Slashdot Mirror
KDE 3.5 Fork Trinity Releases First Major Update
First time accepted submitter Z_God writes "Disappointed with KDE 4's performance and other shortcomings, Timothy Pearson continued KDE 3.5 development under the name Trinity. Tuesday the first major update of the Trinity Desktop Environment was released providing an alternative upgrade path for KDE users that do not feel comfortable with KDE 4. The Trinity Desktop Environment should provide a fast and familiar experience for all users expecting a traditional desktop environment. Packages are available for Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora from the Trinity project site."
I might give this a try. One of the reasons I stopped using KDE was because it was painfully slow on my poor laptop.
You know, if I still had my old laptop I'd give this a try. I always found KDE3.5 to be a *Very* friendly way to introduce people to Linux. It was Window-like enough that they could intuit their way around the menus. Then again, the wife's laptop doesn't quite have enough power for the KDE4 environment... Might be worth checking out. If only the site weren't already slashdotted...
I assume QT 3.x is still required. While it's technically Free software and all that, the subsequent additional freeing (LGPL) of QT 4.x in my mind makes it a lot more relevant. If that's the case, is there hope that this team would attempt to port Trinity to QT 4 in the future? Now THAT would really turn heads, at least in my opinion. I'd use it in a heartbeat.
Why do you hate freedom? A major point of open source is so that if you're dissatisfied with the direction a vendor goes, you can fork and maintain locally. That's what's going on here. You don't have to fucking use it, jerk.
...to get even earlier versions :P
For some reason that I can only attribute to nostalgia, I've always wanted to use KDE 1 and KDE 2.
Great news about KDE3.5.
Now could we get a continuation of Gnome2?
We could call it Old Gnome Users of America.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
I hate to reply to myself, but it looks like it was started but stalled due to QT 4 bugs and slowness. I found this through the slashdotted project roadmap. Is it really that much worse? Can anyone speak to this?
Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?
Because change is NOT always good.
The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop. It's supposed to take priority. I have never experienced the level of outright frustration as when the KDE Plasma Weather Widget got stuck in a constant crash-restart loop and the KDE Crash Reporter burnt up all my RAM (in addition to stealing focus constantly.) In KDE 3.5 I could've simply killed the widget process. But in KDE4, no, I can;t, because killing the widget process wipes out my launcher, my desktop icons, my taskbar - all the critical system components I need to even do so much as load a damn terminal to kill the widget. Yes, I know, Ctrl-Alt-F2, but having to deal with that in the first place is just the solution that proves there's a problem.
I now run GNOME2. I tried GNOME3, Unity, and even KDE4. And I mean for 2-3 weeks each. I couldn't stand any of them. It's not that each has their little annoyances. I mean, GNOME2 is slap full of those as well. Rather, my issue with the latest generation of WMs is simply that they're growing more and more devoid of choice. Want a launcher on the left side? Good luck! Maybe loading another separate desktop widget system? Why would you want that?! Every little thing I try to do, these new WMs tell me "I can't do that." I'm not using GNOME2 because I love the eye candy (I prefer the LOOK of GNOME3, actually.) I'm using it because every time I want to do something that's not the default, GNOME2 lets me do it. It's the "have it your way" WM. Nothing in the latest generation actually offers that level of freedom-as-in-choice.
When the taskbar and program launcher (preferably a menu) in KDE4 is its own separate process, THEN I'll try it again. Critical system components should NOT be freaking widgets! That is dumb. And I will not upgrade to "dumber and choice-less" just because it looks pretty, else I could just go get a Mac.
Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?
Because not all change is good?
Trinity is a good name for it, because the server got nuked!
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Oh yeah, well I'm going to fork Trinity to make it more like KDE 4!
Nepomuk must be indexing the files on his server right now.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Someone did:
https://github.com/Perberos/Mate-Desktop-Environment
http://k3rnel.net/2011/06/22/bluebubble-the-fine-manual/
Not sure how much mileage there is in these, though. Working on upgrading the crippled 'fallback' mode of Gnome 3 to something a bit closer to the Gnome 2 Panel might be more worthwhile in the long run. Meanwhile, there's Xfce.
