How about KOffice, it is a more pleasant to work with than OpenOffice, and does not take the route of Microsoft's add-features-that-1%-of-the-population-uses way of developing Microsoft Office. Also, it actually features integration with the underlying desktop, unlike OpenOffice.
> add some SVG boys, KDE is starting to look butt-ugly:
> http://jimmac.musichall.cz/screenshots/e-sync.jpeg
KDE already has SVG support in two different implementations. KDE's own and Qt's.
Also, I have yet to see transcluesent menus like in KDE:
http://www.mosfet.org/hpl1.png
KDE -- the desktop that doesn't have to continuously play catchup
> KDE programs are
> very slow to compile
use./configure --enable-final
this reduces compile times by more than half, in my experience
> and load.
Use objprelink.
> but the point is that KDE is a hell of a lot slower than GNOME.
From what? Load times? Look at other big applications written in C++ and compiled in g++, like Mozilla and OpenOffice. They tend to load slow too. If you actually look at speed of applications, KDE wins hands down. Konqueror versus Nautilus. Konqueror wins. KOffice versus StarOffice/OO, KOffice wins. Other components tend to be around the same speed.
> So, from my perspective, which is not that of a compiler designer, GNOME is a lot freaking faster than KDE.
Yeah, "ordinary users" don't even compile KDE or GNOME.
KDE already does this for all large icons. It has since KDE 2.1.
kcontrol->Icons->blend alpha channel
Currently, it uses software rendering to do it (Konq. seems a lot faster than Nautilus). KDE 3 will use xrender to do it, which will be hardware accelerrated (and so, there will be no performance hit because the video card handles it instead of the CPU).
KDE 1.0 vs. Nothing: KDE 1.0
KDE 1.1 vs. Nothing: KDE 1.0
KDE 1.2 vs. GNOME 1.0: KDE 1.2
KDE 1.2 vs. GNOME 1.2: GNOME 1.2
KDE 2.0 vs. GNOME 1.2: both (but more GNOME 1.2)
KDE 2.1 vs. GNOME 1.2: KDE 2.1
KDE 2.2 vs. GNOME 1.4: KDE 2.2
KDE 3.0 vs. GNOME 2.0: I probably will use KDE 3.0
Frankly speaking, both DE's are good, but I like KDE better since 2.0. Right now, I prefer KDE a lot more than GNOME. It's more mature, more stable, and has more features that I want and need. The only downside I can think of with KDE was the lack of eye candy and customizability. But, KDE 2.1 and KDE 2.2 really seemed to fill in the gap. KDE 2.2's panel is about as customizable as GNOME 1.4's panel. The theme support is about the same (although there is nothing like the KDE Liquid theme, with transparent menus, shadowed text, and strippled window backgrounds for GNOME). I think that the rest of the "look" aspect is better for KDE. It has builtin antialiasing (gdkxft for GNOME doesn't work for everything). I also like the alpha transparent icons in KDE. I think KDE 3.0 will really shine because of the builtin xrender support in Qt. This should allow stuff like truly transparent terminals and windows:).
KDE also seems to be faster in some areas (Konq. vs. Nautilus, for example). Most of the rest of speed is about the same (provided kde uses objprelink). Application support is about the same.
I think that the biggest thing going for KDE is probably that it is a lot more intregrated than GNOME is. I think that that's what a "desktop environment" should be, after all.
Yeah, I've heard about multi-gnome-terminal. I doubt that it looks nicer. The KDE default hicolor theme is imho, one of the best designed widget styles EVER. Another good one is Mosfet's liquid engine. There is __NO__ gtk+ engine/theme that can do what liquid does. And yes, KDE 2.2 added a lot of "effects", that GNOME does not have. Also, Qt, unlike gtk+, has builtin xft support for antialiasing (yes, I've tried gdkxft, but it doesn't antialias all apps and is not builtin). I'd say that KDE has a huge lead in the eye candy department for now. Gnome2/Gtk2 will have this builtin, but Qt3 adds complete xrender support, so it'll be interesting to see who wins in the next round:).
I think KDE and GNOME take about the sametime to bootup, I've tried both. I'd say they are equal here.
Nautilus is getting a lot better, but in terms of FEATURES, it's still not as good as Konqueror. Konqueror can basically replace an entire WINDOW MANAGER if you want it to. For example, open a new Konqueror window, split it into three frames. Open up a console frame in one, keep the file manager in another, and open a webpage in another. You simply cannot do these with Nautilus. Also, there are a lot of useful kioslaves, very few which have good, working, equivalents in Nautilus. Also, konqueror is a lot more useful for webbrowsing than Nautilus. Although Nautilus can view webpages (either through gtkhtml or gecko), it really is not designed to be a Web Browser like Konqueror is (ever wonder why Nautilus is always referred to as a File Manager?) I'd say KDE has a big lead over GNOME in file browsing until Nautilus can get as many features as Konqueror has.
