I don't think I'd listen to the people who wrote KDE 4 either. And his largest critic doesn't believe in forks and never worked on KDE 3.5 in the first place. I really hope Trinity gets a few more developers as that is probably what I would try if I come back to Linux.
I agree but it took me a while to figure out why I like the button and hate auto-hide.
With auto-hide the computer decides when the panel is visible. With the button I decide when the panel is visible. I prefer the latter and hate the former.
If I still ran Linux, was on KDE 4.2 and trusted extensions maybe this would have minimized the pain. However, as I pointed out that this was far from my only gripe about KDE 4. I don't really want the Windows 7 Taskbar, I want Kasbar (which was included in base so please lets drop that entire it was 3rd party crap please). I dislike AutoHide, I liked the arrows or the option where it would drop behind the active window and reshow when the mouse was thrown in the corner. I liked the window decorations and options. I liked how easy it was to configure.
In short, you might be convinced that I should have liked KDE 4.2, etc. and my complaints are minor and easily resolved. I, however, used 5 different versions of KDE 4 over 2.5 years and hated every minute of it. Telling me about settings I couldn't figure out and extensions I didn't find and might not have installed if I had known about them doesn't help me or get me back at all. It is like going to your restaurant that made some fabulous changes. However, your food was cold and the service was awful and your bill was wrong. And you didn't go back just once, you went back 5 different times and every time your service was crappy and your food sucked. Eventually you stop eating there but you still feel a bit bitter every time you drive by.
I'm a database guy so this hurts to write. JWZ wrote an email client. It worked. Netscape decided to switch to a database. It didn't work. JWZ wrote about it in addition to his line that: "To a database person, every nail looks like a thumb. Or something like that."
http://www.jwz.org/doc/mailsum.html
No seriously, it doesn't exist. I went to your link, I went to download it and got a 404. When I said it doesn't exist what I meant was: IT DOESN'T EXIST!
So should I use the one that isn't stable or the one that isn't found (404)?
I am more than leery or using extensions as part of my core _anything_. Gnome Tweak means you don't have it. KDE plasmoids on kde-look means you don't have it. And this is an example of why, the software you gave a link to no longer exists.
I made it until at least 4.3 and probably 4.4 before I gave up and went back to Windows. And this is from someone who hadn't used Windows in 4 years. KDE 4.2 was didn't hold a candle to KDE 3.5 for me.
I care that it is much harder to configure. I care that the taskbar didn't work as well as 3.5 until I finally gave up and went back to Windows. Remember Kaskbar? Square Icons with a preview of the window. Exactly like Windows 7 before Windows 7. I'm positive that MS stole it from KDE. Could I figure out how to replicate it in KDE for the first couple of years? Nope. Finally give up? Yup. And have you ever looked at the bug reports on the auto-hide panels? Ugh, especially with dual monitor.
So yeah, I still miss my KDE 3.5 setup and have not found a way to replicate it with KDE 4 and I get upset when people keep saying that it works the same because it flat out doesn't. Right click for stay on top? Nope. Pin the window? Not through KDE 4.4 anyway. Change window decoration by right clicking Kaskbar? Hah! And the panels never sized correctly with 4.
You say 30 seconds; Microsoft says two weeks. http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/12/17/microsoft-2-week-learning-curve-for-windows-8/. Why should I believe you over Microsoft? Or maybe I should look at the Times? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/25/technology/personaltech/microsofts-windows-revamped-and-split-in-2.html?_r=0 Anyhow, I think I'll just stick to Win 7 rather than trusting your personal anecdote and bad analogies.
So why switch? If there is no difference why not save the money and keep running Win 7 Pro? You are advocating like a paid shill to switch to Win 8 but have yet to give an actual advantage to using it.
You didn't read the article about the iCrash did you? Where knobs are do matter. The iDrive in 2004 was so bad they had to have a class for new drivers and Consumer Reports refused to recommend BMWs until the problems with the interface were mitigated. Obviously this was an extreme example. However, the interface for computers is much more complicated than the steering wheel. Which you should notice they aren't mucking about with looking for some better paradigm.
