Ars Technica: Deep Inside KDE 3.2 318
binner writes "Ars Technica features an article 'Deep inside the K Desktop Environment 3.2' written by Datschge and Henrique Pinto. After introducing KDE and the project's structure the authors present some new applications of KDE 3.2. After that they explain the key KDE technologies KParts, DCOP, KIO, Kiosk and KXMLGUI and give examples for code reusage and an overview of efforts to integrate non-KDE applications. For developers Umbrello, Cervisia and Valgrind with KCachegrind are introduced and of course KDevelop 3.0. An examination of licenses precedes the positive conclusion."
For more on cool things about KDE... (Score:5, Interesting)
It outlines some practical nicities that are a result of the technologies like KIO slaves mentioned in the Ars Technica piece, including:
Managing web sites (handling content without an FTP application, web gallery creation)
Extending Konqueror with view profiles (replace FTP/Samba applications with Konq, and browse Google easily)
Using KPrinter in any app
Enjoy
Re:For more on cool things about KDE... (Score:5, Informative)
I would, but an empty wiki page doesn't do anything for me
Maybe fixing this might help:
Re:For more on cool things about KDE... (Score:4, Informative)
I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm currently using Fluxbox, but at the moment I'm emerging kde...should take a good long time to compile everything...but I'm going to give it a run-through and kick the tires a bit.
If I don't like it, there's always 'emerge -C kde'
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:5, Informative)
I'm with you (Score:2, Interesting)
I always end up going back to Gnome because the interface is cleaner and more elegant. 2.6 is due out in March. I just run Gnome and run KDE apps inside Gnome when I need to. If I had to make a poor analogy, I would compare KDE to Windows and Gnome to MacOS--one has the wider support for technologies and applications, but the other actually feels like a GUI should.
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:2)
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:2)
Athlon Barton 2500+ 1gig RAM.
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:2)
For instance 'emerge -p kde' may give me:
Calculating dependencies
[ebuild N ] kde-base/kdepim-3.2.0-r2
[ebuild N ] media-libs/taglib-1.0
[ebuild N ] kde-base/kdemultimedia-3.2.0
[ebuild N ] kde-base/kdeaddons-3.2.0
[ebuild N ] dev-libs/fribidi-0.10.4
[ebuild N ] kde-base/kdegraphics-3.2.0
[ebuild N ] kde-base/kdeedu-3.2.0
[e
Re:I've stayed away from KDE...until now. (Score:3, Interesting)
As a long time... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:As a long time... (Score:4, Informative)
I wouldn't call a p3-500 a slow machine to run kde on.
Re:As a long time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As a long time... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:As a long time... (Score:5, Interesting)
Interestingly I always thought that there would be no way for KDE to make it better than Gnome and I only tried it because my brothers nearly forced me to.
I think the most striking feature in KDE was the wallet-manager. I just love the possibility to store everything with a masterpassword.
And since K3B startet working with ATAPI drives (ie. without ide-scsi) I stopped using the command line for cd-burning as well. (You should also try the emovix feature of K3B: amazing!)
There's one thing I really learned from the switch: I don't try to persuade my friends any longer to use the same DM as I use. (I don't like to admit that I was wrong
Re:As a long time... (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, it's just as fast (if not faster) on Linux than on *BSD.
My P3-450 works just fine with Linux and KDE 3.2.
KDE takes a lot more resources than a Windows XP box
Actually, the reverse is true. KDE is quite snappy on these machines, whereas XP (and W2K) are painful to deal with (although adding an extra 128MB of RAM does bring XP up to 'usable'.)
Re:As a long time... (Score:2)
Language bindings (Score:5, Informative)
There's another pointer to the Ruby bindings - and a place for feedback and such-like - here [rubyforge.org].
Re:Language bindings (Score:2)
Here's a list of GTK's bindings:
http://www.gtk.org/bindings.html [gtk.org]
KDE needs to improve here, and C++ needs a standardized ABI first. The ease of binding other languages to C is what gives GNOME a huge leap in this regard, and not much else.