As for reusable applications, KDE has a big lead over GNOME in this. And it has ever since KDE2, dcop, and kparts. Bonobo, although it has existed before kparts, has changed around so much that it simply isn't used much (yet, hopefully will change with gnome2).
Well, actually, KDE 3 alphas have not come out yet. The first one is due Friday, afaik. However, most of the rest of your comment is correct, I think. KDE 3 will probably come out sooner than GNOME 2.0 will too (KDE 3 alpha1 is a usable as a end-user desktop, while GNOME alpha1 seems to be a technology preview). So, according the the latest KDE 3 release timeline, it should come out in February.
well, I think that we are sliding down the path to becoming a police state. It's actually pretty popular right now.
Don't beleive me? look at the latest gallup polls here.
What was particularily shocking was this:
Requiring Arabs, including those who are U.S. citizens, to carry a special ID.
49% supported this, and 49% opposed it. That is incredibly insane. Perhaps those 49% who supported it should be especially identified for being morons:).
Yes, but that's only pseudo-transparency. Real transparency/transcluency can only be acheived with xrender. Note, I'm talking about everything under the transparent window showing through, not jus the root image.
Re:KDE fscking up systems
on
KDE 2.2.1 Up
·
· Score: 1
kde doesn't fsck up glibc.. blame the packagers/distro (they might be the same)
Re:What defines a Desktop
on
KDE 2.2.1 Up
·
· Score: 1
I'd say show them KDE and gnome first.. they are probably used to a desktop environment..
you probably want to show them KDE first because (imho) it's a much more "complete" desktop. But that is probably personal taste.
Check out http://doc.trolltech.com/3.0/keyfeatures30.html
it's the main changes between qt 2.3.x and 3.0 (beta 5, which came out yesterday)...
mind you, that this list is only the main changes, and there have been numerous more...
the things that I suppose are the most interesting imho are:
improved xrender support (should be about to do things like transparent konsoles in kde3)
new database support
the text editing widget, used in kword, afaik
In my experience, kde's "feel" is a lot better. It is a lot more tightly intregrated. As for the look, I don't think any gtk theme can match mosfet's liquid theme. For the look it provides, you'd expect the traditional eye candy bloat, but it's actually really really fast. I also tend to like kde apps more because they tend to intregrate better with each other and the desktop.
Yeah same here.. we've see konqueror usage go up with every KDE release to the point where it is about the same as Netscape/Mozilla. But still, nothing beats IE in terms of usage.
Re:What can be done about terrorism?
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
Christians have had their militant-in-the-name-of-religion past too. Think about the Spanish in the reconquista. Think about the crusaders. Think about the conquistadors. Think about the imperialists. Hell, think about the Americans nearly decimating the Native Americans in the territory of the United States (a lot of tribes were lost, and all of them shrunk in size by a lot).
As for predominatly Muslim countries which have/had peaceful relations with the rest of the world, look at Turkey. They've even had a women head of state this decade.
Another _was_ Pakistan. Although they are in the shitter right now.
Another _was_ Iran (f.m.a. Persia). They were quite open until 1979. Well, actually, the Shah was prolly not moderate. He was very pro-Western, which tends to piss of Converatives in countries. It'd be like if suddenly, the US had an autocrat who was extremely liberal, legalized all drugs, legalized homosexual marriages, etc.. I'd guarentee that there'd be a revolution by the countless number of Conservate Christians living in this country.
Another is Bangladesh. They have a women head of state.
Another is Indonesia.
I'm sure there are countless more.
Re:Islam logged off from the Koran long ago
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
I won't respond to the regime part, because that extends beyond religions, but if you want to look at a predominatly Muslim country which has had all of these, look at Turkey. They've even had a women head of state this decade.
Another _was_ Pakistan. Although they are in the shitter right now.
Another _was_ Iran (f.m.a. Persia). They were quite open until 1979. Well, actually, the Shah was prolly not moderate. He was very pro-Western, which tends to piss of Converatives in countries. It'd be like if suddenly, the US had an autocrat who was extremely liberal, legalized all drugs, legalized homosexual marriages, etc.. I'd guarentee that there'd be a revolution by the countless number of Conservate Christians living in this country.
Another is Bangladesh. They have a women head of state.
Slashdot Mirror
> http://jimmac.musichall.cz/screenshots/OpenOffice. jpeg
g
How about KOffice, it is a more pleasant to work with than OpenOffice, and does not take the route of Microsoft's add-features-that-1%-of-the-population-uses way of developing Microsoft Office. Also, it actually features integration with the underlying desktop, unlike OpenOffice.
