefed about GNOME 3,
  shown during the GNOME:State of the Union presentation at the summit is the only notable thing coming out of the Gnome camp. I suppose it's hilarious to people who think uninspired memes are still funny after about a week or so of appearing on the net.

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[MrEricSir]

It's a lot more risque when you consider that this video was shown at a conference in Germany!

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd call it bad taste, to be charitable about it. And leave it up to the Gnome devs to make Hitler a sympathetic character.

WTG, Gnome.

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[MrEricSir]

You must be a lot of fun at parties!

Re:Anti-Gnome bias?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you say that? I'll have you know that I'm a veritable holocaust of frivolity and mirth at parties!

They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[erroneus]

In some ways, it's all good that they are different. But in others, it is harmful. Already there are some standards that the two conform to such as .desktop files. They need more of this and it should be extended to include compatibility for themes as well.

In the end, it should be such that applications written for KDE can be converted or compiled for GNOME and vice versa with little or not change. I realize what I am saying would effectively merge the projects but these two opposing camps harm Linux as a whole. It's not enough to say "Linux Compatible" right now. App developers must choose between GNOME or KDE or even just X. It's harmful for commercial apps and more by having such an environment.

At one point, this competitive growth was a great thing... one was better than the other which would in turn make changes and improvements to surpass the first. But I think we have matured to a point where this is no longer a productive thing as it stands now, I believe it is causing hesitation among commercial app developers.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

What causes hesitation among commercial app developers is the absolutely atrocious state of application distribution and dependency resolution. Every distribution has their own package format (or at the very least, different package names and content) and a different set of dependencies are required for every single one.

It's just not practical to target Linux as a commercial developer when you have to generate and maintain several different types of packages, their dependency lists AND the software repositories to go with them.

On Windows, I can target the largest audience with a single executable file. On Linux, I can target an insignificant desktop audience by maintaining a package for every variant of the system. So who in their right mind would think it to be cost effective to target Linux for desktop software on a commercial basis?

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Enderandrew]

There are many freedesktop standards that cross both Gnome and KDE. Sometimes they can both agree on something that makes life easy for everyone. And sometimes they disagree.

The KDE devs for instance came out with a new systray standard that they pushed for freedesktop inclusion, but the Gnome devs rejected it.

As far as theme support, I know in KDE, there are tools to make GTK apps look native in KDE. I don't know about vice-versa.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Anonymous Coward]

How would you go about uniting GNOME and KDE with out terminating one projects entire development teams since both have different view points on most things and Gnome is all into it's minimalistic fetish

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Rhapsody Scarlet]

Many people have suggested what you just have. It's never worked before and there's no reason to think it will work now.

Your statement about running KDE apps on GNOME and vice-versa does puzzle me though. Right now I've got a complete mix of KDE/Qt and GNOME/GTK+ applications running on my KDE 4.6 desktop, and all is well. They may be using slightly more resources than strictly necessary, but I don't really care about that. Stuff like the Portland Project and the Tango Desktop Project seem to have done their work in making applications both function correctly and look right on my desktop, and Oxygen-Gtk is taking that even further by making GTK+ apps look nearly indistinguishable from Qt apps. Probably best to ask someone else what's going on with the GNOME/Xfce side though.

I really don't think a merger is possible or necessary, what is necessary is more communication and cooperation between developers of various desktop environments, and in the five years I've been using Linux (sorry, GNU/Linux, I am a Debianite now...) I've seen massive strides in this. I can comfortably use whatever applications seem best regardless of widget toolkit with no worries about whether it will all function correctly, and that's good enough for me.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[jones_supa]

Exactly. And not to even mention the constantly changing APIs and desktop environments. Linux is like in some kind of eternal R&D phase...

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[RobbieThe1st]

Of course, yo could just do what Teamspeak, or Unigine or others do: Just release a tarball with the binary and most supporting files.
Any specific dependancies can be handled by the user, or in some cases, just allow the distros themselves to manage packaging your software up.

Seems to work well enough; Most Linux users don't need the hand-holding of Windows users.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

Both of those programs you listed are orientated towards developers / gamers which have a better understanding of how systems work and how to resolve dependencies than the average user. Hand-holding has nothing to do with it; it's just the target audience of those programs already knowing what they're doing.