Re:Language bindings (Score:4, Funny)
I can just imagine a GUI implemented in a purely functional language:
Q: I tried to click on the button but nothing is happening? What's wrong?
A: If we responded to user actions, would create side-effects in the program. We can't condone that.
kMCP? (Score:5, Funny)
Are you Corn Fed? [ebay.com]
Re:kMCP? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:kMCP? (Score:5, Funny)
Using the library computers sucks. As does being homeless in general.
Re:kMCP? (Score:3, Funny)
KDE just gets better and better... (Score:5, Informative)
The biggest thing for me is that KDE doesn't treat users like idiots. All the configuration options are out there if I want them, easily accessible via the menus. The GNOME people seem to have decided that ordinary users are too moronic to be allowed to configure the look and feel of their own desktops. That and all the gratuitous UI changes like exchanging the places of the OK and Cancel buttons.
Besides, with the theme set to plastik/plastig I get the same look and feel in gtk apps even when I do need to use them. At last, a consistent unix desktop.
Re:KDE just gets better and better... (Score:2, Insightful)
The super geek would say, that putting all the options in menus is in fact treating the user like an idiot. But that's definitely not you because
I'm still the text-terminal type anyway
Also...
The GNOME people seem to have decided that ordinary users are too moronic to be allowed to configure the look and feel of their own desktops
No, they
Re:KDE just gets better and better... (Score:2)
XFCE4 doesn't have a web browser. Doesn't have an office suite. Doesn't have a chat client. If you want these things, you have to either run GNOME apps, KD
Re:KDE just gets better and better... (Score:2, Insightful)
This is exactly the kind of thinking that is holding Linux back from its full potential. The average joe-6-pack end user is sick and tired of Windows, and wants to get away. However, the average end-user is not "so smart they don't need menus"
It is only when developers (like the KDE team) start thinking of the average not-as-smart-as-you end user that Linux will truly flourish as
Re:KDE just gets better and better... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:KDE just gets better and better... (Score:2, Informative)
I see a Sqrt button rather prominently in mine, in all modes (basic, financial, scientific)... The "power" (x^y) is only available in scientifc though.
GUI Cleanliness (Score:5, Insightful)
The GNOME changes are not dumbed down, they're cleaner. Advanced users are still quite capable of changing a plethora of options, using advanced methods. Only the very commonly changed options are placed in the menues and config panels, which makes it dead easy for both novices *and* experienced users to tweak the common things.
So far as the gatuitious UI changes, there are clear advantages to the way GNOME has chosen to do things. The dialog button order is a favorite thing of people who wish to bash GNOME, and thus serve as an excellent example. The new button order is *easier* on people both physically and mentally. (location of button wrt mouse movements, location wrt eye movements, etc.)
Additionally, there are no "OK" buttons. If you find one, it's a bug. Which is great. If you see a dialog, what the hell does "OK" mean? You have to read the whole dialog. And deal with the fact that in some cases, "OK" is the safe option, while in others it's the dangerous option. Different apps would pop up dialogs with different OK/Cancel meanings for the same dialog action. (like quit without saving - does OK mean "OK, Save" or "OK, Quit" ?) GNOME solves the problem by mandating that you don't use OK, but put the actual action as the button label. "Save" or "Quit". Much, much harder to accidently click OK when you meant Cancel because the meanings for two apps are different.
Granted, the last bit can be done even with the Windows/KDE button order (i.e. [Save] [Cancel] vs [Cancel] [Save]), which is something I really wish both Windows/KDE would do. The GNOME/Mac ordering however makes for consistent button location, however, since the "positive" (most commonly used) button is always in the same location in the dialog, which (as mentioned above) is both easier and more efficient physically and mentally, for both novice and experienced users. KDE having the ability to change button orders (as I've been told it does) is definitely cool; it would be great if they defaulted to the more human-friendly GNOME/Mac order, and let users who refused to learn switch back to the classic order.
