The Future of KDE 301
Samawi writes "linux.com has just published an interview with core KDE developer Daniel M. Duley. Topics covered include the upcoming KDE 2.0 (including links to screenshots!), Corba & TinyMico, the advanced widget theme designer, the new high-color icons for the very-soon-to-be-released KDE 1.1.2, influence of Gnome, etc. "
Re:KDE has no future [Get your terms right] (Score:1)
Re:Wizards? (Score:1)
Deja vu (Score:1)
I suppose either your definition of "no time" is different from mine, or your subtle irony just passed over my head.
BTW: if you wanna count how many people work full time in KDE , you need to count some places besides MandrakeSoft (which anyways accounts for about 1/3rd of RHAD labs already anyhow?)
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
I think C++ does encourage bad OO design in many ways, unless you are wise to them. Operator overloading, multiple inheritence are things that must be handled with extreme care. Overuse of any kind of inheritence is bad. Sure, C can discourage good OO design, from where I see it mostly by making the programming constructs more unwieldy. That, and by not complaining when you access members of a struct that you shouldn't. For that, I have to go with some philosophy from Perl - you shouldn't touch something because you aren't supposed to, not because the compiler won't let you.
My point is that both C++ and C require you to have a solid understanding of OO design, and that neither stop you from doing it right.
C++ makes it a smoother process, easier on the programmer, for sure. Sometimes I think that's a really a hinderance, though.
Re:Developers (Score:1)
There are many subjects here on
They should have used a real UNIX (Score:1)
Re:Corel will be pissed off (Score:1)
And don't tell me NT is "Enterprise ready" (Score:1)
impressions of kde (Score:2)
(Its a fantastic way of converting your skeptical gf's who make fun of you for calling latex a wordprocessor
Oh and kfm is simply the best! Not so much for the filemanager (which I suppose is cool too) but it really is a superfast easy to run web-browser that is utterly responsive , its not completely as functional as netscape but it gets the job done w/out waiting for the 20 seconds for netscape to pop up in that cludgy kind of way that is so annoying! Oh yea and the back button takes you to where you were on the previous page (not further up the page like netscape (or at least every version of netscape i've come across)) for slashdot threading alone its worth it
Seriously kde really is starting to look like a desktop that most kids think of when they think of gui apps and 'modern' computers (for better or worse)! As far as stability, I was actually having some weirdness w/ kde and 1.1 (this was a 'contrib' type debian package unofficial, not something compiled on my own).. Its definitely the one to give your nongeek friends *imho*
-avi
But it won't compile with egcs (Score:1)
Re:Chasing Taillights? (Score:1)
The current KDE 2.0 user manger is much like the one in 1.x.x, it's quite a bit different then the Wndows version, in features and in the way it works... and it works pretty good.
KDE is an open-source, open-minded project, they don't mind reusing interface ideas from other platforms, and adding radically new ones, and tossing out several bad ones (MDI / parent child windows comes to mind).
Remember if you can write a better version of KUser or the device manger in Qt 2.0/KDE 2.0 feel free to submit it ftp://ftp.kde.org/incomming/
Re:Chasing Taillights? (Score:1)
I'm so glad I'm not forced to use it! :-)
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
KDE had a lead of millions and millions of years! (Score:1)
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
Also, you are factually wrong: the generated C didn't implement private members, for example. Simply, the translator refused to generate the C to access the member that was supposed to be private, and spews an error *before* trying to implement it in C.
So, private members are feasible in C... as long as that means "I am a C programmer who can remember not to access that member!"
Re:Hardly... (Score:1)
It is similar to the GIMP -- and is compatible with all GIMP plugins, making a powerful, KDE/Corbra aware Imaging program, with an interface that doesn't totally bite (although GIMP 1.1.x is getting better -- part of the GIMP are just strangely designed -- and rely on right clicking way to much!)
A good user interface is obvious to new users -- the GIMP takes experience to figure it out.
Having Mosfet working full time on these key issues is important, users like an interface that is flexable, and yet doesn't required a degree in CS to understand how to use it.
KDE 2.0 and customizability... (Score:1)
Another thing that really might be good to improve is the Minicli (the mini-command-line KDE gives when you press Alt-F2.) When it works, it works nicely, but I quit using it for anything serious because... nothing happens when the command you execute is misspelled or something. I'm thinking that they could pop up a small xterm-window that contained all text sent to stderr the first time anything sends to stderr when you exec something with minicli. (Would this be a Wretched Hack, a Good Idea, or some disgusting hybrid? Just curious.)
