-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 John Andersen wrote:
G T Smith wrote:
I am mainly underwhelmed by KDE4 because it really is a rehash of some 20 year old ideas. There is no doubting the technical skill and commitment of the KDE team in the implementation, but there is an underlying dressing up of yesterdays mutton as todays lamb in KDE4 (and Vista for that matter)... The Media orientated approach may be appropriate for the gadget generation when relative affluence was the norm, but may not fit the current situation. What are really needed are some new ideas...
Frankly, I'm not seeing any significant "Media Orientated Approach" in KDE4, at least not more so than KDE3. (I will, point out I use K4 in Kubuntu, which is a lot more media friendly than Novell).
It is the argument being raised by some in the "discussion" for KDE4 being the future desktop. That the new desktop should be better at handling multi-media requirements. (Though to be honest what the desktop has to do with it this context really puzzles me).
But as for your other point, K4 being a "rehash of 20 year old Ideas", I'd be interested in two things:
1) What do you see in the current crop of desktops that reminds you of 1988. (Windows version 2 vintage), and which is in need of change?
2) What, other than the aforementioned multi-media, do we do on computers today that we did not do 10, 15, or 20 years ago that requires something other than a rehash?
More thinking in terms of where it all started out. The concept of an essentially two (and a half) dimensional visual representation with a simple tree like dialogue. All that is happening is revamp of this underlying principle. While one of the programmers favourite data structures is the tree, this is not a particularly natural conceptual structure for many. It is is very powerful tool in algorithmic processes, it is not quite as effective in a heuristic or pattern matching context.(BTW in the intel small systems world there was also GEM, and at least one other environment of which the name escapes me). For instance relational database concepts have been around for some time for categorising data and while it makes sense to organise computing executable structures in trees, why are we still organising our documents in this manner?[1] The perceived need for indexing systems such as beagle must in part come from the recognition that the current way of doing things is not entirely effective as an organisational mechanism. If we change the way personal documentation is perceived as been organized this implies a change in how that documentation is accessed, i.e at the desktop. Rather than in individual applications.
Generally something that works (such as the basic concept of different applications running in "windows" on a desktop) tend to hang around until it no longer works well, or some new invention arrives that allows a different approach.
I've not seen much of either.
I think the underlying problem is in many contexts and for many (non-IT) people it does not really work that well, it is something many are familiar with but more as a known barrier than a real aid. It is less of a barrier than the command line but still a barrier nonetheless. The difficulty is that many at the technical end do not really see this as an issue with the technology more an issue with the people using the technology. Maybe the cart is being put in front of the horse here, and we should be looking at presentation mechanisms that people are more comfortable with? Curiously, where some innovation may be creeping in is on devices that do not have the screen real estate to do a full blown windowing system.... [1] I am well aware that many earlier big irons did organise data in this manner. - -- ============================================================================== 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 iEYEARECAAYFAkk/nKoACgkQasN0sSnLmgKMnQCgotfNUv4DmllVK/D7q+DrWFB5 s+EAoOuxyZRoVALZC0tK2elH+cImbrZC =HrOc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org