Slashdot Mirror


KDE 2.0 in Action

Stormie writes "KDE hacker Mosfet has just put up on his web page a section entitled KDE2.0 in action with a rundown of what is coming in version 2, along with a bunch of great screenshots. Exciting stuff!"

312 comments

  1. Hmmm.. The themes by edgy · · Score: 2

    I hope some cleaner themes come out by the time KDE 2.0 comes out. I mean, it doesn't look very bad, but the designers need some professionals with graphics design to make some really snazzy looking themes so that desktop looks more professional.

    Eh, but what do I know.

    1. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by navindra · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with the themes? Don't forget you also have a choice of widget styles, all of them quite neat:

      KDE Step, great NeXT-step style
      Marble theme
      Qt CDE style
      Qt Motif
      Qt Platinum (the default, and it's great)
      Qt Windows
      System the great Mosfet theme.

      After KRASH, it's hoped will have more of these. :)

    2. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by cybaea · · Score: 2

      I hope they concentrate on defining and documenting the interfaces (and debugging them, of course!) so that others can ork on the eye-candy.

      To my mind those are different development tasks and should probably (as you suggest) be done by different people with experience in graphics design, HCI, typesetting, and much more.

      It is hard to make a good UI and I think the KDE team deserves great credit for what they have accomplished in this area. Let's stabilise the code and the interfaces a bit, then let people "play" and come up with various suggestions, and then let us decide on one or two themes that we all like (fat chance!) and all will support.

      Congratulations to the KDE team! I look forward to the 2.0 release.

      --
      Hi!
    3. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by grrussel · · Score: 1
      Yup, come KRASH, I'll make at least one to go with my Sky At Night kwm theme. And I'm sure KDE Themes.org will accept themes for KDE 2.0

      You could, of course, use the GUI theme creator to create your own KDE theme...

      George Russell (russell@kde.org)

    4. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      KDE 2.0 should be able to read GNOME themes, so there will probably be a lot of good themes.

      The KDE themes could do a lot better however. bye, AC

    5. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see a theme mechanism that does not screw with the default theme ! Even ones made for 1.1.2 tend to leave icons and sounds behind when switching to another theme. I hate having to go back and clean this stuff up; it kind of defeats the fun nature of having themes at all. The Star Trek theme is especially bad about this.

    6. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by mwillis · · Score: 1

      Agreed!

      I installed one called win95 on a lark. I was not amused when all the icons changed to little windows. I quickly changed back to the "default" theme, and deleted win95, but those darn little windows were still there. Instead of a K menu, it was still a windows thing.

      The horror! My KDE desktop was infected by Win95 icons.

      It took me an hour or more to find and delete the icons that were causing this. I needed to restart kde to really fix things though. [tip: examine the text files in the .tar.gz theme file.]

      I didn't try the star trek theme, but a version of the moscow theme does this too.

    7. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by DrSpoo · · Score: 2

      Exactly. I've reported this as a "bug" in the bug reporting system KDE uses. I saw Mosfet on IRC once and wanted to ask him to fix it, but didn't want to sound thankless ;)

      After looking at the code that does themes (its actually quite simple), the fix to this could be
      a little tricky to implement. A theme can contain any number of icons that get installed to your local .kde directory. KDE looks first for icons in your local .kde directory (like kfm_trash.png or something like that) and if it doesn't find them, it looks in the global /opt/kde directory. As far as I can tell, the theme manager doesn't track which icons get installed to your local .kde dir, so it has no way to "uninstall" them. In Windoze, there are only a few defined icons that can be changed so its easy to revert back to the defaults. But in KDE, literally every icon can be user customized.

      One solution would be to have a list of "core" icons that always get reverted back to the defaults before a new theme is applied. Another solution would be to just remove (actually, just rename) _all_ user icons, but thats not very elegant either. If you have a better solution, let Mosfet hear it.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    8. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to agree on that one. The current widget situation isn't really surprising, as Mosfet has made most, if not all, of the custom widgets in the CVS, and as he has said, his artistic skills are somewhat questionable. So with the release of the widget designer, hopefully by KRASH, we'll have a bunch of widgets, of which some will hopefully be usable.

      One other thing that I'd really like to see related to KDE 2.0 themes is the possibility to package KWM (Kwin now with 2.0?) themes with Qt themes. So just by installing a KDE 2.0 theme you get matching widgets, titlebars and so on, rather than having to install a separate Kwin themes and Qt widget sets.

    9. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Zoltar · · Score: 2

      You bring up a very valid point. While develpoment teams can have some good ideas on graphics and UI, if you want a polished, professional *slick* look you should have *real* graphic artists doing the art work.

      But first and foremost it must work. My experience with gnome/E was so bad with the version that shipped with RH6.0 that, even though I loved the way it looked, I probably won't try it again for quite a while. At this point in my life I don't don't want to spend hours tweaking my desktop or cleaning up core dumps that are spewed all over the place. I want a desktop that works. period. I want it to look good too, but functionality comes first.

      After all, that's what drove me to Linux in the first place, functionality.

    10. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by anatoli · · Score: 1
      Have theme-specific icons reside under ~/.kde/$THEME/icons. KDE should search ~/.kde/core-icons, then ~/.kde/$THEME/icons, then ~/.kde/icons, then /opt/kde/icons (or whatever).

      Now, ~/.kde/core-icons is the place for your icons you don't want to be overriden (probably just symlinks to /opt/kde/icons) and ~/.kde/icons is the place for your icons that are different from the standard icons but you let the theme override them. Both would be empty by default.

      Or I'm totally off the tracks here?

      Please moderate this post down for your protection.
      --

      --
      Industrial space for lease in Flatlandia.
    11. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by PimpBot · · Score: 1

      (NOTE: I'm not trying to start a flamewar here)

      In my expierence, the latest GNOME isn't that much better. It still get core dumps like mad, and for some reason, it can't draw pngs correctly(that's probably my fault though...I must have forgotten a ./compile tag *somewhere*).

      KDE, however, is quick, stable, and clean..yeah, its not the pretties thing, but it gets the job done...KDE 2 looks like it'll be prettier, though.

      IMHO, just install gnome for the libs (can't live w/out gnomeicu!) use the apps that come with KDE, but run WindowMaker ;-)
      --------------------------

    12. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by warmi · · Score: 0

      Themes are meaningless.
      They got sucked into this "theme-contest" by GTK , one diference being that KDE first made sure that their stuff is at least stable enough for everyday work and then started plying with themes and other stuff ...

      Good work KDE team.



    13. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its quite evident that you have no idea what GTK+ is. If you have a problem with the stability of the gnome libs and core, that is one thing, but GTK+ is solid.

      Since I know better than to hope you'll go to www.gtk.org and find out what GTK+ is, I'll elucidate: GTK+ is a fairly small library that draws buttons, textboxes, and other "widgets." It also handles events, and abstracts Xlib drawing. It is an OO library, that is written in C. (C++ is just syntactic sugar, you can write OO programs in any language with structured data types).

    14. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Yakko · · Score: 1
      My experience with gnome/E was so bad with the version that shipped with RH6.0 that, even though I loved the way it looked, I probably won't try it again for quite a while.

      This brokenness of GNOME in RHS 6.0 is the reason I went to Mandrake. Not only did their GNOME implementation actually work for me, I got to try KDE as well. I'm using KDE on a system here at work, and it works ok... I've really got to get afterstep 1.7 whipped into shape (the WM I use at home), tho, since it does a lot of weird things that 1.0 never did.

      *sigh* I've had little time to do anything with as, tho

      --

      --

      --
      Me spell chucker work grate. Need grandma chicken.
    15. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by warmi · · Score: 0

      Oh really ? And why the hell when using GTK I have to cast every fucking line ??

      GTK based programs look terribly, full of cast and other shit - but I guess that is the price you have to pay for trying to emulate OO language using something that is not.

      BTW. "Syntactic sugar" - nice bullshit you are trying to sell here ...

    16. Re:Hmmm.. The themes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but he had a point - it's not GTK that cruds up the code, it's gnomers who want to work on the sexy stuff and not the design and stability aspects. Well, maybe that's not what he meant. TROLL!

  2. Looking Good by sufi · · Score: 5

    The thing I have always like about KDE is it's simplicity of use.

    I am not a linux hacker and have never claimed to be, I am used to windows98 and NT4 and while I dislike it's bugs, security issues and lack of source they are still useful operating systems.

    Until KDE came along I have to admit I was scared of linux... the WMs that were around were very basic and I was addicted to the Ms way of doing things.

    Now this is all changing,I have been using KDE for quite a while now and anticipate the release of v2 with baited breath, it takes something like KDE to convert all us MS users who like the idea of linux but are scared of it.

    You can run it quite happily after install, or you can hack it to bits. It's themeable and it has all the software bits and LAF of windows, while at the same time being quite different.

    What more could a windows user want?

    What's more, here in the office we are considering putting all the admin monkeys on a locked down version of linux with StarOffice and KDE too!

    The future is bright.

  3. [ot] developer-friendly too by navindra · · Score: 3

    Shameless plug: Here's brief, fun article on how nice it is to program with KDE these days.

    1. Re:[ot] developer-friendly too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice ! Oh, you've even included a link to my KIO page :-) Thanks :)

    2. Re:[ot] developer-friendly too by Yakko · · Score: 1
      Shameless plug:

      Truly amazing. However, I must learn C++ to do this. This won't happen before I learn Perl (and probably a bit more C)... Perl's already trying to teach me to be somewhat object-oriented... we'll see how this goes for someone staunchly procedure-oriented.

      I do have to comment, though, that this example goes counter to the paradigm that using C++ to program makes for bloat.

      --

      --

      --
      Me spell chucker work grate. Need grandma chicken.
  4. Switching allegiances by parm · · Score: 3
    I've always been a staunch Gnome supporter - KDE was always a bit slow, flaky, bloated and win95-like for my tastes...

    However, I have to conceded that 2.0 is shaping up to look very nice indeed. Konq is something that, as a web designer, particuarly catches my attention. If they get it doing CSS and HTML4 properly then they'll be my friend for life :)

    Also, I reckon I'd be far happier letting a new user out on KDE2.0 than gnome in its current state... Though whether KDE lives up to expectations remains to be seen... I for one am looking forward to it :)

    --
    -- I reserve the right to be completely wrong --
    1. Re:Switching allegiances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One thing to watch out for -

      Don't jusge KDE on the Redhat 6.0/ 6.1 default install of it. They've somehow managed to really screw it up. NIH syndrome, I suspect, trying to "encourage" people to use GNOME...

      If you want a lovely default KDE installation, try Mandrake 6.1. It handles GNOME well too.

    2. Re:Switching allegiances by parm · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't trust anything on the RedsHat default install of it ;-) I've got a vanilla Debian system, but compile everything up from sources, much safer that way...

      --
      -- I reserve the right to be completely wrong --
    3. Re:Switching allegiances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      er...I think you're mixing up KDE and GNOME here. Lack of speed, flaky-ness and bloat are locked down by Gnome. Speed, elegance and efficiency belong to KDE. The RedHat 6.0 version of KDE has been neutored. I wonder why?

    4. Re:Switching allegiances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooohhhh. "I know you are, but what am I" and a Redhat conspiracy theory all in the same post! You get extra points for that one. Bravo, bravo!

    5. Re:Switching allegiances by Stephen+VanDahm · · Score: 1

      It's pretty obvious that Red Hat heavily favors GNOME over KDE, but I've never understood why. KDE is used by SuSE, Caldera Systems, and Mandrake -- what's the business advantage of being different? I'm not arguing that there isn't a good reason, I'm just asking what y'all think it is.

      My view is that the GNOME vs. KDE thing is hurting Linux deeply. Solaris developers know that almost everyone running Solaris 7 has CDE installed. As a result, it's practical for them to include drag-and-drop stuff in their applications. Don't Linux distributors want to provide this same type of consistancy?

      I'm really interested in hearing Red Hat's reasoning.

      Take care,

      Steve

    6. Re:Switching allegiances by ralphclark · · Score: 1

      If they get it doing CSS and HTML4 properly then they'll be my friend for life :)

      Isn't that a QT issue rather than a KDE issue? I got the idea that the HTML rendering was done within a QT component (but what do *I* know).


      Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
      Thought exists only as an abstraction

    7. Re:Switching allegiances by Hobbex · · Score: 2


      If having only one desktop would make it anything like CDE I would say THANK GOD we have a bunch of competing ones.

      Drag and drop is nice, but it is not a must have feature. A desktop looking slightly more modern than Windows 2.11 (yes, I meant 2) sort of is...

      -
      We cannot reason ourselves out of our basic irrationality. All we can do is learn the art of being irrational in a reasonable way.

    8. Re:Switching allegiances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. It's a KDE issue, definitely. It's because the KDE Libraries provide this kind of easy, simple functionality that it's possible to make a program in such little code that you can do this. The thing is, Qt doesn't provide an HTML widget. KDE does; it's called khtmlw in the KDE1.x branch, and khtml in the 2.x branch (yup, it's a total rewrite.) It's fast now, and I mean really fast. Quite impressive. As fast as (dare i say it?) even the beloved Mozilla project, which, though I support, I must admit I think is in for a tough time. Konqi is the future.

      Maybe not. But I think so. Therefore it is. :)

    9. Re:Switching allegiances by McKing · · Score: 1

      From the info I've seen, Konqueror actually seems more complete in the support for the DHTML standards than Mozilla right now. I don't like to admit it, but IE is light years ahead of Communicator in most respects (except for the swiss-cheese that MS calls security). Konq actually seems like it will catch up to the DOM and CSS standards and maybe surpass both Mozilla and IE.

      KDE as a "desktop environment" I could care less about. I really can't wait for a nice, standards compliant web browser on Unix (instead of Netscape's buggy, incomplete, just-plain-sucks offerings). I wonder if (since it based on QT) Konq can run on Windows? I have a project that I am working on that would be much easier if I could take advantage of some of the CSS and DOM features that are lacking in either IE or NN (or both). It would be nice to be able to just install Konq on the user's desktop, make a nice little icon for them to click on, and target the full specs instead of just the subset that NN or IE follows (or worse, the "extensions" to the standard that MS so gratefully put in to tempt developers). This is the first of several "browser-based" apps we are going to do in the near future, and I was shocked at the curent state of affairs in the standards compliance of the various browers.

      --
      If only "common" sense was actually that common...
  5. More Screenshots by (Score:+6) · · Score: 5

    That site seems to be slashdotted already, but there are some more screenshots here: http://www.inficad.com/~nytehorse/

    1. Re:More Screenshots by RevDigger · · Score: 1

      *Laz` (jeremy@209.224.118.250) has joined channel #humanism
      Laz`: so I'm at the colo
      Laz`: someone just HAD to go and post the screenshots page to /.
      RevDigger: haha
      RevDigger: aw, did you get slashdotted again?
      Laz`: so I up mbufs ...set maxclients to 500
      Laz`: bamn
      Laz`: sustaining 400 maxclients now..about to reboot with another new kernel
      Laz`: yeah..this time is worse
      keichii: what screenshots?
      Laz`: we turned off uunet, to force more traffic out of Uu.Net
      RevDigger: damn Laz, you know what they call people who spend too much time at a consol at a colo, don't you?
      Laz`: Jeff said we're spitting out 9Mbps
      keichii: laz: where are you on /.?
      Laz`: kei: mosfet.jorsm.com (might want to wait, since I'm rebooting)
      RevDigger: "NT Admins"
      IceCold: What is humanism?
      Laz`: kei: duno now..
      Laz`: Dig: hahah
      Laz`: well..wish me luck
      Laz`: Dig: go defend my honor :)
      Laz`: bbl
      RevDigger: k
      *Signoff: Laz` (ircII EPIC4pre2.003 -- Accept no limitations)

  6. Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Since my previous comment got moderated down I'll just make the same point in a (perhaps less flamebaity way): Why would I want a Windows-clone (KDE or Gnome)? I didn't buy this memory and these cpu-cyles to throw them at a replication of all the mistakes M$ have made, with a few extra ones for free.

    I use Star Office, Netscape, and Window Maker. I occasionally fire up the Gnome file manager to tidy up the hard drive but I'm only interested in app's, not ugly, messy desktop simulations.

    TWW

    1. Re:Not flamebait by Roberto · · Score: 1

      If you want to use individual apps, use them. After you use enough KDE apps, the integration is so compelling you will want to use KDE versions instead of the alternatives.

      For instance, it is cool being able to drop the URL of a .ps file into kghostview and have it read it. Or drop a file from ftp into a text editor and edit it.