I have watched multiple people do the transition on mac and 2 weeks is a conservative estimate. There are plenty of anecdotes about Win 8 being a multiple day transition. Three weeks is the often quoted Gnome transition.
Seriously, awful car analogy aside, why the hell would I try Windows 8?
Better car analogy: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/12/automobiles/menus-behaving-badly.html
What would be silly would be to pay to "upgrade" to an operating system that has a serious learning curve. I have neither the money, the inclination or the time to learn a new OS. That goes for Mac, Gnome, KDE and Windows 8 at this point. At some point I'll be compelled to switch. But the, "after three weeks I really liked it" and "you can actually accomplish many of the same things" are hardly compelling reasons.
Now put yourself in the shoes of a CTO and CFO. Do you want to pay for a rollout where you know your productivity will significantly drop for two plus weeks? And at the end of a month your employees might be 3 to 5 minutes more effective per day. But this is the optimal scenario of Win 8, KDE and Gnome. Not a personal or business case I find compelling. Actually I feel pretty compelled to stick w/ XP and Win 7 because I can get my work done. Maybe I'll look at Trinity again. Bah, get off my lawn.
Which is why, even w/ a hand me down mac I use an older, smaller windows machine to actually get work done. Also why KDE4 and Gnome seem like such a bad idea to me. I liked my customized KDE 3.5. I don't have three or four weeks to get use to a different workflow or a new "paradigm" or whatever crap Sergio is pushing today.
I'm pretty sure I'll miss it. Left KDE when they dropped Kaskbar. Use Win 7 Taskbar extensively. Find Macs Doc a sad replacement. And I almost never look at the desktop. Plus, I frequently switch windows / tasks.
Personally I would be more inclined to use Thunderbird if they had stopped developing years ago. They started stealing short cut keys that had been in use since Netscape 3.0. Their "fix" (or rather "not broke / won't fix") to an unreadable client was to install and unspecified and unsupported theme. Their "fix" (or rather "not broke / won't fix") for those of us who need to manually configure settings was to unplug / turnoff wireless and wait five minutes for the wizard to give up. The more I looked at it the more I became convinced that a previously solid email client had become kludgy by design and hostile to its users.
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/07/kids-today/ Is an interesting read about some issues but there are scads more.
As for oil companies, and I'll include the Koch brothers as they are oily enough, here you go. One day you too will be able to use google. Interesting that they spend more money on media blitzes and propaganda than actual research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial Scientists (notably climatologists) have reached scientific consensus that global warming is occurring and is mainly due to human activity.[17] However, political and public debate continues regarding the reality and extent of global warming and the economics of possible responses. Numerous authors, including several scholars, say that some conservative think tanks, corporations and business groups have engaged in deliberate denial of the science of climate change since the 1990s.[7][8][15][18][19][20][21]
Wikipedia: California, 2010 Koch subsidiary donates $1 million to stop Calif. GHG law In September 2010, a company controlled by the Koch brothers donated $1 million to the campaign to pass Proposition 23, the Suspend AB 32 California ballot initiative that would halt the state's global warming law. The contribution came from Flint Hills Resources, a Kansas petrochemical company that is a subsidiary of Koch Industries. The Koch donation came a day after Tesoro, a Texas oil company that has been bankrolling the pro-Prop 23 campaign, put $1 million into the campaign coffers. According to the No Prop 23 campaign, 97 percent of the $8.2 million raised by the Yes forces has been given by oil-related interests and 89 percent of that money has come from out of state. Three companies, Koch Industries, Tesoro, and Valero -- another Texas-based oil company -- have provided 80 percent of those funds.[68] Other Koch funding Koch-funded organizations According to the 2010 report by Greenpeace, Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine, Koch has out-spent ExxonMobil in funding climate change denial. From 2005 to 2008, ExxonMobil spent $8.9 million, while the Koch Industries-controlled foundations contributed $24.9 million in funding to organizations of climate change skeptics. Efforts include: More than $5 million to Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP) for its nationwide “Hot Air Tour” campaign opposing clean energy and climate legislation. More than $1 million to the Heritage Foundation, which writes about climate and environmental policy issues. Over $1 million to the Cato Institute, which disputes the scientific evidence behind global warming, questions the rationale for taking climate action, and has been heavily involved in spinning the recent ClimateGate story. $800,000 to the Manhattan Institute, which has hosted Bjorn Lomborg twice in the last two years, a prominent media spokesperson who challenges and attacks policy measures to address climate change. $365,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE), which advocates against taking action on climate change because warming is “inevitable” and expensive to address. $360,000 to Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy (PRIPP) which supported and funded An Inconvenient Truth...or Convenient Fiction, a film attacking the science of global warming and intended as a rebuttal to former Vice-President Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth (PRIPP also threatened to sue the U.S. Government for listing the polar bear as an endangered species.) $325,000 to the Tax Foundation, which issued a misleading study
Please also remember that oil companies will at times only let the results be released when favorable or won't bother to fund research if they don't expect it to be favorable.
