Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
KDE GUI

KDE 3.1 Beta Released 411

Posted by CmdrTaco from the get-it-on dept.
shadow303 writes "KDE 3.1 beta has been released. There are numerous improvements, including tabbed browsing with Konqueror." I still can't say I care for tabbed browsing, but a lot of people swear by it. The new style/theme looks quite excellent, as do the various improved dialog boxes.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

KDE 3.1 Beta Released More

KDE 3.1 Beta Released

Comments Filter:

  • 3.1? (Score:4, Funny)

    by SpanishInquisition ( 127269 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @12:59PM (#4119718) Homepage Journal
    Gnome is only 2.0 so I guess KDE is better right?

  • Tabbed browsing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LunarOne ( 91127 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:00PM (#4119739) Homepage
    Tabbed browsing is, of course, the bomb! I can't use IE anymore because of it. I middle click on links with IE and when nothing happens, it is just so annoying. It's like browsing in a dark place.

    Frsit Psot?

    • The feature that makes IE unusable for me is the lack of gesture recognition. It took me all of 11 seconds to get used to "swiping" a page back. Now I can't bear the wait while I move the pointer all the way up to that Back button.
      • The main difference between IE and the mozilla/galeon/konq/operas of the world is that because IE is the monopoly, they don't have to *care* what make a good browser.

        For example, IE will probably *never* implement things like pop up blocking, a cookie dialogue that doesn't suck (more info doesn't stay out), or any of the really funky and innovative things that Konq/mozilla does.

        Because MS is the big fish, they have to be friendly to everyone, and that includes places that do things like pop up ads (msn for example), so adding in that ability is counter productive to them, as is things like opening up the API enough that projects like those at mozdev [mozdev.org] can exist.
        • My IE blocks pop-ups. With a plug-in, of course. See, if Microsoft added pop-up blocking to IE, they get caught between a rock and a hard place---someone will cry that they are overstepping their monopoly power by driving all the mom-and-pop pop-up blockers into oblivion, and since it's not open source, they might have a case. Mozilla does the same thing, but since it's open source, I think the people have less of a case that "they're trying to drive me out of business!"

          It took me a while, but I found a pop up blocker (PopupPopper) that is free as in beer -- no ads, nada.
      • I use my side mouse buttons, 4 for forward, 5 for back. With a 3 button mouse I could see a use, but what else do you use gestures for?
        -
        Read at your own risk - Open Letter to America from a Canadian [baltimorechronicle.com]
      • Konqueror doesn't seem to respond to the gestures I make at it...
        • Do you have the KDE gesture program running? You can make any KDE program work with gestures with it, so Konqueror itself doesn't have genture recognition in it.

          I don't use it, so I can't recall the name... I don't even know that it's part of kdebase.

          --
          Evan

    • Re:Tabbed browsing (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Dr. Spork ( 142693 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:39PM (#4120100)
      I'm sorry, but tabs are a feature I always turn off. I mean, I'm not mad they're there, but I tried using them and didn't like them. The basic problem with tabs is that they force you to switch windows at two totally different places on your desktop.

      I imagine that I am fairly typical in that I have several browser pages up at any one time, and in addition to that, I have some other apps open (music player, IRC, news program, file manager, etc). The reason I have all that stuff open is because I switch between them, and I want to do this efficiently.

      However, to switch from my newsreader to a "submerged" tab on Konqueror or Mozilla, I first have to use my WM to swith to the browser, and then use the browser interface to switch to the proper tab. What makes this process even more lame is that at least in Mozilla, the tabs are on the opposite end of the screen from where I switch tasks on my WM. This means I have to do a lot of unnecessary mousing around.

      A much more sensible approach is to open new browser windows rather than tabs, and then do all of your switching using the WM. One of the many advantages of this is that you can use keyboard shortcuts to cycle through all your windows, browser and the rest.

      All in all, I find myself wishing that Konqueror developers would concentrate more on rendering performance and standards compliance. I suspect that tabs are a gimmick that will be requested only by a tiny but vocal minority. It's my opinion that if you feel like you need tabs, there is something wrong with your window manager (or you don't know how to use it right).