      Then, once you are running all those KDE apps, you
      will just use KDE. After all, the only "resident" parts in KDE 2 and kdesk and kicker, kicker being optional, and kdesk tiny.

    2. Re:Not flamebait by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

      The reason I prefer KDE is that I can very quickly redesign and configure my desktop through a "standard" GUI interface. This is how I am used to do it, although we used WindowMaker in school, there's only so many HOWTO's you think is fun to read. I have no need to make my desktop very "fancy" by compiling my own animated menus or the like. Especially not specifying geometry on all my programs.

      The key here is to respect the view of others in this matter. If you want to edit text-files, please continue to do so. There will always be room for you, even though KDE and Gnome are more popular alternatives these days. They are big and ugly compared to more minimalistic WMs.

      To put down Gnome a bit, I find it too buggy, too much CPU and memory intensitive, to enjoy using it. KDE is IMHO faster, cleaner and easier to use. Of course this may change as Gnome develops some more.

      - Steeltoe

    3. Re:Not flamebait by maroberts · · Score: 3

      Sounds almost as "flamebaity", but worth a reply ;-)

      > I use Star Office, Netscape, and Window Maker.
      Star Office, Netscape, and AFAIK Window Maker are *not* "lean and mean" packages - why then complain about KDE ? Anyway, if you used the KDE equivalents of these packages, then they would share libraries and consume less memory [I'm not trying to claim KDE doesn't use a lot of resources BTW]

      > I'm only interested in app's, not ugly, messy desktop simulations
      KDE is more than just a desktop, there's lots of apps that work with it too, including
      * KOffice [potential replacement for StarOffice/Office]
      * Konqueror [potential Netscape challenger]

      > Why would I want a Windows-clone (KDE or Gnome)?

      KDE has a lot of options built in - you don't have to make it look like Windows. It can provide a Mac interface, or you can even remove the MS-like "Start Panel" altogether if you wish.

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

    4. Re:Not flamebait by bero-rh · · Score: 1

      Why would I want a Windows-clone (KDE or Gnome)?

      They aren't for everyone - I admit preferring just the console myself. ;)

      But let's not forget about newbies who are used to Windoze - it's much easier for them to switch over if there's a beginner-friendly desktop to start with.

      And KDE has some nice features that are useful even for people who know their way around Linux already. Most things are faster to do from a shell - others are faster in a GUI...

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
    5. Re:Not flamebait by Suydam · · Score: 2
      I'm not trying to start a flame-war...but it's obvious that you haven't used Windowmaker in a long time. There are several tools that allow you to affect your windowmaker desktop without "compiling animated menus" as you put it.

      WMPrefs comes with the default Windowmaker installation and is setup the moment you run it for the first time.

      wmakerconf is a GTK+ app that does much the same thing, but with a bit of a nicer (IMHO) interface.

      Try them out..i think you'll find that you like them both.

      --


      Werd.
    6. Re:Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Star Office, Netscape, and AFAIK Window Maker are *not* "lean and mean" packages - why then complain about KDE ?

      Windowmaker is quite lean, but the others aren't. On the other hand, they do something for me. Desktops do very little for me in themselves. KOffice etc. are not out of (early) beta yet so they can't do the work I need done.

      TWW

    7. Re:Not flamebait by hey! · · Score: 2

      Well, the reason you'd want a desktop environment is to provide standard, user controllable forms of IPC. To make an analogy, why do I need a system of printer drivers? Why don't applications simply send native commands to printers, which would certainly be faster? Because you're stuck with the choices of printers the developer makes. The desktop environment provides standards which, if adhered to by the developer, allow the user to assemble his how suite of applications. In a word processor, a user should be able to insert a graph or table from his choice of spreadsheet. Furthermore, a user should be able to insert objects of types that the developer has never considered, for example results from a simulation engine or maps from a Geographic Informatin System. The most important thing is not the "simulation" of a desktop environment, which after all is a very weak metaphor. Most users would be surprised to learn that Windows or the Macintosh use a "dektop" metaphor. The important factor is the provision of standard abstractions for developers which allows them to participate in a community of applications, from which the user can pick and choose, and expect certain reasonable default behaviors.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Not flamebait by Masem · · Score: 2
      I know one half of the answer above (Namely, if we're going to make Linux aimed at desktop users, we *need* the MS-like feel with consistancy across applications).

      However, I also question where the GUI areas of Linux have been heading. When I started using Linux, it was touted as being an entire OS that could live in 40 megs of HD space and 16 megs of RAM on a 286 , and yet be fully functional. I'm using right now a 486, running X-Windows and a generic window manager with xterms and Netscape, along with a rather high load web server among other things. I tried KDE 1.x and GNOME and both slowed my system to a crawl; sure, they're nice and convinent, but speed is much more important than looks.

      (And yes, I know I can get a faster system for dirt cheap nowadays but that's not the point :-)

      Basically, while I strongly believe both KDE and Gnome need to move forward to make Linux a viable desktop system, we still need to consider the true power users that don't need the intergration of all GUI parts and can deal with the simple window manager and inconsistancies across apps. And while KDE and GNOME apps can be run without having the main core package loaded (that is, you need the core library files), they still tend to be slower than those that access the original X libs directly.

      --
      "Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
      "I can see my house from here!" - ST:
    9. Re:Not flamebait by Enmity_qXp · · Score: 1

      I think you are only looking at the "out-of-the-box" KDE desktop. And thats being shortsighted.

      The possibilities are nearly infinite, in regards to the customizations you can make. That is the real beauty of it. Yes the "stock" KDE is a lot like Windoze, and I am sure that was intentional. Why? So the new users aren't scared off. Your basic user expects a computer to look like windoze, with a similiar feel and features.

      So if ya dont like it... change it. At least you have that option.


      --
      "there's a big difference between kneeling down, and bending over" - FZ
    10. Re:Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      • we still need to consider the true power users that don't need the intergration of all GUI parts and can deal with the simple window manager and inconsistancies across apps

      Uh, don't we have that covered already?

    11. Re:Not flamebait by screeching+weasel · · Score: 1

      screw the newbies. make them learn how to use Linux like we all did. If they really want to learn, they will on their own. I personally don't want to use an OS that products that cater to the lowest common denominator.


    12. Re:Not flamebait by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      "When I started using Linux, it was touted as being an entire OS that could live in 40 megs of HD space and 16 megs of RAM on a 286..."

      Um, I don't think that linux could ever run on a 286 (the linux86, or whatever it's called, project aside.)

    13. Re:Not flamebait by Jeff+Monks · · Score: 1
      I didn't buy this memory and these cpu-cyles to throw them at a replication of all the mistakes M$ have made, with a few extra ones for free.

      I use Star Office...

      So, you don't like Microsoft-inspired interfaces and messy desktops, but you like StarOffice? Huh?

      Don't get me wrong, I like SO, too. But I think deriding window managers that copy some of Windows' features while praising an office suite that does it seems a little odd.

    14. Re:Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are really serious about what you write, use LaTeX and Lynx+Pine with fvwm. When you use StarOffice and Netscape, KDE is like a innocent child in wasting memory.

    15. Re:Not flamebait by osu-neko · · Score: 3
      screw the newbies. make them learn how to use Linux like we all did. If they really want to learn, they will on their own. I personally don't want to use an OS that products that cater to the lowest common denominator.

      Then don't install KDE. Sheesh! It's not like your perfectly-configured-for-your-needs OS will suddenly become less perfect because some newbie somewhere else on the planet installs a GUI over the top of his or her installation.

      Free software is about choice. Why do you want to deny other people a choice just because you personally wouldn't choose it?

      --

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    16. Re:Not flamebait by thmitch · · Score: 1

      If you don't want to waste your memory and cpu cycles on KDE then don't use it, no one is forcing you to run KDE on your system. If your happy with Star Office, Netscape and Window Maker then by all means use them, no one is stopping you.

      Terry

    17. Re:Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, he will then have to ditch his perfectly configured for his needs OS to install FreeBSD, because the unwashed can now use the same OS as him. Of course, once enough people switch to FreeBSD, he'll have to go to netbsd, then open...

      For some people, operating systems are like underground bands.

      LINUS SOLD OUT! =)

    18. Re:Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then Hurd, then OS2, then something else not yet invented, then finally, after Microsoft becomes Nanosoft (i.e. 1/1000 its current size), he will go back to MS-DOS once it has only an 0.1% market-share and is considered an elite OS because nobody but geeks uses it anymore. Some people just love to be snotty a-holes.

  7. Very Nice! by Deosyne · · Score: 1

    Wow! So rare to see a new version of a product that is actually a new version. :) KDE v2 is looking like a very nice little manager; I may even consider switching over from GNOME. It appears that they are really trying to make it more casual user friendly as well as more fully featured for the power user. I can't wait to get hold of the release. :)

    Deosyne

    1. Re:Very Nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do what you like, but take a look at http://www.gnome.org/screenshots/index .shtml Gnome's comming along quite well also (and much nicer looking IMHO (look at the 4th and 5th screenshots)

    2. Re:Very Nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDEs theme-engine can do everything GNOMEs can
      do and more. So this is really not important. If I
      like a Gtk-theme Ill just import it into
      the more functional and more stable KDE.
      Therefore look is really no criteria ...

  8. KDE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What is KDE? Are there more WM's than Twm? What are they used for?

    1. Re:KDE? by Suydam · · Score: 2
      I hope you're kidding. :) Because if you've been stuck with TWM for a long time, someoen's been keeping you in a cave.

      However, on the off chance that you're serious, try looking at Linux.com's Page of Window Manager Choices.

      --


      Werd.
  9. The screenshots are too big by MKaufmann · · Score: 1

    Screenshots with over 400kb in size are much too big. Together they have some 5mb.

    If I'm not browsing themes.org, I don't want to see background images, start panels or whatever, just the plain application window.

    Furthermore they're in gif format - all the colors are dithered down to 8bpp. I think this increases file size because it's less compressable. PNG files would be smaller.

    These screenshots aren't the only big one in last time. There seems to be a trend towards big all-in-one screenshots. The bigger the better. :-(

    1. Re:The screenshots are too big by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree the screenshots are big. I don't believe he's used GIF compression.

  10. Slashdotted? by madprof · · Score: 1

    Either my browser is being odd or this page has been slashdotted out of existence.
    I managed to load it once and then hit refresh for a reason which resulted in "reset connection with server".
    Perhaps wait a little while until it is back up again?

    1. Re:Slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a copy of mosfet's screenshots but I can't afford the risk of being slashdotted. If you can mirror the stuff, give me an email address and I'll point you to my copy.

    2. Re:Slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As has been said, these screenshots are big and
      every slot we open fills almost immediately. We started getting httpd warnings this morning. After a series of resource adjustments, I'm told we're having trouble getting the machine back up. Time to look at additional telemetry options for the downtown Chicago POP. Check back in about 35 minutes. Sorry for the inconvenience.

      --Mosfet's ISP

  11. Quite Impressive by logout · · Score: 1

    I am a user of Windowmaker. My Linux box is a p166MMX box with
    64Mb memory with Matrox Millennium II vga board. It's too slow
    to run Gnome or Enlightenment, and although KDE is relatively
    faster than Gnome on my box but I disliked the monolithic theme
    of KDE. So I use plain-vanilla Windowmaker with Korean language
    patch included.

    I always envy the fantastic desktop themes of a PII-350 box
    of my friends. He's running Gnome with Enlightenment. Well,
    from the desktop screenshot, I think that KDE 2.0 desktop is
    quite beautiful at least as various themes of E.

    Hope soon I get KDE 2.0.

    1. Re:Quite Impressive by Nite_Hawk · · Score: 1

      Hrm.. I run E with gtk themes on a P150mmx laptop with only 16megs of ram. Granted, it's not the fastest in the world due mostly to ram contrants, but if you've got 64megs of ram and a Mil2, it shouldn't be all *that* slow. Might want to make sure you've got the newest gtk and gnome stuff, it should help out. (particularly the newer gtks)

    2. Re:Quite Impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try using windowmaker, then compare it to E. Yes, E does a lot more decorative things than WindowMaker, but windowmaker just *feels* a million times faster. It doesn't matter what machine you are on. WindowMaker always seems faster. E is nice to load every once ina while and show off to friends,b ut for every day use, In need something that is feels *fast*, e.g. WindowMaker or fvwm.

    3. Re:Quite Impressive by Nite_Hawk · · Score: 1

      I actually ran windowmaker for nearly a year when E was at DR0.14. It was indeed fast, and much faster than E0.13 was (especially with neuromancer loaded). However, when I switched around DR0.15, E no longer had the lag it did at .13, and imho, was comparable to WindowMaker in terms of speed. Certain themes certainly can slow it down if they arn't designed well, especially if things like translucent window moves are also enabled. This isn't something that is forced on you in E though, and you don't need to use them if you don't want to. Over the summer, I used Enlightenment on a 486dx2/66 with 32megs of ram at work, and it was actually suprisingly responsive. Enough so that I kept it on the system. Now, maybe on your system, E wasn't as responsive as you wanted it to be, but that doesn't mean that it can't be fast. There are a lot of variables that come into play.

  12. If you want to try it yourself... by bero-rh · · Score: 5

    For those who want to try it themselves rather than just looking at screenshots, I've put up RPMs of a recent snapshot on http://people.redhat.com/bero/experimen tal/.
    There will be a new snapshot today.

    The packages install to /opt/kde2, so they won't overwrite a KDE 1.x installation.

    They're made for Red Hat Linux 6.1, but should run without problems on similar distributions.

    --
    This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
    1. Re:If you want to try it yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...seems to slashdotted, too...

      $ ftp people.redhat.com
      ftp: connect: Connection refused

      did anyone mirror the packages before the server died?

    2. Re:If you want to try it yourself... by bero-rh · · Score: 1

      It's back up, and now has updated (==1.80.19991118) packages for
      qt, kdesupport, kdelibs and kdebase. Other updates coming up soon.

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  13. Re:Too big ? Nope! by maroberts · · Score: 1

    I posted a complaint about image sizes in another article, but in this web page they appear to have done the decent thing and put thumbnail links to the main images.

    PNG is undeniably more sophisticated than GIF, as well as being free of royalty problems; however it still doesn't enjoy universal browser support. Webmasters have a choice between being trendy and being compatible.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  14. BIG FAT WARNING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    This is not even pre-alpha stuff! Do not use this for everyday work!

  15. How is its memory consumption ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both KDE and Gnome takes up too much memory to be really fun on my system. One solution is to add more memory, I know, but I am still very interested, has anyone got any information on the Memory consumption of KDE2.0. More, Much more, Less much less or equal to KDE 1.1.2 ?

    1. Re:How is its memory consumption ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Less. KDE 2 has been redesigned to use _less_ memory than KDE 1. For instance, on startup you don't have a full filemanager running, only the program that takes care of the desktop icons (used to be part of kfm). And even when you fire up the file manager, it doesn't load the tree view, nor the HTML stuff. It will do that on demand only (shared libs), and that's still very fast (opening a shared libs is very fast). On the whole, a lot of optimisations have been done to reduce memory usage (ever heard of ksycoca ?).

  16. "kdesktop" (Re:Not flamebait) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Roberto, it's "kdesktop", not "kdesk" :-) And yes, integration is nice. Even more integration coming along, for those who like it... This reminds me of making embedding in konqueror configurable :) David.

  17. I converted all to PNG but now it's /.'ed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I can't get through myself ;-) I'll upload them as soon as I can get in. mosfet@kde.org

  18. improved COM (openparts / KOM) by johnjones · · Score: 1

    I hope that they have improved the speed the the xlib thingmy (sorry dont know its name) the ORB they where useing before was not speedy to say the least (MICO) they should try OMNIORB from at&t research in cambridge (yes the real cambridge)

    lets face it Desktop will not run well on a 486 let alone a P90

    stick to the command line boys and girls anddont moan you can do everything there that you want to (vi rules ;-)

    THemes can you drag KDE to GTK ?
    (or the other way around)

    vector surport I saw Koffice had some vector surport in it GNOME lacks this
    PDF reading KDE has a pants one GNOME is good @ this (thanks !!)

    pilot stuff hope thats improved !

    overall I like what KDE is doing

    KEEP GOING !!

    peace

    john

    out


    a poor student @ bournemouth uni in the UK (a deltic so please dont moan about spelling but the content)

    1. Re:improved COM (openparts / KOM) by bero-rh · · Score: 1

      KDE 2.0 hasn't depended on MICO for quite a while.
      Most CORBA stuff has been replaced with either DCOP (for IPC, much faster) or kanossa (embedding one application within another, again much faster).
      Right now, this is at the cost of some compatibility - but CorbaDCOP bridges are being worked on.

