On 05/26/2013 04:04 AM, Rajko wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 13:44:55 -0400 Larry Stotler
wrote: I agree with many that KDE4 should have been called something else since it was basically a replacement not an upgrade. While it was a lot different with not much compatibility with KDE3, naming it KDE4 was logical consequence of being based on Qt4, like KDE3 being based on Qt3.
The basic problem was how it was introduced to the people.
It was pushed on all users in order to have larger user base that will test and report bugs, which will result in faster development. Problem was that majority of computer users have no actual experience in debugging and can't create useful bug reports. What they will do is just instal another desktop option, distro, or go back to Windows. That was my path when I had minimal knowledge and no idea that there are help options like Usenet and mail lists.
In general any change in software that introduces new concepts is painful as people must change habits, which is not as easy as to create new one. Add to that problems with user setups that are not easily transferable to the new system, bugs in a new software and massive change, and you will lose many existing users in the process.
It also didn't help that KDE4 was foisted on the users when still a Beta at best and most likely a late stage Alpha. -- “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.” -Albert Einstein _ _... ..._ _ _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org