The audience that the original post was talking about is your average user, maybe not even your average Linux user*. Software designed for the average user can't rely on them to run the program from the command line to see the "ld: library XYZ not found" message and then go hunting for dependencies. They're going to double-click the icon on the desktop and wonder like hell why the program is taking so long to start up. For an example of how confusing this is even for experienced users, you need to look no further than installing Google Chrome, only to find that you don't have libpng12 installed (but rather your distro provides libpng14 by default).

TL;DR It's a terrible installation experience when installing third-party software and average users aren't going to take the time to find out how to resolve dependencies. They just want it to work.

* Because by bringing commercial software to Linux you're increasing the number of potential Linux users as well; as an example, you only need to look at the people who are tied to Windows because a commercial or open source equivalent is not available for the software they use.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Microlith]

It's not enough to say "Linux Compatible" right now. App developers must choose between GNOME or KDE or even just X.

It's not like having the libraries for both on your system is a huge space cost. And, quite frankly, no one does "just X" these days.

At one point, this competitive growth was a great thing... one was better than the other which would in turn make changes and improvements to surpass the first. But I think we have matured to a point where this is no longer a productive thing as it stands now, I believe it is causing hesitation among commercial app developers.

So what you're saying is that, despite the fact that proprietary vendors are NOT hesitating, that open source and free software projects need to STOP what they're doing for the sake of proprietary vendors. No. That's what Redhat, et. al. do. That's what an Ubuntu LTS is for. The greater community and the projects that distros are built upon should not be forced to bend to the desires of proprietary software vendors.

The Linux kernel sure as hell doesn't wait. And it's no worse off for it (even if you want to claim it is.)

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Microlith]

What causes hesitation among commercial app developers is the absolutely atrocious state of application distribution and dependency resolution. Every distribution has their own package format (or at the very least, different package names and content) and a different set of dependencies are required for every single one.

But why should these projects go out of their way to make life easier for proprietary software vendors? Why?

It's just not practical to target Linux as a commercial developer

Despite the fact that many vendors DO target Linux? Can you name anyone who has shied away due to the issues you describe?

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

On Linux, I can target an insignificant desktop audience by maintaining a package for every variant of the system.

On Linux, I target LSB and it just magically works with all the current major Linux distributions. I don't see what the problem is.

So who in their right mind would think it to be cost effective to target Linux for desktop software on a commercial basis?

People who actually know how to target Linux as a whole. I don't think you qualify.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

Exactly. And not to even mention the constantly changing APIs and desktop environments. Linux is like in some kind of eternal R&D phase...

Could you give examples of how the APIs were constantly changing in the minor versions of the major desktop environments, toolkits etc?

As hard as I look, I can't find KDE3, KDE4, GTK2, GTK3, Qt3, Qt4 changing existing APIs constantly any more than adding new API commands and fixing bugs.

If you're referring to the significant changes between the major versions, then I have to disagree there is anything in particular different going on here from other operating systems. Just look at how Microsoft changes their APIs significantly between their major versions (see Microsoft's .net technologies as an example of this).

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

Oh really? What package format are you using? I'd love to know as it would have to handle the resolution of dependencies regardless of what the packages were called or whether the package manager for said format was actually installed on the local system.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

What causes hesitation among commercial app developers is the absolutely atrocious state of application distribution and dependency resolution. Every distribution has their own package format (or at the very least, different package names and content) and a different set of dependencies are required for every single one.

But why should these projects go out of their way to make life easier for proprietary software vendors? Why?

I didn't say they should. I just explained the reason, from personal experience no less, why you don't see a lot of commercial desktop software on Linux.

It's just not practical to target Linux as a commercial developer

Despite the fact that many vendors DO target Linux? Can you name anyone who has shied away due to the issues you describe?

I think you're going to have to name a few, well-known desktop products that work on Linux, rather than the other way around (since there is no way I can determine whether other individuals or companies have been influenced for this reason).

I can tell you that I have personally though; it's not practical for a small-time developer to actually manage and maintain all of those packages in addition to providing support for Windows and Mac, especially when the Linux audience is much smaller.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

To clarify this response,

You might be able to target the LSB for some essential components of Linux, like kernel interfaces and perhaps filesystem layout (and even that isn't 100% reliable between distributions)... but the moment you start calling upon dynamic libraries for image manipulation, event systems and various other functionality you run into trouble, because there's no mechanism in Linux to handle when a library file is non-existent beyond sending "ld: library XYZ not found" to stdout.