> add some SVG boys, KDE is starting to look butt-ugly:
> http://jimmac.musichall.cz/screenshots/e-sync.jpe
KDE already has SVG support in two different implementations. KDE's own and Qt's.
Also, I have yet to see transcluesent menus like in KDE:
http://www.mosfet.org/hpl1.png
KDE -- the desktop that doesn't have to continuously play catchup
> KDE programs are ./configure --enable-final
> very slow to compile
use
this reduces compile times by more than half, in my experience
> and load.
Use objprelink.
> but the point is that KDE is a hell of a lot slower than GNOME.
From what? Load times? Look at other big applications written in C++ and compiled in g++, like Mozilla and OpenOffice. They tend to load slow too. If you actually look at speed of applications, KDE wins hands down. Konqueror versus Nautilus. Konqueror wins. KOffice versus StarOffice/OO, KOffice wins. Other components tend to be around the same speed.
> So, from my perspective, which is not that of a compiler designer, GNOME is a lot freaking faster than KDE.
Yeah, "ordinary users" don't even compile KDE or GNOME.
KDE already does this for all large icons. It has since KDE 2.1.
kcontrol->Icons->blend alpha channel
Currently, it uses software rendering to do it (Konq. seems a lot faster than Nautilus). KDE 3 will use xrender to do it, which will be hardware accelerrated (and so, there will be no performance hit because the video card handles it instead of the CPU).
No, actually almost all cards in XFree 4.1 have xrender support. And so has the closed-src NVIDIA driver for almost 8 months now.
What I've used:
:).
KDE 1.0 vs. Nothing: KDE 1.0
KDE 1.1 vs. Nothing: KDE 1.0
KDE 1.2 vs. GNOME 1.0: KDE 1.2
KDE 1.2 vs. GNOME 1.2: GNOME 1.2
KDE 2.0 vs. GNOME 1.2: both (but more GNOME 1.2)
KDE 2.1 vs. GNOME 1.2: KDE 2.1
KDE 2.2 vs. GNOME 1.4: KDE 2.2
KDE 3.0 vs. GNOME 2.0: I probably will use KDE 3.0
Frankly speaking, both DE's are good, but I like KDE better since 2.0. Right now, I prefer KDE a lot more than GNOME. It's more mature, more stable, and has more features that I want and need. The only downside I can think of with KDE was the lack of eye candy and customizability. But, KDE 2.1 and KDE 2.2 really seemed to fill in the gap. KDE 2.2's panel is about as customizable as GNOME 1.4's panel. The theme support is about the same (although there is nothing like the KDE Liquid theme, with transparent menus, shadowed text, and strippled window backgrounds for GNOME). I think that the rest of the "look" aspect is better for KDE. It has builtin antialiasing (gdkxft for GNOME doesn't work for everything). I also like the alpha transparent icons in KDE. I think KDE 3.0 will really shine because of the builtin xrender support in Qt. This should allow stuff like truly transparent terminals and windows
KDE also seems to be faster in some areas (Konq. vs. Nautilus, for example). Most of the rest of speed is about the same (provided kde uses objprelink). Application support is about the same.
I think that the biggest thing going for KDE is probably that it is a lot more intregrated than GNOME is. I think that that's what a "desktop environment" should be, after all.
Yeah, I've heard about multi-gnome-terminal. I doubt that it looks nicer. The KDE default hicolor theme is imho, one of the best designed widget styles EVER. Another good one is Mosfet's liquid engine. There is __NO__ gtk+ engine/theme that can do what liquid does. And yes, KDE 2.2 added a lot of "effects", that GNOME does not have. Also, Qt, unlike gtk+, has builtin xft support for antialiasing (yes, I've tried gdkxft, but it doesn't antialias all apps and is not builtin). I'd say that KDE has a huge lead in the eye candy department for now. Gnome2/Gtk2 will have this builtin, but Qt3 adds complete xrender support, so it'll be interesting to see who wins in the next round :).
I think KDE and GNOME take about the sametime to bootup, I've tried both. I'd say they are equal here.
Nautilus is getting a lot better, but in terms of FEATURES, it's still not as good as Konqueror. Konqueror can basically replace an entire WINDOW MANAGER if you want it to. For example, open a new Konqueror window, split it into three frames. Open up a console frame in one, keep the file manager in another, and open a webpage in another. You simply cannot do these with Nautilus. Also, there are a lot of useful kioslaves, very few which have good, working, equivalents in Nautilus. Also, konqueror is a lot more useful for webbrowsing than Nautilus. Although Nautilus can view webpages (either through gtkhtml or gecko), it really is not designed to be a Web Browser like Konqueror is (ever wonder why Nautilus is always referred to as a File Manager?) I'd say KDE has a big lead over GNOME in file browsing until Nautilus can get as many features as Konqueror has.