Lots of users and developers think the GNOME/Mac button order is "weird" because they're used to the Windows' way, but that kind of thinking doesn't ever foster improvements. Thankfully, GNOME, OS X, KDE, and most other modern desktops are willing to break the mold and do things differently, even at the risk of "confusing" users, for the sake of moving the GUI experience forward, and not keeping us all locked into Microsoft's (and others') design mistakes made a decade or more ago.
I don't claim that GNOME has things perfect. Far from it. Simply explaining the reasoning behind certain 'controversial' changes. Hopefully useful.
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:2)
So you save 30 seconds once (or how often do you configure your desktop?), but you lose configurability and flexibility.
Doesn't sound like a good deal for me. I'd rather have the desktop b
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:5, Interesting)
If a feature is only available through modifying configuration files, I consider it incomplete.
The problem is this: lets say I want to change a setting. I can
a) search through the menus - hopefully I will find it before my third attempt or
b) use a programmer style configuration. This involves
- determining if it is in a text file or is a command line option
- determining which text file it is in
- determining what the name of the command/flag/whatever is
- determining the form of its parameters
- determining what its operational limits are
where in a GUI system, that is all handled out front. The worst part is one of getting help. Where do I look for help on a config parameter? I can't just point and wait for the tooltip, or pop-open a context sensitive help system. I have to find where the developer has hidden the documentation.
If its not available in some intuitive, context-documented options screen, then its not finished. I do not work for my applications - they work for me.
IMHO, more focus on framework is needed. Make a configuration file system where for each option you simply describe a simple widget and its tooltip. Keep it super simple so developers would be encouraged to use it as it would be quick to describe a new variable. Then, just make all the little widgets appear in an "advanced options" menu. No layout, no struggling, just a giant scrollable list of widgets with pop-up documentation. That's what a modern config file should be. And make it work on a text file in the back-end so that power-users can do their thing.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:4, Insightful)
Even failing this, it would help a huge amount if the programs would at least tell you from the GUI where the configuration file is.
For advanced configuration, GUI is extremely limited. One of the most obvious problems is the inability to "comment out" setups and to refer to them when setting other parts, or recover them later. Copying more than one setting from one part to another is also often impossible, referring to one setting while making another is often impossible (on different tabs). Setups that repeat a bunch of settings an arbitrary number of times result in unweildy user interface. All of these are trivial in text-based interfaces. It seems any attempt to make a GUI for complex interfaces eventually devolves into a registry-editor style, which combines the worst problems with the GUI (no comments) with the worst problems of the text editor (no indication what values are legal at each point).
I don't believe GUI configuration will ever really work. If you think about it, programming the computers is really a configuration (ie "configure it to edit MS Word documents"). If GUI configuration was possible, all programming could also be accomplished by pressing buttons and dragging images around.
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:2, Flamebait)
changing the button order was probably one of the most irresponsible things the GNOME usability team has done. why? the usability improvements are nascent at best, the sort of improvement that has good theory behind it but in the real world matters only a little at best.
what's more important than the GNOME's minor (if any) usability win is consistency, which you yourself mentioned. on the X11 platform those buttons have appeared in t
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:2)
so please, don't bring up the button ordering issue in public again, especially not as a benefit. it's embarrassing to everyone who develops for the X11 environment.
What's embarrassing is an ambiguous "OK" button. Apparently, you've NEVER actually sat a user down to use your software.
I handle technical support for my company. We run Windows XP. There is no end of accidental closes, minimizing, c
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:5, Insightful)
Not when you've used KDE or Windows applications everyday for the past 7 years. There's this little thing called "backwards compatibility". While it's quite a pain for purist, it is sometimes worth it.
You should listen to your users: people are getting mad about the button order thing for valid reasons. How would you like me sneaking into your house and swapping out your QWERTY keyboard for a Dvorak one? You might find it pretty d*mn frustrating, especially when I casually reply that "it's better".