      • Re:Tabbed browsing (Score:5, Informative)

        by Teancom ( 13486 ) <david&gnuconsulting,com> on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:49PM (#4120204) Homepage
        Actually, they were almost completely implemented by somebody that is not a "hardcore" konq/khtml developer. I.e., somebody decided they really wanted them, wrote them up, and then several other people helped with the debugging and configuration. I really wish I remembered the guy's name, but it's actually been a few months, and my memory is poor :-P But here, like in all other open source projects, the stuff gets done that people want. If the vocal minority includes somebody with the talent to implement tabs, then, guess what, here you go :-) And enough different people have piped up about loving tabs, that I think it is more than just a matter of "not knowing how to use their window manager".

        All that said, I dislike tabs, tried them, and haven't used them since B-)

      • Re:Tabbed browsing (Score:3, Informative)

        by Masem ( 1171 )
        While I can't argue with the concept of more work to get to given tabbed page from outside the application, the use of tabs currently solves a problem that until recently most GUI elements has with task switching, in that every instance of a SDI (single document interface) application would be listed in the task bar-like area. Thus, if you had multiple browser windows open, your task bar would be swamped with each window's title, and given all the other likely stuff you'd be running it would be difficult to determine the distinction of the different windows without some other mechanism or checking each one separately. Even without the task bar, using some application switcher may generate an overly long list, which could be hard to navigate or slower to use than normal tab switching. Newer GUIs (including XP and KDE2/3) are more intelligent now and will group multiple instances of the same application into the same task 'button', providing a popup menu to select the specific instance of that application. But when Opera and Mozilla were being developed into their current reincarnations, this wasn't a feature, and given that most developers or users will have several browser windows open at a time, compared to any other SDI-type application besides editors, it's not a suprise this feature was added. (And even in the case of editors, I noticed that a lot of the windows shareware and commercial packages have had the options of tabs to switch between open files, showing the same problem as multiple browser windows.)

        Now, I dont' have Moz handy currently, but I do know that Opera allows you to place the tabs at the bottom of the page; I want to say Moz does too. Thus, in your case, you could jump to the Opera app from the bottom task bar, then use bottom tabs to find the right tab; mouse movement is limited, and locating the right page should be faster. Tab location (above, below, off) has almost always been an option in any program that I've seen them used effectively.

        The other consideration is that maybe, there needs to be a way for apps to communicate to the task-bar/applications list as to describe all the current instances that are open. Thus, regardless if the program is tabbed or not, clicking on the task bar button for that program would should all instances of it, and selecting the appropriate instance would either go to that window, or bring the right tab forward. This, of course, is not trivial to work back into most GUI frameworks currently.

        But, most important, tabs should be optional: some people love multiple windows, some don't. Appropriately written, the additional feature of tabs should be very light weight and ignorable when not used.

        • Its true that creating a hierarchy of windows resolves the problem of 'swamping' the taskbar. However, I do not think that tabs, or "similar program grouping" in the taskbar is the best solution.

          This is actually what desktops are for.
          Just place your browser windows in some desktop[s] and switch to that desktop (And ofcourse, turn off 'show all windows' in the task bar). This has the very important added benefit of being able to group any type of windows (aka: Financial related browser and other program windows in desktop 1, Music related windows in desktop 2, and so on..)

          A perfect WM resolves the need for tabs, but good WM's hardly exist, and people tend to like solutions, even if they're very unoptimal and improper.
      • 1. website X's story has a link to another website. I "right click-select: open in new tab". Now the two pages that are related are in the same client. This way, when I'm writing a reply I can cross-reference the linked story without having to worry about loosing what I'm writing by using the back/foward button.
        Summary: it reduces desktop clutter by allowing me to keep similarly related pages in the same browser instance without requiring back/forward button usage (which causes webpages to forget what you inputed at times).

        2. I'm reading an article that spans multiple pages and writing a summary (obviously easier to do if you have the entire article at your finger tips). Without tabbed browsing, I'd have to open multiple windows to avoid the back button which makes the damn flashy thingies reload everytime. If the article is 5 pages long, that makes for a lot of browser windows and a lot of annoying manual window management.

        3. Some websites insist on opening new windows to show some piece of information. Personally, I find that "load in new tab" feature priceless for such sites (example: the previews on kde-look.org).

        These examples all revolve around situations where multiple windows are annoying and slow me down. Tabbed browsing, is imho an essential evolution in the presentation of webpages-- I would find the web incredibly more annoying without them.
      • If you use the keyboard then the problem you describe is a snap -- use alt-tab to get to the mozilla window, then ctrl-pageup and ctrl-pagedn to move between tabs (Mozilla). Then it shouldn't matter that one is your WM and the other an application.

