First KDE 4 App ('Kind of') Running 74
An anonymous reader writes "It looks like the first KDE 4 application is running. Click the link for screenshots." In short, "Kate now kind of works."
Eureka! -- Archimedes
Re:Plastic (Score:2)
Re:Plastic (Score:1)
Re:Plastic (Score:2)
Re:Plastic (Score:2)
Re:Plastic (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Plastic (Score:2)
KDE4? (Score:3, Interesting)
Trolltech just pisses me off so much. I mean Qt is OK but damn if the price doesn't keep going up, and up, and up... It's already insanely expensive and it just keeps going higher. Who the hell are they trying to target with that thing anyway?! If they sold it for $1000 I can guarantee they would sell 3 or 4 times the number of licenses. They would lose nothing moneywise but gain massive market dominance (snowball effect). Then regular folk like myself could purchase and use Qt to do great things because it really is the best cross-platform toolkit out there (free or not).
Re:KDE4? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Re:KDE4? (Score:1, Informative)
No you don't -- that's what the QPL is for. You don't need to go with the GPL if you're not writing a GPL app.
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
If you're a proprietary shareware/crapware author, then look elsewhere. Trolltech has already said you're not their market. So get over it. If you are a pro
Re:KDE4? (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at it this way, the cross-platform market is small. There just isn't much money to be made there so the cross-platform toolkits should be cheap. Most of the time I would like to support other platforms but the cost can't be justified due to Qt's huge price and the relatively small cross-platform market. The only people it hurts are the users.
If it weren't for the one or two cash-cows Trolltech has they would already be out of business. They're like a government contractor sucking the teet of wasteful spending (I wonder if one of their cash cows is some government).
The reason I want Qt to be cheap is specifically so it does become massively widespread. This will make platform dependance a thing of the past. This helps us all.
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Re:KDE4? (Score:3, Informative)
That money would pay for MSDN subscriptions for those same developers for 5 years.
Re:KDE4? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure it is. IF it saves just one week worth of work it is well worth it. Where I work we have our own custom tool kit, that contains much less than QT. Way back when (early 90's - before STL did things better, but in a different way) we paid someone to spend months making the tool kit. Just this year I personally spent several weeks tracking down bugs in it (And I know of some I was unable to fix). I also have to re-do things that QT includes already.
A successful business owner needs to consider
Re:KDE4? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:KDE4? (Score:1)
--
Yes, I'm stealing your jobs! Don't you just hate me?
Re:KDE4? (Score:1)
Re:KDE4? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you think $2500 is too expensive for tools of the trade, then talk to an automechanic, or someone in the building trades. I knew a tile setter who had his van stolen, and it cost him a heck of a lot more than $2500 to replace his tools of the trade. And that's not counting the van!
Re:KDE4? (Score:4, Interesting)
No, but my mechanic friends do have several thousand in snap-on brand tools. Someone who wants to be a mechanic come to work the first day and has the snap-on man bring several thousand worth of tools the first day. (Snap-on gives easy credit to new mechanics, and they have the about the best tools, though you pay twice as much for them)
QT is a tool kit, not one tool. Buy the QT toolkit and you get hundreds of widgets, strings, and other tools. All well written (many people like them better than the C++ STL), debugged (as much as anything is debugged), and supported (Unlike this support knows something, unlike most of the others you named).
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
I can buy tools at a "dollar store". For a few bucks I can get the basics. Not free, but not much less. I can get good tools for half the price of snap-on. (In fact I do, but mechanics don't because the quality and service eventually pays for the cost)
I know a carpenter who paid $350 for his hammer, out of his own pocket. Everyone else he works with is happy with a $25 hammer. (The $20 hammers ruin your body quick) The $350 is much better than any other hammer I've ever used. Worth $350? I
Re:KDE4? (Score:3, Informative)
wxWidgets [wxwidgets.org] has binding for numerous languages and is under a license like the LGPL (see the home page). Anyway if you want to support multiple platforms try it out. There lots of applications use it already.
It doesn't quite have the scope of QT which from my understanding includes ALOT of extra functionality that isn't just GUI based.