I'm all for moving the GUI experience forward, but only when "moving forward" is a meaningful experience, not an ad hoc piece of usability dogma that does not concern itself with feedback from real users.
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:2)
as for creating a mainstream, accessible desktop
Re:GUI Cleanliness (Score:2)
This is the precise reason having multiple desktop environment projects is a bad idea.
Witness your other post in this thread, calling Gnome's button order "silliness" even though it logically makes sense and merely points out how other GUIs like Windows and KDE have been doing it wrong. This is why I prefer Gnome--it concentrates on the user experience, not another Konquerer sidetab to add to the clutter. "OK" is one of the worst GUI decisions ever made.
Sit
I saw this one last week! (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps it's just my setup (Score:5, Informative)
- Konqueror now has sane tabs - before they would have a scroll bar of sorts. I still sometimes instinctively keep only 3 or 4 tabs in Konqueror, while I'm used to several times that many in Mozilla.
- KDEwallet, once I get it properly set up, could prove quite useful for managing passwords.
- The ability to make one's taskbar transparent (I don't use this at the moment) and not the entire width of the screen (I do use this). Kicker as a whole is becoming more and more refined
- The debs I got have some nice icons, making me want to keep my taskbar bigger instead of ~Win2k sized
- I seem to notice a marginal speed increase. It's a nice trend that continues for recent KDE releases.
And now for the bad news. Some things that appear broken with my Debian setup, but I will wait to confirm with a Fedora-based install to determine if it's a packaging or KDE problem.
- One website that formerly rendered fine in Konqueror now doesn't use its pull down menus correctly. Probably a javascript issue that I haven't looked too closely at
- KMail has been a little flakey with one of my higher-traffic POP accounts, but this may not be KMails fault, just a coincidence.
- For whatever reason, my desktop occasionally gets switched to a Firefox virtual desktop I often keep open. Probably due to some javascript/focus thing with Firefox, but I hadn't noticed it before. Of course, somewhere along the line I upgraded Firefox, but I don't have the problem on a RH 8 system.
- I was really looking forward to Juk. Unfortunately, while it appears to work fine for mp3/ogg files, my install will simply not play FLACs until I try playing an OGG or mp3 first. Even then the application has crashed on me, and I stopped trying to use it and went back to xmms. I'm _really_ trying to be rid of xmms (and use something semi-full screen, preferably qt based). noatun has also been somewhat unstable for me, but that's true of every version (I think it was a problem with one of the "skins" this time). I haven't spent enough time with these to really track things down, so YMMV.
For me, the tabs in konqueror alone were worth the upgrade. The problems I listed above may very well be other applications or the packages, and none are showstoppers. After I get my new desktop set up (still haven't finalized a distro, could be Debian, Fedora, or Gentoo), I hope to be able to report any reproducible bugs.
Re:Perhaps it's just my setup (Score:3, Informative)
Nitpick about the Konqueror tabs (Score:3, Informative)
As with many KDE widgets (toolbars, the file list browser in konqueror), the tabs seem to flash a lot before settling down. Maybe it's my slow PII-233 processor, though it seems like KDE3.2 finally got the app load time down to a reasonable level even on this box, so I think the processor's not the problem.
I think the problem with the Konqui tabs is that they are sized based on their label data,
Re:Perhaps it's just my setup (Score:5, Interesting)
Then you'll love what is, for me, one of the killer features of KDE 3.2: prevention of focus stealing.
Go to "Desktop", "Window Behaviour", "Advanced" and at the bottom there's an option "Focus stealing prevention level". I've set mine to 'high' and I love it. Never again will a popup in another application, window, or desktop mess with what I'm typing. This is especially important for me because I have to deal with a flaky mail server all the time, and at least once while I was typing this short message, it popped up a window saying "... the server may have gone down or there may be a network problem".
