-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Constantinos Galilei wrote:
On Tuesday August 25 2009 5:27:08 am G T Smith wrote:
On a more pertinent note, one also needs to consider those who voted with their feet...
Do they? You mentioned the importance of choice. Why should KDE people care about what non-KDE users think of KDE? Believe it or not, there are those who leave other desktops for KDE, as well. If you find that uncomfortable, go ahead and disbelieve it, but ask yourself if Gnome people should care what non-Gnome users think.
There are still features I miss from OS/2's Workplace Shell, but I wouldn't go back to it. I actually made a feature request on this a long time ago, but I'm guessing it didn't interest too many people. I'd still like to see KDE eventually have work folders that act like mini-sessions that you could create by saving the current running programs as a folder and launch them by clicking the folder later, though.
I think this would have major technical difficulties in implementing (see below)...
The only thing I used on a regular basis that was QT based was konqueror as a file browser. (I am not impressed by dolphin). This was largely mitigated by mc and the discovery that Nautilus no longer did crazy things on my setups. The few other KDE things I use on occasional basis had GTK or X based alternative. KDE AFAIK is the only QT based desktop, and there are rather a lot of non-QT based desktops. So I realised that it it did not make much sense for me install KDE or the QT libraries or invest time in setting up KDE4 (YMMV).
You've actually inspired me to uninstall Gnome. The only GTK apps I use are Firefox, Openoffice (of which I will be using the QT version if that's ever finished) and GIMP, and with the exception of GIMP, these thankfully don't *look* like GTK apps. I've had Gnome on my machine forever and it's kind of a waste of drive space.
This discussion has wandered of into weird and wonderful territory elsewhere. Something that was not my intent. The Gnome API and the GTK GUI API are two different but mutually interdependant things (and unfortunately in many cases you will need to retain the Gnome configuration tools in order to configure the Gnome GUI interface, and whether it is possible or easy to do this without Gnome being installed is not something I know very much about). Good luck in defining the config *you* need. However, in this case you may have a flaw in your logic. The QT version of OpenOffice may be possibly constrained by the SUN Java SDK/JDK and some particular issues with the QT development tools for Java. (Someone involved in OpenOffice development may have insight on this). What complicates matters is with a choice of GUI APIs all with subtle (and not so subtle) differences in use, writing to all APIs is not really a practicable solution (possibly outside of Java). A desktop is just a presentation layer, and as such should ideally accommodate application interface designs that are non-standard to that desktop. The problem is that for the naive user the resultant unholy mess with configuration can be very confusing (as it can be for the not so naive for that matter). It would be nice to have a tool to handle this issue (and I am not aware that one exists) which is a reason for at least the KDE and GNOME communities to be aware and care, but as the GNOME and KDE diplomatic relationship seems to be at best cool I do not see this happening soon, if at all. Adding execution images of some sort would be horribly difficult in this situation, unless one could persuade all developers to configure or add the appropriate support. KDE 3.x is a bit more than purely a desktop, it is also has integrated components that give productivity and collaboration abilities with a bit more functionality than MS Works in some ways but not as much as either OpenOffice (or MS Office) in others. It in some ways it could be argued KDE3.x violates the *NIX KISS principle that you have a lot of small things which do simple tightly defined stuff well. (I am under the impression that KDE 4.x ignores that principle and is built on complex ways of making simple things seem simpler, which is a worthy objective I suppose, but the results are causing some dissension in the ranks). Gnome AFAIK is more of a pure desktop. Having briefly looked at both the QT and GTK APIs I came to the general conclusion that for my usages GTK had a simplicity and flexibility that QT lacked (I hate coding GUI interfaces, and GTK plus Glade seem a little less painless than QT plus the QT tools). s
PS There is now a further factor to consider. When Nokia acquired Trolltech hence QT, it was not to get a foothold in the PC based Open Source market place (it was more likely part of a strategic response to the potential threat posed by android, and the need to update the Symbian OS GUI). Nokia are largely indifferent to Open Source based development and its community, (and can afford to be as Open Source based development in of handset applications is marginal). In some ways Nokia can make M$ seem positively cuddly...., and Nokias relative silence about the future of QT outside of their core market is probably more of a cause of concern than if they had said anything.
This point is more or less moot. The open source community has a fork of QT that will be available forever. I actually hope that Nokia changes the policy on the commercial QT, but it's actually not in their interests as a separate QT would be major competition and developers would be able to write commercial applications using the free QT without paying a fee to Nokia/Trolltech. Keeping a unified QT means that free and commercial QT applications remain compatible and the commercial version remains relevant. Nokia's kind of stuck on this one.
Forever is a very big word. I think any developer(s) contemplating a port from anything to QT will be doing a rethink, QT on Linux may be heading into the same anomalous zone as ReiserFS. KDE may need to either port to something else or take a lead role in the open source QT fork, at least for QA purposes, if they have not already. Especially if Nokia finally decide to just do a technology asset strip of Trolltech, (which effectively is what happened with Symbian/PSION). Nokia with the N900 series of device seem to have dropped Maemo Linux in favour of Windows 7. Symbian has also been open sourced (I have not looked at what exactly is involved), but as the various Symbian SDKs have always been freely available I am not sure this is really a big change. However, the development tools (phone simulators and the like) are exclusively windows based. If Nokia make the QT tools available in a similar manner it seems possible that non-Linux versions are more likely to be promoted. (It should not be forgotten Nokia outside of North America are still dominant in their primary market, so I doubt they would regard the FOSS/Linux lobby as something to worry about at this time). - -- ============================================================================== I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. Bjarne Stroustrup ============================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkqdKcgACgkQasN0sSnLmgLkVgCfetmHCtFocQ8KS1EnPZRfAAtV N2QAn3xZ2mb4PbBc2BQlQ3j49tCmR89n =/RcW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org