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  19. www.kde.org/technology.html by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have :)

  20. While it may be nice there is still an issue by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

    While KDE 2.0 may be nice, etc, etc...

    It still leaves the problem of the QT licensing. I know, I know... But last week I was at SD EAST and asked when they would be decreasing their licensing fees for commercial software. Their answer was "We need to live too!" (In a very snooty voice). Well excuse me!

    I like Linux, even gave some Linux talks at SD. And I had the chance to talk to a few people about Linux. For Linux to attract the widest array of developers for the desktop they need to attract all developers. And the ones who cannot afford 2K USD are the shareware developers or small company.

    And to be honest I find it disgusting considering companies like them charge so much, when companies like Cygnus charge only 199 USD for a development environment.

    I have ranted and raved and until the commercial license changes I will not even look at KDE.

    --

    "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
    "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    1. Re:While it may be nice there is still an issue by rew2 · · Score: 0

      QT is free for use in open source programs that allow free redistribution. The license fee applies if you want to produce commercial software, with a conventional fee-per-copy type of license. Troll Tech charges $1550 for a Unix/Linux only or a Windows only license, or $2390 for both. (This is per programmer seat, there is no run time license.) If you have a commercial app that's not going to be feasible to sell because of that license fee, it was never viable in the first place. One good experienced programmer can easily cost $100,000/year or more, after all payroll taxes and support expenses are taken into account. If QT makes that programmer 2% more productive it pays for itself in a year. In any case it's small beer in the overall costs of a software company.

      Any free software fan who thinks that $2400 is an outrageous fee for a GUI library should be delighted that Troll Tech is providing such a powerful economic incentive for programmers to open up their source and make it freely redistributable. After all RMS is now advocating the use of the GPL, rather than the LGPL, for libraries, so as to effectively make the closed source license fee infinity (non-free apps can't legally link to GPLed libraries). Troll Tech is simply providing a less draconian incentive for open source.

    2. Re:While it may be nice there is still an issue by rew2 · · Score: 1

      QT is free for use in open source programs that allow free redistribution. The license fee applies if you want to produce commercial software, with a conventional fee-per-copy type of license. Troll Tech charges $1550 for a Unix/Linux only or a Windows only license, or $2390 for both. (This is per programmer seat, there is no run time license.) If you have a commercial app that's not going to be feasible to sell because of that license fee, it was never viable in the first place. One good experienced programmer can easily cost $100,000/year or more, after all payroll taxes and support expenses are taken into account. If QT makes that programmer 2% more productive it pays for itself in a year. In any case it's small beer in the overall costs of a software company.

      Any free software fan who thinks that $2400 is an outrageous fee for a GUI library should be delighted that Troll Tech is providing such a powerful economic incentive for programmers to open up their source and make it freely redistributable. After all RMS is now advocating the use of the GPL, rather than the LGPL, for libraries, so as to effectively make the closed source license fee infinity (non-free apps can't legally link to GPLed libraries). Troll Tech is simply providing a less draconian incentive for open source.

      My only gripe is that the free license doesn't apply to the Windows version of QT -- you can't make a free open source Windows program using QT. But then Gnome doesn't work on Windows at all.

    3. Re:While it may be nice there is still an issue by kijiki · · Score: 1

      Huh? QT is a widget library, as is GTK+. They both work on win32. GTK+ is free for use on win32, or anywhere else.

      Gnome is a "desktop environment" as is KDE. Neither of these (currently) work on windows. Of course, Gnome could be ported and still be free software. KDE could not.

  21. Someone please mirror this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The site is completely out of reach from here.

    Thank you.

    1. Re:Someone please mirror this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As has been said, these screenshots are big and every slot we open fills almost immediately. We started getting httpd warnings this morning. After a series of resource adjustments, I'm told we're having trouble getting the machine back up. Time to look at additional telemetry options for the downtown Chicago POP. Check back in about 35 minutes. Sorry for the inconvenience. - Mosfet's ISP

  22. Right click menu? by FigWig · · Score: 1

    Will KDE 2 support right click desktop menu (with access to any program)? I find this to be the most useful feature of the WM I use, blackbox. All the apps and utils I use plus several SSH sessions are merely two clicks away no matter where my mouse is at the time. Quite a time saver. Plus any start-menu type thing takes up way too much screen real estate on my dinky monitor.

    --
    Scuttlemonkey is a troll
    1. Re:Right click menu? by dfaure · · Score: 2

      Good news for you : KDE 1.x already does. Edit krootwmrc, go to (or create) group [MouseButtons] and add Left=Menu I know, I know, there should have been a dialog box for this. But that's the way you like, no ? ;-) And I need to port that to kdesktop. Will do in a second :-)

  23. mirror here by navindra · · Score: 1

    http://www.openface.ca/~navindra/mosfet/screenshot s.html

    I'm not making this a hyperlink on purpose. If you've seen this site at all, please don't visit this page. PLEASE, PLEASE be very gentle.

  24. Re:BIG FAT WARNING -- not quite so pre-alpha by boloni · · Score: 2

    Actually, if you have a working version right now there are no major stability or performance problems. If you refresh from CVS than it may happen that at some hour of the night some applications are out of sync.

    Of course some applications are incomplete, etc. But I am using it for daily work from July and I had weeks of uptime.

    The big letter warnings are more of a legalese kind of stuff, and what day really say is "please do not put it as default in the distribution (yet)".

    L.

  25. NO CORBA !!! what where they thinking by johnjones · · Score: 2

    DCOP IPC !
    IPC done whithout a standard corba is a nightmare yes you can do it and yes you can make programing easyer wich is why they are doing it I surpose

    BUT its incompatable nightmare and the only thing that would save it would be Koffice and the fact its open source (easy to change the whole thing write bridges and such)

    IPC is for people who are speed freaks (im talking Cray people money to burn on development)

    WHY NO CORBA ??

    this is what Corba was designed to do and very well to it makes runing services easy and abstract ie you may run it where you like a server in hong kong or on your laptop and you dont have to worry because it was a standard thats why they where useing Mico

    there where lots of flames and I read them and they seemed to say DCOP would be complemtry and you need an ORB DCOP would help speed things up relieing on the X way of doing things

    am I wrong ?

    regards

    john


    a poor student @ bournemouth uni in the UK (a deltic so please dont moan about spelling but the content)

    1. Re:NO CORBA !!! what where they thinking by dfaure · · Score: 1

      Yes you are wrong. Or at least you don't get the full picture. DCOP isn't a stupid IPC like X atoms or other old stuff. DCOP works with your server in hong kong, since it uses TCP/IP when talking to remote computers. It is object oriented, has an IDL compiler like CORBA (but much simpler to use since the IDL is generated from standard header files), and most importantly DCOP is very very lightweight. All KDE apps benefit from being able to use DCOP, whereas in the old days of using CORBA they couldn't afford the memory and speed issues. Please read http://www.kde.org/technology.html Or even best : try the current KDE and compare with the previous CORBA-based one. Facts speak for themselves.

    2. Re:NO CORBA !!! what where they thinking by boloni · · Score: 2

      -No, CORBA was designed for remote invocation of services. It has a tremendous overhead which basically is justified only if you are really working across different machine architectures and different languages.

      -Statistically, most of the program interaction on the computer is between local programs (I would say 99%). So this is the case we have to optimize for.

      -Unfortunately, if you are running your services in Hong Kong and accessing it from your laptop there are more things to worry about then just interoperability, and this is not a problem of CORBA or DCOP.

      -During the last several years, CORBA became a horribly large standard, and ended up by claiming territory for which it was not designed for. The one-year KDE experience with CORBA as a local object model shows that it fails to provide a fast and reliable service for this case.

      -On the other hand, yes, Linux users are speed freaks. Look on the comments in this thread: there are complaints that KDE is not faster then twm and it eats more memory.

      Lotzi

    3. Re:NO CORBA !!! what where they thinking by kris · · Score: 3

      KDE 2 does use Corba, but it does not do so for
      local procedure calls and local inter-application
      communication. The KDE 2 team had a version
      of KDE 2 which was using Corba for everything and
      it was dog slow. They decided to build an
      alternate version which did not use Corba, but
      used shared objects and direct procedure calls
      instead and they found that it was more stable
      and much, much faster.

      So in KDE 2 you can still use Corba if you want
      to, but KDE 2 does not do this by default and
      you do not have to, either, if you want speed.

      Corba is an IPC protocol, which means that for
      each procedure call there is a message being
      sent. Doing this involves a lot of syscalls and
      context switches, which basically makes things
      slow. The method KDE 2 uses now makes foreign code
      local to your applications and you can do local
      subroutine calls - talk about saved overhead
      and speed increase.

      © Copyright 1999 Kristian Köhntopp

    4. Re:NO CORBA !!! what where they thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      © Copyright 1999 Kristian Köhntopp
      May not be reprinted or reused on other websites. except by permission from the Author.
      You must be kidding, right?

  26. Keep shareware on Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pain in the butt software (aka shareware) is a concept I would rather not see on Linux. As far as commercial development, I don't see any real companies minding and AFAIK quite a few have Linux/KDE/Qt port projects.

  27. request by navindra · · Score: 1

    Can someone else please just mirror this now?

    1. Re:request by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Upload it to slashmirror.

    2. Re:request by navindra · · Score: 1

      Good idea. What's that?

  28. Not enough "eye candy" Was: Re:Not flamebait by demonbitch · · Score: 1

    KDE is alright, but there should be something better. Screw system performance. What most people are interested in is "eye candy". The jump from DOS to Macintosh in 1984 was proof of that. The same goes with the eventual mass migration of the genpub to Window 9x from 3.1. I know a whole lot of folks who made the move from Win9x to Linux just to use Enlightenment. One thing a lot of "techies" seem to forget (and I am one) is that the ONLY thing that draws crowds is the "cool factor". I keep hoping that someone will add cinematic MPEG window animations to a window manager so that you can have a window "blow away" like grains of sand rather than just close. Or minimize into the background in a pseudo 3D environment. Does it help system performance? No. Does it improve the functionality of the OS and apps? No. But, frankly, who cares? If you are going to run a GUI on a Linux box, make it cool, easy to use and fun. Those are concepts that appear to be ignored too often. If you don't like these ideas, then pick another GUI, but don't think you will ever convince anyone that your choice of GUI is better than theirs. They picked theirs for a reason and so did you.

    Peace Out
    D.B.

    --
    Don't complain about my web page. It's mine. ALL MINE.
    1. Re:Not enough "eye candy" Was: Re:Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I Agree with you 100%. The only thing that attracts people to new stuff is the Coolness factor. We should be able to harness the faster cpu's and computers to create come cool affects in the Windowmanager. This will bring more people to Linux.

  29. It is not non-standard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read www.technology.html. It uses all standard libraries that come with X such as libICE and is easily programmable via langs like C.

  30. release On 15 dec by johnjones · · Score: 1

    "kdelibs is frozen. This means that you should not introduce any changes to the API of kdelibs.

    kdebase and koffice is feature frozen. This means that you should try to concentrate on bugfixing and getting the basic functionality to work correctly.

    On 15 dec we will release. Make sure the important things work by then. It's up to you to decide what is important. "

    quote from KDE news

    Koffice looking good how about porting the functions to a GTK front end ? (GTK is nier the QT because I like to give windows(the microkernel one) a chance to use my apps QT makes you pay to use under windows

    full respect to the KDE team !

    regards

    john




    a poor student @ bournemouth uni in the UK (a deltic so please dont moan about spelling but the content)

  31. KDE doomed to repeat Windows's mistakes by psychonaut · · Score: 1

    From the KDE FAQ:

    KDE is not a clone. Specifically KDE is not a CDE or Windows clone. While the KDE developers have and will continue to glean the best features from all existing desktop environments KDE is a truly unique environment that has and will continue to go its own way.

    It looks to me as though some of other OSes' (namely, Windows 95) worst features were also gleaned. For example:

    • KDE decides to put new windows in the most annoying places. Whenever I launch Xemacs, half the window is off the screen.

    • The above problem is aggravated further by the fact that KDE does not remember window positions. No matter how many times I drag my Xemacs window to the upper left corner, the next time I launch it, KDE will still put Xemacs back halfway off the screen where it thinks is best.

    • 'Cute' animation abounds. No, I don't need to wait while I watch my windows maximize and minimize, thank you...

    • The default file dialog window size is tiny, not to mention not persistent when resized. Folks, the days of 320x200 monitors is long behind us; there's no reason why we shouldn't be allowed to see more files at once when we go to open or save a document.

    While I have no doubt that the designers of KDE did not intentionally make parts of their interface bug-for-bug compatible with Windows, it is obvious that they have, at times, been trapped in the Microsoft paradigm. I can only hope that KDE 2 will have addressed these misfeatures. If not, I recommend the designers pick up a copy of Windows 9[5|8] Annoyances lest they repeat more of Microsoft's mistakes. If I were looking to "glean features" from an OS GUI, Windows 95 would not be high on my list of interfaces to emulate.


    Regards,

    1. Re:KDE doomed to repeat Windows's mistakes by dfaure · · Score: 1

      Report KDE bugs to http://bugs.kde.org, not to slashdot. Cute animation : you can disable them. File dialog : most people complain it's too big and you find it too tiny ? interesting :-) And it DOES save its size. XEmacs : it pops up nicely for me. Check your XEmacs ;-) And btw, most of this has NOTHING to do with Windows. Ever tried to resize the file dialog under windows ?

    2. Re:KDE doomed to repeat Windows's mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The KDE filedialog remembers its size. Maybe the guy resized it to be tiny to have something to complain? My XEmacs does session management with KDE, btw. Each time I loging, KDE places it exactly where it was before.

    3. Re:KDE doomed to repeat Windows's mistakes by scrytch · · Score: 2

      > Report KDE bugs to http://bugs.kde.org, not to slashdot.

      Where you can list open bugs that haven't been closed in over a year (maybe fixed, but the ticket is left to ... die of loneliness I guess?)

      And where you find that you cannot submit bugs from any kind of web form, but have to send some kind of specially-formatted email.

      Windows, meanwhile, now comes with a bug submit program -- they just bury it real deep.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  32. What are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KWM's window placement is configurable and what "animation" are you talking about? The only animation I see is KFM's gear spinning, not unlike Netscape.

  33. Takes more to compile, less to run by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KDE comes with a lot more stuff now so it takes longer to compile, but the default setup is a lot more streamlined to takes less memory to run.

  34. Who cares by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

    The QT Free License allows you or anyone else to develop free software. All this talk about free OS's, free desktop environments, and free software in general is great. But when it comes down to it, QT is a very complex and necessary element to KDE. You and I will probably always be able to use it for free, and if you're developing free software, it stays free. Commercial software and development on the other hand, will cost you. Let's examine the phrase commercial software. Commercial is derived from Commerce, which is transactions usually for businesses involving money. Should the Troll people who worked hard for QT not eat and clothe their children at the expense of businesses? You have to be realistic here.

    In the real world, people make money and buy food clothing and shelter. Free software doesn't pay the bills.

    1. Re:Who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or even "we know where you live, I'll toss a ****ing petrol bomb through your door". But enough of HST. FreeQt means free software. WHy must these GPL zelots always start whingeing whenever someone mentions KDE?

  35. KDE & Gnome are slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I can't fail to stress a point that was mentioned before:

    KDE & Gnome are slow (at least for now), whatever you people say. Gnome is helped a bit by not using E (some people say that sawmill is better). About KDE: i simply find the user interface too cluttered and confusing.

    I used fvwm until some 3 months ago [i was a former Slackware user :-)] but now i use Windowmaker. This in my view looks good, and doesn't put a damper in performance like the other 2 options above do.

    Some apps i use:

    • Netscape for WWW browsing
    • NEdit for text editing
    • gentoo as a file manager
    1. Re:KDE & Gnome are slow by Eric+Green · · Score: 2
      I find KDE 1.1 to be quite snappy even on slow computers like a Cyrix 150mhz. However, KDE 1.0 was quite sluggish when that old Cyrix had only 32 megabytes of RAM, but upgrading to 64 megabytes made it run quite well indeed, thank you.

      I've come to the conclusion that all desktop environments are memory hogs, whether they're KDE, GNOME, or Windows 98 :-(. If you have a low-memory machine, you're much better off sticking with something like fvwm or blackbox that doesn't use much RAM.