Here is the key, 97% of climate scientist believe in anthropological global warming. What all of us spew on different forums doesn't change that one bit. And the entire, "they are just doing it for the funding" is insulting to scientist and stupid if you think about who has the money.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think I'd listen to the people who wrote KDE 4 either. And his largest critic doesn't believe in forks and never worked on KDE 3.5 in the first place. I really hope Trinity gets a few more developers as that is probably what I would try if I come back to Linux.
I actually feel like KDE and Gnome were the traitors, not me. If Windows 9 is anything like Windows 8 I'm going to have a huge problem.
Or it will still be 2% as that is how percentages work.
No.
Vi(m) is a text editor. Some of us don't know what emacs is anymore. Personally I'm waiting for them to release their own kernel.
Who would put a recreational area next to the sewage treatment plant?
I agree but it took me a while to figure out why I like the button and hate auto-hide.
With auto-hide the computer decides when the panel is visible. With the button I decide when the panel is visible. I prefer the latter and hate the former.
If I still ran Linux, was on KDE 4.2 and trusted extensions maybe this would have minimized the pain. However, as I pointed out that this was far from my only gripe about KDE 4. I don't really want the Windows 7 Taskbar, I want Kasbar (which was included in base so please lets drop that entire it was 3rd party crap please). I dislike AutoHide, I liked the arrows or the option where it would drop behind the active window and reshow when the mouse was thrown in the corner. I liked the window decorations and options. I liked how easy it was to configure. In short, you might be convinced that I should have liked KDE 4.2, etc. and my complaints are minor and easily resolved. I, however, used 5 different versions of KDE 4 over 2.5 years and hated every minute of it. Telling me about settings I couldn't figure out and extensions I didn't find and might not have installed if I had known about them doesn't help me or get me back at all. It is like going to your restaurant that made some fabulous changes. However, your food was cold and the service was awful and your bill was wrong. And you didn't go back just once, you went back 5 different times and every time your service was crappy and your food sucked. Eventually you stop eating there but you still feel a bit bitter every time you drive by.
I'm a database guy so this hurts to write. JWZ wrote an email client. It worked. Netscape decided to switch to a database. It didn't work. JWZ wrote about it in addition to his line that: "To a database person, every nail looks like a thumb. Or something like that." http://www.jwz.org/doc/mailsum.html
No seriously, it doesn't exist. I went to your link, I went to download it and got a 404. When I said it doesn't exist what I meant was: IT DOESN'T EXIST!
Kasbar was part of the BASE PACKAGE in KDE 3.5. It was included in at least three different distributions that I tried back in the day.
And now I'm suppose to install plasmoids that don't exist.
"Kasbar is included in the kdebase package" - http://xmelegance.org/kasbar/index.html
If it is in the official release I'm counting it. And no official or semi-official replacement.