Gnome 2 is the root of the problem, actually. Gnome 3 is just following the (flawed) decisions and judgements that lead to Gnome 2 to their logical conclusions. If you really want a useable Gnome you need to go back to Tranquilty and fork from there.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
That's KDE, and what's with Gnome? Gnome3 consists nearly solely of regressions, there's barely any functionality left. The primary mode, "gnome-shell" is beyond words, acting as everyone has fat fingers on a 3'' touchscreen, combining worst ideas of iPhone and Windows Phone ("you can't run a program more than once", etc). The secondary mode, "gnome-fallback" is a bad joke too -- no usable panel, no desktop, no messing with the menu (try right clicking... try dragging...). Individual programs are no better: for example, someone had the brilliant idea of taking away the tray mode from RhythmBox. Oh, and network-manager (AKA "no network more complex than single DHCP") is a hard dependency.
There is a fork attempt called "Mate" but it doesn't look that promising yet. I wonder whether it's a matter of time, or if it's time to migrate to XFCE or something. As Linus and ESR said, XFCE feels like a big step back.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
KDE 4.7 is actually quite nice.
He who has no
I certainly respect and will always cherish 3.5, but the new 4.xes aren't that bad either. I'm betting that by KDE 5 and GNOME 4, the K Desktop Environment will have a fairly masterful market share once more.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Is "Trinity" a deliberate allusion to "Unity"?
The problem is that Slashdot, like most other communities, tends to hold onto widely accepted opinions even if they aren't currently true (or correct). Like you, I agree: Early KDE 4 releases weren't up to par, but 4.7 is very, very well done. But, because there's this preconceived notion that anything KDE 4 is terrible, the myth is perpetuated ad infinitum.
Of course, there's also the group that wants to run it on 6+ year old hardware, even though there's 1) plenty of light weight projects that will work on old hardware and 2) other OSes like Windows 7 likely won't work well on very old hardware either.
He who has no
Good for you? Not everyone agrees, though.
I suppose it's silly of me to comment on this, but really, what is wrong with posting this? Okay, so 4.7 is available. Why does that invalidate someone else's effort to fork the 3.x branch? I think you're getting hung up on version-itis, the idea that a larger version number is inherently better, or in a less confrontational manner of putting it, that the changes in a higher version number inherently represent progress. Major version number changes are not necessarily better. Instead, think of it is significantly different. Yes, the point is to improve the system, but sometimes people disagree with the direction a project is taken on a subsequent major revision. Frankly, when people bitch about it, they are often told "if you dislike it so much, stick with the old version, it still works." Well, this guy took it to heart and is continuing development. As it happens, I think that's pretty freaking awesome.
The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop. It's supposed to take priority.
And by "the desktop" you probably mean "a folder". I don't know about you, but my real wooden desktop doesn't look like a folder at all. Instead, it's filled with post-it notes, pencils, sometimes a notebook, a computer, a phone, a lamp and a Rubik cube. In short, it's filled with gadgets.
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
Sure it is. It still is half as responsive as 3 was for me (on older hardware, even), feels clunky and unpolished, and still has not returned some of the features I used KDE 3 for. KDE 4 is a step backwards towards Windows, not a step forward, and I am certain that KDE 5 will be worse.
Great Intellect...
I love that users can actually continue using their loving software, even if corporation or community what is responsible maintaining the software is heading own direction.
I love KDE4 more than KDE 3.5 and that is because the speed and simplicity with great amount of features and now since 4.7 there is more than what 3.5 had. I have even ran 4.7 on old AMD Athlon 1800Mhz, 1 Gigabyte RAM with Nvidia GT4xxx and it just worked fine without problems. The HDD was bottleneck and when I tried SSD on it by swapping such to it with IDE adapter it just blow my mind out how fast KDE 4.7 has come from 4.0-4.2 versions.
People still don't like to give a change for newer KDE but it is their miss. They have rights to stick with KDE 3.5 if they want but I dont see a point on it so much.