There's two ways to solve this problem essentially; design a package format which works across all distributions (can be done using a minimal bootstrap executable with the package data attached on the end) or modify the dynamic loader so that it calls upon package management to resolve the library dependencies at runtime, and prompt the user to install the designated packages (through the X server if it is running!)

I originally thought the former was a better option, but the latter seems to solve quite a few issues; third party developers can link against a dynamic library and not have to worry about whether or not it's currently installed on the system and you can easily distribute binaries without requiring any package wrapping at all. The only issue you might run into with this solution is non-native applications (such as those written in scripting languages) have no way of having their interpreter resolved since the system will treat the application as a text file until after installation.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[RobbieThe1st]

Point, however, remember that for newbies and such, installing and configuring Arch or Debian is also out of the question. So, just provide a package for recent Ubuntu releases, and a tarball for "others" if you don't want to keep sets for other distros around and tested.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

Oh really? What package format are you using?

Either an LSB-compliant installer or LSB-RPM (a very restricted version of the RPM format that works on every LSB compliant distribution).

I'd love to know as it would have to handle the resolution of dependencies regardless of what the packages were called

LSB provides many common dependencies, any others you have require you to package the application in a similar way .app folders work on OS X and pretty much how you would provide a local library to an application on Windows.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

You might be able to target the LSB for some essential components of Linux, like kernel interfaces and perhaps filesystem layout

LSB does far more than that. Just check out all the stuff you get in LSB-desktop. Everything from basic x11 libraries, widget systems like qt, gtk to advanced video manipulation libraries.

but the moment you start calling upon dynamic libraries for image manipulation, event systems and various other functionality you run into trouble, because there's no mechanism in Linux to handle when a library file is non-existent beyond sending "ld: library XYZ not found" to stdout.

You're not following the LSB specification if you're doing it that way. You're meant to provide libraries that aren't part of the LSB with the application in question should it require one.

The only issue you might run into with this solution is non-native applications (such as those written in scripting languages) have no way of having their interpreter resolved since the system will treat the application as a text file until after installation.

Using .desktop files that give the full path to the interpreter and script seems simple enough to me.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

Quite a number of the Debian-based systems do not include any form of RPM support (unless the user installs RPM from their repository, but in my experience it is very rarely installed by default).

Now maybe that's changed and the main Debian systems do; but that still only provides you a minimum. You can't specify package dependencies since packages are named differently between distributions (hell, they're named differently between RPM-based systems let alone Debian-based systems).

So where does that get you? You either need your package installer to know how to handle and invoke package management as well as the names that go along with it, or you bundle the libraries with your program itself. The latter is highly discouraged and frowned upon due to the conflict and library duplication that arises from it (as well as that LD_LIBRARY_PATH is considered a security issue). Even if the LSB defines that certain libraries should always exist on a Linux system, you can't guarantee that the provided libraries are of the correct version, haven't been patched by an upstream vendor (changing their external interfaces) or a variety of weird and wonderful things you can do to to make a library not work quite as it is expected to.

In the end, if you require any complex libraries (think UI), do you include their dependencies, and then those dependencies dependencies, and while you're at it, why not just ship an entire Linux distribution to make sure everything works right?

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

Quite a number of the Debian-based systems do not include any form of RPM support (unless the user installs RPM from their repository, but in my experience it is very rarely installed by default).

All the major debian-based ones are LSB compliant and use some RPM executable that's wrapped with 'alien' to convert the RPMs on the fly to deb and install it to non-interfering path as specified by the LSB.

I have no doubt there is some specialized distro that is meant to be a firewall only or some such and won't provide the LSB, but in those cases, you install the LSB manually and get your application magically working after it's installed. Not really a big deal.

You can't specify package dependencies since packages are named differently between distributions (hell, they're named differently between RPM-based systems let alone Debian-based systems).

That doesn't really matter, because LSB provides you with what you get minimum. No more, no less. If it's not provided in the LSB, you ship it with your application and it's self contained in your application path.

So where does that get you?

Very far actually, I have yet to hear anyone complain about issues with my past LSB packages.

