At Wed, 3 Jun 2009 01:25:46 -0500, David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. wrote:
Therein lies the point. There is a difference between 'getting work done' on a computer and never getting done 'getting your computer to work.'
That point has been entirely missed in the decisions made surrounding the forced transition to KDE4. I would not have been hesitant at all to move to KDE4 if I could just sit down and 'get work done' on the desktop. But instead I end up endlessly chasing disappearing widgets or plasmoids that add nothing to my ability to 'get work done' but cause endless problems when they crash.
That's the main point here. Though I'm usually a GNOME user, I have one production machine with KDE4 installed. It took me a whole day to reinstall the system, running GNOME now, solely for the purpose of getting work done. And it has eaten a lot of time being spent for bug hunting and working around things which did prevent people to be able to use that machine at all. KDE4 is deeply broken, period. I'm not going to move back to it ever, and so there will not be any bug reports from me either. Thanks for clarifying the situation, that's just it. KDE developers should realise what's going on (and maybe take the great KDE3 and re-develop things from there again), and distribution makers should consider the consequences of forcing people to radically change the desktop environment by force-moving them to KDE4. Some said above, it doesn't affect me that much, I'm a convinced GNOME user, these are just my 5ø. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org