I hope the Trinity 3.5 will get new ideas and features what can be added later then to 4.x or 5.x series if they are great and innovative.
Or, you know, people have different tastes and opinions from you? No, can't be. It has to be just myths and FUD, right?
1. I've been using both, KDE 3 and 4 for years. I didn't make the switch because of "versionitis", but because 3.5 wasn't satisfying in various aspects (e.g. the broken menu editor, broken USB auto mounting, poor calendar storage format choices... I could continue this list endlessly).
2. What I'm questioning is not if "Trinity" is a good from a technical perspective, but the relevance of the project itself. People are free to do in their basements whatever they please, but not everything is worth being posted on such a high volume/high profile forum. This is a prime example. The work is irrelevant since the reason why it was started (KDE 4.0 did suck, after all) doesn't exist any longer (KDE 4.7 rocks). You'll never get enough manpower to keep up with KDE mainline. Thus, Trinity will trail behind, with the gap growing constantly. Just look other, larger projects: even Gnome is struggling to keep up the pace. The story just got posted because it triggered the right ./ buzzwords: Linux desktop and KDE 3.5 vs. 4.x.
3. Anyone who's used both, QT3 and QT4 will agree with me that QT4 was a huge step forward. E.g. the widget rendering infrastructure alone is now so much more elegant that it would be a reason to make the switch.
Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
So you probably know this already, but for the benefit of similarly-minded but less-knowledgeable readers, there are many desktop environments for Linux -- open source breeds choice, after all.
We're mostly a KDE shop where I work, but there are users using xfce, fvwm, and xmonad here, and one who swears by gnome, but launches it from KDM, because our system has its big warning banner set up for KDM but not GDM or XDM.
So if they end-of-life gnome2 out from under you, you still have options.
2*3*3*3*3*11*251
No, killing the plasma-desktop process does not kill all your chance to start a terminal: krunner is a separate process, so alt-f2 will give you the minicli and you can start anything you want.
It may be filled with gadgets, but it doesnt crash and burn just because a pencil tip gets broken off.
"The Desktop" is and has always been nothing but a very poor metaphor anyway. Get your damn desktop off my root window! ;)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
So please explain WHY in godsname KDE insists on copying a movie file from a samba share before playing it in a capable player? That is just plain annoying on small files but when you are talking about 20gb files it is just plain silly. This kind of thing is so fucking basic and since the same player can just play from the share with other desktops it is a complete and utter failure on the KDE team to prioritize on basic functionality over bling.
KDE dropped the ball. Polishing a turned over several releases so it shines a bit more still means you got a turd.
You are talking like a stockholm beating, believing your captor is becoming your friend because the beatings have gotten slightly less regular.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
This is one of the best things about OSS. Anyone can fork and when there is a strong need, the fork will happen.
I'm spoilt for choice
I pitty the slaves of a their Master's view of computing (yes, fanboys, I mean you)
metageek
what always annoyed me is the FUD that anything using 3D hardware is going to be slower. Maybe on a 2nd generation intel laptop model gfx chip, but you'd struggle to buy one. $5 can get you a basic GMA card well capable of it, and once you've offloaded your GFX to something which is -designed- to do that specific job, it's the opposite - it absolutely flies.
As for the "bloat" - people should try running top (or hitting ctrl-esc, since it's KDE). As the above says, QT4 is better than QT3, especially when it comes to memory footprint...
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
This story is extremely relevant to the Slashdot community. No doubt that KDE 4.7 is well-refined. However, KDE 4 and KDE 3 differ significantly in both how they are developed and how they are used. To have the KDE 3.5 forked into an actively-developed fork will not downplay KDE 4's significance nor its own active development. This just gives us users a choice between two considerably different desktop environments. People who like KDE 4 will stay with it, and people who don't like KDE 4 abandoned it a long time ago, so there's no harm done by keeping its predecessor alive under a different name.