In the end, if you require any complex libraries (think UI), do you include their dependencies, and then those dependencies dependencies, and while you're at it, why not just ship an entire Linux distribution to make sure everything works right?

Did you even bother reading what the LSB provides?

LSB provides an abundance of "complex libraries" to begin with. I'm not really seeing this endless amount of dependencies you're talking about, because most of the major ones are all in the LSB already and everything else generally relies on those major ones to begin with.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

Looking at the LSB now, is specifies that "libpng12" should be available on a system out-of-the-box. In fact, I pointed out earlier that Google Chrome uses libpng12.

So that's at least OpenSUSE which is not LSB compliant as it provides libpng14, not libpng12 (and the difference is Chrome silently doesn't work after you install it).

So considering the second largest distribution is not LSB compliant out-of-the-box, the argument that the LSB provides everything you need is outright misleading. If all major and minor Linux distributions confirmed 100% to the LSB, you might have a point, but the fact is that they don't.

And don't say "you install the LSB manually" because the average user (not technical people) have no idea what the LSB even is or what it provides.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

So that's at least OpenSUSE which is not LSB compliant as it provides libpng14, not libpng12 (and the difference is Chrome silently doesn't work after you install it).

Well no shit, Chrome isn't compiled against the LSB. If the application isn't compiled against the LSB, it's not going to work with LSB.

If you want to compile Chromium against LSB, you would need to install the LSB development packages and enter the LSB building environment, where you build the application against the LSB libraries, the LSB glibc runtime etc.

OpenSuSE currently supports the latest LSB stable version, 4.1 fully.

And don't say "you install the LSB manually" because the average user (not technical people) have no idea what the LSB even is or what it provides.

Alright, then don't reference some obscure debian distributions without stating exactly which ones, where I could only assume the ones that I even knew of that were not LSB compliant, were not even used by the "average user" either (such as those debian-packaged distributions designed to be only a firewall).

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Hach-Que]

Did you not read what I said?

The LSB 4.1 specifies libpng12. OpenSUSE does not ship it by default (it ships libpng14). Ergo, OpenSUSE is not 100% LSB compliant.

Re:They should be unifying KDE and GNOME

[Ash-Fox]

Your assumption is that libpng12 would be exposed in the same way it would be exposed if the library was normally in OpenSuSE which is wrong. You'd need to enter the LSB environment, not OpenSuSE distribution's environment.

Yeah.. key applications

[Anonymous Coward]

There are still not all kde 3.5 key applications in kde4 ... and now 5 ?
Kitchensync anyone,.. or similar program? How long did it take until i had a bluetooth program in kde4?

Dark ages are coming to the Linux Desktop .. Gnome 3 .. KDE 5 .... so maybe the smaller ones will rise... Enlightenment (e17), XFCE, LXDE ?

Re:Yeah.. key applications

[obarthelemy]

2011 will be the year of the desktops on linux !

Re:Yeah.. key applications

[Enderandrew]

Some of those apps never made it to KDE 4 because they were abandoned. There isn't much you can do about that.

However, there are many new apps and plasmoids that only exist in KDE 4 and never existed in 3.

It also looks like Qt 5 won't be as drastic of a change as Qt 4 was, and that KDE 5 won't be as drastic of a change as KDE 4.

FRIST PsOT

[Anonymous Coward]

OF AMERICA) is tShe

Re:FRIST PsOT

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for that pic! I creamed in my pants just watching it! Now I have to go change but it was totally worth it!

My thoughts exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

4 is not even at feature parity with 3.5 yet, not to mention stability. Why move on already?

Oh, yeah. New. Shiny.

Maybe there are reasons why they are separate?

[Anonymous Coward]

Has it ever occurred to you that, just maybe, there are some very significant reasons why they are separate? You know, like philosophical and technical differences, maybe?

It's hard to decide where to begin! First, just look at the main programming languages and UI toolkits for each environment. The KDE developers chose to use a mature, robust, well-tested programming language (C++) and framework (Qt) to build upon. The GNOME developers, on the other hand, made a half-assed pseudo-OO extension to C (GObject), and used one of the shittiest UI toolkits ever developed (GTK+).

There are many differences when it comes to the quality of applications (KDE apps are much better), the release cycle (KDE's releases are far more consistent), the community (KDE's is much more helpful and less ego-centric), future goals (KDE actually views innovation and achievement as important), and so forth.