      -E

      --
      Send mail here if you want to reach me.
  36. OK what about non X windowing by johnjones · · Score: 1

    I admit it I DONT KNOW

    so am I right in thinking if you wanted to port KDE to a non X based windowing system you would need to port a chunk of X the libICE and so on ??

    this seems mad to me !
    (of course mad things go down well sometimes, ugly shaped blue machines sell who would have thought that ! buy an SGI and see colour)

    linux and hurd and Mach and ... I would like to write my app and it work in all windowing systems without to much hassle

    I like X but what happens when we slowly convert to X12 ? or berlin takes off ? or want to write apps for MAC OS 10 (knowen as macosX now)

    confused

    john
    a poor student @ bournemouth uni in the UK (a deltic so please dont moan about spelling but the content)

    1. Re:OK what about non X windowing by dfaure · · Score: 1

      libICE exists on your system. No need to use X in order to use it. You can even write text-based DCOP clients !

      BUT : if you want to port Qt and KDE to something else than X, good luck. If we convert one day, well we'll have to convert a lot of things in all X-based programs out there, and that's not only Qt and KDE !!! Whatever other project takes off, I hope they keep an X-compatible API.

      Nothing's mad here. Open the source code of any GUI program, you'll see that currently it uses X. It has, we all run X.

    2. Re:OK what about non X windowing by extrasolar · · Score: 2

      I have been keeping tabs on Berlin development and they most defintely will not keep an X compatible API. Berlin is ahead of its time and the whole point of the project is to go beyond what we have now with X. They have a very nice architechture and I don't think X should ruin it.

      ***Beginning*of*Signiture***
      Linux? That's GNU/Linux to you mister!

    3. Re:OK what about non X windowing by dfaure · · Score: 1

      Interesting.
      It means it will take ages to be really used,
      because porting existing widget toolkits and applications is going to take a very long and painful time. What a waste of effort.

      Unless the plan is to restart everything from scratch, and this time we'll start an unified project called knome or gde :)

    4. Re:OK what about non X windowing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What a waste of effort.

      Didn't they say that about C when FORTRAN was king?

    5. Re:OK what about non X windowing by extrasolar · · Score: 2

      Yes. I think the good idea is to start everything from scratch. All our current toolkits is based on X and Berlin will never need toolkits. The widgets themselves can be replaced and any language can be used that has a CORBA binding.

      Berlin is not as far but has the superior design. Once it gets started I think you will see development speed up.

      What do you mean by wasted effort? Are you saying we should only have one windowing enviroment forever? If there was a project I was interested in developing I would work on it and I wouldn't give a damn about production value or how well it competes with Microsoft or how much it furthers the movement. I think Berlin is wholly remarkable in design. I am looking forward to a more usable release.

      ***Beginning*of*Signiture***
      Linux? That's GNU/Linux to you mister!

  37. ummm.... by zwerf · · Score: 1

    These screenshots have been around for a while now. I think. Can't check because the server's slashdotted. The ones I saw looked pretty nice though. Looking forward to check it out.

    --
    This .sig down for maintenance.
  38. Re:Ummm perhaps you should read the docs by Wheely · · Score: 1

    You can turn off window resize animation in the
    Window manager properties config screen.

    You can change your window placement policy to one
    of several different schemes in the same place.

    It would be nice if KWM remembered window postions but presumably you can launch xemacs with "-geometry" specified.

    Also, real programmers do not "copy con: file.exe" they go "dd if=/dev/tty of=/usr/bin/myfile"

    Regards

  39. It will always be free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look on the KDE page there is a KDE/Free Qt foundation which has legally signed documents by TT that if they try ever try to restrict the free version of Qt or fail to update it within a certain amount of time Qt automatically shifts to a BSD license.

    1. Re:It will always be free by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I am one of the KDE representatives in the foundation. TT can't screw us (and they don't even want to screw us, of course).

      In fact, I am much more confident about TT not screwing free software developers than I am about some free software fanatics screwing people who don't agree with their views on free software.

  40. Kdevelop is THE SHIT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I tried kdevelop recently -- what an amazing job they've done of providing a completely usable IDE -- in a surprisingly short time. Yeah yean, "just gimmie vi 'n a couple-o' xterms". Well, me and John Carmack know that a strong IDE with docs and a debugger make you much, much more productive than old-style environments. The question I have: what is it about KDE that's so great that the kdevelop crew were so efficient in producing the app? Is the QT class library that good?

    1. Re:Kdevelop is THE SHIT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I 100% agree. Kdevelop is an EXCELLENT ide even for a beta. Although my personal preferrence is Code Crusader Kdevelop has gone leaps above any linux ide i have ever seen.... Excellent job from the kdevelop team and they have my personall thanks!

    2. Re:Kdevelop is THE SHIT! by HalloFlippy · · Score: 1

      As a strapped-for-cash grad student in a computer engineering program, KDevelop has been my saviour. Granted, I don't do anything so fancy as creating a dialog, but it at least works for me. Better than forking out $100 (student discount) for Visual C++, just so I can write console programs.

      --

      I am a man of const int sorrows
    3. Re:Kdevelop is THE SHIT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it have an integrated debugger yet? I know there was a patch floating around that added an integrated debugger, but will it be a part of the 1.0 release?

  41. Nope, Java and XML interfaces exist. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As far as X12, I doubt they will dump support for all X applications. And berlin? Who knows?

  42. If only they could get working on Harmony again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope the KDE people would speed up the development of Harmony, as long as they don't use a LGPL'ed toolkit it will allways feel like it is failing to be a true Linux product. Alternativly they could make it possible to create integrated KDE applications using Gtk--, that would be just as great. Until that time I limit my choices to the three desktop environments that offer this: XFCE3, Gnome and Enlightenment.

  43. Whiners by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

    I find it humorous that in this day and age, when powerful computers are so inexpensive, that people whine about this desktop environment or that one not running on their trusty 486/66 with a whopping 8 megs of ram. X isn't intended to run on your Yugo of the computing world, let alone a window manager or a desktop environment. Actually, DOS would be a good choice for you. And could you please pass me a 5 1/4" diskette? I need a new copy of turtle logo.

    1. Re:Whiners by Demona · · Score: 3
      How arrogant! Believe it or not, some people cannot or will not purchase "new" hardware -- they simply want to get the best out of what they have. X will run on a bloody 386 with 4Mb of RAM, so says the Debian team. Give it a window manager and everything else is gravy.

      I was under the impression that free software was about choice, not belittling others for the choices they have made -- and about doing the best with what one has, rather than "solving" a problem by throwing money at it.

      --
      Fuck Slashdot
    2. Re:Whiners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "so says the Debian team"? Did *you* ever try that? Trust me, I did. Yes, X will start (after ca. 5 minutes), but don't even think about starting an xterm (requires too many libraries). It's possible to do some work in a few open rxvts (Robert Nation's version, not the new and fancy ones) when using a stripped down fvwm1. But don't dare to start any bigger console applications in one of these rxvts, using lynx or even emacs is totally out of the question.

    3. Re:Whiners by Demona · · Score: 1

      Still sounds as though it could be useful, if it was all one had. And yes, I have tried it. Really wasn't any worse than running Quake3 on a Voodoo1 -- actually less painful :)

      --
      Fuck Slashdot
    4. Re:Whiners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, my first car was a Yugo and after pulling out the back seats it flew - had it for years without experiencing any problems (no brake-downs/expensive repairs etc.) I could have saved up and bought a new BMW, but when _they_ brake down you need to have the problem analysed by a proprietory system (makes BMW a lot of money). The Yugo was a lot more fun than any car I've had since. XXX

    5. Re:Whiners by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Point proven. Whiner exposed.

    6. Re:Whiners by Demona · · Score: 1
      >Point proven. Whiner exposed.

      If you'd like to view my comments as whining, you're free to do so. After visiting your web site, I'd hazard a guess that this is just the way your particular sense of humor works. Reminds me of Primus' website: "Your browser doesn't support frames? C'mon, Sparky, get with the program and ditch that C-64!"

      Maybe, if you feel like bothering, you could tell me how you interpret my views as whining; I try to get the most out of what I have, and not waste time or energy complaining about things I can't change.

      --
      Fuck Slashdot
    7. Re:Whiners by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I don't think he was being arrogant. It is a fact that all of these new DEs are being developed on "Modern Machines". That, along with all the eye-candy and program integration that most users of these DEs want means that the target machine is one with a lot of memory and CPU power. I agree that it is unreasonable for people with old (and yes, a 486 is old in the computer world) hardware to expect all the new programs targetted at new hardware to work as well as they do on new hardware.

    8. Re:Whiners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If something is well-programmed, turning off the most CPU/memory intensive features should allow the program to run at a reasonable speed. People with more powerful machines can turn on these features if they want them.

      GTK is a good example of this. GTK apps run pretty slowly on my system if a theme is set up. But without a theme installed, they are very fast. Hopefully KDE/QT will work the same way.

      It's not unreasonable to expect this. Some people use free software because they can't afford to buy expensive programs. I wouldn't expect Quake3 to run on a 486, but a minimal setup of KDE just needs to draw a couple icons and a start menu on the screen. Even a 286 would have more than enough power to do this.

    9. Re:Whiners by kijiki · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I used to use a 386sx/20 laptop with 8 megs of ram as an X terminal. I stripped out everything that wasn't absolutely required for a terminal, and ran twm locally. It was no speed demon, but it was quite usable. It took nothing like 5 minute to start, more like 1. Perhaps you should try again, this time without a default install of an everything + the kitchen sink distribution.

    10. Re:Whiners by Roberto · · Score: 1

      KDE provides a huge lot of features. A 286 can't even get X running, much less a program on top of it, even if it only draws a single icon.

  44. Gnome doomed to repeat Windows's mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Speaking of annoying things in window managers...

    How come whenever I open a new window in Gnome it doesn't become the active window. All I want is to be able to click on the Terminal icon, have it pop open a terminal and begin typing. But noooo... I have to then click on the terminal window to make it active first. What a pain in the ass.

    Gnome's keyboard shortcuts suck. I can't remember why they suck becuase I have avoided Gnome like the plague recently.

  45. Harmony is dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was no reason for it to continue with Qt2.0 being free software.

  46. New Mirror - old disabled by navindra · · Score: 1

    slashmirror, maximum 25 users.

  47. Random musings by jd · · Score: 2
    I have a reasonable-ish collection of Window Managers and desktop environments, including such classics as twm, tvwm, Open Look, ICE, fvwm, fvwm2, KDE, Window Maker, xstep, Enlightenment + Gnome and Motif 1.2.

    Frankly, -ALL- the window managers (yes, even including twm) have their strengths and weaknesses. Most of them, I've not used in a while, but I have the knowledge that if I need to do something for which some old, half-forgotten window manager is absolutely ideal and everything else is just blah, it's there.

    People can complain about (insert name of WM or desktop environment hee) being too slow, too bloated or too cheesy, but I think they're missing the point. The point, to me, is that X allows choice, in a useful sense, in a way that almost no other windowing system ever created does.

    Actually, even the complaints are good, IMHO, in that they show that people -expect- choice, and are picky about what works for them, not letting someone else tell them what they -should- want, and why they're wrong if they don't agree.

    Summary: Long Live REAL Freedom Of Choice!

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Random musings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're spot-on, jd. Here where I work we've got a reasonable ex-NT Dell server which is good enough to support KDE, and a little old slow ex-NT workstation on which I've installed WM2 as a lean and efficient manager. WM2 has an extra advantage: title at the side gives the window more available height.

  48. I would... by RPoet · · Score: 1

    Only now your mirror is /.'ed too, so I can't get to the files.. :(

    --
    "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    1. Re:I would... by navindra · · Score: 1

      Nah.. the box/connection actually took the load. I just took down the page and sent people to slashmirror.

      Thanks, though. :)

    2. Re:I would... by RPoet · · Score: 1

      I noticed after I posted! I also put up a mirror here in Norway!

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  49. If only anonymous cowards would do it themselves! by Roberto · · Score: 1

    After all, "you" can do it just as easily as "they", and it is "you" who sais "it" would be a good thing.

  50. Re:Looking Good "baited breath?" by MetalHead · · Score: 1

    "Baited breath?" Been eating sushi?

    --
    Bang the head that doesn't bang!
  51. mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ftp://128.253.254.56/upload/screenshots.html

  52. European mirror by RPoet · · Score: 1
    --
    "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  53. Well said! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yeah, it's an afternoon's task to port all of KDE to the crappy GTK C-based API... why would anyone want to do away with a beautifully designed C++ UI class library anyway? People are idiots.

  54. Gnome has always been far more flakey than KDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    at least for me.

  55. It will never happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GTK and it's C++ wrappers don't support half the widgets, classes, or templates needed to reimplement KOffice on Gtk/Gnome. They are doing there own office suite, but it is much further behind.

    1. Re:It will never happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They are doing there own office suite, but it is much further behind.

      This is actually quite untrue. There's a lot more work done on the GNOME office suite then people realize.

  56. Good thing they dropped slow, bloated CORBA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When they dropped CORBA support, their binary sizes went down by 50%! Nevermind that programmers efficiency went up dramatically. What good is a supposedly interoperable toolkit (CORBA) if no-one understands it and it's a memory PIG? No good at all. The KDE guys did the right thing.

    1. Re:Good thing they dropped slow, bloated CORBA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet another clueless post. CORBA cannot be a memory pig, because it is not a program or a library. It is a specification. The reason KDE was big and slow when it was using CORBA was due to their choice of ORBs. Take a look at ORBit if you want to see a fast orb.

    2. Re:Good thing they dropped slow, bloated CORBA by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Actually, the standard C++ IDL mapping forces you to be bloated by specification.

  57. Server's Down! by tilleyrw · · Score: 1

    It seems that the server hosting these files has gone down. It's been down since 0900 EST.

    --
    This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
  58. Gnome has no window manager... by Croaker · · Score: 1

    Making the newly popped up window active is the window manager's job. While most distros enable Enlightenment as the default window manager by default (well, OK, the distros I have seen) you can use any Gnome compliant window manager. Unlike KDE, there really isn't a specific Gnome WM.

    I suggest you look at the config for whatever window manager you are running. I believe both Enlightenment and WindowMaker (the two Gnome-aware WM I've used) allow you to set policies like this.

  59. On thoughts and I/O and such... by uradu · · Score: 1

    Ok, I can't take it anymore, Karma points be damned. Regarding your .sig: if your spelling were the only problem, I could MAYBE live with that. But your entire stream-of-consciousness style of writing is short circuiting my brain cells, and they are revolting in the form of this reply.

    Just to let you know, most humans have a linguistic preprocessor, a sort of Pretty Print if you will, that allows them to arrange random thoughts into linear, formatted output compatible with most other people's I/O standards. USE IT!

  60. Looks nice, but... by Bartmoss · · Score: 1

    ....when Windows runs more efficent than your latest GUI for X, you know something's wrong with the later.

    KDE just eats up too much memory and is way too slow. I tried on a 300MHz machine with 192MB of Ram, and it didn't feel "snappy" enough for me.

    Now I am back to plain Windowmaker.

    1. Re:Looks nice, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What wasn't snappy? The integrated file manager? The text editor? Or what? WindowMaker doesn't have these things, how can it be snappier? Are you comparing apples with oranges?

  61. Hmmm... by cluening · · Score: 1

    I think I can do that same thing in even less lines:

    int main()
    {
    system("/usr/bin/netscape");
    return 0;
    }

    I am not sure how that proves developer-friendliness, but apparently it does...

    --
    Posted from the wireless couch.
    1. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, you can't really do anything with netscape can you? here khtml gives you a flexible HTML widget to do as you please.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by dfaure · · Score: 2

      You completely missed the point.
      Don't confuse HTML widget and web browser.
      The point here is that you can very easily use an HTML widget in your application, be it a mail reader, a text file (help files, man pages,....) viewer, or whatever else.
      A stupid example : want to add a 'credits' page to your app written in HTML ? Use KHTMLWidget.

      How can you do that with netscape ?

    3. Re:Hmmm... by Feign+Ram · · Score: 1

      Why not enter "netscape&" in an xterm ? You can't program netscape (!Mozilla) , except for passing it a URL, file name, etc. That's why !!!

    4. Re:Hmmm... by KenSeymour · · Score: 1

      I agree. On our project, we were trying to
      allow flexible parameter specification.

      One of our developers succested using a web
      browser control, getting the report-specific parameter screen from a network packet.
      After getting the report parameters from the user, they will in turn be sent back to our
      N-Tier system to be stored until report execution.