Your logic doesn't make sense though. If the market is small they the product should/will be expensive (cost to develop ~ $1000 with 5 custome
Re:KDE4? (Score:4, Insightful)
No, you want QT to be cheap so you can make more profit through Trolltech making less profit. If, as another poster has mentioned below, it's so easy to offer a cross platform toolkit on par with QT at such a great price and still remain a viable company, why don't you do it? Why doesn't someone else do it? (Remember, Microsoft is not cross platform).
Do you really believe that Microsoft wouldn't charge more for a cross platform toolkit? Honestly?
Trolltech has already helped us all. KDE uses QT for free and has produced an excellent environment. Developers that have a grasp on their cash flow buy commercial QT licenses and make money selling their programs. Then there are people like you that can bitch about having to pay Trolltech money by trolling on Slashdot. See? Everybody wins!
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
What you mean like RealBasic [realbasic.com] ?
I mean come on
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Now what I do not like about QT is how it has seemed to pass the FREE test when things like OpenOffice and Safari seem to get people nickers in a knot.
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
No it isn't. WebCore is LGPL'ed, like KHTML's license requires, but Safari is not.
Yes and no. KDE-folks did not complain about Apple. They specificly mentioned that Apple is following the license and their actions are legal. What the KDE-devs complained about was the USERS who whined how KHTML-developers are "lazy" and "incompetent", since they are so slow at merging the Apple-improvements. KHTML
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
Well I do not think that the KHTML developers are lazy or incompetent but I do wish they would merge in the Apple improvements as soon as they can. Since I do not add code to the project or give money I can not bitch too much. At best I can suggest and hope.
Re:KDE4? (Score:2)
They would love to do that. But it's very difficult since all they get is an occasional code-bomb (read: huge blob of code) with no access to their bug-database (so they can't check what "this fixes bug number 43665" means), no revision-history (so they do not know why some changes were made and how the code evolved), several references to internal OS X API's
Re:KDE4? (Score:4, Informative)
Wrong (Score:1, Flamebait)
So the situation is not comparable at all.
Re:Wrong (Score:2)
Contrariwise--if you use GCC or emacs the way people tend to use Qt, and link against them, then you fall under the GPL and have to ship source. And people have done just that--made special versions of GCC (Apple), or special versions of emacs.
So the situations are exactly comparable. Furthermore, the FSF
Re:Wrong (Score:2)
Re:KDE4? (Score:1)
I definitely agree on the benefits of chargine more for something, up to the point the market will sustain.
I used to feel guilty for asking for money for setting up servers, etc, as favours for friends.
But I noticed that when I started advertising commercially I got a lot more customers when I said "I'll install Linux and give you a proxy server / filtering NATing gateway for $500" than when I did the same for "$100".
It makes no sense to me, in both cases I'd take a machine (supplied) install Squid + Deb
Re:KDE4? (Score:1)
More Screenshots (Score:2, Informative)
Optimizations (Score:5, Interesting)
I began using Linux with RH 7.3 & KDE 3.0 on an old 700Mhz Duron with 256Mb SDRAM. I kept running linux - and later FreeBSD - and KDE on this machine for two years, and every major KDE release seemed like a minor hardware upgrade. That is one of the reasons I kept that old machine for that long - and longer, previously it had win98se installed. First, I thought I will either replace it completely or buy more RAM, better CPU in half a year. Then as I went through each KDE realese - and probably better C++ support in gcc also helped - I felt less and less the need to upgrade the hw. I wonder how long they can keep up producing more efficient code that runs better and better on old hardware. Currently KDE 3.4 has only one 'serious' requirement: memory. If you have 256+, itt will run nicely on a 300Mhz celeron, but of course, you'll have to turn off some eyecandies to reach an agreeable performance.
Keep up the good work guys and gals!
Re:Optimizations (Score:2, Insightful)
One interesting comparison is memory usage of new kate compared to present one. KDE developers do an amazing job when it comes to code optimizations - and it seems they will do it again for KDE 4.
This may just be down to the new GCC and Qt. KDE developers do do an amazing job, with KDE getting quicker every release since 3.1 for me, but in this case, they are sitting on top of some pretty major optimisations themselves.
More customisability, flexibility important (Score:1)
Also, I hope they make sure these desktop environments completely themeable, personally I have distaste of the aqua and brushed metal themes , and would like to be able to completely change