It's funny how these things are. KDE's features are about the only thing that make me cope with Linux pains. Windows desktop is so primitive in comparison... what, no IOSlaves in a modern desktop?
Re:Let's just have one Linux desktop
on
KDE 3.5 Released
·
· Score: 0
Thank you so much. No KDE announcement is ever complete without some ignorant or troll talking FUD about the damn-evil-propietary Qt's license. Now we're all done here.
The fact that the desktop is rendered through 3D graphics hardware does not mean the desktop itself is 3D, you know. A MS developer - don't remember who right now, was on a video about Avalon - stated that in fact a true 3D desktop would be confusing for its customers and it was not worth the effort, at least for now.
Well, I'm pretty sure Mac OS X has a few problems of its own. In fact, as long as they have to sell new versions of the software, it's nothing but logical to put the flaws of the previous product as an alleged advantage of the new one.
It's just how commercial software vendors play the game, and MS it's not the only one playing this way.
I can not believe this big old piece of crap and FUD is moderated with +3 as insightful. Sometimes I only have to read posts like this to understand why Windows is still king, and will be for many many years to come. Sad.
- Given patience and time, _I_ can do all I did in Windows, and using only free software. - Portage is very convenient, and has all the software I need. - KDE as a desktop beats Windows hands down. Without KDE, I wouldn't use Linux, it's as simple as that. Thank you, KDE hackers! - Command line goodies. Yes, cygwin can be used on windows but...
Having said that, I must say I understand why so few people use Linux. After all these years, Linux-land hardware support is no match for what Windows offers, Windows is way faster for desktop tasks, in Linux you _can't_ do everything you can do in Windows, and most people - sadly, I would say - don't care for free software at all.
I would like to see better competition and I'm glad Linux is here and it's so useful to me, but for the majority of users, Windows is still the best choice, even with its great share of problems.
I live in Spain, and I can tell you only geeks have ever heard of something called Jabber. MSN is so extended even geeks have to use MSN in order to be able to chat with friends.
Most people used to use ICQ here, but then Windows XP came with MSN and changed it all. Almost nobody seem to use ICQ anymore.
if linux wants to get anywhere with mainstream users, there's going to have to be one superior desktop environment, rather than two slightly inferior ones.
I think there are far, far more important issues preventing Linux sucess on the desktop.
if developers are split between two desktop environments that essentially do the same thing, it gets linux nowhere.
As a I said, even if developers really wanted to work on a single desktop and agreed on using the same technology, they're probably not prepared to do that. Do you think a Gnome developer has the skills required to start hacking in C++ and QT technologies right now? I'm almost sure the answer is no. The same is true for KDE developers and C/GTK. If Gnome had never been started, I'm pretty sure Gnome devs would be hacking on any other thing, but not in KDE anyway.
The fact that matters is that this discussion is always pointless because as long as both have active developers working on them and users willing to use them, none of them is going to go away, it's simply not going to happen. It's time to finally accept this fact and live with it.
I've never heard a newbie complaining about the variety of linux desktops. They may have problems installing software, and of course headaches with hardware drivers and kernel compilation. They also say things such as "does do not this thing run Half-life 2?". But I don't remamber any user moaning about the fact that there are two different desktops. In fact, they usually just use the one their distribution uses by default, and don't try the other until they are not newbies anymore.
It seems that so much time is put in KDE and Gnome, that if the two teams worked together, they might make something superior to what they made on their own
Sigh. There's no way they'd be working together anyway. Gnome devs love C and GTK. KDE devs are C++ experts and like QT.
Besides that, Gnome users like Gnome. KDE users... well, like KDE. They can choose because both are different and there are many different kinds of users, you know...
There's not going to be a single desktop environment. Period.
They know users are switching to Firefox/Opera for better security or features, mainly tabbed browsing. It they can provide them that, they will stay with IE and so probably at MS they think there's no incentive to put efforts into standards.
In other words, they're just upgrading IE because they're losing their internet monopoly, but they never had real intention of improving their browser
It seems to me that the "Linux community" that produces applications are programmers, who will probably treat GUI design as secondary.
That's only part of the problem. The fact is that it's rare to find a good programmer who does also have artistic or design skills. So that's why I think you are right and artists are needed in open source projects.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, saying 'Windows is shit' while at they same proudly announcing 'Hey, you can run Windows now too!' would soung a little weird, wouldn't it?
Yep. Wake me up when aliens and predator start kicking each other's asses, please.
It's funny how these things are. KDE's features are about the only thing that make me cope with Linux pains. Windows desktop is so primitive in comparison... what, no IOSlaves in a modern desktop?
don't know about performance, but you can see screenshots of openGL based Quake3 here:
http://www.linuxedge.org/?q=node/39
At least it seems it works fine.
Thank you so much. No KDE announcement is ever complete without some ignorant or troll talking FUD about the damn-evil-propietary Qt's license. Now we're all done here.