The only way you could reconcile these differences would be to outright discard one of the environments. In fact, that's happening naturally. That's why GNOME is a dying project, and GNOME 3 appears to be a failed effort. The community has gotten fed up with all aspects of the GNOME situation, and that's why most people are now moving to KDE, with the rest mainly moving to XFCE.

In a way, you will get your dream of a unified Linux desktop environment. It's in progress today. It'll just take a few more years for the last remnants of GNOME to become totally irrelevant.

Will we See QUANTA???

[JoeCommodore]

Been using 3.5 Quanta and still waiting...

I read of the problems/apathy integrating Quanta into Kdevelop4...

How about just fixing the libs in Quanta 3.5 to just work in 4 and 5??? Would that be more doable?

Either that or someone needs to make a suitable alternative.

Re:Will we See QUANTA???

[SIR_Taco]

I've had Quanta (version 3.5.10) installed since 4.6.... now I'm on 4.7.... don't have an issue

Re:Will we See QUANTA???

[solanum]

I've had Quanta (version 3.5.10) installed since 4.6.... now I'm on 4.7.... don't have an issue

Same here, but I think the problem is that we won't be able to run the KDE 3.5 version of Quanta in a KDE 5.0 environment, we'd have to install the KDE 3.5 environment and swap between that and KDE 5.0 to use it. It really amazes me that Quanta has yet to be ported to KDE 4 as there really isn't an equivalent web development environment on Linux. I've tried several others and for me as a home user with a couple of small family websites none of the other free (in both senses) web development environments have the combination of ease of use and features that Quanta has.

KDE can choke on it

[drinkypoo]

There, FTFY

no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[dltaylor]

Without X support as a major piece of the Linux distribution, it is useless to me as a desktop environment. I think I only have one of seven Linux kernels running on various hardware that do not have at least one application displaying on a non-local X server.

I use "evince" running on a Linux box to display PDFs from a Windows machine's shared storage to a Cygwin X server on the same box to avoid the security issues with Acrobat Reader. Firefox worked well that way for web browsing until the developers decided to only run one instance (fixed by having multiple "users", but still); Chromium still does.

At home I have thoroughly "sandboxed" Flash by having it as a single-user installation for a non-privileged account. Only that account can run Flash and it has no read access to any other user directory, and no write access to any system files, so no snooping in my email folders, for example. The Flash-enabled Firefox normally displays on the same desktop X server as my other applications, though.

Putting X-terms from Linux boxes on my workplace Windows machine is trivial, as is running Eclipse. One of my co-workers even bothered to bring over the whole desktop, starting with a GDM launch, I think. We do this to allow easy copy/cut/paste into the company's dedicated Windows-only applications.

If you actually bother to think about how the display paradigm is shifting back to a (now-graphic) 3270 model, where the back end of an application runs elsewhere and the display is local to a user, with all of the input/input validation and rendering done on the smart terminal (pad, 'phone' ...), then Wayland makes even less sense. It is trying to solve a performance problem (native 3D Linux games, and "cutesy" desktop graphic effects) that doesn't even exist, except in the developer's sad fantasies.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[JabberWokky]

Qt has a -platform commandline arg to choose between X and Wayland. It can also be set globally. It is reasonable (given historical choices with regard to Qt and KDE) that KDE may well choose that same option as well.

Lots of fearmongering, and now you are greatly afeared. Might want to wait to see what develops rather than reflexively prognosticate doom.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

No one really gives a fuck dude. Linux is for fags.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's perfect for you, then.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[V!NCENT]

You think that because Wayland is not networked that we're going to lose networked widgets, but that's not the case.

You see, for a long time X has become more and more client orientated. When 2D was getting replaced with compositing, the entire stream of new features actually made X.org more and more like Wayland.

Wayland is not realy what you probably think it is. Wayland is a Window Manager on top of OpenGL ES and other techniques like Gallium3D.

So where does the networking come from? Where it should have been in the first place: widget toolkits like GTK+ and Qt.

The first steps are already made: GTK+ can expose an HTML interface and KDE's Plasma desktop (which is totaly made out of widgets, including the tackbar ea.) is now networked. It will only be a matter of time before Qt becomes totaly networked. The ball is already rolling on that one.