/* No Comment */
Yeah, Taco would fix it. Sure. Crappy stories are *new* on slashdot. Heck, if he's gone for another month, I wouldn't be surprised if duplicate stories started popping up now that he's departed. Maybe even a story with a typo in it.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
One of the worst trends in computing is trying to make real-world analogies to everything. Who cares what the real top of your desk looks like? Your desk is not a personal computer, and vice versa.
KDE 4.7 is up to par with what?
- Printing is not "up to par". KDE 3.5 used to have a printing system that anyone could envy, in KDE 4.x printing barely works (bug 180051)
- PIM is not "up to par". KDE 3.5 used to have a sync feature, a bit clumsy, but it worked. The sync feature in KDE 4.x is only available in SVN and barely works. And don't get me started with syncing with my phone...
And I could cite you the bug database all day, giving you an example of bugs that make features really uncomfortable to use. I am subscribed to at least a dozen bugs, all that affect my productivity, while in KDE 3.5 I had little or no issues.
- I have issues with network shares.
- I have issues with instant messaging (granted, some of them existed with 3.5, but the fixes were commited right before the KDE 4 fiasco started)
- I have issues with the text editors
- I have issues with using KDE over SSH
- I have issues with performance (maybe I should upgrade my ancient quad-core PC with 8 GB RAM)
Most of these are not fixed in 4.7, which is not available for all distros yet, so even if they were, it doesn't matter. You know, KDE 3.5 was stable, mature and polished. KDE used to be a pain in the ass, but with 3.5 all the issues slowly disappeared. It was already available everywhere, in all distros. KDE 4.7 just got out, and it's filled with issues I cursed KDE 3.3 or 3.4 for. Compared to KDE 3.5, KDE 4.7 is still crap. And slow.
>The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop
Former OS/2 user here.
The Desktop should be an object just like any other object in the environment.
I take umbrage with your insistence that the root window is somehow special.
Also, your rant is otherwise so full of holes I will stop there since I would wind up writing a dissertation.
--
BMO - former KDE4 hater.
Of course, there's also the group that wants to run it on 6+ year old hardware
This is posted from a laptop which is 8 years old, buddy. It runs Lubuntu 10.04 LTS, and rocks with it (LXDE). It was starting to suck a bit with Ubuntu 10.04 (Gnome 2) and with PCLinuxOS 2009 (KDE 3.something), but LXDE purged the bloat and revived the hardware.
other OSes like Windows 7 likely won't work well on very old hardware either.
In what way is that relevant? The laptop of which I spoke came with original XP (pre SP1), which ran OK on it, but sucked in so many ways (starting with the applications). I can't imagine running Win7 on it; probably more like staggering or slithering than running, actually.
So why don't I get a new laptop? Easy: this one has a nice 17" 1920x1200 display. All the new models (even from the same vendor) have nothing better than a shortscreen 1920x1080, if they even have that. The extra 120 vertical pixels are valuable.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
...and stop posting irrelevant stories like this on the front page. KDE 4.0 was horrible, yes, but it's not like KDE 4 development was halted. The latest release is 4.7 and it's much more stable and feature rich than 3.5 ever was.
There's no question that KDE4 is now plenty stable. However, there must be plenty of people like me who: Can't stand the unintuitive way the UI of plasma applets and controls work; and/or strongly disagree with KDE's current "semantic desktop" goals.
After a couple of years of use, I really haven't found anything in KDE4 that's a compelling improvement over KDE3 other than that KDE4 is still actively maintained. What's worse for me, KDE4 has introduced many UI "features" that I find to be very annoying. (Maybe if I was a fan of eye candy, I'd have a different opinion. But I'm not.) If this project fixes the unmaintained code issue, I might go back to KDE3.
Do any of you happen to know if KAudio Creator still works in Trinity? I've yet to find a CD ripper that actually works anywhere near as well as KAudio Creator for ripping tons of disk at a time, I open an instance for each drive and it works beautifully. All the rest of the rippers I've used are buggy as hell or more complicated than I want to deal with for the size of collection I have to rip (what's with K3B skipping the first track? It's been a known bug for a long time). I might throw Trinity on the system just for that if it's still around.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong about using a samba share, sorry. That problem with KDE 4 persists no matter what sort of a share you're using: if it's not visible in the filesystem, there is usually no streaming. It sucks.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
I agree with your right to choose to think it's "retarded".