        Anyway, I love tabbed browsing. Being able to group all of my "slashdot reading" in one window is excellent, especially since I have them load in the background and so they're all loaded by the time I get around to reading them! In fact, my brother is by no means a computer expert, and I switched him to Mozilla just by showing him tabs. It's not a small minority who like this feature, believe me...

      • I'm sorry, but tabs are a feature I always turn off. I mean, I'm not mad they're there, but I tried using them and didn't like them. The basic problem with tabs is that they force you to switch windows at two totally different places on your desktop.

        Actually, tabbed browsing is completely logical, given the way the desktop and file manager theme is carried out on modern OS's.

        Think about it...

        Each tab in your window manager is associated with a running program. You click on Mozilla or Konq, and within that program are more tabs associated with multiple views of data for that program.

        It's like expanding a folder in your file manager. Opening up a new window for each new page you want to view is akin to putting all your files in one huge directory. It just makes it harder to locate what you want as the number of files (windows) increases.

        Tabbed browsing also decreases resource usage. Instead of having a new window open for each page, you have one window with multiple page views available. The resource usage is constrained to what is necessary to render the page, minimizing all the other widgets and menus normally needed for a complete window for each page.

        The tabbed interface can be found in other similar programs, such as GUI text editors (www.ultraedit.com is one of my favorites on the Windows platform). I often have 20 files open at a time, and a dozen web pages. Between those two programs, I'd have 30+ windows open without the tabbed interface. No thanks!

        Not to mention how nice tabbed browsing is for reading blogs and newspapers. I go through my favorites: slashdot, cnn, my local newspaper, news.com, etc (incidentally, I have one bookmark that opens up all these pages at once with a single click... thanks to tabbed browsing and the cool bookmarks available in mozilla). Each site I middle-click all the interesting links, stacking up other pages to peruse, without taking my immediate attention away from what I am scanning.

        I'm sure eventually you will be able to move the tab row in mozilla/konq to the bottom of the screen, to be closer to where most people have their window manager programs running. It doesn't make much difference to me, as the rest of the menu, bookmarks, and url bar are all located right by the browser tabs. It'd make more sense to drag your window manager bar to the top of the screen, if your UI allows.
      • I really must point out that I have also discovered tabbed browsing recently.

        I find it absolutely handy. Why? Because I can open multiple links without the focus shifting to those new links.

        Then I just tab through them when I want to view the next page, which, has already loaded.

        Handy for busy sites that take forever to load as well. (slashdotted sites for example)

        Just my $.02, to each their own.

        - Yo Grark
        • Yeah, but you can do this through opening new windows, too. For example, I didn't want to lose my place on the page, so in order to reply to you, I middle-clicked on [Reply to This], which in my Mozilla setup opens a new window. I finish typing this message and close the window using all the neato features of my GUI.

          The advantage of doing it this way is that I have all the advantage of tabs but I can manage all my windows in the same place.

    • If you have to use IE (And cant bitch slap the webmaster) try Crazy Browser [crazybrowser.com]. It will give you tabs, and stop pop ups. Middle mouse button works also.. Then complete it with Proxomitron [proxomitron.org] and you can do almost anything. Proxomitron is kinda like junkbusters for windows, more options, gui interface, proxy switcher, very nice.
      -
      Open Letter To America from a Canadian [baltimorechronicle.com]
    • Tabbed browsing? What's wrong with emacs + w3? ;)

  • KDE and the new America (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:10PM (#4119813)
    One has to wonder if it is decent or even moral to use KDE these days. Since the 11th of September, we as Americans have had an opportunity to examine ourselves and our core values, and the question must be asked: does KDE fit into these core values, and is it something that ought to be a part of our day-to-day lives as we come to grips with the new reality that has been thrust upon us?

    One thing must be understood: KDE is virtually 100% foreign technology. The foundation of KDE is the Qt toolkit, a set of GUI widgets developed by TrollTech, a Norwegian company. Norway, like the rest of Scandanavia and Europe in general, is an extremely socialist country. Socialism is something that Americans decided long ago would not be allowed in our nation, and yet millions of Linux users are downloading it without so much as a second thought. Beyond that, Norway's liberal immigration laws have allowed all sorts of unsavory characters into their nation... including the Muslims with which we are currently at war.