As for reusable applications, KDE has a big lead over GNOME in this. And it has ever since KDE2, dcop, and kparts. Bonobo, although it has existed before kparts, has changed around so much that it simply isn't used much (yet, hopefully will change with gnome2).
Actually, QT is GPL, Gtk+ *is not*.
The terminal is nicer?
How it gnome-terminal nicer than konsole?
Konsole's biggest feature is it's multiple terms in one window, of couse.
Well, actually, KDE 3 alphas have not come out yet. The first one is due Friday, afaik. However, most of the rest of your comment is correct, I think. KDE 3 will probably come out sooner than GNOME 2.0 will too (KDE 3 alpha1 is a usable as a end-user desktop, while GNOME alpha1 seems to be a technology preview). So, according the the latest KDE 3 release timeline, it should come out in February.
almost same here
Because Halflife sucks compared to quake3
And Counterstrike sucks compared to Urban Terror (http://www.urbanterror.net/)
How is it weak and futile?
This is a bit redundant, but,
From the 1999 US State Department human rights report:
"Women and girls were subjected to rape, kidnaping, and forced marriage, particularly in areas outside of Taliban control."
well, I think that we are sliding down the path to becoming a police state. It's actually pretty popular right now.
:).
Don't beleive me? look at the latest gallup polls here.
What was particularily shocking was this:
Requiring Arabs, including those who are U.S. citizens, to carry a special ID.
49% supported this, and 49% opposed it. That is incredibly insane. Perhaps those 49% who supported it should be especially identified for being morons
Yes, but that's only pseudo-transparency. Real transparency/transcluency can only be acheived with xrender. Note, I'm talking about everything under the transparent window showing through, not jus the root image.
kde doesn't fsck up glibc.. blame the packagers/distro (they might be the same)
I'd say show them KDE and gnome first.. they are probably used to a desktop environment..
you probably want to show them KDE first because (imho) it's a much more "complete" desktop. But that is probably personal taste.
Check out http://doc.trolltech.com/3.0/keyfeatures30.html
it's the main changes between qt 2.3.x and 3.0 (beta 5, which came out yesterday)...
mind you, that this list is only the main changes, and there have been numerous more...
the things that I suppose are the most interesting imho are:
improved xrender support (should be about to do things like transparent konsoles in kde3)
new database support
the text editing widget, used in kword, afaik
bitch at redhat to make kde the default desktop
6 months isn't a long time till kde 3 ;p
In my experience, kde's "feel" is a lot better. It is a lot more tightly intregrated. As for the look, I don't think any gtk theme can match mosfet's liquid theme. For the look it provides, you'd expect the traditional eye candy bloat, but it's actually really really fast. I also tend to like kde apps more because they tend to intregrate better with each other and the desktop.
Actually, it is not. It's a proprietary Microsoft standard.
Yeah same here.. we've see konqueror usage go up with every KDE release to the point where it is about the same as Netscape/Mozilla. But still, nothing beats IE in terms of usage.
Christians have had their militant-in-the-name-of-religion past too. Think about the Spanish in the reconquista. Think about the crusaders. Think about the conquistadors. Think about the imperialists. Hell, think about the Americans nearly decimating the Native Americans in the territory of the United States (a lot of tribes were lost, and all of them shrunk in size by a lot).
As for predominatly Muslim countries which have/had peaceful relations with the rest of the world, look at Turkey. They've even had a women head of state this decade.
Another _was_ Pakistan. Although they are in the shitter right now.
Another _was_ Iran (f.m.a. Persia). They were quite open until 1979. Well, actually, the Shah was prolly not moderate. He was very pro-Western, which tends to piss of Converatives in countries. It'd be like if suddenly, the US had an autocrat who was extremely liberal, legalized all drugs, legalized homosexual marriages, etc.. I'd guarentee that there'd be a revolution by the countless number of Conservate Christians living in this country.
Another is Bangladesh. They have a women head of state.
Another is Indonesia.
I'm sure there are countless more.
I won't respond to the regime part, because that extends beyond religions, but if you want to look at a predominatly Muslim country which has had all of these, look at Turkey. They've even had a women head of state this decade.
Another _was_ Pakistan. Although they are in the shitter right now.
Another _was_ Iran (f.m.a. Persia). They were quite open until 1979. Well, actually, the Shah was prolly not moderate. He was very pro-Western, which tends to piss of Converatives in countries. It'd be like if suddenly, the US had an autocrat who was extremely liberal, legalized all drugs, legalized homosexual marriages, etc.. I'd guarentee that there'd be a revolution by the countless number of Conservate Christians living in this country.
Another is Bangladesh. They have a women head of state.
Another is Indonesia.
I'm sure there are countless more.