Now I have a beef with the Mozilla/Thunderbird developers for such a stupid UI and way of dealing with transient network issues, but that's another topic.
killer app? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:killer app? (Score:4, Insightful)
But sometimes I wonder if the killer app is still alive and well. Often the killer apps of the past were the programs that added functionality which was not present prior to their introduction or not popularized until one app broke critical mass.
I can't recall a killer app that provided the same (or even slightly better) functionality as a popular pre-existing one. Mabye it's because it's late and I'm tired, or mabye the answer is so oboviously painful I can't see it.
Feel free to point out the ones that shined who didn't create their niches.
Re:killer app? (Score:2, Insightful)
What is reasonable though? (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem with the closed source software fees is that they are outrageous. Shareware developers need not apply, which happen to make the Windows platform what it is today. Shareware developers should not be underestimated in their importance.
To get a license for both Windows and Linux for QT you would have to pay 2500 USD minimum. Gee for that I can get a universal subscript to MSDN, which gives me an IDE, OS, Office, Windows, Windows Server, etc,etc. And what do I get from Trolltech? And SDK! Gee, yippee...
My point is that shareware developers are not against paying money. Contrary they would pay money, but reasonable amounts!
On the other hand... (Score:5, Interesting)
At least when it comes to hobby projects that grew into a "shareware" size project, it's very convienient to grab some GPL code here and there - and then you don't have much choice but to GPL it all, if you want others to use and enjoy it.
Shareware makes Windows what it is today? Huh? If I look at my programs they're usually either a) Free (as in beer, not speech) or b) Full-blown commercial. What's shareware? Mirc and a few other, not much.
Unless you count those that are "trial" or "evaluation" versions, but they are typically what I'd consider full-blown commercial, stuff like e.g. Paint Shop Pro doesn't strike me as standard "shareware". That'd be more like Mastersplitter or some such tool someone whipped up on a slow day.
If anything, it is the lack of shareware that makes Linux what it is. Somewhere around there's this tool that'll do what you want, or reasonably close, and it's free. And you can tinker with it until it *does* what you want.
What I really miss on Linux is the juggernaughts... when you *know* GIMP etc. just won't cut it, but there is no real powertool available, no matter what you're willing to pay.
In addition, you can take the "the market knows best" position. Trolltech is a business, trying to maximize profits. Issuing shareware licences would cost them basicly nothing. Since any company would want free profit, why aren't they offering one? Either Trolltech is irrational, or there simply is no interest, no volume.
Kjella
Re:What is reasonable though? (Score:2, Insightful)
A big mess of losers who want you to pay $30 for their crappy half-day hack that's available free in any other OS, and where they've spent more effort on "antipiracy" measures than on the program itself?
Traceroute? yep, that'll be $30 please.
Text editor? yep, that'll be $30 please.
Hex editor? yep, that'll be $30 please.
Icon editor? yep, that'll be $30 please.
Graphics converter? yep, that'll be $30 please.
and
KDE 3.2 (Score:5, Insightful)
Plastik is the first theme I've seen that makes KDE really start to look like a professional desktop rather than a mish-mash of poorly concieved applications. The underlying framework (KParts, kioslaves) and QT have always been superior to Gnome's, that much I'll admit. I still think it's a shame that QT is licensed under the GPL rather than a BSD-style license, but I guess I'll live.
I might even switch permanently if KDE 3.3 brings as many improvements.
Re:KDE 3.2 (Score:5, Interesting)
But why did you dislike their business model in the first place? I mean they've bent over backwards for the OSS community and they've also produced some dam fine software. Want to write free software? QT is Free. Want to write closed source software? Pay for QT just like you do with your software tools in the win-32 world. Should Trolltech have busted their ass for the last 7 years for for Free just out of the goodness of their hearts? Why do you begrudge someone who wants to support OSS but also wants to be able to make a living? Do you just dislike any company who wants to market a product and make money? Geez.
Re:KDE 3.2 (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly right. And yet there are so many who call the GPL "anti-commerce"! Amazing.