I'm still learning C++, otherwise I'd have done these things already. If KDE had been coded in C, I'd have "fixed" these by now :-).
Finally: Sure, the desktop screenshots are cool. But who ever has time to look at the desktop? With a GIMP window here, X11amp there, kvt there, and assorted other delights, at least 3 of the virtual desktops are completely covered, and I pay much more attention to the contents of the application windows than what's behind them. Yeah, I'm weird, but I think "themes" are the spawn of the devil and an animated Pink Panther cursor is akin to a bow tie with embedded blinking Christmas lights... cute, but you get sick of it really quickly.
Re: (Score:1)
Looks cool... (Score:1)
Re:MRTG Graph of Slashdot Effect..Freebsd??? (Score:1)
The original server ("www") is one we've been having problems with lately anyway. We simply weren't prepared. It's just a members web server.
Had we been aware of the article we would have moved Donald's site to the server that is now the mirror sooner. It's now on the commercial web server ("halley" or "www2" if you don't have a cached entry), and it's not even blinking at the load:
3:22PM up 83 days, 21:50, 2 users, load averages: 0.05, 0.07, 0.04
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
But this calls into question how intuitive Mac UI really is, given that
I couldn't find a way to do it despite looking hard.
I think they are going in the wrong direction here (Score:1)
Granted, many of the things they are doing is helpful, application interoperability, ease of use, etc. But until they get on the track of making a better desktop, people will be sticking to windows desktops.
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:2)
True
> I can't write graphical perl programs for KDE
You will. The PerlQt port is lagging behind right now.. but that doesn't mean that it won't catch up again.
> I can't write python applications for KDE
Why not? Last I looked (yesterday), the python binding for KDE were quite complete.
> I can't write C applications for KDE
Would you even if there was a binding?
I think that this entire line of argument is a red herring. I hear this mostly from people who inherently don't like KDE and want to find something to pick on (now that the license issue is mostly a moot point, let's attack the lack of language support!)
The fact is that for all the talk, whenever language bindings *are* created, nobody uses them. You say you want to use perl with KDE. Okay.. a binding was created... but it fell behind since nobody used it! You say you want to use C. Fine enough. Why is it that when there *was* a C binding that nobody used it?
What it comes down to is this: if people really wanted to use other languages with KDE, then that binding would happen (e.g., python)!
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:1)
UNIX is inheritably bigger, not because it's bloated -- but because it's designed to be more flexable -- since traditional UNIX hardware makes PC's look like toys -- so you do need some RAM and speed to use a modern UNIX setup completely with advanced desktop configuration.
We will try to support old machines as much as possible -- but it's not always pratical -- you can always yourself hack the code to preform better on your machine.
In the days of 450-600 mhz processor machines, with 128 megs of RAM, and the majority of users using machines around 200mhz with 32-64 megs of RAM, the OS is going to be more optimized for this hardware -- and not as much for a 16 mhz or 33 mhz machine.
Re:Windows is going to have this feature (Score:1)
I think in the long run one of the benefits of Linux is going to be that the user will have a CHOICE of what desktop / WM to use. I've played with KDE and Gnome and I enjoyed both of them for different reasons. I have been using KDE for the past couple months just because I grew tired of cleaning up core dumps every day with Gnome, but I plan on trying it again with the next release.
When the level of the "average" computer user grows they will want more than what "The Man" tells them is good, they will want to make that decision for themselves. Long kive Freedom of Choice !!!!!
TinyMico? (Score:3)
Mini-Mico!
(bows, then runs
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
You can go with a stripped-down non-pixmap theme if you want to - or get the fanciest desktop out there. It's your choice.
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
Private, protected, and public interfaces are usefull only if you don't trust people using your class. I have go with the Perl philosophy on this one -- programmers shouldn't touch class internals because they aren't supposed to, not because they aren't allowed to. Not that declaring something 'private' will keep anyone from accessing the private members if they want to. Yes, C can't do it at all, I just don't think it's an important part of good OO design.
C macros cause code bloat, but templates don't?! Sorry, but that is just craziness. Just like macros, templates generate source code, one set of it for each instantiation of the template.
Exception handling is a whole different ball of wax, not really related to OOP except that it is a feature of C++ (and a relatively new one at that), which is an OO language. setjmp/longjmp are evil, and certainly not a replacement. Exceptions could be done well in C, with way too much work on the part of the coder. This is one area where C++ wins... except that I've had so much trouble with compilers that I never use them. They are a new feature, after all, and compilers are still trying to handle the ANSI standard (which is itself not very old).