-- conclusion --
Wayland is a Window Manager that moves beyond X.org in terms of using a modular and cleaner graphics architecture (Gallium3D shader based) and the networking goes to the widget toolkits.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[Hatta]

Wayland is a Window Manager

So, what if I want to use my own window manager? I no longer get to use wayland apps? This is why the window manager and display server have been separate for so long. There's no reason to conflate the two now.

So where does the networking come from? Where it should have been in the first place: widget toolkits like GTK+ and Qt.

So every tool kit has to support networking itself, rather than just inheriting it from the display server? Why is that "where it should have been"? Every new tool kit is going to have to reinvent the wheel.

Nothing about Wayland sounds good at all to me.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[serviscope_minor]

You think that because Wayland is not networked that we're going to lose networked widgets, but that's not the case.

It's a definite risk. However, there are many more things wrong with Wayland than just that.

You see, for a long time X has become more and more client orientated. When 2D was getting replaced with compositing, the entire stream of new features actually made X.org more and more like Wayland.

Yes: and that's not a good thing. I think personally that the new extensions are mis-designed. It would have made much more sense to keep font rendering on the server, but to update it. That is much better for remote clients.

Wayland is not realy what you probably think it is. Wayland is a Window Manager on top of OpenGL ES and other techniques like Gallium3D.

Yes, and it's not a terribly good one. For instance, using a number of tortured arguments, the geniuses behind Wayland have decided that the clients should be responsible for the window decorations. Now Linux will have the ALL the features of Windows and OSX like the one where broken applications can't be moved/resized etc. Or windows have inconsistenst snap-to-edge behaviour. And so on.

Some parts of the Wayland design are sensible: like using it top multiplex several X servers onto one physical screen. The parts where it is supposed to replace X are misdesigned by people who really ought to know better.

So where does the networking come from? Where it should have been in the first place: widget toolkits like GTK+ and Qt.

So everyone whould have to implement their own serialization, tunnelling, security and servers? Brilliant! Why didn't I think of that!

The first steps are already made: GTK+ can expose an HTML interface and KDE's Plasma desktop (which is totaly made out of widgets, including the tackbar ea.) is now networked. It will only be a matter of time before Qt becomes totaly networked. The ball is already rolling on that one.

It's astonishing that proponents of Wayland declare that it is so much better than X because for one, X is bloated and complex (yeah, maybe if you still use a Sun 3/60). Then on the other hand thay come out and suggest that the network bits should be replaced with HTML5! That is the most astonishing piece of doublethink.

Wayland is a Window Manager that moves beyond X.org in terms of using a modular and cleaner graphics architecture (Gallium3D shader based) and the networking goes to the widget toolkits

Conclusion: Wayland is a new low-level display system which is being used to replace a higher livel system (X11) in an ill-conceived and ill thought out manner that destroys many excellent features without replacing them with any credible alternative.

Wayland may look shinier, but in terms of actual usability for people like me, it will inevitably be a large step backwards.

Re:no "X", no need for desktop Linux

[serviscope_minor]

So, what if I want to use my own window manager? I no longer get to use wayland apps? This is why the window manager and display server have been separate for so long. There's no reason to conflate the two now.

Wayland is the compositor system. You write a wayland server in much the same way as you write a window manager, so they can be freely replaced. Apparently it takes about the same amount of code.

Which makes the claim that it is a better, simpler system rather curious.

Oh also, all the demos so far have had client-drawn decorations. Yay for broken programs having unmovable windows!

I also remember a blog post about how Wayland had got DnD working. I also find this rather shocking. I have written an implementation of XDnD which seemed able to interoperate with every client I tried it with. It is not very complex and there are some excellent example implementations out there to use as a guide. The fact that they assumed that it was blog worthy to implement DnD does not bode well for the vaunted "simplicity" of Wayland.

Nothing about Wayland sounds good at all to me.

But shiny?

Almost interesting...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow - this story is almost interesting. No, wait... actually it isn't.

One request

[lennier1]

Keep the ability to choose whether you want a tablet-oriented interface or not.