I disagree with your claim that it is a waste of time.
/* No Comment */
And that's fine. Some people hate Gnome 3, while I happen to like it. I have no objection to anyone that wants to use older stuff, or new forks of older stuff.
But as is usually the case, the shouting is largely unidirectional. "Zomg, new shit sucks, it's totally unusable, I'm never going to use this, you're all jerks if you like it, get off my lawn."
It's a grating and juvenile process. Every time something gets an overhaul, everyone screams that "new isn't better", as if that's insightful. We all know that, and they are trying to make something better. If something is genuinely broken, file a bug report. If you just don't like it, that's fine too. There's no reason we can't be civil about it.
After my release-day copy of KDE 3.5 just finished compiling, too! Of all the luck...
He acknowledged that, had you cared to read a few more sentences before jumping to reply.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
So what? Why do you care? Is your life that pathetic that you really get so worked up that someone doesn't like the same thing as you?
Yay, thanks Trinity team!!
Personally, I'm an XFCE convert. The Xubuntu variant looks and feels very similar to the classic GNOME 2 Ubuntu, it's not overly flashy looking (I don't want my GUI to dazzle, I want it to stay out of my applications' way), and it's relatively hardware friendly. It's not as diligent about being slim as it used to be- but that's not necessarily a bad thing when I'm trying to use it as a full desktop environment on modern hardware.
Although I've never tried GNOME 3. Not a big fan of Unity for normal usage, although it probably suits my small-screen devices (netbooks etc.) well enough.
To have the KDE 3.5 forked into an actively-developed fork will not downplay KDE 4's significance nor its own active development. This just gives us users a choice between two considerably different desktop environments.
When you fork, you gain a choice and lose synergies. If Trinity gains steam, how much development effort will it pull away from KDE 4? How much energy will it take from application developers trying to target both platforms? Will Debian divert other packaging efforts to support this new desktop? And how much extra confusion or frustration will this add for Linux users? Choices you don't care about are, in fact, drawbacks.
I'm not arguing for or against the Trinity effort. Forks can bring value to the community, especially when solving a legal dispute, circumventing a stagnant core team, trying out something really innovative, or targeting a specialized set of interests. But fragmentation has a cost, and it's not as simple as saying more choices are always better.
-1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
well...
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=277010
(granted, after mere 3 month and a huge flamewar, we got a status update!)
Red Leader Standing By!
No, he did not. He talked about ctrl-alt-f2, which goes to a text console, not alt-f2, which opens krunner, aka the minicli, right inside the X11 session. You'd realized that, had you cared to read both his and my post before jumping to reply. Toodle-pip.
Somehow, the Trinity link above seems to be a dead link
Is the Trinity version# going to be 3.5, or 1.0, or something else? How do they plan to increment it? As for the name, I thought that a name like QDE (for Qt based DE) would have been more suggestive.
Nothing is taken away from KDE. The trinity people are different people, and they are welcome to do what they want to do: they even do it right inside the KDE svn infrastructure. Their itch, they scratch, it's totally fine. And when I asked them to rename their fork of Krita (because Krita 2.4 is so much better that we all want to forget Krita 1.6), they did, no complaints. Great people, good cooperation. They only need to start showing up at aKademy or Desktop Summits.
Will Trinity use the latest version of Konqueror as its default browser, instead of the still unready Rekonq? And will they use the most updated versions of KOffice and other K apps? I hope they don't start forking all those apps, but do what they can to get them running on Trinity. Oh, and hope that KPackage is a lot better.
When KDE 5 is out, it'll be running on Wayland. If Trinity doesn't merge back, I hope that they too take advantage of Wayland.
"Ahead" how? Your statement assumes that there is some sort of objective, linear measure of progress that is universally agreed on as such, and that is far from the case. People that work as 'UI designers' naturally want everything changing all the time to keep themselves in work, but *users* of the software might well prefer that they quit breaking things that work.