    The rest of the KDE intrinsics are developed by primarily European agitators, folks who would not bat an eyelash at knocking down the capitalist foundation upon which our nation has been built. Bashing Microsoft is a popular sport in this forum, but the truth must be told: MSFT is an American company that employs American citizens with American families. Joke all you want about Microsoft employees, but they need to eat just like the rest of us do. For the life of me, I cannot understand why one would eschew Microsoft products in favor of things such as KDE.

    Now, MSFT products are not perfect, but the last time I checked, neither was KDE! So in a very real sense, we are talking about choosing the lesser of two evils, and in this case the choice could not be clearer (at least, in the opinion of this patriot.) Using KDE doesn't help this country one bit, but purchasing dutifully from Microsoft helps to ensure our economic vitality (and, by extension, our nation, our military, and our way of life.)

    I doubt that Osama bin Laden owns a PC, but if he did, he'd probably be running KDE. Does this make you comfortable? It shouldn't.

  • tabbed browsing. (Score:3, Funny)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:12PM (#4119849)
    how could you not like it? Instead of having to open 5 different windows of Mozilla I have just one and easy access to each (I use E and don't have the option of a taskbar or icons).

    I can have Slashdot open, my banking open, and porn (three different ones usually).

    Also probably conserves on my short memory usage ;)

    • multitasking with tabs (Score:4, Insightful)

      by mblase ( 200735 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:25PM (#4119974)
      I use tabs a lot on sites like Slashdot -- especially once I figured out how to use 'em fast. By checking a couple of preferences in Mozilla, I can control-click (or right-click and select) any link and have it open in a new tab, behind my current web page.

      Usually I scroll down the Slashdot home page, open up a few story links in new tabs without any other interruptions, and keep scrolling. When I'm done, I close that tab and all the stories I wanted to read are loaded and ready.

      You can do the same with multiple windows, I suppose, but it's not as compact and the new browser windows usually load over the one you're currently on, not under it.
    • I'm a web developer and need to get to refernce sites, my terminal, and a testing window. So I'm not always in a browser window and like to access things from the taskbar directly. Which is why I don't use tabs. But to avoid making a mess I much prefer KDE's (it's also in Widnows XP now) taskbar groups.

  • I don't get it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Quasar1999 ( 520073 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:13PM (#4119865) Journal
    I've only used Linux via the GUI for a few months (ya, ya I know...)... but why is there KDE and Gnome? Why are the two not one. The only differences I see between the two are skins, very minor UI functionality, and some utils that are unique to either or. But why can't KDE and Gnome be merged, and allow the end user to customize everything the way they want? And use the utilities they want. I like KDE's appearence, but I hate it's 'feel' when actually doing tasks.

    What is so fundamentally different between Gnome and KDE that doesn't allow them to be merged into one project? IMHO that's all that is required to finally get a solid Desktop presence for linux.
    • well they are based on completely different architectures, not to mention the underlying libraries (GTK and Qt), "merging" them (even if the developer teams wanted to) would probably be no less work than creating a new environment from scratch.

      and in any case, why should there be only one? (unless they start playing a theme song by Queen on startup, or something)

    • I've only used Linux via the GUI for a few months (ya, ya I know...)... but why is there KDE and Gnome? Why are the two not one. The only differences I see between the two are skins, very minor UI functionality, and some utils that are unique to either or. But why can't KDE and Gnome be merged, and allow the end user to customize everything the way they want? And use the utilities they want. I like KDE's appearence, but I hate it's 'feel' when actually doing tasks.

      Well, this is understandable. It's a phase we all go through, so don't worry. I went through it for instance, after a month or two of using Linux. It takes time, but you will realise the reasons for this. To try and save you time however, here is why, in a nutshell:

      In the beginning there was KDE. It was free software (the GPL definition), but it was linked agianst Qt which was non free. This caused a lot of strife the community, as not only was KDE (in theory) illegal to distribute as it broke the terms of the GPL, but also the KDE developers were seen as being unreponsive to the issue. This was an important issue to many, as it would have "polluted" the platform with a core non free component. Why does this matter you say? Just imagine what would have happened if TrollTech had gone bust, or been bought out? One day Qt is there, the next it's not and you're shafted. Actually, project Harmony was set up to clone Qt (iirc), but after some considerable pressure from the community TrollTech GPL'd Qt, and all was well.