      In Windows, you can tie GUI events generated in
      the HTML control to callbacks in your application.

      I'm glad to see that some developers in Linux are pushing code in this direction.
      We need something more than 15-30 year old ideas in Linux.

      --
      "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
    5. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks to me, though, like that confusion is exactly what they've implemented - a browser as a widget. I hope there's enough API that one can replace or remove as much stuff that isn't HTML as one wishes.

  62. Re:Ummm perhaps you should read the docs by psychonaut · · Score: 1
    OK, so I flubbed the resize animation bit... the other points still hold IMHO. I know you can change the window placement policy, but its AI still needs work if it's putting windows off the screen. As for launching xemacs with -geometry specifiers -- well, I shouldn't have to concern myself with such things in a GUI; the system should be responsible for proper window placement (specifically, it should put the window back where it was before, and failing that, use a defined placement policy).

    Regards,

  63. K for Killer application? by osguzzler · · Score: 1

    Has anybody any data showing a correlation between the appearance of KDE and the increase of Linux's popularity? I imagine KDE could be more responsible than any other application for the crossing of the credibility threshold (as far as popular use is concerned).

    --

    Adam:What kept you?
    God:Rome wasn't built in a day
    1. Re:K for Killer application? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask the question this time next year when Corel Linux has taken over the universe....

    2. Re:K for Killer application? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before KDE, the anti-Linux press used to argue: "No GUI, forget it". Now they argue that WindowsNT was a better server system and Linux didn't scale good enough. Not really the data you were asking for, but maybe a helpful observation :-)

  64. Porting KOffice to use Gtk+ by JamesKPolk · · Score: 1

    Well, I guess it might be possible to port KOffice to Gtk+, but ...

    1) The KDE class hierarchy derives off of the Qt hierarchy, and KOffice naturally uses the KDE libraries. So, porting KOffice means porting all of the KDE libraries first.

    2) There's already much to do for finishing KOffice and KDE2, so I think it's not very likely that the KOffice or KDE developers are going to take the time to port to Gtk+.

    However, there is a bright side. If you'd really be interested in it, I should think it would be possible to port it yourself, or put together a group of porters yourself, because all of the KDE code is GPL.

    Oh, random thought before I go... I suppose it might be possible just to make a modified version of the widget classes, to make kdeui, khtml, and the rest of the libraries use the Gtk+ widgets, while still keeping the Qt programming interface.

  65. KWM by JamesKPolk · · Score: 1

    First, don't judge the whole project by its window manager.

    Second, If you hate KWM, and its window placements, that much, do this to your startkde file:

    - sleep 2 ; exec kwm
    + sleep 2 ; exec wmaker

    And, whamo! No more KDE window manager. (Note: you obviously have to have Windowmaker installed for that to work.)

  66. KDE and Windowmaker by JamesKPolk · · Score: 1

    You do know that it's possible to use Windowmaker with KDE, right?

    Just substitute wmaker for kwm in your startkde script.

    1. Re:KDE and Windowmaker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go back and read his post. No, I mean ACTUALLY read the words he wrote before posting.

      Now, perhaps you'll notice he was complaining about KDE's memory usage, not kwm's. Replacing kwm with windowmaker in KDE will not signifigatly change its memory usage. rm -rfing KDE and using just windowmaker will free up quite a bit of ram.

    2. Re:KDE and Windowmaker by Bartmoss · · Score: 1

      Yes but that doesn't make KDE run better either.

  67. ehhh. by screeching+weasel · · Score: 0

    great. but it's still a bloated, crappy win95 wannabe. could be worse though. could be gnome.

    come on. you'd think an OS as cool as Linux would have some desktop environments that weren't shameless win95 clones.

    of course this is just my opinion, and i may be wrong. (to quote Dennis Miller)


    1. Re:ehhh. by ralphclark · · Score: 1

      KDE 1.x on top of X does seem to want a lot of memory though it isn't so bad if you can avoid using Netscape.

      Since they rewrote it and dropped CORBA, KDE 2.0 is supposed to be faster and less bloated. Besides, the spec of an entry level PC these days is double what it was a year ago (and we all knew that's how it goes, year on year so there's no point bitching about it).

      With regard to the Win95-esque features: that's what people want, by and large, so it's appropriate to support them. For myself, I detest Windows, but only largely because of the bugs and instability. If it worked as it was supposed to it would be a reasonably good desktop platform. I do quite like the right-click context menu particularly, it saves a lot of unnecessary mouse movement and IMO should be used even more extensively that it is now.

      Anyway, what's the alternative? Has anyone yet come up with a GUI paradigm that isn't solidly based on Xerox Parc WIMPS idea? I haven't seen one.

      Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
      Thought exists only as an abstraction

    2. Re:ehhh. by dale@rawl.co.nz · · Score: 1

      I know where your coming from. But if you want a user friendly desktop then its going to have some things like windows 9x. I think KDE will really help Linux get established as a desktop OS. Remember freedom of choice, you can still use another window manager, and even run kde programs within that. Its also unfair to say every user friendly desktop item is a Micro$oft clone.

      Then main thing here is that is isn't microsoft and it isn't windows. What should I say, you want Linux on the desktop?
      Be carefull what you wish for it might just come true.

      Three cheers for KDE!

    3. Re:ehhh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Anyway, what's the alternative? Has anyone yet come up with a GUI paradigm that isn't solidly based on Xerox Parc WIMPS idea? I haven't seen one.

      yes. berlin.

  68. bad example by hawk · · Score: 2

    > Screw system performance. What most people are
    >interested in is "eye candy". The jump from DOS
    >to Macintosh in 1984 was proof of that.

    Nope. They were competeing with 4.7 (?)mhz 8088s (though you could get 8mhz 8086's at the time, which were about twice as fast).

    The mac was *significantly* faster than the dos machines, even after spending most of its power on the graphical system.

    We put my 128k mac next to an 8088, running the same number crunching operation (numerical integrations, iirc) in microsoft basic. The mac was graphing the solutions it calculated faster than the 8088 could do the calculations--and aside from the plotting, the code was identical (we typed my code into tony's machine. He was shocked; he had been convincedhis machine was much faster).

    Hmm, I think i just dated myself :)

    1. Re:bad example by Eccles · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I think i just dated myself :)

      "Well, it's not like you're dating anyone else." --Dogbert

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    2. Re:bad example by hawk · · Score: 1

      I better not be dating anyone else; I'm married :)

  69. Easy solution by jeremy+f · · Score: 2

    Just make sure you're not theming as root, I'm not sure if the themes will enter the global shared folder or not...

    Here's how you remove the offensive theme. Just rm everything from ~/.kde/share/apps/kwm, and restart kde / kwm.

    If you backup your kwm folder, you can freely experiment with themes without fear of losing your original settings.

  70. Ok, HOW? by Roberto · · Score: 1

    How is the WM supposed to remember your preferred position for XEmacs? How is it supposed to even know the window belongs to XEmacs?

    In X, the application can remember its position. It can move itself there. It can do that regardless of WM. Why not ask XEmacs people to do it?

    1. Re:Ok, HOW? by anatoli · · Score: 1
      It's called session management.

      A WM can be a session manager too. The apps must cooperate (set relevant session hints) though.

      Now, it'd be wrong for each app to do the session management for itself, because the user might want to switch between several sessions, or several session policies. So, all session settings oughtta be kept in a central repository ($HOME/.xsession perhaps).

      Please moderate this post down for your protection.
      --

      --
      Industrial space for lease in Flatlandia.
    2. Re:Ok, HOW? by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Yes, a WM can do that. Of course that means it
      will get restored to the position in the next session (KWM does do that). The complaint is about position in the next INVOCATION of xemacs.

      To do that, the app can do the job.

      As a sidenote, ~/.xsession is the default session for xdm, so it would be bad to go changing it.

    3. Re:Ok, HOW? by anatoli · · Score: 1
      EMACS doesn't know whether it is started by the session manager when next session starts, or by the user. So KFM should do us some favor and apply session settings every time app gets started (only if asked to do so, of course).

      My bad about .xsession. Let the user mess with it if he so desires.

      Please moderate this post down for your protection.
      --

      --
      Industrial space for lease in Flatlandia.
    4. Re:Ok, HOW? by Roberto · · Score: 1

      A session can contain multiple start settings for a single app.

      For example, it could contain: "start xemacs editing /etc/passwd on desktop 2, +200+120" and "start xemacs editing /etc/group minimized"

      When you start Xemacs, which one should KDE chose?
      If you start Xemacs with a commandline argument specifying a file, should KDE ignore it and open the one specified in the session? Or both?

      If the user starts Xemacs specifying geometry, should KDE override it? Is there a way to recognize if the geometry is specified or just a default?

      It's a lot trickier than it looks :-)

    5. Re:Ok, HOW? by anatoli · · Score: 1
      A session can contain multiple start settings for a single app.

      For example, it could contain: "start xemacs editing /etc/passwd on desktop 2, +200+120" and "start xemacs editing /etc/group minimized"

      When you start Xemacs, which one should KDE chose?

      One that exited most recently.
      If you start Xemacs with a commandline argument specifying a file, should KDE ignore it and open the one specified in the session? Or both?

      If the user starts Xemacs specifying geometry, should KDE override it? Is there a way to recognize if the geometry is specified or just a default?

      This ought to be configurable per application. The most sensible choice for EMACS is probably "apply session settings iff started without any command line arguments".

      Better yet, have a menu with a list of recently finished apps, and let the user restart any of them. Oh wait, I gonna patent it! Sheesh!

      It's a lot trickier than it looks :-)
      Indeed.

      Please moderate this post down for your protection.
      --

      --
      Industrial space for lease in Flatlandia.
    6. Re:Ok, HOW? by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Oh, but there is a catch (of course ;-)
      When applications exit normally, they don't store session information!

      So, you are going to have to make the application store some information on any exit, regardless of wether it's a session checkpoint or not.

      That's not session management anymore :-)

  71. Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because its actually a good GUI design?

  72. You are.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the lowest common asshole. An elitist geek. Worried that someone with a life will invade your own personal geekdom? Get a grip.

  73. What? It runs fine on my P166/32M by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Much better than Windows. I don't know what people are doing to their systems but it's obviously different than mine.

  74. Re:Meet the new Windows, same as the old Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you would bother to check the sizes of both the KDE and Gnome packages, then you'd see that Gnome + GTK is about twice the size of KDE + QT. And Gnome isn't even a windowmanager, you need an extra few megs to include Windowmaker, E, or any other WM you want to use with Gnome.

    If you're so willing to complain about the desktops, why don't you start designing something better?

  75. Get real by RPoet · · Score: 1

    You shouldn't be fooling yourself. Everyone knows what a huge memory hog X is (internal TCP-IP, anyone?); put something like KDE or GNOME on top of that, and then try to run Netscape...

    And then go back to Windows. You'll feel the difference in speed, no matter how much RAM or CPU you have, even on Windows NT.


    Ok, so there's the possibility of running pure TWM and browsing the web with Lynx. Or better yet, ditch X and be a console freak. THERE's speed for ya, and imagine how kewl you'd be.

    All I'm saying is, why try to be something we're not? A lot of people hear amazing things about how fast Linux is, and as soon as they try it out for themselves, they post to newsgroups asking what's wrong with their installation since it's so slow compared to Windows. So let's get real.

    --
    "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    1. Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I also have a P166. KDE and GNOME run fine on it, as long as I don't use themes. I don't use wallpaper either, it's a waste of memory (I'll see it for a few seconds when I log in, then it will be covered by apps). There are some features of KDE to save memory - edit /usr/bin/startkde and comment out the lines for kbgndwm, autorun, kaudioserver, kwmsound, and krootwm.

      I have 64MB of RAM in my system, but only about 16MB will be used when I first log in (Win98 uses about 20MB before I start any apps). You're right about X being a memory hog, it's using about 11MB right now. Netscape is a lot worse though - it's using 27MB (!!), and that's probably what makes Linux seem slow for people low on memory.

    2. Re:Get real by warmi · · Score: 0

      Windows offers much more than pure X. It isn't even in the same category...

    3. Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Internal TCP-IP anyone?" -- You sir, are an absolute idiot. X is a client server request based protocol. There is nothing requiring TCP/IP at all. Since you probably don't make much use of X's remote display capabilities, your requests are going over a UNIX domain socket. look in /tmp/.X11-unix And you probably are thinking X uses more memory that it actually does. Want to learn something? X mmaps (man mmap) your video card's ram into its address space. You're also probably using the SVGA X server, which supports about a billion different video cards. This doesn't hurt your ram, since most of the code is never paged into memory from the disk. But it appears bloated to the uninitiated.

      X is bigger than it needs to be, but to call NT small in comparison shows a laughable misunderstanding of how most unix VMs works.

      And I disagree. going from win95 to Linux with X made my 64meg P90 usable again.

      I suspect you have a poorly supported video card. Why not fix it, instead of generalizing your very limited experience, pretending its a universal?

    4. Re:Get real by Bartmoss · · Score: 1

      Yes I know. I tried to run X+Netscape+KDE on 64 MB of Ram... it worked... kinda... but probably has reduced the lifetime of my harddisk by quite a bit.

      Now I hav 192MB and things work fine. Unless I add KDE to the mix. Also, QT seems to be very, very unoptimized. GTK seems much more snappy than QT, especially if you have pixmap themes... but since QT2 and KDE2 are not really done yet, it's hard to compare the two.

    5. Re:Get real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, running locally XFree doesn't even use the overhead of a local Unix domain socket... it uses shared memory, so anything the application writes to a portion of its memory space is instantly in X's memory space without any kind of interface at all.

  76. GPL (QPL) is fine by Eric+Green · · Score: 3
    As a commercial software developer I have no problem with buying a QT license for a measly 2K or so per programmer. A good programmer costs at least $60K/year in pay and benefits even in low-rent places like Houston or Phoenix, so we're talking less than 4% of a programmer's salary for the year -- and it's a one-time cost. Does it make a programmer 4% more productive? I daresay YES, if you are developing C++ applications, QT is a beautiful thing.

    Ongoing royalties are what kills me as a software developer. I don't want to have to send 2% of my revenue stream to every #%%@ vendor library that's linked into my code. All those percents adds up too quickly, and they're all volume-oriented so I have to tell them "I'm going to sell 50,000 copies so you charge me the 1.5% instead of the 2% rate for 20,000 copies". The problem there of course is how the hell do I know how many copies I'm going to sell?! This is the computer business, folks! Great programs fail to sell all the time because the projected market for it dried up and moved on to other things, or because the market isn't there yet... per-copy volume based royalties are the utter PITS.

    Remember, if you're an independent developer writing programs with QT, you can still develop the program with the QPL version. It's just when you actually sell it (get some money for it!) that you must send your $2k to the Trolls. If you can't make $2k off of a piece of software, you shouldn't be trying to release it as "shareware" anyhow, you should just GPL it and toss it onto the pile of Open Source code that already exists!

    -E

    --
    Send mail here if you want to reach me.
  77. Then don't use it. You won't be missed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Go use Hurd/Heard/Hird/Whatever-the-he!!-the-useless-thin g-is-called with the rest of the hard-core nerds with no life and even less clue. The Linux community won't miss you.

    Heaven forbid that you would actually help somebody use Linux, you unmitigated a-hole!

    Linux Rules.

    You Suck.

    Out.

  78. I am being real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KDE starts faster than Windows 98 on my P166, apps start faster - even simple ones like KWrite, the screen updates more quickly, KFM is faster...

    1. Re:I am being real by RPoet · · Score: 1

      Too bad that's not the case with my 433Mhz, 64MB system. There must be something wrong with my installation ;)

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    2. Re:I am being real by warmi · · Score: 0

      Unless your Windows 98 is fucked up , you are lying - simple as that.
      Windows _is_ faster than X and on the same hardware and always will be. It is design issue, Windows is optimized for local graphics ( and WIndows 98 even more optimized for intel platform)
      and X is not.

    3. Re:I am being real by Bartmoss · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, as I said, on 64MB, my system was barely usable. Also, note that X and Netscape 8especially netscape) seem to bloat over time, ie. probably have memory leaks somewhere... Restarting X once a week does a lot to reduce system load.

      X 3.3.5 seems to be better though.

    4. Re:I am being real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I'm sorry, what you say is not true. Stop listening to the dolts on Slashdot who think X uses tcp/ip and read a decent book on the protocol, or otherwise do some real research, and you'll find that XFree is in fact optimized for local graphics display. Open mouth, insert foot, etc.