That's one of the reasons why many people don't consider Unity and Gnome 3 alternatives anymore.

dress

[dsadwdwfwfwfw]

auction market Black And White Print Dress 5847 comes with an 18k dial with black rhodium finishThis set of three watchesthe largest decrease in sales of the Swatch GroupBucherer) X Print Cotton Dress now the depths of the ocean have been scrutinized by Richard Milleare based on the implementation of triple class of complementary blocks: to issue box as a power storage section Print Cotton Dress 1 epic Tourbillon watch at platinum and zirconium alloys used as raw material caseChinese companies are often only a few years time on the birth of their luxury process from birth to adulthoodMovado has nearly 100 patents have been registered Rectangular mother of pearl face with black crocodile leather strap off by each otherexactly practice the Tissot's philosophy: "days Shuttle not only watch "simple design Black And White Print Dress as well as the "1000 Migilia" logo In this parallel and unconventional worldovercome technical challenges is a prerequisite for the ever-victorious Print Cotton Dress Anti-reflective (AR) coating helps eliminate glarewe believe that the network itself has become a social platformwarm and sweetand the blue chronograph-handhttp://www.choicekarenmillen.com/karen-millen-print-cotton-dress-p-23411.html http://www.choicekarenmillen.com/karen-millen-black-and-white-print-dress-p-23238.html [url=http://www.choicekarenmillen.com/karen-millen-black-and-white-print-dress-p-23238.html]Black And White Print Dress[/url] [url=http://www.choicekarenmillen.com/karen-millen-print-cotton-dress-p-23411.html]Print Cotton Dress[/url] [url=http://www.choicekarenmillen.com/karen-millen-jersey-stripe-dress-p-23481.html]Jersey Stripe Dress[/url]

KDE & GNUSTEP are all we need

[unixisc]

GNOME is GNU Networked Object Model Environment. Once they dropped the goals of making it an Object Model Environment, they destroyed the rationale for it remaining in the first place. Even if the goal was to massage the ego of GNU, there was still GNUSTEP there to actually offer something that KDE doesn't, and be a viable alternative growing on the achievements of NEXTSTEP in the past. If GNUSTEP could run all GNOME and KDE applications, it would be perfect! It would offer all the features that NEXT offered, while avoiding the 'shiny' features that send some people scurrying to XFCE or TWM. Also, if GNUSTEP could be ported to Wayland, so that like the original NEXTSTEP, it has no X underpinnings or requirements, that would be even better.

Will KDE 5 be the Wayland version?

[unixisc]

Does this, plus the previous KDE story, imply that KDE 5 will be the version that's based on Wayland, rather than X, and that any support for X apps on KDE will be via Wayland? And in the meantime, any improvements for KDE on X will be KDE 4.8 and 4.9? If that were the case, seems a good idea. Gnome was debating recently whether to support Linux-only: I think Gnome should support Minix and nothing else. Let GNUSTEP be GNU's approach to Linux, Hurd and if they wish, BSD, and let KDE cover Linux and BSD. Oh, and I hope Wayland gets ported to Minix as well. Incidentally, at what stage is Wayland currently? Will BSD be supporting it as well, or will Wayland be Linux only? Will Hurd refuse to touch it due to its use of LGPL, or will GNU try and come out w/ a variation of it that falls under GPL3? Looks like plenty of new ports & projects for the good people @ Debian - just these combos should have their hands full, let alone the various CPU architectures that'll then be thrown in.

Re:Will KDE 5 be the Wayland version?

[Anonymous Coward]

KDE already runs on top of Windows, Mac OS X and X11. Wayland support will be in addition to X11 support not instead for the foreseeable future.

Re:Will KDE 5 be the Wayland version?

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, there won't be a "KDE 5". Ever.
See http://vizzzion.org/blog/2011/06/there-is-no-kde5/ for details.

So far only KDE Frameworks 5.0 have been announced. There are no plans for KDE Plasma Workspaces 5.0 as of today. At least KPW 4.x (which KWin is part of) will always also run on X.org. Wayland will only be optional.

In KDE's effort to improve your desktop experience

[Osgeld]

The team announced that they will be removing the mouse, instead of the mouse users are expected to use a tiny window on the screen called "the mouse", and the team said most users would not notice once they got used to it. In other news the team also announced they solved what some have perceived as annoying action where the controls for widgets would jump out like a light show.

Framwork

[Airport Plus]

This is still buggy and giving the same problems, [url]http://www.airportplus.co.uk[/url]