      In the meantime, Miguel de Icaza had set up the GNOME project. It was based on GTK which was LGPL'd all the way. They also made many different design decisions - for instance GNOME is written in C, whereas KDE is C++. This is more important than it may seem, as (it was claimed) C is easier to bind to other languages, so gnome would be more inclusive. They also based their object model on CORBA rather than C++ for instance. There are many differences.

      Today, they are so different there is no hope of merging them, so forget that. They do work together though, check out freestandards.org - the standards they produce there are often better than either of the technologies the individual projects came up with. KDE and GNOME used to be completely incompatible. Today, even the dreaded clipboard problem has been solved. So they do work together, and I for one am very interested in seeing this extended to sharing code as well. We'll have to see if this is possible.

      Don't see this as a bad thing, please. Yes there is duplication of effort, sometimes needless. But consider the real world. There is lots of competition in the real world. Lots of different companies compete to provide the same product, but usually in different ways. The competition between KDE and GNOME keeps them sharp.

      Do people use GNOME? YES! I just jumped ship from KDE3 to GNOME2.0.1 built from Garnome. I love it to bits, before I hated GTKs flakeyness and uglyness. Now I can't get enough of it. It's beautiful. GNOME2 has had a lot of effort put into usability, and it shows. It's not perfect yet, and there are still missing bits, but I think I'm a convert. Up until now, KDE has been the clear leader really. You said you don't like the "feel" of KDE: well, I know what you mean. To me, GNOME2 just feels better, although it seriously lacks features at the moment. It depends on personal preference though. One friend of mine swears by Enlightenment.

      Competition is natural, and good. In the real world, people disagree over how things should be done. As long as competition is bracketed by standards, we will move forward, and this is what's happening.

      What is so fundamentally different between Gnome and KDE that doesn't allow them to be merged into one project? IMHO that's all that is required to finally get a solid Desktop presence for linux.

      LOL, don't worry, we all have opinions when we move to Linux. We learn later most of those opinions are misinformed ;) Remember - not everything is what it seems. Linux will have a solid desktop presence, but not yet. It's not ready. Both KDE and GNOME need a lot of polish and work, but they are good foundations on which to build. Remember: not everything is what it seems.

    • but why is there KDE and Gnome? Why are the two not one.

      Because freedom is choice and the control over your own destiny. Open Source and Free Software is not about monolithic environments that you must use. It's not about some elite group deciding what is best for you.

      This freedom allows you to choose between KDE, GNOME, XFCE, Windowmaker, Enightenment, Blackbox or whatever. It allows you to choose between Redhat, SuSE, Gentoo, Manduck or Slackware. It allows you to choose between Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD. Choose between Emacs, XEmacs, Vim, nvi, elvis, joe, jed, kwrite, kate, gedit and dozens more.

      What is so fundamentally different between Gnome and KDE that doesn't allow them to be merged into one project?

      1) Politics. GNOME is Free Software and KDE is Open Source. Personally, I can't tell the difference between the two, but independent experimentation has shown that if you put a hardcore FSF/GNU person in the same room as an Open Source advocate, you can actually warp the curvature of time/space. And besides, GNOME is a GNU project and KDE is not, and for some people that makes all the difference in the world.

      2) Language. GNOME is C and KDE is C++. Both have bindings to other languages, but for all practical purposes, one is C and the other C++.

      3) Toolkits. First off, you have Qt versus GTK+. Until you can merge these two into one toolkit, you will never be able to merge KDE and GNOME. Both have different APIs, different OO paradigms, and different scopes.

      IMHO that's all that is required to finally get a solid Desktop presence for linux.

      If it is required for Linux to have a monolithic core of elites deciding what software must be used, before it can get on the desktop, then perhaps the desktop is not the right goal.

      But no matter to me, since I use FreeBSD instead of Linux. There's choice for you!
  • The site provides RPMs for Suse, they can be downloaded from

    http://download.at.kde.org/pub/kde/unstable/kde-3. 1-beta1/SuSE/i386/8.0/ [kde.org]

    However, when I check the RPMs I get

    error: failed dependencies:
    libkviewsupport.so.0 is needed by kdegraphics3-3.0.7-0

    Any ideas where kdegraphics3-3.0.7-0 can be found, rpmfind didn't turn up anything useful. I am using SuSE 8 with a full install of KDE3.03, but this has been updated many times since its initial install as SuSE 7.0.

    I did get some components working. The panel is much improved, and support for dual head displays looks much better (the panel can now be configured on a per display basis). However, I couln't convince Konq to display any web page, in tabs or otherwise :-(.