  79. Hilarious! by Roberto · · Score: 1

    Let's push this "contest" a bit further.
    I can add another 5 lines of code and modify any arbitrary object in the page in any arbitrary way
    using DOM.

    Add that to your version :-)

    1. Re:Hilarious! by cluening · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, but without a single extra line I can read news and mail and author a web page with my version, as well as a whole slew of other things. How's your version coming along? :)

      --
      Posted from the wireless couch.
    2. Re:Hilarious! by Roberto · · Score: 1

      You can already access news and email simply using pop3: and nntp: URL's :-)

  80. Re:LEFT click menu? by dfaure · · Score: 1

    ok, make that "left click menu", for KDE 1.x,
    as you can guess from the key "Left" in the config file.

    I've just implemented it in kdesktop (the one for KDE 2.0), this way :
    you can assign ANY menu to ANY mouse button,
    the possible menus being : the applications menu,
    the window-list menu, the usual desktop menu or nothing.
    Happy ? :-)

    (The apps menu showing up in kdesktop doesn't work yet though)

  81. Still about a year behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking at KWord AbiWord is way, way, behind. And KPresenter has a lot of features not even in MS Office.

    1. Re:Still about a year behind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flip side of course is that Gnumeric, Gimp, dia, gill, and gnome-db are light-years ahead of their KDE equivilants...

    2. Re:Still about a year behind by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Gnumeric: have you tried KOffice's spreadsheet?
      Gimp: Since when is Gimp a GNOME app?
      Gnome-db: is it usable already?
      I have no idea what gill is.

  82. They do now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you read the gnome list they are developing a "standard" Gnome WM because they finally realized not having a optimized WM for your environment sucks. You can still use other WM's just like you can in KDE, but they are developing one true Gnome WM - just like KDE did 2 years ago.

    1. Re:They do now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please stop being stupid. Failing that, please stop wasting oxygen.

      The development of the "Gnome WM" is more a result of the falling out between raster and gnome. Of course, through your KDE colored glasses (your last sentance really blatently gives away your irrational bias) I can understand how you'd spin that as: "the old way sucks just like we do, so now we're gonna copy KDE."

      With your skills misrepresenting reality, I see a lucrative career in front of you as Steve Job's personal bitch (err.. advisor).

  83. 'Desktop Environments' by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

    A lot of people don't seem to understand one of the major points behind environments such as KDE and Gnome. Of course, you could always use just plain old Windowmaker, Enlightenment or fvwm2, but then you'd leave out a huge amount of functionality. These new desktop environments aren't just pretty user interfaces; they have large amounts of code hidden inside which radically simplify tasks which used to be extremely complex.

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    1. Re:'Desktop Environments' by NatePuri · · Score: 2

      they have large amounts of code hidden inside which radically simplify tasks which used to be extremely complex

      Like what? I use 'plain old WindowMaker.' I'm a law student and computer enthusiast and tend to deal with mostly all documents, html, ps, pdf, etc.

      My ideal 'desktop environment' needs an emailer (mutt)(non-kde/gnome), a browser (netscape/soon to be mozilla)(non-kde/gnome), a text editor/word processor (nedit/wordperfect)(non-kde/gnome), a file manager (mc)(non-kde/gnome), a presentation tool (mgp)(non-kde/gnome), and a figure drawer (xfig/gimp) (non-kde/gnome).

      What is KDE making easier in my life? I've used it, and found that it is pretty nice, but after about 12 hrs of use, my memory is is really bogged down at 144MEG of RAM.

      I believe in spartan simplicity. In WMaker with the combination of keybindings and edited menus, I can move around my desktop and my most frequently used applications in eye blinks. Clicking around is such a waste of time and energy, I think it actually raises my stress level to have to click my mouse more than twice. I prever hitting F12, have my menu pop up, use arrows to find my app and launch it. This takes about two seconds.

      To be really fast, I have my terminal, editor, browser and file manager in a custom menu that I have attached key bindings to. So alt n starts netscape, alt t starts terminal (wterm -tr -wm) (for a beautiful transparent term for wmaker that takes only 1K of RAM), ctrl alt m start midnight commander (gmc is no where near the functionality, kfm is closer but what a mem hog at 11K, gmc is only 6K. MC is 1.5K and in wterm there are clickable areas for everything. It's so fast.

      The only functionality I miss is being able to drag files to a trash can before I decide to permanently delete them. But I use the OffiX-files and OffiX-trash applications to get that functionality.

      What I would love to see is GNUstep get a lot more attention. Applications based on GNUstep and WINGs are fast, light and pretty. Linux should be optimized for stablity and speed first and ease of use second. Feature parity with Win is a waste of time. We need feature parity with NEXT and Apple.

  84. Re:Meet the new Windows, same as the old Windows by Nite_Hawk · · Score: 1

    Simply looking at package size can be a bit misleading. Depending on how many icons and graphics you include, how big they are, and what color depth, it can drastically change those sizes. Sound files, additional programs, even graphical help files or desktop backgrounds can have a large effect. I'm not going to say either way which is more bloated, or how much bloat in each case could be removed from the code, because I really don't know. I'm partial to gnome myself for other reasons.

  85. KSpread, and I bet he hasn't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no clue what Gnome-db's status is, no clue what gill is. But I know Gnumeric isn't up to anything near a 1.0 and Gimp ain't no Gnome app

  86. Unix software marketing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been seeing this overpricing-on-Unix problem for years. There will be a program XX that's $50 on Windows, but $500 on the Unix platforms. The marketing strategy seems to be: "We don't expect to sell a lot of these, so we've got to charge a HUGE amount per copy (which ensures that we won't sell a lot of these)." Pricing is one of the few "innovations" that Microsoft got right.

  87. My thoughts on KDE 2.x by scrytch · · Score: 2

    I managed to get 2.x up on my Linux box once, when I got the base to compile. Since then, I've had a few difficulties compiling a few parts, which caused the whole makefile to bomb. The ODBC library, for instance, did not compile, which would be okay, hunky-dory, it's unstable, but I couldn't even get make -k to get over it. Had to manually edit the makefile.

    Recently, I've had to edit the makefile for kdelibs again because it compiles them out of order and several dependencies don't work. It would seem not one of the developers ever recompiles this system from scratch, because there is no dependency checking.

    Anyhow, when I got it working, I was impressed by the speed and looks (a bit crashy, but this was EARLY stuff and I didn't have everything installed either). The wizard was incomplete, but the art was good, but "My name is Kandalf"??? OH PLEASE. The wizard doesn't need a name, much less such a god-AWFUL corny (Korny?) one. Just a nitpick, but I just about gagged. Really.

    Anyhow, slightly less trivial notes: I certainly hope it's not the default QT 2.0 look that I saw there. There *is* too much of a thing as "too much 3d". The buttons had these ultra-rounded edges, and the radio buttons looked not only way too bumpy, but ... rough. Almost like they were hand-drawn (though a true "hand-drawn" theme that introduced little variances in each widget would be COOL, if a little slow)

    Kicker wasn't terribly impressive. I do not like having my taskbar crunched into a little, or even large applet space. I like to smack my mouse to the top of the screen (yeah i keep it at the top) and have the whole edge to select my app. yes, the idea of the "K" menu is also awful, I guess it's a necessary concession to people used to the equally awful "start" button. This is a gripe I had with gnome, and now KDE replicates it.

    BTW, what the heck is krootwm called now? It was really crashy when I was using it, and I would have liked to be able to restart it.

    --
    I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    1. Re:My thoughts on KDE 2.x by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kandalf ... KImageWorkshop ... In the future all Koftware with start with K Kelp! Kelp!

  88. That's probably why people won't port to Gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a real commercial software company having a set and friendly policy towards commercial software development (such as the QPL) is much more important than a trival no-cost-to-the-user fee for non-free software development. If I was developing commercial software for Linux I wouldn't want to use a toolkit whose licenses' organizatonal leader (RMS) wants to ban commercial development on. Plus, no one outside on Unix codes GUI applications in C anymore and no one really uses Gnome's bindings.

  89. Lair. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least KSpread, KPresenter, KIllustrator, and KWord are further along than anything Gnome has. It's in CVS, check it out.

  90. You are a confused one aren't you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gimp isn't even a Gnome app, much less part of the Gnome Office project. For every app that is KDE has a better, more functional equivanlent. You are right about KImageShop tho, that and the database thingy are not likely to be in KDE2.0 while the spreadsheet, presentation, vector drawing thingy, and word processor are.

  91. Re:Pictures of mosfet's wishful thinking. by Roberto · · Score: 1

    KImageShop is in CVS. It compiles. It does what the screenshot shows. How can that be wishful thinking?

  92. Would of had a KDE Gimp months ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The KDE developers made a working port of the Gimp to KDE a long time ago, but the Gimp people were jerks and didn't allow them to distribute it.

    1. Re:Would of had a KDE Gimp months ago by Nite_Hawk · · Score: 1

      Why didn't they just distribute it anyway? It's GPLed code, if they followed the rules, then it shouldn't matter what the gimp people think about it.

    2. Re:Would of had a KDE Gimp months ago by servo8 · · Score: 1

      This was back when Qt was still closed source -- it would have violated GPL to distribute it, which is why the gimp authors put their foot down. I think QPL may also be incompatible with GPL, soo...

  93. KDE performance by omidk · · Score: 1

    I am begining to realize that the problem isnt really the window managers....its X. The fact that X uses 20 megs and the WHOLE NT kernel uses 20 megs on my system tells me something is wrong with that piece of crap. Is there anyway that X will every improve? I know about berlin but i would like to see something useful sometime during the next millenium

    1. Re:KDE performance by warmi · · Score: 0

      Exactly ... X is simply not as efficient like Windows Win32 GUI. One reason is portability which almost always means slower implementation then something designed to fit on specific need ( Windows)

    2. Re:KDE performance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on people, even reading Slashdot you should know this by now!

      X MAPS YOUR ENTIRE VIDEO MEMORY, CAUSING THE KERNEL TO SHOW IT AS TAKING UP MORE RAM THAN IT ACTUALLY DOES

      X MAPS YOUR ENTIRE VIDEO MEMORY, CAUSING THE KERNEL TO SHOW IT AS TAKING UP MORE RAM THAN IT ACTUALLY DOES

      Are there any questions?

  94. Question -- window manager operations by coats · · Score: 1
    I like large virtual desktops -- I currently run 2Kx1.5K@32bpp virtual, both at home and at work (because my 16M graphics cards won't support anything larger ;-( ). With large virtual displays, it is really useful to be able to hang a "desks&windows" menu off one of the mouse keys, the way FVWM does with "MB2" by default.

    How do I find out which WM's let me do something like this, and for that matter how do I find the documentation on how to do it? Frankly, the RTF(M4)S for FVWM has me annoyed. (I do C, Fortran, lisp, HTML, and hard-core numerical algorithms; my brain doesn't have the space left over to hold everything else, too!)

    Thanks!

    --
    "My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
    1. Re:Question -- window manager operations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WindowMaker does this by default (MB2), and it is compatible with KDE and GNOME. Edit /usr/bin/startkde, and replace "kwm" with "wmaker" (assuming WindowMaker is installed, of course). It comes with a nice graphical configuration tool (WPrefs), so you shouldn't need man pages if you want to reconfigure it.

  95. Answers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First the taskbar. That, the date applet, and the minipager are plugins and replaceable. I plan on doing an iconbox at least which I prefer, imagine I will do a external taskbar as well. Second, the K button has been there since the beginning of KDE, is what users are familiar with, so it's there in 2.0. Third, krootwm is gone - it's part of kdesktop. Hope this helps, mosfet@kde.org.

  96. KDE does that just fine. by Roberto · · Score: 1

    Middle-click on the background.

  97. GNOME has gotten better by DragonHawk · · Score: 2

    My experience with gnome/E was so bad with the version that shipped with RH6.0 that, even though I loved the way it looked, I probably won't try it again for quite a while.

    Yah, even the GNOME people admit that the version that shipped with Red Hat 6.0 had way too many bugs. But I can say that the October GNOME release, which I am currently running, is very stable, and works quite well.

    I do think GNOME needs to drop Enlightenment in favor of another window manager. I mean, E! has some great eye candy and is very feature-filled, but it really isn't designed to integrate with GNOME the way kwm integrates with KDE.

    --

    dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
    I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
  98. A bug submit program for Windows? by DragonHawk · · Score: 2

    Windows, meanwhile, now comes with a bug submit program -- they just bury it real deep.

    A bug submit program for Windows? Wow, that's kind of like a windshield wiper on a submarine. Run it all you want, and things still aren't going to get any better.

    --

    dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
    I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
  99. Gnumeric vs. Kspread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    (while I hate getting suckered into this kind of debate...)

    GNUMERIC: Yes, I've seen kspread; and I've seen gnumeric.

    There is simply no comparison. Gnumeric is over 60,000 lines of code (counted by ';') and, this doesn't include dialog boxes which are stored in another form. Kast I checked, kspread was less then 14,000 lines of code, and did a lot, lot less.

    Gimp: A GTK+ app. It has been bonobized, which is perhaps the most important bit. Gnomifying it would be fairly easy (and, for the most part, not that interesting, as it's already duplicated most of the code needed)

    Gnome-db: yes, it is useable. It's also usefull.

    Gill: It's an illustrator. Renders SVG.

    Dia: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~alla/dia/

    1. Re:Gnumeric vs. Kspread by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Comparing by LOC will always favour the C code, which simply needs more LOCs to implement the same features.

      When was the last time you checked KSpread? It has had lots of development lately.

      What did you find missing on KSpread? Maybe someone will concentrate on those features.

      Gill: Did you look at Killustrator?

      Gimp: So, it is not a GNOME app. Is the "bonobization" part of the GIMP source tree or is it a hacked version?

    2. Re:Gnumeric vs. Kspread by extrasolar · · Score: 2

      Bonobo is the GNOME component model. It is similar (albeit not as far) as the KOpenParts thingy I think. So in effect, it is a Gnome App.

      ***Beginning*of*Signiture***
      Linux? That's GNU/Linux to you mister!

  100. Freedom and choice continue to solve that problem by DragonHawk · · Score: 2

    I also question where the GUI areas of Linux have been heading.

    They are aiming for the sorts of features Microsoft claims's windows has: Integration, easy-to-learn, drag-and-drop, object embedding, that sort of thing. Generally, power users are only minorly interested in these sorts of things, which is why, up until recently, Unix programs often did not have them. This explains why an bare-bones Xlib program is faster: Because it is a bare-bones Xlib program. TANSTAAFL, and you're not going to get all of those new features for free, either. Fortunately, power users are generally quite content to continue to use their bare-bones Xlib programs, while "home users" get their pretty icons and such.

    Fotunately, Linux is still about freedom and choice as much as it is about performance and stability.

    When I started using Linux, it was touted as being an entire OS that could live in 40 megs of HD space and 16 megs of RAM on a 286.

    Minor nit-pick: Linux requires protected, virtual memory, something the i286 cannot do. So an i386 is the minimum processor Linux runs on. (While there are other projects based on Linux that are targeting the 286, they are not Linux.) Additionally, no one ever claimed you could run Enlightenment on a 386. :-)

    --

    dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
    I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
  101. Lots of Konqueror shots here by drix · · Score: 2

    This was on Slashdot the other day, but we only got one screenshot of the elusive Konqueror browser. Follow this link for lots more. From what I see, it's pretty amazing - if this really was conceptualized and designed less than two weeks ago, that's very impressive that they already have a functioning browser that displays Slashdot and other sites perfectly, and has built in support for PDF and DVI. Not bad.
    --
    "Some people say that I proved if you get a C average, you can end up being successful in life."

    --

    I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
  102. KDE and KOffice are running fast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm running KDE2.0almostalpha and KOffice on a Pentium Pro 150 with 64MB and they're running fast. Normally I use CDE and VUE on my work, but this is great. The only problem is the QT-license.

  103. KDE is amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't believe the gall of slashdotter who piss all over KDE. Its simply the most advanced environment for linux, by a longshot.

  104. It has been a lot longer than 2 weeks ;-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not sure where that came from. The Java/DOM HTML widget was entered into CVS during the KDEII conference and was in development long before that. People have been working on Konq itself since KDE2 development started. mosfet@kde.org

    1. Re:It has been a lot longer than 2 weeks ;-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it's your page, so I stand corrected :)

  105. so WHAT if they look like Winduhs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why all the complaints about KDE and Gnome looking like Winduhs? Come on people, it's a GUI

  106. so WHAT if they look like Winduhs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why all the complaints about KDE and Gnome looking like Winduhs? Come on people, it's a GUI; there're only so many ways to make a button or a scrollbar. Ask someone that trains lusers how to use Winduhs stuff... change the rendering of a button in the slightest and they're frightened half out of their wits. Ask the Tk people what the Great Complaint about the initial Winduhs port was... "It doesn't look right".