Re:KDE 3.2 (Score:2, Insightful)
I just see that there's a fundamental difference between toolkits and kernels. If I develop an application for Linux, I can choose any license for said application. If I develop an application for Linux + QT, I must develop under the GPL. If I develop an application for Linux + GTK, I can choose any licen
Re:KDE 3.2 (Score:2, Informative)
If I develop an application for Linux + QT, I must develop under the GPL. If I develop an application for Linux + GTK, I can choose any license. Which is more "free"?
QT is more free. The Freedom granted by the GPL is not to the developer (as in freedom to do what he wants with the code), but rather it is Freedom given to the code. The code, under GPL, will never be closed or unmodifiable. It will never serve the purpose of one entity. It will always be there to be used, modified and distributed. A
Re:KDE 3.2 (Score:2)
personally, i hope you apply your same insane level of "corporate responsibility" based purchasing decision making strategy to other items in your life. sure, it makes shopping in the grocery store a little more annoying, but it's worth it. an
Re:KDE 3.2 (Score:3, Funny)
What does it mean, when you're going for "Funny" but get "Troll" instead?
A nice feature (Score:5, Informative)
-Benjamin Meyer
P.S. Along the same topic why the &%$* does Open Office make a
Over-linking (Score:5, Funny)
If someone has done a study on the most effective text to link ratio, I'm sure they'd find that this Ars article is about 10x higher.
KDE 3.2.1 (Score:5, Informative)
KDE, emacs, etc... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry to post such a blatantly inflammatory gripe, and please don't reply to it in kind. Just be aware that the whole KDE vs. Gnome conversation is quickly degrading to the same sort of drivel that existed in the vi vs. emacs, gui vs. cli, X vs. Y debates.
Both KDE and Gnome are reasonably good programming environments (meaning I can program in both without requiring corrective surgery or extreme pain) and they both do a good job of managing, unifying, homogenizing, and (whatever) of the desktop.
If they come from two licensing lineages, so be it. I'm not worried about the environment / license you are going to choose, I'm going to choose the one I feel most comfortable with and has licensing (at cost or otherwise) that allows me to use it as I need. I'll assume you will do the same.
Less "better than Gnome!" or "worse than Gnome!" and more "it's really great that it has cleaned up feature X" please.
I apologize for such a rant, thank you for putting up with it.
Re:KDE, emacs, etc... (Score:2)
On the other hand, there has been great progress recently. Already, there is a GTK theme which uses Qt to do all the drawing, so all GTK apps automagically looks like KDE apps, with the currently selected KDE theme.
Furthermore, the two deskt
Re:KDE, emacs, etc... (Score:2)
Let's not forget external programs (Score:2, Insightful)
Why no MDK rpm? (Score:4, Interesting)
I find it interesting that Mandrake that is supposed to be one of the major players that supports KDE doesn't have a package there. Nor can I find it in PLF's [zarb.org] (Penguin Liberation Front) packages.
Anyone know what's up with this?
Re:Why no MDK rpm? (Score:2)
BTW, if you are not planning to use the version for multiple architectures, I suggest compiling with optimizations for the specific processor you are running it on. Compiling qt, kdelibs and kdebase with -mcpu=athlon -O3 (as opposed to -O2) has resulted in at least a 30% speedup on my box.
You can automate this by changing the file
to change the optflags of th
Re:Why no MDK rpm? (Score:3, Informative)
KDE vs. Gnome (Score:2, Funny)
Gnome - 1999 beige Toyota Camry sedan
(*I drive a Camry and I use Gnome)
What a gyp! (Score:4, Funny)
The problem with KDE is still QT. (Score:2, Informative)
The other problem has to do with commercial software. The QT commercial product is pretty expensive. If Linux takes off on the desktop and KDE becomes the standard then every commerical developer will have to pay the Troll toll.