So should I use the one that isn't stable or the one that isn't found (404)?
I am more than leery or using extensions as part of my core _anything_. Gnome Tweak means you don't have it. KDE plasmoids on kde-look means you don't have it. And this is an example of why, the software you gave a link to no longer exists.
I made it until at least 4.3 and probably 4.4 before I gave up and went back to Windows. And this is from someone who hadn't used Windows in 4 years. KDE 4.2 was didn't hold a candle to KDE 3.5 for me.
And where is my Kaskbar?
I care that it is much harder to configure. I care that the taskbar didn't work as well as 3.5 until I finally gave up and went back to Windows. Remember Kaskbar? Square Icons with a preview of the window. Exactly like Windows 7 before Windows 7. I'm positive that MS stole it from KDE. Could I figure out how to replicate it in KDE for the first couple of years? Nope. Finally give up? Yup. And have you ever looked at the bug reports on the auto-hide panels? Ugh, especially with dual monitor.
So yeah, I still miss my KDE 3.5 setup and have not found a way to replicate it with KDE 4 and I get upset when people keep saying that it works the same because it flat out doesn't. Right click for stay on top? Nope. Pin the window? Not through KDE 4.4 anyway. Change window decoration by right clicking Kaskbar? Hah! And the panels never sized correctly with 4.
You say 30 seconds; Microsoft says two weeks. http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/12/17/microsoft-2-week-learning-curve-for-windows-8/. Why should I believe you over Microsoft? Or maybe I should look at the Times? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/25/technology/personaltech/microsofts-windows-revamped-and-split-in-2.html?_r=0 Anyhow, I think I'll just stick to Win 7 rather than trusting your personal anecdote and bad analogies.
So why switch? If there is no difference why not save the money and keep running Win 7 Pro? You are advocating like a paid shill to switch to Win 8 but have yet to give an actual advantage to using it.
You didn't read the article about the iCrash did you? Where knobs are do matter. The iDrive in 2004 was so bad they had to have a class for new drivers and Consumer Reports refused to recommend BMWs until the problems with the interface were mitigated. Obviously this was an extreme example. However, the interface for computers is much more complicated than the steering wheel. Which you should notice they aren't mucking about with looking for some better paradigm.
I have watched multiple people do the transition on mac and 2 weeks is a conservative estimate. There are plenty of anecdotes about Win 8 being a multiple day transition. Three weeks is the often quoted Gnome transition.
Seriously, awful car analogy aside, why the hell would I try Windows 8?
Better car analogy: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/12/automobiles/menus-behaving-badly.html
What would be silly would be to pay to "upgrade" to an operating system that has a serious learning curve. I have neither the money, the inclination or the time to learn a new OS. That goes for Mac, Gnome, KDE and Windows 8 at this point. At some point I'll be compelled to switch. But the, "after three weeks I really liked it" and "you can actually accomplish many of the same things" are hardly compelling reasons.
Now put yourself in the shoes of a CTO and CFO. Do you want to pay for a rollout where you know your productivity will significantly drop for two plus weeks? And at the end of a month your employees might be 3 to 5 minutes more effective per day. But this is the optimal scenario of Win 8, KDE and Gnome. Not a personal or business case I find compelling. Actually I feel pretty compelled to stick w/ XP and Win 7 because I can get my work done. Maybe I'll look at Trinity again. Bah, get off my lawn.
They control 95%+ of the desktop / laptop market. You know, machines for getting work done. Business machines. So yeah, I'd say they have a monopoly.
Which is why, even w/ a hand me down mac I use an older, smaller windows machine to actually get work done. Also why KDE4 and Gnome seem like such a bad idea to me. I liked my customized KDE 3.5. I don't have three or four weeks to get use to a different workflow or a new "paradigm" or whatever crap Sergio is pushing today.
I'm pretty sure I'll miss it. Left KDE when they dropped Kaskbar. Use Win 7 Taskbar extensively. Find Macs Doc a sad replacement. And I almost never look at the desktop. Plus, I frequently switch windows / tasks.