    Practically everyone confesses that the block to Linux/*BSD on the desktop is the GUI; if you want people to be able to move from Winduhs, you've got to give them an interface they'll recognise. If you long for one of those scrollbars with so many twiddlers it needs its own manpage, make the APIs so it's a matter of skinning... and leave the default be something familiar to the "unwashed". Let Gnome and KDE have the one thing Winduhs never had- configurability. Then it can work like Winduhs for those that need it so, while not tying the rest of us to something irritating.

    Foam Off...

    Drats, ./ and my regular browser don't like each other; I reposted with Lynx, in case you see two of this.

  107. Just different themes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are insignificant. The cool things in the KDE page is how all this cool stuff is actually coming out.

  108. Process list interface by Scola · · Score: 1

    I'm currious if the list of processes will be as configurable under 2.0 as 1.0. Every screenshot I've seen shows the list as an applet of some sort in the panel. This is the way Gnome does it. The panel seems to have integrated some nice gnome-like features (it's good to see the two projects pushing each other to improve), however, the process list being there in Gnome is one of the worst, most poorly thought out parts of Gnome. In fact the whole idea of the windows-like bottom of the screen fixed-size process list is extremely stupid. The ability for the KDE to put its process list at the top-left corner, and let it expand down is a great feature. KDE and BeOS use a similar type of interface for this, and its a good one. I'd hate to see KDE go from doing the right thing to the wrong one. Perhaps I'll download krash just to check this out, and bitch (or write some code) if it doesn't.

    1. Re:Process list interface by warmi · · Score: 0

      In your opinion. I , on the other hand can't stand Windowmaker or BeOS type taskbars.
      KDE offers you both -which is great but comes with default set to Windows like type. It is great design decision based on assumption that most people using KDE will find this feature very familiar and confortable.

    2. Re:Process list interface by boc · · Score: 1

      If you put the pager or tasklist in a corner panel you can do exactly this in GNOME.

    3. Re:Process list interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now only if the gnome panel crash all the time and didn't look so ugly. The tasklist just doesn't work right, it's all slow and looks like windows 95. I thought we got beyond this. Everyone should just use a windowmanager instead of all this desktop crap, it makes no sense, just eats your memory and looks ugly. Maybe if the gnome hackers learned to code I might actually use some of their stuff, but as it is, it's not even an option.

    4. Re:Process list interface by jdube · · Score: 1

      And I'm sure Miguel's winning all these awards by picking his ass. I'm sure, since you can so profusly reject Gnome, that you can code something much better, because if you know what it means to "know how to code" thes you must be better than Havoc Pennington... can you email me the URL of the desktop environment you coded please?
      Don't make unfounded, untrue remarks.


      If you think you know what the hell is really going on you're probably full of shit.

      --
      If you think you know what the hell is really going on you're probably full of shit.
      jdube is who I am.
    5. Re:Process list interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      please don't blame miguel for the panel problems, he had nothing to do with it. iirc, jerky did it.

    6. Re:Process list interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oops, jerky == jirka.

    7. Re:Process list interface by jdube · · Score: 1

      No no no... I was being sarcastic. I never said the Panel had problews, I've NEVER had problems with it. I think you misunderstood what I was saying... I wasn't talking about the panel, just Gnome in general and how he said it sucks / Gnome hackers need to learn how to code. :)


      If you think you know what the hell is really going on you're probably full of shit.

      --
      If you think you know what the hell is really going on you're probably full of shit.
      jdube is who I am.
    8. Re:Process list interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No no no... I was being sarcastic.

      So was I, you dumbass.

    9. Re:Process list interface by jdube · · Score: 1

      don't call me a dumbass.


      If you think you know what the hell is really going on you're probably full of shit.

      --
      If you think you know what the hell is really going on you're probably full of shit.
      jdube is who I am.
  109. More info on kicker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Since I coded a lot of this stuff maybe I can clarify: First the taskbar since your the second person to ask about it. The taskbar, date applet, and minipager are all plugins and can be replaced. The default ones are meant to be small and meet what most people have asked for. I'll probably end up doing a taskbar like in 1.x, I will certainly do an iconbox which is my favorite, and if I don't do it someone else will.

    The other relevant topic is how these applets are handled. KDE has a rather cool API for applets. The applet area is resizable and individual applets can specify a "stretch" hint so some applets can stretch more than others, or they can be fixed in size. When you resize that little splitter all the applets "stretch" to the new size. Applets also can take advantage of full client/server access to the KDE menu. It's all a rather powerful. mosfet@kde.org

  110. Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...all you would have to do is port the free version of Qt2 to win32. Despite what misinformed people may say, the actual license of Qt2 doesn't say that it is not free for win32.

    It is just that the free version doesn't include the win32 code.

    1. Re:Actually... by Midnight+Coder · · Score: 1

      all you would have to do is port the free version of Qt2 to win32.
      It has been done. About a month ago someone on the QT interest list said they had done it, and it had only taken them a couple of hours.

      If you want I can search for the post.

    2. Re:Actually... by kijiki · · Score: 2

      www.troll.no/qpl Granted right #3 says that all your modifications (which to port to win32 would be a LOT of changes) must be distributed as patches. A similar restriction on minix hamstrung its development and was one reason for linux. Why the Open Source definition allows these games to be played is beyond me. Requiring changes to be distributed as patches is, for me, only one step above running the source through cpp before release.

    3. Re:Actually... by Midnight+Coder · · Score: 1

      The minix case is entirely different, the Minix license requires royalties for redistribution of source.

    4. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with minix, people distributed patches because they were legally prohibited from distributing the modified source. with QT, people have to distribute patches because they are legally prohibited from distributed modified source.

      Just because QT is free-beer and minix wasn't doesn't automagically make QT free-speech.

    5. Re:Actually... by Midnight+Coder · · Score: 1

      I notice the license has changed now. Not that it matters.

    6. Re:Actually... by Midnight+Coder · · Score: 1

      Your babbling.

  111. Why Copy Crap? by Bill+Daras · · Score: 1

    The Windows interface sucks, so why not copy something good like MacOS? Or any other good GUI...except that god forsaken crap that crawled out of Redmond.

    1. Re:Why Copy Crap? by warmi · · Score: 0

      Don't like it ... don't use it.

  112. 4 8 by Roberto · · Score: 1

    If you double the amount of RAM in the system, didn't you expect to see a major difference in performance?

    1. Re:4 8 by kijiki · · Score: 1

      well yes, but there is no sane reason in the world to have 4 megs. No one out there owns a computer, but is too poor to shell out 12 bucks for 4 more megs of ram.

    2. Re:4 8 by Roberto · · Score: 1

      well that's the point, isn't it? ;-)

      Getting extra 4MB for a 486 can be quite difficult, since that memory has not been manufactured in years. In fact, those 4MB will probably cost you about the same as 32MB for a modern computer.

    3. Re:4 8 by kijiki · · Score: 1

      wrong. I probably overestimated the price, if you don't need it RIGHT NOW you can probably get it for free from someone who is throwing out an "obsolete" machine (personal definition: less than a 486DX-33). If not, go to a used computer equipment store. Any reasonably sized civilized area will have at least one.

    4. Re:4 8 by Roberto · · Score: 1

      It may surprise you, but I live in a half million inhabitants city where there is no used computer store, 150KM away from a million inhabitants one with no used computer store. And yes, I usually consider this a civilized area :-)

      I went through this very same thing less than a year ago. No computer store would sell me that memory for less than $30 the 4MB stick, recycled from an old computer.

      Of course everyone's mileage WILL vary :-)

  113. X memory usage by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

    It's a bit more complicated than it looks. Apparently it's due to it allocating all the memory on the graphics card twice; as a result X using 24MB with my 8MB Matrox G200 doesn't sound nearly as bad.

    The Linux kernel uses hardly anything compared with the NT one as well. :)

    And whatever people say, KDE (and Gnome) don't really use so much memory - a lot of it is in shared libraries. The real culprits are Netscape (obese) and StarOffice (makes Netscape look positively skinny). Netscape on my system uses more memory than KDE and XFree86 put together.

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  114. Re: Whine... See my Ompages-Debian software select by NatePuri · · Score: 3

    Please see this document on Ompages that describes how to set up a very functional graphical desktop based on Debian and Windowmaker specifically for use with low end hardware. If you are running debian you can 'apt-get install package1 package2 ...' these packages and you will have a nice fast desktop for your 486. I wrote this as part of the the Ompages Project it is my contribution to the project to put together a software selection that people with low end and legacy hardware can participate in modern computer culture. Let me know what you all think.

    Needless to say, I'm a huge proponent of retaining feature parity between legacy and modern desktops. It is essential to proliferation of computers throughout the world. It is also quite feasible. You sacrifice no functionality, but you will sacrifice some ease of use and look and feel qualities in some applications. But that is not such a bad thing, people who are forced for financial reasons to use older hardware are getting the added benefit of an opportunity to learn about computers in a much more thorough way than his/her counterpart with KDE, W2K. I greatly admire how far KDE has come. But we must remember who they cater to. KDE is to woo people away from W95/NT in the corporate/business setting. What about the rest of the world with an old computer? If you read and apply the above document you will have a very useful desktop that gives away *no* functionality and is based _mostly_ on free software. I have a fairly powerful desktop but love the speed and stablity my system has after applying what is in that document. I have applied it to my girlfriend's 486 and it is not all that much slower. I enjoy it; I hope you all do too.

  115. I agree by Gkeeper80 · · Score: 1

    I'm a windows convert as well. I'd prefer to use linux all the time, but unfortunatly there are still a few things i need windows for. I installed redhat 6, played around in gnome for a while, but i really like the simplicity of KDE. I like the layout and i'm really looking foward to the new version.

  116. Oh, I understand... by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 3

    I boot _MacOS_ for that sort of thing.
    Linux offers me things that I CANNOT get from MacOS or Windows, in a million years, not in Jobs and Gates' wildest dreams. At this time, mostly what it offers me is an escape hatch. I am typing this in MacOS, from which I've been reading interesting news such as the fact that newer MacOSes are bringing in auto-update behaviors that are the antithesis of what I can tolerate on my computer.
    I don't think either KDE or Gnome are remotely comparable to MacOS for usability. I don't _ask_ Linux to be as usable as what I pay for with MacOS. Instead I ask different things of Linux: first, I ask that it be there if I need it, and second, I ask it to be something I can completely control and audit, the power to reconfigure the system being in _my_ hands- lastly, I ask it to not forget this, but I am thankful that the nature of Linux is to preserve areas of difference and iconoclasm where I'd be able to settle.
    I dispute that a desktop environment adds functionality. I _totally_ dispute that. I use one every day in MacOS and I still dispute that claim... what's happening is that the desktop environment is _attempting_ to provide _other_ _interfaces_ to data and ideas that might otherwise have to be jotted down as notes or interacted with by words and sentences.
    This is a far cry from providing _added_ functionality. Particularly with the Windows paradigm, it's actually a loss of functionality in many ways- the attempts at other interfaces end up so strange and convoluted that the 'visual' environment has more unwritten rules than the old CLI environments had. This all must be memorized, just as CLI rules were: another nasty gotcha is the tendency to assume that the GUI approach is inherently so 'intuitive' that controls and objects can be strewn around and reshuffled arbitrarily.
    These new desktop environments are not remotely new- they are simply implementations of 'the other paradigm' in computer interaction. First there was language-based interaction, and 'talking' to the computer with words, commands, and remembering what it said in reply. Then there was the graphic-based interaction, which was originally intended to convey the sense of a logical, consistent environment like a physical object such as a desk, 'mapping' to direct physical manipulation of realworld objects, and operating on specific rules worked out in advance.
    ...er, things didn't exactly work out that way...

  117. What more could a Unix user want? by Tom+Christiansen · · Score: 3
    What more could a windows user want?
    An interesting question to some, perhaps, but even so, I suspect that this is far from the optimal forum in which to pose it, assuming you're interested in useful answers. :-)

    But I have a question that might stand a chance of being answered here. It is this: What more could a Unix user want? Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that KDE suffices to mollify those vendors and users who are really just interested in Winix. But what about the real hackers? What do they want?

    Obviously, it's not Winix. But what is it?

    1. Re:What more could a Unix user want? by quasimoto · · Score: 1

      Don't know. I use FreeBSD/KDE. As a platform it suits me just fine. Someone else will call me crazy because it is so 'limited' in the multimedia arena. Ok, I can live without some of the 'cute' things MS win98 does 'cause I don't want them. However, there is a place for my soon-to-be Corel Linux box. "the computer *is* the game", no? -d

    2. Re:What more could a Unix user want? by daviddennis · · Score: 2

      I don't know if I'm a typical Unix user. Compared to most Slashdotters, I suspect I have a touching ignorance of what's under the hood. But I've used a Unix-style operating system as my primary computing platform since circa 1994, so I think I can give you some hints.

      Right now, the environment I most like is SGI Irix. Buy a used SGI Indigo2, plug it in, turn it on and there it is: Once installed, everything works. Fonts work. Cut and paste works. Netscape works (well, it crashes too, but less than on other platforms). Xemacs works. The fonts work; I can read most of them without eyestrain. The user interface looks nothing like Windows95, so I can immediately get the feeling I'm not a Microsoft drone. The system is reliable; other than running out of disk space, I've had exactly zero problems with it.

      I'm not going to say my SGI machine is perfect - the 2GB system disk is a travesty, to tell the truth, and their upgrade prices are a comedy routine in and of themselves. But you can buy an old SGI for about the same as a similarly equipped PC, and if you upgrade it using off-the-shelf memory and disk, it's not expensive to feed.

      So, what would make me want to move on from Irix? Probably something like Enlightenment, something where the creator rethought everything from the start and produced a truly unique brainchild. Enlightenment also looks pretty, and I doubt that I'd have a SGI box if I didn't like pretty.

      But I'm not in a big hurry. If commercial software wasn't so expensive on the platform, I'd have no complaints whatsoever about SGI (other than the fact that SGI the company appears to be deserting loyal users such as myself).

      To get closer to an answer to the original poster's question, I think what "real" hackers want is a user interface that's not difficult to use, but which doesn't remind them of Windows. I think that to many, a different system should look, well, different. I miss the colourful world of operating systems of the past, from LISP machines to TENEX to ITS, where every machine was an intriguing new challenge.

      Now, it's more or less to Unix and Windows, and I daresay few hackers appreciate the latter. So we're left with just one OS to call our own. Depressing.

      (But Be's looking interesting. And I think that if you read the above, you can see Be's appeal quite clearly).

      D

      ----

  118. Curse you, !Browse... by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

    Apologies, but the browser I used to post that comment (!Browse on an Acorn RiscPC 600) managed to lop off three or four paragraphs that described how the new code made it a lot easier for people writing the applications.

    Say, if you want to add a print function. You wouldn't have to write some automatic Postscript generator, you'd simply get KDE/Qt (or Gnome?) to do it for you, using the exact same code used to draw whatever it was on the screen.

    The end result would be much faster development of new applications, and much less code-bloat due to common features being re-used so many times.

    And as a bonus, these desktop environments also look nice, too, and provide lots of common GUI features. :)

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  119. The same old tirade. by Roberto · · Score: 1

    Chris, you seem to repeat this mantra once every few months here or in usenet ;-)

    So your reason to use linux is to have things your Mac does not do. Big deal. I want linux to be good enough so that I don't need to even think on buying a mac, and I'm willing to spend my effort making it so.

    "I don't think either KDE or Gnome are remotely comparable to MacOS for usability."

    It's not a matter of thinking. Try them. Try them for a long while so you lose your MAC habits. Trying them briefly will simply make you hate them because anything that is not a Mac will be foreign to you.

    I personally believe your mac is probably better in usability. I also believe it's not so much better that it's worth paying even $100 for it, at least for MY use.

  120. The reason behind KDE by Roberto · · Score: 1

    Who told you KDE "is to woo people away from W95/NT in the corporate/business setting"?

    I write KDE programs for entirely different reasons, and I know for a fact that others have their own personal reasons that don;t match that either.

    Aren't you being way too quick to assign a motive to people you simply don't know?