    • Sorry, that should have read, any idea where libkviewsupport.so.0 can be found, kdegraphics3-3.0.7-0 is the base package.
  • the link in the story is mistakenly going to Apple's website [apple.com]

    i mean, only Apple users would want to slow down their system with drop shadows, lickable buttons, translucent drop-down menus? I just want to get work done.

    • i mean, only Apple users would want to slow down their system with drop shadows, lickable buttons, translucent drop-down menus? I just want to get work done.

      Lickable buttons? Wow! Does that mean we need to get touch-screens now, too? I hope I don't get a <ZOT!>

  • Emace or VI or.... Kate? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zulux ( 112259 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @01:17PM (#4119902) Homepage Journal

    Kate has been a god send 'round here - Programmers who are just starting out the *NIX way need a editor that behaves kinda-like Windows notepad or other Windows IDE editors, but has cool features, and Kate fits the bill. The code folding works well and the whole package is just a joy to use.

    Eventually they all should move to Emacs or VI for better productivity, but for the small, insignificant, time it takes to learn Kate, it's suprisingly productive.

    Perhaps Kate will evolve to add the features of Emace, but I hope those features are 'hidden' and don't destroy the easy to learn interface of the curent Kate.

    Bit-o-somthing: All out instances of Kate run on one BSD box and are viewed on Windows destops via VNC. It's the same soluton that we use for our clients that want to keep their Windows but use out *NIX apps that we make for them. It makes us both happy; they get to keep Windows Solitare and viruses, and out app is safly running on a real operating system.


    • Being a little bored with VIM I am trying a few different editors and have had some suprising results. Most of my code I write is Java/Python/VelocityMacro/JSP. For me JEdit has been a godsend as I have found that I can do almost everything in there that I need (sorta sick like emacs) but I have a very elegent and easy to use editor with outstanding tools like a built in jpython, code insight, and class browsing.

      There is even a plugin that allows basic VI emulation (command mode) which excites the hell out of me. The syntax highlighting seems a bit more complete than VIM's (it just works better, especially in tricky JSP pages).

      Kate was an editor that I tried for a day or two, but with a VERY small syntax-highlighting pallete it's hard to be as productive as I am in VIM or JEdit.

      Note, for java people.. JEdit is a nice lite alternative to something like NetBeans or JBuilder. It's probably not the best thing for those weak of heart though, plugins can be touchy and a little fickle to get working. If your comfortable with an Emacs level of configurability, you might like it. (Note, this is comming from a non-emacs user).

      Cheers

    • It surprised me a bit when I realised this is the first time I've even heard kate mentioned. Before going to Linux I primarily used ultraedit for working on anything with little to no gui. I was quite happy to find something similar in layout, even if more lightweight already installed when I decided to give Linux a try.
  • How does it work in KDE/Qt? There were a few screenshots that showed real-look transparency, in menus for example. Through the menu, you could see the windows below it and/or the desktop. Prior to this, with the exception of a hacked X server, the only transparency I've seen is the transparent-to-root-window like with an eterm or gnome-terminal.

    Is whoever took this SS using a hacked X server, or does Qt now have it's own display sub system that does rendering for all Qt Windows, including let Qt applications share real a alpha channel with eachother?

    • Re:Transparency? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Raster Burn ( 213891 )
      I believe it just takes a quick screen shot to create the transparency effect. It does cause a little lag to render the transparency, but I do like the effect. It's not enough of a lag to be annoying on my 850MHz PC.

    • Re:Transparency? (Score:2, Informative)

      by madstork2000 ( 143169 )
      I don't know much about the fundemental architecture, but the transparency I get is from mosfets liquid theme.

      http://www.mosfet.org/liquid.html

      According to his site his theme uses custom QT widgets. But it is easy to install and not special tweaks were needed to the X server.

      I really don't know squat about how it all works, I just thought I would point out this one particular way transparency is handled. Hope it helps get you started.

      MS2k
      • Well, I'm dumping Linux and going back to OS X as soon as I can back up some stuff, so I'll have real transparency there- I just wondered how Qt got around the limitations of X11.
    • The effect is a neat little hack, which takes advantage of the fact that whilst you are looking at a menu, none of the underlying windows or anything are going to move. This means that you can just take a screenshot of what's under the menu, and then use that as the basis for you menu when you draw it.