I like templates. I (guardedly) like exceptions. I like inline functions over macros, const instead of #define, and other C++ features. But OO is still very doable in C, and it isn't markedly more cumbersome.
If you really want to see how this is all done in C, then browse the gtk+ source tree.
Re:BOTH GNOME AND KDE SUCK (Score:1)
2) GTK is the most customizable GUI. it can be made to look like win9x, or nothing like it. quit it with the flames. it seems more than half of people using linux (or whatever) use it for the sole reason its not windows, which is pathetic. why not use something 1) because you like it 2) and helps you work better. quit worrying about what your friends think when they find out you use redhat..............AND KDE*(^*(&*( OH NO^^&*^^%$.
----------
Have FreeBSD questions?
Re:BOTH GNOME AND KDE SUCK (Score:1)
Was my message not plain enough? I suggested a couple of changes to the way the Gnome and KDE interface work. Those suggestions are valid. My note was to let people know that simply copying Microsoft is not good enough. Try to make a UI that is better than Windows. If the goal is to only be as "good" as windows, then mediocrity wins again! At the current state, Gnome and KDE are simply ripoffs of a poorly designed UI from Redmond. Why would anyone copy such a design?
As I said before both Gnome and KDE suck! They could have set the bar up a bit higher, but they settled for the same crappy interface.
Re:KDE has no future (Score:1)
Topic seen. You: see doctor.
Re:But it won't compile with egcs (Score:1)
I compiled KDE1.0-pre1, KDE-1.0, KDE-1.1, and KDE-1.1.1 all with egcs with pgcc patches thrown in for good measure. All compiled out of the box without modification or problems.
KDE and egcs work extremely well together.
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
Question: Is it possible to buy a three button mouse for a mac? Or a wheel mouse?
Question2: IF it is possible, do any programs take advantage of enhanced mice?
Question3: Why doesn't apple abandon its only-one-button-for-everybody mouse strategy. After all, they've dropped a lot of the cruft from the original mac (M68k, black and white only, no internal expansion)...
Re:Chasing Taillights? (Score:1)
I think the kde developers want it to look like windows since the help system also looks similar (it has the same icons) and the tree in the file manager is the same as explorer
Re:Flame (Score:1)
Re:They don't work together (Score:1)
Re:Ok, this mirror is good I swear. (Score:1)
And it's FreeBSD anyway.
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
the point is, that it is all done by the compiler, not you, if you would try to implement good inheritance (multiple, public/private etc.) it would not be all that easy and not that easy to use (if you want polymorphism).
>
it's not about trust. you want to make it known, which functions/members are internal and which are for general use. objects have internal mechanizms (change with time) and external interfaces (should not change in time). you want to differentiate between these.
>
they generate one function for each different value of template parameters, the macros are simple peices of code inserted everywhere where the macro is called.
----------------------------------------
you seem to be missing that all the programming languages generally do the same, everything that you can implement in one of them, can be implemented in machine code. yet we have different languages for different purposes. the computer languages are for people. OO is much easier to do if the language supports it (like C++) or even mandates it (like Smalltalk).
erik
I disagree. (Score:1)
2) If you are going to make money by selling proprietary software what is wrong with the idea of having to give back some of that money to troll tech? (How much you can argue about but surely there is nothing wrong with giving something back!).
3)KDE symbolizes a Marxist approach to software development
KDE development has no political or religious affinity. Each project can choose their own development model. Different projects contribute code under different licenses. Core development tends to be done on an anarchy/meritocracy basis.
Basically KDE development encourages Open Source development but allows proprietary development at a cost.
consumer Linux? (Score:1)
Re:KDE shouldn't win! (Score:1)
This is wrong also. The correct answer is both should win. What we need to get away from is the idea that there has to be just one winner and everything else is a loser. If both KDE and Gnome develop into excellent desktop environments (and both show potential to do so), then they will both be winners. Users will be the winners if they continue to have more than one viable choice. The only losers will be those who feel they have to control everything (like Microsoft) or those who are deathly paralyzed by fear that they might have to make a decision, even if there is really no wrong choice.
Re:HAHAHAHA (Score:1)
Re:KDE 2.0 and customizability... (Score:1)
running an xterm from minicli: that would suck
The whole point of minicli is that you *don't* load another program, so it's faster and memory slim
Things that'd be nice to share... (Score:1)
John
Re:They should have used a real UNIX (Score:1)
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
KDE can please you! (Score:1)
should do.