    For what it's worth, most KDE people I have asked work in it for fun and to have a desktop they can use themselves, in that order.

  121. Oops...backbone correction by Lazaru5 · · Score: 1

    Laz`: we turned off uunet, to force more traffic out of Uu.Net

    I meant to say that we forced the traffic through Nap.Net.

    UU.Net = 1.544Mbps T1
    Nap.Net/GTEI/BBN = 100Mbps Ethernet

    --

    --
    My comments and opinions completely reflect those of anyone and anything I am remotely associated with.
  122. Why not in Debian's Distribution? by Cycon · · Score: 1

    I apologize if this has already been asked and answered, but:

    Does anyone know why KDE is not included as part of the debian distribution? I know that there are some licensing issues with QT 1.x, but are these not resolved in QT 2.x?

    Furthermore, when I check dselect's list of available packages, QT *is* available, in the non-free section. Why isn't KDE available in the non-free section therefore as well?

    PS: Yes, I am aware that deb packages are available directly from KDE, I just want to know why they're not included in the distibution by default.

    --
    Your Brain + EEG + LEGO Robots = Brainstorms
    1. Re:Why not in Debian's Distribution? by Roberto · · Score: 1

      Because Debian won't include it.
      As for their reasons, some Debian representative surely will be happy to explain.

      After they do, I suggest you ask him why they don't distribute the LGPL'd kdelibs package.

    2. Re:Why not in Debian's Distribution? by osu-neko · · Score: 1
      Does anyone know why KDE is not included as part of the debian distribution? I know that there are some licensing issues with QT 1.x, but are these not resolved in QT 2.x?

      Yes, the issues are resolved in QT2, but not in QT1. Since there is currently no version of KDE available based on QT2, it is irrelevant that these issues have been resolved in QT2. As long as the current version of KDE is based on QT1, it cannot be included in Debian.

      Furthermore, when I check dselect's list of available packages, QT *is* available, in the non-free section. Why isn't KDE available in the non-free section therefore as well?

      Why would KDE be in the non-free section? It's GPL, so it's free software. The problem with KDE is not that it's non-free or anything, the problem is that it's license conflicts with QT1's license in such a way that it's technically illegal to distribute KDE at all! This was pointed out to the KDE and QT developers. KDE never changed their license, and QT never changed their license for QT1, so as far as I know, it's still illegal to distribute QT1 based KDE. Most people do it anyways, but the Debian maintainers are somewhat pedantic. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of opinion, but that's the way it is...

      --

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  123. Which of course Orbit doesn't implement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thus the speed ;-)

    1. Re:Which of course Orbit doesn't implement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one on earth uses Orbit except for GNOME. KDE programmers would never use this library. Also, Orbit just implements a minor subset of CORBA.

  124. Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am on the Gnome list and kwm having more integration was specifically mentioned.

  125. *g* agh! I've been Robertoed! ;) by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 3

    I'm not sure whether to be pleased or insulted that my arguments are so memorable to top KDE people without having them actually convice said top KDE people ;) ("insulted!" ;) )
    It _is_ a matter of thinking. And yes, I _have_ tried both KDE and Gnome. KDE let me log onto the net using kppp before I'd even sorted out pppd. I owe KDE lasting thanks for being an important part of my Linux adoption process.
    That said, you're completely, stubbornly wrong about your assumption that it's all just a matter of habits. That's a crock: it's also both uneducated and insulting that you're claiming I hated KDE simply because it was unfamiliar- if that is the case, why did I enjoy bash? My objections to _BOTH_ KDE and Gnome are simply that they attempt to do desktop interface _badly_. They bring nothing new and make little or no effort to actually present a consistent, predictable visual 'picture' of the computer.
    In fairness, I will point out one of the major points that always leads me to this conclusion- I have never seen _any_ file manager, other than the MacOS Finder, that behaves as though the user's placement of an icon or object is in any way significant or worthy of notice. It's always 'and now we sort everything and line it up in neat rows, because we can'. I _realise_ that's what everybody but MacOS does, but can't you see that it screws up people's orientation? That's not how a desk behaves. On a desk, you put stuff down and it stays where you put it- witness the cluttered workbenches of a thousand techies all over the world. If someone came in and organised everything alphabetically, they would be _lost_. Why do you and just about every other GUI maker insist on taking control of the graphical objects and reshuffling them?
    To add to this, you may well do better than most X developers (particularly singling out the GNU developers, who should know better!) at providing keyboard shortcuts to operations. However, you seem to not have a clue as to how prevalent and consistent this is in the environment I'm talking about- it really loses you credibility to claim that my switching to KDE and doing everything that way is merely a matter of habit. You don't seem to know what you're talking about... so you insist, repeatedly, that it's just a matter of my being personally prejudiced against your way of doing things, which you maintain is not merely comparable but equal. Do you have _any_ _idea_ of how many millions of dollars a company like Apple spent on human interface design? On how many hundreds of hours designers like Bruce 'Tog' Tognazzini spent designing and testing and working to make these things sensible and usable? Have you actually read the work of others in this area? Hell, you could read _Microsoft_ Human Interface Guidelines- they don't obey their own rules, but they too have put the effort into this area, and that's for just one reason: it's not just a matter of what people are used to, there are actual rights and wrongs involved.
    I don't care if you say 'I personally believe your mac is probably better in usability'. I am saying this: as somebody who is concerned with human interface design, I would like to see you making less assumptions. Yes, the world is heavily biased (polluted?) due to the vast numbers of people who have been extensively taught Windows HI rules. Yes, I personally am out in left field using a Mac but espousing purely CLI human interface guidelines, something I haven't even really begun to properly develop on a large scale. Still, every time (and it's been several times, hasn't it?) I see you come back at a critisism with 'That's just your habits speaking, there's no difference so just try it and lose your other habits', I cringe. You CAN'T learn anything if you deny there's anything to learn. KDE is ill served by those assumptions. Keep them if you must- I choose to challenge them.

    1. Re:*g* agh! I've been Robertoed! ;) by Roberto · · Score: 2

      Disclaimer: I am far from "top" anything, and wether you want to feel insulted by what I say or not, I'm not sure I can fix, since I don;t think I was insulting. Whatever.

      "It _is_ a matter of thinking." Nonsense. You can't judge without experiencing.

      People hate unfamiliar interfaces. If you feel insulted by having that generalization applied to you, then I'd say you are too easily insulted to be worth arguing with.

      You are finding fault on KDE and GNOME at the same time for not being original and for not being identical to MACos. That's schizocriticism.

      KDE does make an effort to present a coherent representation of the computer. If you find the effort a failure, that's a whole different thing.

      "I have never seen _any_ file manager, other than the MacOS Finder, that behaves as though the
      user's placement of an icon or object is in any
      way significant or worthy of notice. It's always
      'and now we sort everything and line it up in neat
      rows, because we can'. I _realise_ that's what everybody but MacOS does, but can't you see that
      it screws up people's orientation? That's not how a desk behaves. "

      This paragraph by itself shows how prejudiced you are. Face it: your computer is not a desktop. You are not finding here that KDE or windows doesn't present a coherent representation of the computer, you are finding that they are not coherent to what you expect, because you expect them to behave like a MAC!. It's habit, TRAINING. Feel insulted already?

      If you think you are presenting a real problem a real windows user ever had, I challenge you to find me ONE reference to this that is not from a MAC user. Go ahead. My email is available.

      "your way of doing things, which you maintain is not merely comparable but equal"

      Go reread my post. Now understand it. Let it enter your pedantic brain. Now reread the part where I specifically say MACos is superior from a usability point of view. Now apologize.

      "You CAN'T learn anything if you deny there's anything to learn"

      Where the HELL did I say that? I suggest that, if you want to argue with voices in your head, you do it in a private place. All I am saying is that for most practical purposes, most people can adapt to one thing or the other without giving a damn, as soon as they had time to adapt.

      That's why there are 300 million windows users who would hate using a mac if it was placed in front of them tomorrow, but wouldn't care in 3 months.

      Now, reread your post. If you felt insulted by mine, how the fuck should I feel about yours?

      BTW: I don't know why, considering the pedantic ass you are, I always end helping you. Did you read my response to you on Usenet about your mail server thing from yesterday?

  126. $1550 for a license? by Woodrow+Stool · · Score: 1

    Jesus Christ ... that is a _ton_ of money for a fricking GUI library, and I say that coming from a DOS/Win16/Win32 background where we are used to spending real money for tools. $1550 is just crazy ... we spent less than that for our VAX Pascal compiler back in the "good old days".

    How about $295? They need to think "volume" - "discount it and they will come".

    $1550 ... no way. Let's clone it.

  127. I forgot to say this: by Roberto · · Score: 1

    Chris, despite what you seem to believe, it is perfectly possible to disagree with you and not be wrong, not be ignorant, know what I'm taking about and not being based on prejudice.

  128. Read the license. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Patches is only an example of the ways it can be distributed. You could just as easily set a CVS server with public access.

    Besides, if all you wanted was to keep a win32 port of latest version of Qt, you patch a whole 5 files or so.

    As for why the Open Source definition allows this: Because otherwise TeX would not be Open Source.
    Ditto about the FSF's definition of "free software".

    There is a file on TeX that can only be modified using an auxiliary web file, something awfully similar to a patch.

    1. Re:Read the license. by kijiki · · Score: 2

      "3. You may make modifications to the Software and distribute your modifications, in a form that is separate from the Software, such as patches."

      A form that is separate from the Software? So yes, a CVS server is allowed, but this prevents you from making tarballs for people who don't want to use CVS. My original argument stands unmodified. Source tarballs are the standard distribution method for free software. I can see no reason for trolltech to disallow that other than to prevent independant development forks.

    2. Re:Read the license. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make a tarball containing the original source, the patch and a two line script to merge it.
      That's how ROMs and .deb's are made.

    3. Re:Read the license. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make a tarball containing the original source, the patch and a two line script to merge it.
      That's how RPMs and .deb's are made.

    4. Re:Read the license. by Midnight+Coder · · Score: 1

      this prevents you from making tarballs for people who don't want to use CVS
      Not at all include a Make file in your source tarball to merge the patch and the original code.

      The Make file would be run when the other developer does a ./configure ; make install on your unpacked tarball. A version of the original QT source would be required as a dependency and could be distributed with your tarball of modifications.

      The real problem with forking QT is in making it better than the original version, few QT developers would help you as the Trolls are nice guys who are are actively improving QT.

      No one is doing it because it becuase it is a dumb idea not because anyone is preventing them.

  129. License+updates+support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, what the subject says :-)

  130. More proof that the GPL only works with the GPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not other free software licenses. And don't mention BSD, you have to change the BSD license of your app to GPL in order to release it.

  131. How Do I choose If I want to Use KDE1 or KDE2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How Do I choose If I want to Use KDE1 or KDE2 as a desktop after installing your rpms ? I have RH6.0

  132. Some Answers to What a Unix User Wants by Tom+Christiansen · · Score: 2
    Right now, all these systems are very Winix oriented. People have asked what a Unix user would want in a windowing system. Here are a few suggestions for how to make something that feels like Unix instead of Winix:
    • Make sure that in optimizing the program interface for the two-minute beginner, you haven't pessimized it for the two-year daily-user.
    • Keep it touch-typist friendly.
      • Let me keep my eyes on the screen at all times, not on the input peripherals.
      • Mimimize the context switches between mouse and keyboard. It slows me down. I can type much, much faster than I can mouse around.
      • Minimize all required mouse use, because it causes RSI. Let me keep my hands on the homerow as much as possible, not dancing around the funny keys that require me to look down to find, like HOME, END, PAGEUP, etc. Put those on real keys.
    • No prior Windows knowledge expected, required, nor in fact, even beneficial.
    • All programs, configurations, library functions, and interfaces must be completely documented.
    • Never make me do anything tedious and repetitive, like holding some an arrow key or a mouse for a long time just to move a large distance.
      • I shouldn't have to read the library code to figure out how Gtk works, nor existing themes to figure out how to make a new one
      • nor should I have to click on happycons to get some dribbled out set of web pages for how to run or configure a program
      • The documentation should searchable, indexable, typesettable, and printable.
      • Follow POSIX 1003.2 requirements that all commands have a minimal manpage.
    • Scriptability. Automatability. All the knobs need to be exposed either via raw text files or else normal CLI programs.
    • Respect for the user's existing preferences where applicable.
      • X defaults -- If I have *visualBell: on, then that should suffice for all applications.
      • stty settings -- If I think ^H is what I want to erase a character, don't make me use DEL or ^?, or worse still, the BACKSPACE key (which sends a ^H anyway) yet not Control-H). And if I have my werase set to ^W, pay attention to that, too.
      • Preferred editor -- if I have an editor setting in my environment, don't make me learn a new one just for your program. Most toolkits' text widgets have insultingly idiotic editing abilities -- pop up my preferred editor instead, or at least, give me that option. Perhaps prefered newsreader, shell, mailer, etc should come into play as well, but the sorry excuse for an editor is the most annoying thing.
    • A way to leverage existing knowledge of words. This may sound bizarre, but nothing is more frustrating to this Unix user than to have a program pop up a set of seventeen tiny graphical stickpin icons. Don't make me guess what your cutes idea of a neat bitmap for an exit or reload or search button is. Allow me the option of using real words, not happycons. And allow for keyboard shortcuts on all functionality.
    • Don't make me suffer through a tedious manual search through scads of cascading menus each time I want to find something. There is no way to search, analyse, or print a cascading menu system. This is insane. A common mechanism provided by the low-level toolkit and managed by the desktop or window manager must be invented. Life is too short for hunt and peck. For example, the window manager could provide a way to search the menus of the current focussed program for a particular text string. That way you never have waste your life on an idiotic recursive but linear visual search.
    That's enough for now. I'm sure it's far too late to expect almost anyone to read this. You might want to check out the short Unix as Literature or the longer In The Beginning for more background on Unix culture.
    1. Re:Some Answers to What a Unix User Wants by NME · · Score: 1

      Hey! That *is* what I want!

      I've just never been able to put it so well. Really, what's quicker: $ netscape &
      or
      Start->Programs->Netscape Communicator->communicator.

      Thanks


      -nme!

    2. Re:Some Answers to What a Unix User Wants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In KDE just do "Alt-F2 netscape". Simple.

  133. Koffice by ksaylor · · Score: 1

    Since the topic at hand is kde2.0, and compiling Koffice requires 2.0 snapshots, I actually would like to ask a question. First, has anybody been able to compile koffice with the latest snapshots(i.e., 19991107)? Second, if you have, how do I do it? I've been trying and trying. I get qt-2.1.0 to compile just fine, but I cannot get past that point. When I try to compile kdesupport-199911XX, I get a lot of missing or not used statements, and finally a reccursive error that kicks me out. I think the last missing integer is klast. Just a little info: I'm using both RH6.0 and OL2.3. Thanks.

  134. Seems like a lot of NIH by Mouse · · Score: 1

    It really depresses me to see the KDE team devoting so much time developing an HTML renderer when Mozilla's Gecko engine is a far better product and is in dire need of help. Imagine if their talents had been devoted to the greater good of Mozilla. Not only would KDE have a far more mature rendering engine(read support for HTML 4.0, CSS1 & 2, XML), but they could have contributed a great deal of the stability to Mozilla. I don't buy into any integration issues. According to Mosfet's own web site, KParts make the integration issue trival(note his integration of ghostscript and dvi). It also begs the question -- how much time could have been devoted to improving the desktop environment of KDE? Last I checked, we are pissed at Microsoft for bloating their desktop with a browser. These guys needs to stop including the kitchen sink and work on the nut and bolts -- a good desktop environment.

    Just to address the issue of competition. Competition is unnecessary in this situation. Obstensively, the KDE crew wants open source to succeed. Therefore, they should embrace the Mozilla project. It's success would drive their success and vica versa. But then, no one will ever accuse the KDE crew of being good, open source community members. Heaven forbid they help another project when it would also benefit them.

    It seems the Mosfet's ego was placed ahead of a good product management decision which points to larger general issue in open source projects. Egos seems to hamper projects, and in some cases, kill them. Established software engineering practice states that a project should maximize reuse. A common theme of projects that "roll their own" solutions is that the "reusable" piece wasn't quite good enough. The GNOME team's complaints about imlib are perfect example of this phenomenon. A GNOME user, I am not exactly thrilled that valuable time will be wsated developing a bew imaging library instead of either working with current imlib or with Raster to correct the perceived flaws. The bottom line in my mind is that these egos are impeding the progress of these projects, and clearly points out that open source is not perfect as some would portend.