Most people I know that use it seem to think that KDE 4.7 has mostly "caught up" with 3.5, a statement based on the same faulty assumption, of course, but still an interesting one.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop. It's supposed to take priority.
Then why you are using a GNOME 2.x where desktop is actually a Nautilus?
You did know that Nautilus is used to draw the desktop? Right?
And you did know that you can run just KWin as it is the window manager and you dont need to load a shell, the plasma? Right?
I have to agree that forking GNOME 2 isn't quite as appealing as it might first sound. GNOME 3's fallback mode already works excellently (I use it!), and work really ought to be focused on refining that instead.
Like what features you are waiting/missing?
Sharing over Samba is quick and easy: there are graphical tools for it, and pretty much every Linux distro has the client tools preinstalled. NFS is balls (forcing me to use the same UID on every machine? Well I guess I can spend a week learning how to configure LDAP or Kerberos...). AFP is capable, so if you only have Macs and Linux, that would work too, although SMB works about as well on a Mac as it does on Windows.
FWIW, sshfs is pretty usable for Unix only setups. Don't know GUIs for it, though.
Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
You can mount samba shares directly into the filesystem :)
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
I think that they've continued the KDE 3.5.x versions, IIRC this was marked 3.5.13 (but since link is slashdotted, can't be sure).
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?
Because not all change is progress.
I'm one of those people who absolutely despise KDE4. I used several versions and then two years ago, I discovered Trinity KDE. I think it's wonderful. If not for Trinity KDE, I would have gone with xfce or something else, but I lost all interest in KDE with the 4.x series.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
just say'en (or repeating) " if it ain't broke don't fix it " seems how i keep hearing that i not understand it. you know becaus of the kde3 - kde4 shinangians. ( i still have debian on all my machines because of it )
I used to be a Mandriva user. I stuck with Spring 2007 just because I didn't want to give up KDE 3.5. For me, the deciding factor to move to Ubuntu was Trinity KDE. I would still be using Mandriva 2007 if not for Trinity.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
nothing wrong with fighting BAD change.
I'm glad Gnome3 is working for you.
From my perspective, what's juvenile is: Desktop developers are paid by companies (Redhat, Novell, etc.) that get paid by companies that do actual work. Those developers then waste that money coming up with Fischer-Price interfaces that hinder people in doing real work as opposed to maybe opening up a single instance of Firefox for 30min, and then shutting down the computer. (Oops, you can't even shut down the computer in Gnome3 anymore, they took that option away.)
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Question for you: what is the program selection mechanism? Is it a drop-down menu like in Gnome2? Arranged by category (Accessories, Office, Games, Internet)?
Or do you have to right-click on the desktop to get a menu? Thereby implying you have to leave part of the desktop uncovered to work.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
then do with your feelings like you suggest they do with their software. getting upset at others behavior in this case is pretty emo. you can't expect them not to express this dissatisfaction with the new software while you readily express yours about their expression.
I can understand getting upset when what's being touted as a replacement for an environment you depend on is complete crap. While there is nothing wrong with removing unneeded complexity to gain simplicity, today's trend in software (and gui) design is to eschew any capability/flexibility that prevents it from being simple.
There's quite a few of us who prefer 3.5 over the Windification that 4.x has become. For example, in 3.5 I have multiple desktops to organize my work flows but under 4.x they decided to toss the baby out with the bath water and switch to the single desktop paradign. Doesn't help me get work done due to destroying years of customizations to support my workflows.
Simply put, if I wanted to use Windows, I'd damn well install it and throw out my productivity, yet I prefer to get stuff done, meaning that 3.5 still suits my needs. In other words "If it aint broke, then don't fix it!"
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
/.'ers waiting for the return of CmdrTaco ...
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Here's what you said:
Here's what I actually said.
I did not say that KDE 4.7 is up to par completely with 3.x's later releases, but I did state that it's "very, very well done." While I appreciate your efforts at putting words into my mouth, I'm somewhat disappointed that you had to twist my words to do so. Not that I'm surprised; this is Slashdot, after all.
