On Sunday 06 July 2008, Larry Stotler wrote:
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 1:11 PM,
wrote: I've been using KDE 4.0.85 here for 5 days, yet cannot see what all this fuss is about. You want a fork for what reason? Because it has bugs? Because it looks different? Because of plasma?
Basically because of the entire look and feel besides the slow down due to the unwanted(at least on my part) effects. But I have to say that the color palette definately doesn't agree with anything I care for. It's look and feel is very Vista like, and that's enough of a killer for me.
When you ask to fork a project, people in general think that technical reasons are your motive. Considering that KDE has always been easy to configure any way you want, appearance that doesn't appeal to you isn't a reason for a fork. I don't like the default colour settings either, so I changed them. I've been doing this since KDE2.
KDE4 works for most purposes at the moment, I see no reason to waste resources supporting 3 desktops instead of 2.
Considering that openSUSE also supports Xfce now, and I think there was another one installed as well, that's not really a big deal.
The main problem is that KDE4 is the future, KDE 3 support shouldn't take much developer time, otherwise KDE4 will achieve feature parity much later than users are patient enough to wait for, which causes aggravation.
Could you please explain how you perceive this difference? In what way is KDE3 functionally different to KDE4?
I'm not going to go over what a lot of people have posted. Basically, the fact that you can't do everything that KDE3 does is bad enough. KDE4 isn't ready for prime time(at least compared to the KDE3 standard that it WILL be compared to) and the fact that the LiveCD is Only available with KDE4 and not KDE3 says a lot about where the devs are wanting to go.
KDE3 has been in development for over 5 years. Expecting KDE4 to have feature parity in 2 years is not realistic. That said, I have yet to find something that would prohibit someone from using KDE4. Basic desktop functionality is here, the rest will arrive sooner if people have patience and avoid demoralizing the developers.
Are you talking about opensuse-updater? Are you implying that the main difference between KDE3 and KDE4 is the appearance?
In many ways, yes. The KDE4 programs have a radically different look. Even the games, like Magghong, look too glitzy. I can't give a lot of comparisions because I don't have my KDE4 system in front of me, and I removed most of the KDE4 versions from this one.
You can configure KDE4 to look like KDE 3, if you don't like the new appearance. That's hardly a reason for complaining. I don't have KDE4 games installed, so I don't know what they look like, yet most of them support themes, if I remember correctly, which means that you'll be able to change the way they look as well (typical KDE!).
You can use KDE4 without the desktop effects and it is faster than KDE3 at many things.
That's the claim. I will have to look into that. But, if I have to do a bunch of work to configure KDE4 to work like KDE3, doesn't that basically defeat the purpose of using KDE4?
It is faster here (radeon 9200), Nvidia card users seem to have problems though. My point is that the difference between KDE4 and KDE3 is much more than appearance, if you judge it based on appearance only, you're missing what KDE offers. I use KDE because I can configure it to function the way I want and because it is the most featureful and integrated desktop I've used. This is still true in KDE4.
Could you specify what functionality that was added in KDE4 consists "bloat"? If you don't like desktop effects, don't use them, it's simple. KDE4 is reported to be faster than KDE3 in most aspects, so it should run better on old machines.
Again, see above. It should be, but it wasn't. At least as a stock system. After installing SuSE 7.3(KDE2) & 8.1(KDE3) recently, I can vouch for the fact that there wasn't that much of a difference in the look and feel as compared to KDE3 to KDE4. (Of course, when I tried to update 7.3 to 8.1, it failed, which is probably why I have always re-installed a new version instead of upgrading.)
I've been using KDE since version 2, I agree that things look different, yet the basic functionality hasn't changed much throughout its history. If you use a desktop judging by its default appearance only, then you may ask someone to offer KDE4 packages that look exactly the same as KDE3, this wouldn't make much sense to me though.
As far as I am concerned, I will be pushing to make sure that KDE3 is included in 11.1 and later if I find that KDE4 doesn't offer a compelling upgrade. openSUSE v10.1 was definately not a compelling upgrade(broken packager, broken PPC support). v10.2 was better, but v10.3 wasn't. v11.0 is a definate improvement in many ways.
The argument isn't about KDE3 availability in later opensuse versions, it's about whether KDE3 should be offered as an installation option or from the buildservice. The installation option requires more support from Novell without adequate justification, in my opinion. I've been upgrading the same installation since suse 9.3, skipping 10.1. 11 seems to be the best so far. Kind regards -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org