KDE is a good desktop but I would really like to see it libera
Arse Technica - Deep Inside KDE 3.2 (Score:2, Funny)
GNOME - Pre-teen midgets gone wild XXX?
Sorry, *tired*.
Gnome theme for KDE? (Score:2)
Steve
Re:Gnome theme for KDE? (Score:3, Informative)
Gnome - KDE - Gnome (Score:2)
Re:Gnome - KDE - Gnome (Score:5, Interesting)
I run it on my 300Mhz P2-laptop and it's fast enough. I also tried it on my 1GHz P3 laptop, and it ran REALLY fast.
On my laptop, full-blown KDE-desktop with Kopete and Konsole uses about 50 megs of RAM (well, that's an estimate. Running CLI-only showed about 5 megs of RAM being used, adding Xfree, KDE and Konsole in to the mix, bumbed that figure to about 58megs. So I would say that KDE might be using under 50 megs of RAM, rest being used by Xfree Konsole and Kopete. I don't consider that to be that much)
noatun (Score:4, Interesting)
You dont know the pain of being a kde user and having to run XMMS!
oh well i use itunes on OSX now
I'm Konvinced, but powerless (Score:5, Interesting)
I've read a lot about KDE and KOffice, enough to try and get it to work on my little Cube (mac). For a couple of weeks I've tried a number of approaches.
- First, install Yellowdog on my main machine. No Go, unless they'll get the Boot from Firewire Disk problem resolved. I'm not convinced I have the skills to install this on my main computer on the main hard-drive.
- Next: installing the OS X "native" alpha, which indeed installed nicely but managed to do exactly nothing.
- Finally I've tried the X11/fink route which was very entertaining (if you're into that kind of mind-numbing fun) but in the end - despite following lots of advice I didn't really get from faq/help/manuals/fora, it managed to do just the same: nothing.
Now why would I share this with a bunch of geeks who can do this with their eyes closed?
Not to be humiliated by you, I'm already quite used to "you're stoopid, zat's ze problem" comments.
But to make you aware that a no-nonsense/no command line/no "first install this, then that, then go through the manuals, then ask help" installer should be highest priority in every project that tries to bridge the gap between superhuman users and regular users.
Of course I'm stupid. But I'm also quite adept on my own platform, I've been using it for the last 20 years (god, I'm old).
Let's wrap this up and tell you what I'm now considering, and please remember that I'm not a regular patient. I'm one of those people who still wants to use something even after being told he's actually too stupid to even install it. The normal reaction - I think - would be to feel better about ones own OS and think less of the one that doesn't want to be friends with you.
My next options are:
- waiting a couple of months until I can safely install Yellowdog on a Tangerine iBook I still have here, but which is still needed as backup machine for me and my wife in case our computers blow up.
- waiting a couple of months until the "native" darwin version of KOffice is out. I think they take installation ease of use very seriously. Although ultimately useless, the installation process was painless. That at least is pleasantly reassuring.
What I'm not going to do: tinker and tinker until I get KOffice to work under the X11/Fink setup. It's just too much of a hassle. There's no joy, and in the end I already have everything I really *need* to enjoy my computer. Curiosity can kill some other cat.
Rant over, have a nice day!
Nice Feature of KMAIL (Score:5, Interesting)
Today this rather wonderful dialog popped up just after I clicked to send an email in Kmail...
Attachments? [blackapology.com]
Often its the little things that really make the difference.
nick
Re:Nice Feature of KMAIL (Score:5, Interesting)
Another new feature of 3.2 I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone here mention yet is the new hotkeys system. It is amazing in its flexibility - you can tell it to do anything from starting a program to performing a DCOP call to pressing a button in any open window in response to just about any type of input - a mouse gesture, a keyboard shortcut, a window opening up. For example, I used it to make mouse gestures to change tracks in XMMS. You can make the input "global" or "local" to any specific program (with the option to set it to only be triggered if a particular window has focus). My only complaint is that the new LIRC remote control setup doesn't integrate into this framework.
could this be a merger of two great desktops? (Score:2)
Integrating Gnome and KDE technologies (Score:4, Insightful)
Theming integration is also cool. Right now there is a gtk theme that uses the current KDE theme engine to draw the widgets. I would love to see a QT theme that uses the current GTK engine to draw widgets. Then a program like KDevelop might actually fit into my desktop.