      Sadly, it means it can't be used in the background of eterms, konsole etc. because there is no way to get a screenshot of the underlying windows.
    • Enlightenment has awesome alpha blending capabilities. For example, when moving a window, the entire window can become transparent until you drop it back in place. Although these type of effects are completely gratuitis, they look so darn pretty.

      • But they're not real transparency, unless you're using a hacked X server. When the window becomes transparent, I'm assuming that it either takes a screenshot of everything else under it quick, or just shows the wallpaper (like in an eterm)?

        It's even prettier when you have effects like this with a display architecture that actually supports them, like Squeak's Morphic or Mac OS X. In both, I can make any window transparent, and see what is below them. Not just a static look at what's below, like with these KDE menus or moving windows in E, but a live view. And because it's part of the architecture and not a cheap hack to get around limits of X11, they don't require cycles like E tricks do. :)

        In Squeak, you can take this one step further. I can change the color of *any* GUI object I want, and getting transparency is just a matter of specifying the alpha level. It's good fun, I tell you! I typically have my email client and irc client taking up the same real estate, perfectly covering the other... I have both translucent, so if I'm in IRC, I can see when I get a new email, and when I'm doing email, I can see when the channel wakes up. Not only pretty, it can be useful and takes up no extra CPU. :)

        Maybe evas will have some fun stuff like this, finally getting it to all of you X11-heads.
  • I'm hoping for some further advances in stability and speed. I'm sick of Konq segfaults from clicking back a few times.

    None the less, KDE 3.1 looks sexy!

    Ya Baby. Ya!
  • CmdrTaco doesn't like tabbed browsing?

    I'm truly curious...what's there not to like about it?

    Less windows, less clutter, quick access... I'm addicted to it, at least.
    • for me, I generally don't like it.

      If I have a lot of windows open, it is easier to cycly through them to get the site I want , then it is to get the focus of one window, then cycle through the tabs of that window to get to what I want.
      • Hmm.. I suppose that makes sense.

        The only problem I have with that approach is that you have to cycle thru all of them just to figure out which is which. It seems with the tabs, the page title is kept somewhat more visible.
  • I think that it's official now - anyone using KDE has to surrender the right to complain about Apple's naming of iApps. Kolf????? Hmm...
  • The Minimize shortcuts!

    I open 30 applications at once, and am constantly switching. Usually, I only want one or two windows up at a time, and I'd like the rest minimized.

    AFAIK, KDE is the only linux desktop environment that has a "show desktop" (minimize all) shortcut, as well as a minimize one window shortcut. I love those.

    And that is the only reason I use kde instead of IceWM. Of course, other people have their important feature, but ... they add up.

    I wish, though, that compiling kde was more like compiling the kernel - features could be removed and added. For instance, I don't really care about the file manager in KDE, and I'd do just as well without the space it takes.

    In fact, if possible, I'd like to have just a panel and the shortcuts; I need no sound manager, no file manager, and no desktop manager. Wouldn't it be nice if such were possible?

  • Tabs rock (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ogerman ( 136333 ) on Thursday August 22, 2002 @04:11PM (#4121620)
    I still can't say I care for tabbed browsing, but a lot of people swear by it.

    Browser tabs are like mouse wheels. They seem pointless at first, but then you get used to them and it's hard to go back. It's a subtle change, but consider how it affects the way you use the GUI: 1.) all web browsing is contained in a single window frame, thus making it easier to mentally seperate from other tasks, 2.) WM taskbars get shuffled, and make it easy to lose track of which windows belong to which applications. Browser tabs stay in the order that web pages were opened are spacially seperate. 3.) When doing heavy web browsing.. ie.) 10 windows open, it's much easier to have all controls at the top of the screen. instead of jumping around.
    • Heard of multiple desktops? :)

      Besides, its a feature the WM can and should implement (tab-looking window switching) if people like it so much.

      Anyhow, why shouldn't I be able to mentally group browsing windows with non-browsing windows? (Music-related, Programming-related, rather than browsing-related or chat-related?)
  • am i nuts or imagining things b/c i thot at some point soon KDE is gonna move away from using XWindows/XFree/whatever

    does anyone know if this is true or should i start taking my medicine again? oh those damn voices are so duplicitous
  • I heared the re-enabled prelink in 3.0.3. In idea why, and does it also work in 3.1 beta 1?

Slashdot Top Deals

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Close