Personally I would be more inclined to use Thunderbird if they had stopped developing years ago. They started stealing short cut keys that had been in use since Netscape 3.0. Their "fix" (or rather "not broke / won't fix") to an unreadable client was to install and unspecified and unsupported theme. Their "fix" (or rather "not broke / won't fix") for those of us who need to manually configure settings was to unplug / turnoff wireless and wait five minutes for the wizard to give up. The more I looked at it the more I became convinced that a previously solid email client had become kludgy by design and hostile to its users.
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/07/kids-today/ Is an interesting read about some issues but there are scads more.
So scientist at NOAA don't need outside funding and are independent; yet they believe in global warming.
http://www.noaa.gov/climate.html
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/globalwarming.html
As for oil companies, and I'll include the Koch brothers as they are oily enough, here you go. One day you too will be able to use google. Interesting that they spend more money on media blitzes and propaganda than actual research.
http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/safety_climate_gcep-research.aspx
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/exxon-still-aids-climate-sceptics/story-e6frg6so-1225894256861
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-sceptics-funding
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/24/tea-party-climate-change-deniers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial
Scientists (notably climatologists) have reached scientific consensus that global warming is occurring and is mainly due to human activity.[17] However, political and public debate continues regarding the reality and extent of global warming and the economics of possible responses. Numerous authors, including several scholars, say that some conservative think tanks, corporations and business groups have engaged in deliberate denial of the science of climate change since the 1990s.[7][8][15][18][19][20][21]
Wikipedia:
California, 2010
Koch subsidiary donates $1 million to stop Calif. GHG law
In September 2010, a company controlled by the Koch brothers donated $1 million to the campaign to pass Proposition 23, the Suspend AB 32 California ballot initiative that would halt the state's global warming law. The contribution came from Flint Hills Resources, a Kansas petrochemical company that is a subsidiary of Koch Industries. The Koch donation came a day after Tesoro, a Texas oil company that has been bankrolling the pro-Prop 23 campaign, put $1 million into the campaign coffers. According to the No Prop 23 campaign, 97 percent of the $8.2 million raised by the Yes forces has been given by oil-related interests and 89 percent of that money has come from out of state. Three companies, Koch Industries, Tesoro, and Valero -- another Texas-based oil company -- have provided 80 percent of those funds.[68]
Other Koch funding
Koch-funded organizations
According to the 2010 report by Greenpeace, Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine, Koch has out-spent ExxonMobil in funding climate change denial. From 2005 to 2008, ExxonMobil spent $8.9 million, while the Koch Industries-controlled foundations contributed $24.9 million in funding to organizations of climate change skeptics. Efforts include:
More than $5 million to Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP) for its nationwide “Hot Air Tour” campaign opposing clean energy and climate legislation.
More than $1 million to the Heritage Foundation, which writes about climate and environmental policy issues.
Over $1 million to the Cato Institute, which disputes the scientific evidence behind global warming, questions the rationale for taking climate action, and has been heavily involved in spinning the recent ClimateGate story.
$800,000 to the Manhattan Institute, which has hosted Bjorn Lomborg twice in the last two years, a prominent media spokesperson who challenges and attacks policy measures to address climate change.
$365,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE), which advocates against taking action on climate change because warming is “inevitable” and expensive to address.
$360,000 to Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy (PRIPP) which supported and funded An Inconvenient Truth...or Convenient Fiction, a film attacking the science of global warming and intended as a rebuttal to former Vice-President Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth (PRIPP also threatened to sue the U.S. Government for listing the polar bear as an endangered species.)
$325,000 to the Tax Foundation, which issued a misleading study
Citation?
Please also remember that oil companies will at times only let the results be released when favorable or won't bother to fund research if they don't expect it to be favorable.
Here is the key, 97% of climate scientist believe in anthropological global warming. What all of us spew on different forums doesn't change that one bit. And the entire, "they are just doing it for the funding" is insulting to scientist and stupid if you think about who has the money.