Another pipe dream that is slowly being worked on is a way to call methods on objects from the Gnome framework to the KDE framework and vice versa.
Re:Integrating Gnome and KDE technologies (Score:3, Interesting)
With fuse_kio [capzilla.net], you can mount any KIO slave directoy on the file system, making them available to GNOME applications as well as GNU command line programs and any other *nix app.
Theming integration is also cool. Right now there is a gtk theme that
Re:Why KDE? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Mac Users UNITE!!!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Hmmm. Seems your right. A hexdump of the file header hints at its history:
Re:Mac Users UNITE!!!!! (Score:2)
Trust me, I do this professionally, they probably did edit it. If it looks better to mirror an image so the computer dude is on the left side rather than the right, we WILL mirror the image.
Shockingly enough, ad photos of telephone operators usually have on unplugged headsets, and I think they are still using glue instead of milk on the front of breakfast cereal boxes.
Re:imo (Score:5, Informative)
Re:imo (Score:2)
Isn't the fact there's a splashscreen on something as simple as a contacts accessory a bit of a problem? You don't see your average calcultor or text editor equipped with splash screens, do you? All I'm saying is that it sounds a bit immature.
Re:imo (Score:2)
(one might think learning about one speaks of FIRST before making public statements is a good idea, no?)
Re:imo (Score:2)
Re:imo (Score:2)
Re:imo (Score:2)
If KDE guys want to brag about the fast loading screen in Kontact, fine. Just don't go comparing it to a loading screen used by a production-use e-mail client that needs to prep tons of mail prior to loading. Then again, I'm not even sure how much a loaded-down Kmail would obliterate the pro-kont
Re:imo (Score:5, Insightful)
If you were to read the article, and read the press announcements that came with KDE 3.2, and indeed try KDE 3.2, you'd find that they have done just that, as well as provide interesting new features. For example:
- KWallet, a new feature but one that makes using passwords and secure form data anywhere in the system much more efficient
- Cleaning up of lots of right click menus
- Cleaning up and improving kmenu
- Improving tabs in Konqueror
- A new universal side bar, which apparently is a lot more efficient for some people
- Even better integration of existing KDE technologies like klipper and kio_slaves into many KDE applications
The list goes on and on, but mostly they are small changes so you either have to use it to notice, or read through CVS changelogs. Next time I suggest you check before making loud statements like that
Re:imo (Score:2, Interesting)
In a nutshell,
Re:imo (Score:3, Insightful)
4 years ago: "Bahh, KDE is too much like Windows, it sucks, real men use Gnome because it can use all my 3 different windowmanagers!"
Now: "Bahh, KDE isn't enough like Windows, it sucks, it doesn't even have a registry-knockoff, you should use Gnome because it's even more dumbed down than Windows XP!"
It doesn't matter what KDE does, there will be always the KDE-haters who will hate it by heart.
Also t
Re:I mostly agree.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I mostly agree.. (Score:5, Informative)
KDE is not slow. Only those who have not yet tried 3.2.0 could make such a statement. I understand why this meme is out there, since I myself wouldn't touch KDE with a 10 foot pole in the 2.x days. It was slow as molasses then. Do remember, Apple distributed the changes they made in KHTML back to Konqueror. The difference in speed is amazing.
As far as bloat, KDE is as bloated or as svelte as you make it. DO_NOT_COMPILE is your friend. For those on binary distributions, try Debian, which lets you pick and choose exactly which KDE apps are installed, allowing just as much choice as DO_NOT_COMPILE.
Re:Debian Unstable packages? (Score:5, Informative)