1) I will concede that KDE 4 is not as feature complete as it should be.
2) I have stated before that I prefer KDE over Gnome, and prefer KDE in general.
But perhaps the most important thing is this:
You would be willing to spend the time citing a bug database (yes, I know this is tongue-in-cheek) but not at all interested in offering patches/bugs to the KDE project?
Here's the other side of the coin:
I don't. They work fine for me.
I've never used Kopete, nor do I use a lot of KDE software. I've always used Pidgin. It works fine for my particular case, because I also use it under Windows. Having the same instant messenger across multiple OSes (Arch, Ubuntu, Windows) is of more utility to me than using whatever is "best integrated" with the environment.
I don't. Kate works fine for me, and I tend to use Eclipse quite regularly otherwise.
Not part of my use case.
Never had issues with it on a Core 2 Duo with 6 gigs of RAM, and I don't have issues with it on my current system, either. Both had fairly recent video cards, though. Plus, you can turn off the eye candy with a shortcut.
Either way, what this suggests to me is that most problems with KDE are largely subjective and the topic of edge-cases that I've never personally encountered. Yes, these are issues that should be fixed, but you know what they say... patches welcome. :)
He who has no
Your response to me in this thread twice is somewhat interesting.
My points have been that 1) it's personal preference (which you agreed with me on) and 2) KDE 4 has improved. So you imply you don't agree with me, agree with me in one response, and then you continue to seem intent on arguing what, exactly?
I thought about as much. Your responses to other posters resort to ad hominem attacks, name calling, and straw men. I suspect you're perhaps a little too emotionally involved in this debate, even though most of the people (like myself) don't really care a great deal.
Yes, I prefer KDE. It works great for me. You don't like it: That's fantastic! It's great that we have different tastes and preferences, which you have agreed to here. Yet twice you've replied to me with relatively negative responses that are mostly meaningless. To think that I was going to write a reply to the comment I cited in that link (#37924856) praising you for agreeing with my sentiment until I realized that your motives were simply to attack myself and others.
It's a shame.
He who has no
I wish my desktop was a nautilus :)
Unfortunately they don't live long above their normal depths, shorter still out of water...
Sent from my PDP-11
Uhm, you DO have multiple desktops in KDE 4.x.
Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
I'm running Gnome 3 on an ~7 (iirc) year old machine and it runs just fine. Maybe it's too much for anything older than that... I haven't tried. Oh, and while you probably don't really care, shutdown still works fine.
As for the rest, that's the kind of inflammatory stuff I'm talking about. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean they're "juvenile". They're trying to do something better, and many of us feel that they have. Apparently that includes the people that sign checks.
So as I said before, go ahead and use something else. Nobody is going to stop you, or judge you. Though it would be cool if you didn't say things that aren't true.
Emo? I've been called a few things, but that one's a first.
So I guess I should clarify... I don't get suicidal or otherwise overly emotional when people piss and moan. Not sure where that came from. It's just the routine we go through every time someone overhauls something.
Constructive criticism is good. Bug reports are good. Even just disliking something is fine (I used to be a kde guy). But the childish tantrums, hateful nonsense and false accusations are both boring and worthless. Some people just don't behave like rational adults, and it's a problem.
So, cranky developer-type that doesn't tolerate wasteful noise drowning out constructive conversation very well? Maybe. Emo... not so much.
I apologize if Gnome has now added back the shutdown option to the normal user menu.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Xfce has a program menu just like Gnome 2. In fact, the only difference between the Xfce menu and the Gnome menu is that the Xfce menu contains an entry for the Xfce settings manager. (I use awn on Xfce; it used to be DockbarX but I made the mistake up upgrading the box to Ubuntu 11.10, which is hell if you want to use anything Gnome 2 related).
Xfce is pretty much what Gnome used to be. It's fairly simple but configurable and comes with a handful of dock applets - with all Gnome 2 dock applets being available if you install XfApplet.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Damn right. The purpose of the root window is to provide something to click on to display the main menu, and somewhere to place iconified windows. Kids these days with their "shortcut icons" and "widgets" ...