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
Witness the original NeXT machine, which had a two-button mouse: but they acted the same! And this same-acting was not in the toolkit or at any software level, it was in the window server, so that it was *impossible* for a program to differentiate the buttons no matter how much it wanted to (you could send a command to the window server but that would split the buttons for all the apps).
Re:KDE sucks, and here is why (Score:1)
Um, maybe I have my philosophers mixed up. Which one was the communist, Ayn Rand?
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:2)
I have tried multiple virtual desktop managers for Windows NT. I have yet to find one that works in the presence of Visual C++ in debug mode. KDE handles multiple desktops quite nicely.
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
Just call it "Kizard" (Score:1)
vatos locos for life esse! (Score:1)
Windows for life too, esse?
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
Now that the facts are out of the way, stop spreading FUD.
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:1)
Re:Why wait (Score:1)
Re:Wizards? (Score:1)
So call 'em Assistants, Advisors, Aides... or if you want to tweak MS at the cost of obscurity, Conjurors.
I'm actually a tad surprised they never went after StarDivision, given that StarOffice (at least early versions... 3.0-ish) looked very, *very* similar to MS Office in many, many details.
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
Things that most annoying me about the Mac:
1) The shared menubar! (I CAN'T STAND IT)
2) The one-button mouse. (It's like using a computer after being in a disfiguring accident)
3) Everything else. (When using a Mac, I feel like I want to smash it in raging fury. It won't actually let me just get stuff done.)
Off Topic Flame (Score:1)
For a while, you had me going. I suspected a fellow linux weenie trying to make MS marketing seem worse than it is. Glad I was wrong...
(um.... sorry 'bout that. I'll stop now
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
I could be wrong here, and all you real programmers out there are free to correct me.
Hmmmmm! (Score:1)
Re:They should have used IIS (Score:1)
And you forgot about the Windows 2000 farce,er challege haven't you?
Microcrap products just can't hack it in the *Real World* it seems only in unrealistic benchmark testing....
Re:Windows is going to have this feature (Score:1)
Re:Just call it "Kizard" (Score:1)
Re:KDE had a lead of millions and millions of year (Score:1)
I was just replying (perhaps too subtly) to the claim that KDE had been in development for "years" before GNOME.
Re:VB is my Window Maker (Score:1)
I now hate VB. Coming from a background in real languages (Pascal, C, C++, etc.) I found VB frustrating. I always knew exactly what I wanted to do and how to do it. But getting VB to do it is another story. VB makes the really easy stuff easier, and makes everything else a pain in the ass.
Back in my day, we used AppleSoft Basic. It had line numbers, and "?SYNTAX ERROR" messages on perfect code! It didn't even have an editor. Any we liked it!!!!
You go on about your fancy shmancy "structured programming". Back in my day, we had so many GOTO's we could hardly figure out what we wrote!
Basic is a wonderful language for teaching little kids how to program. It should never have progressed further than maybe QBASIC. VB was an attempt to take an old language that isn't good enough for real programming, wrap it in point 'n crash garbage, and get people to use it. Once you learn a real language, you'll never touch VB.
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
Re-arranging widgets is definitely nice. But I was trying to re-arrange the window widgets (program menu, sticky, maximize, minimize, close) and discovered that you can rearrange them a little, but not much from where they're expected to be.
Do you want to put minimize to the right of maximize? You're out of luck.
Do you want the program menu on the right side of the window? Sorry. You can click the button there but the menu still opens up on the LEFT side.
And then there's the completely arbitrary restriction that you can't have more than 3 widgets on each side of the window. I wanted to put EVERYTHING on the right side, because of the way I often lose the upper left corner of a window behind the top-left taskbar. Sorry, only 3 per side, and of course the program menu has to be on the left. But I dealt with it by getting rid of maximize, which I never use.
Anyway, I realize I'm complaining about TINY little things, but I hope that KDE 2.0 fixes these arbitrary restrictions.
--
Winning (Score:1)
I can't help but think that if there were 'bosses' of GNOME + KDE who could make a deal (and force their programmers to accept it), we could get some co-ordination between the two projects. But if that were the case all the time, we wouldn't have Linux, there'd just be Windows.
Re:Mirror is Up! - You're a dolt. (Score:1)
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:1)
And several months ago, he was lamenting about how unstable Windows was, but how we had no choice, and he added in parentheses: "(Well, there's Linux, but only the weird kid next door uses that.)"