The fact that the desktop is rendered through 3D graphics hardware does not mean the desktop itself is 3D, you know. A MS developer - don't remember who right now, was on a video about Avalon - stated that in fact a true 3D desktop would be confusing for its customers and it was not worth the effort, at least for now.
Well, I'm pretty sure Mac OS X has a few problems of its own. In fact, as long as they have to sell new versions of the software, it's nothing but logical to put the flaws of the previous product as an alleged advantage of the new one.
It's just how commercial software vendors play the game, and MS it's not the only one playing this way.
You still don't get it, don't you? There is an official Qt4 Windows GPL edition, no one has to port Qt to Windows. It's already there.
I can not believe this big old piece of crap and FUD is moderated with +3 as insightful. Sometimes I only have to read posts like this to understand why Windows is still king, and will be for many many years to come. Sad.
Here are my reasons for using Linux.
- Given patience and time, _I_ can do all I did in Windows, and using only free software.
- Portage is very convenient, and has all the software I need.
- KDE as a desktop beats Windows hands down. Without KDE, I wouldn't use Linux, it's as simple as that. Thank you, KDE hackers!
- Command line goodies. Yes, cygwin can be used on windows but...
Having said that, I must say I understand why so few people use Linux. After all these years, Linux-land hardware support is no match for what Windows offers, Windows is way faster for desktop tasks, in Linux you _can't_ do everything you can do in Windows, and most people - sadly, I would say - don't care for free software at all.
I would like to see better competition and I'm glad Linux is here and it's so useful to me, but for the majority of users, Windows is still the best choice, even with its great share of problems.
I live in Spain, and I can tell you only geeks have ever heard of something called Jabber. MSN is so extended even geeks have to use MSN in order to be able to chat with friends.
Most people used to use ICQ here, but then Windows XP came with MSN and changed it all. Almost nobody seem to use ICQ anymore.
Hey, you forgot Qt vs GTK+ and KDE vs Gnome, you insensitive clod!
They don't read it, but they open the article in their browsers ;)
God bless tabbed browsing!
Has been the black monolith found?
That's why stuff ifheavily advertised. People don't really need most things they buy anyway :)
Of course Microsoft wants to understand Linux and Open Source. Knowing your enemy is the first step towars defeating him.
Of course. I always knew this DOOM3 thing installed on my hard drive was just another text editor with a fancy geeky name.
Am I the only one who likes to stay a generation behind and benefit from the price drops?
Hardly. I do the same thing but with PC games. The games itself are cheaper and by the time I buy them, they work great on cheap hardware.
Don't fear. The moderation "-1 Paranoid" has not yet been implemented on Slashdot.
Actually, some would argue "+1 Paranoid" would be more adequate.
I think there are far, far more important issues preventing Linux sucess on the desktop.
if developers are split between two desktop environments that essentially do the same thing, it gets linux nowhere.
As a I said, even if developers really wanted to work on a single desktop and agreed on using the same technology, they're probably not prepared to do that. Do you think a Gnome developer has the skills required to start hacking in C++ and QT technologies right now? I'm almost sure the answer is no. The same is true for KDE developers and C/GTK. If Gnome had never been started, I'm pretty sure Gnome devs would be hacking on any other thing, but not in KDE anyway.
The fact that matters is that this discussion is always pointless because as long as both have active developers working on them and users willing to use them, none of them is going to go away, it's simply not going to happen. It's time to finally accept this fact and live with it.
I've never heard a newbie complaining about the variety of linux desktops. They may have problems installing software, and of course headaches with hardware drivers and kernel compilation. They also say things such as "does do not this thing run Half-life 2?". But I don't remamber any user moaning about the fact that there are two different desktops. In fact, they usually just use the one their distribution uses by default, and don't try the other until they are not newbies anymore.
It seems that so much time is put in KDE and Gnome, that if the two teams worked together, they might make something superior to what they made on their own
Sigh. There's no way they'd be working together anyway. Gnome devs love C and GTK. KDE devs are C++ experts and like QT.
Besides that, Gnome users like Gnome. KDE users... well, like KDE. They can choose because both are different and there are many different kinds of users, you know...
There's not going to be a single desktop environment. Period.
They know users are switching to Firefox/Opera for better security or features, mainly tabbed browsing. It they can provide them that, they will stay with IE and so probably at MS they think there's no incentive to put efforts into standards.
In other words, they're just upgrading IE because they're losing their internet monopoly, but they never had real intention of improving their browser
It seems to me that the "Linux community" that produces applications are programmers, who will probably treat GUI design as secondary.
That's only part of the problem. The fact is that it's rare to find a good programmer who does also have artistic or design skills. So that's why I think you are right and artists are needed in open source projects.
AFAIK, at least Debian does it this way. I wonder if it is not a nightmare to maintain, though.