But Al has finally seen the light - he now runs many columns about Linux. Contrary to the pessimists who say Microsoft has a monopoly over our minds, this is a victory. It was pretty much his job to give advice on Windows, but he's converted to Linux anyway.
--
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
1) Writing theme engines (called styles there) for Qt is a whole lot easier than doing it for GTK.
Why? OO design. You can *inherit* the, say, platinum style, and hack the widget that annoys you the most. On GTK the closest equivalent starts with "copy the sources for the GTKStep engine to that other directory".
2) Qt's user (non programmer) definable styles (the equivalent of GTK pixmap themes) are faster. One of the most used elements of those styles are gradients. In GTK you do them by stretching pixmaps, while in Qt you do them programatically (and actually, you do it from mosfet's cute designer), and they get rendered using optimized code instead of a general purpose pixmap routine.
Of course, if I am wrong, I invite anyone to correct me.
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:1)
The great thing about UNIX is how you can get commands that process data streams and pipe them together. The problem is that there isn't a similar widely adopted standard for GUI programs on Unix. The analagous capabilities are inter app cut and paste, and object sharing (as in OLE or OpenDoc).
KDE and Gnome are addressing this issue. When you can build the functional equivalent of Office 2K (in terms of functionality, not quality) with free software, and can work easily with third party apps w/ no special rigamarole, then you have a Windows killer. It seems to me that KDE is further down this path.
Chasing Taillights? (Score:2)
But the screenshots of the device manager and user manager really made me wince. These are identical copies of the windows equivalents. Know what immediate impression I get? Microsoft leads, KDE copies. This is not a reputation we deserve to get.
Re:I like WindowMaker still (Score:1)
I happen to like using an integrated Desktop Environment - it's very convenient for me to have an integrated file manager, web browser (although I don't use it very much, I prefer Netscape), mail checker, ICQ program, MP3 player, and soon word processor. I've used WindowMaker and liked it; used E and liked it; used AfterStep and liked it; used GNOME and liked it, and used a few others and didn't like them.
It all boils down to personal choice. As long as you can still use other things, what's the problem? Stop complaining and do something USEFUL!
that's the great part (Score:2)
--
Re:I like WindowMaker still (Score:1)
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:1)
Your kidding right? Please tell me you are kidding? You mean your third party hacks are better than things KDE and GNOME do inherently. Try configuring hardware with out the control panel? The customizeability of *nix and KDE blows windows out of the water! Do you think people are moving to linux because linux and windows are the same? KDE and Windows are not the same thing, if you would use *nix software before making baseless comparisons you probably would not have posted that silly comment.
Whatever (Score:1)
Re:\/\/2K Ru13z!!!!!!!!!!! (Score:1)
>> you have to use dos to do everything
>> linix will go bankrupt
Beautiful. And you fooled the moderators, too. Y'oughta get bonus points for that.
But hotgrrl67532 is mine; stay away from her or else I'll send you the Good Times virus.
KDE 2 before Win2K (Score:1)
It's pretty good, though somewhat buggy. Konqueror (which just might convert a old nc/mc guy like myself, quite a feat) looks great but is pretty unstable right now. It works though. Just needs some bugs fixed.
I'm confident it'll be very useable very soon. I'm currently doing a reinstall, and I'm going to try it out again.
I also tried out XFree86 3.9.15. Pretty damn slick. I only had to add *one line* to my XF86Config file: Driver "MGA". I also changed the X symlink to point to XFree86 rather than XF86_SVGA.
My only problem was that it "broke" kdm/xdm. Now it only goes into twm no matter what I select. I glanced through some documentation and went through a load of config files trying to find out what's running twm. I found some and changed twm to startkde and it's still doing it.
Ho hum, I'll figure it out.
KDE vs. GNOME == Linux vs. 386BSD? (Score:1)
386BSD was always a step behind, had a very "vocal" leader (Jolitz vs. Miguil?), and eventually failed to accomplish its goals, splintered, and pretty much no one rememebrs 386BSD now.
Just a thought.
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:1)
Eat that
Re:They don't work together (Score:1)
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:1)
I find it makes Slashdot reading much less annoying in Netscape. If you click a link regularly, it's really slow coming back, and it won't be displaying the right part of the document.
Re:Winning (Score:1)
Personally I haven't run into that many problems getting Gnome and KDE to coexist. For example, on my laptop I am using SuSE, which sets up KDE by default, however, I have Gnome installed also and I can use both at the same time. I have also been doing GTK+ development on that machine without any problems.
One of the cool things about open source right now is that we have enough developers that we can afford to support two similar projects.
Personally, I think eventually we will see cooperation between at least parts of the two groups, and probably also some borrowing back and forth of code, but I don't really see any reason to rush things at this time. Once both KDE and Gnome fully integrate support for CORBA, I think that may help bridge some of the gaps between them.
Re:I like WindowMaker still (Score:1)
In addition to that, I fancy myself a programmer, and I'm not exactly rolling in cash - I'd much prefer to spend my money on something useful (like hardware) than on things I can get for free.
Re:Mbufs? (Score:1)
Things for you to do:
Get a life
Learn how to code
Get your head out of your ass
Stop dragging your knuckles.
Buttons on right side of titlebar (Score:1)
Re:Whatever (Score:1)
However, I still remember an email from Miguel. Around september 1997? That said something like "we already have the gimp, mc which has a graphical version almost ready, VFS (and so on)".
So, at least on his eyes, KDE did *not* have a large lead at the time of GNOME creation.
Re:Wizards? (Score:1)
Re:Wizards? (Score:1)
KDE has a very well-integrated desktop (Score:2)
Okay, I'd been using KDE way back before the 1.0 releases, and I liked it. Then I got side-tracked trying to get gnome to compile (over and over and over). Finally GNOME is relatively stable, and... yeah, I've got cool themes and capplets out the wazoo.
... anyway, the other day I installed Caldera OpenLinux 2.2, and all I can say is that I was very impressed, and that's not something I say often. I would probably recommend a KDE-based desktop to a non-unix guru over GNOME at the moment for the following reasons:
1 - KDE doesn't suffer from the Desktop Environment / Windowmanager duality that GNOME does. -- yes, I know you can run differnt WM's with kde, too, but most people don't. Fact is that KDE is just plain a more cohesive desktop environemt - much similar to a newbie-friendly MacOS or Windows9X (which is what new linux users are familiar with...)
2 - while developers may still remember the stigma of the old qt license, end users don't care, and they probably don't know what a widget is, or what the difference between c++ and c is. So... for once, we finally get down to "which environment makes me more productive?". While I like gnome and use it at work on Solaris and linux, it does have a lot of funky bells and whistles, and it's arguably much slower than KDE
3 - stability. maybe it's just me, but living on the cutting edge of gnome development hurts. People tend to break fundamental pieces quite often (witness gnome-print - try getting it to work on Solaris or non-redhat 6.0) panel sometimes craps out, and combined with development versions of E, my dual xeon linux box sometimes hangs for a second or two. That's not good. My experience with the KDE cutting edge has been much more cross-platform friendly, and it seems to be a more focused and coordinated effort. Nobody comes out of left-field with a new method that only works on the latest RedHat, or worse yet, only compiles on their system.
I still use gnome at work, I prefer gtk toolkit for development projects, I prefer c to c++, and my gnome/e desktop looks really cool, but if I were setting up linux for my mom or sister, I'd probably give them a KDE desktop.
Re:KDE vs GNOME (C++ vs C)? (Score:2)
All that said, I wish Qt would use the signal/slot mechanism of Gtk--. Moc is a nasty little boondoggle I could do without.
Re:I think they are going in the wrong direction h (Score:2)
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:2)
biggest thing stopping windows sheep from using Linux is the lack of a robust, fully functional GUI.
Actually it's lack of MS applications (Office), sure we have WP/Applix/Staroffice, but these types of people "don't want to learn a new application
Re:KDE has a very well-integrated desktop (Score:2)
I worry that KDE will try to be too much like Gnome and become as unusable.
Re:KDE for everyone (Score:2)
Mirror is Up! (Score:2)
Mirror is up at http://www2.jorsm.com/~mosfet/screens hots.htm [jorsm.com].
JORSM Admin
Re:\/\/2K Ru13z!!!!!!!!!!! (Score:2)
I noticed that too, if that is the best they can do, we have nothing to worry about.
Hell, I would welcome alternative viewpoints if they were presented with intelligent arguments - either there are no intelligent arguments for pro-windows, or those making the comments are a bunch of vacuum-cranium doodz with nothing better to do than show their stupidity.
Hardly... (Score:2)
Besides, I remember a common argument about KDE 1.0. "Sure it has a lot of features but it's so ugly!" I wish you people would make up your mind!
Finally, since he's the theme developer, his screenshots are oriented at what he's working on of course. Go check out the rest of the screenshots on www.kde.org and koffice.kde.org and, more importantly, read some of the mailing lists. That way you can make an informed decision instead of basing your comments on a short interview with only one of the KDE developers.