Windows7 Vs KDE4

[Ben Page]

Check out this "interesting" video>>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaESbAv35y4

[albandy]

Great video.

[Giant Speck]

I think we've already had one or two threads about this already.

[Skripka]

I think we've already had one or two threads about this already.

Understatement of the new century.

[MasterNetra]

I think we've already had one or two threads about this already.

Prehaps, but it was amusing.

[dspari1]

KDE4 was such a disaster that even Linus switched to gnome after bashing it and encouraging everyone to switch to KDE. I'm encouraged by KDE 4.2, and I believe that Linus will switch back. :guitar:

[Skripka]

KDE4 was such a disaster that even Linus switched to gnome after bashing it and encouraging everyone to switch to KDE. I'm encouraged by KDE 4.2, and I believe that Linus will switch back. :guitar:

Who is this "Linus" guy and why do we give a ^%$&$#^ what OS he uses?

[dspari1]

Who is this "Linus" guy and why do we give a ^%$&$#^ what OS he uses?

The guy who started this whole Linux thing?

[billgoldberg]

Who is this "Linus" guy and why do we give a ^%$&$#^ what OS he uses?

I'm pretty sure you are joking but still, he's talking about Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux.

You shouldn't give a **** about which OS he uses or what DE, I don't.

[dspari1]

I'm pretty sure you are joking but still, he's talking about Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux.

You shouldn't give a **** about which OS he uses or what DE, I don't.

Yet, when Linus makes controversial statements about Desktop Environments, it gets plastered all over. For the record, I'm using KDE 4.2 now whether Linus uses it or not.

[Firestem4]

Who is this "Linus" guy and why do we give a ^%$&$#^ what OS he uses?

+1

My first Linux distro ive used was KDE4 (8.10) And you know what? Even with the unstable peice of crap that 4.0 was. It was 10x better than my laptop with Vista installed.

I am using 4.2 now. And THAT is 10x better than 4.0.

I highly suggest anyone who used 4.0 and hated it, upgrade to 4.2. It is a painless and esay process (I'm a linux newb and I did it). Stability and performance is so much better

[Giant Speck]

Linus Torvalds could use Windows for all I care. It doesn't change my user experience one tiny bit.

[Skripka]

+1

My first Linux distro ive used was KDE4 (8.10) And you know what? Even with the unstable peice of crap that 4.0 was. It was 10x better than my laptop with Vista installed.

I am using 4.2 now. And THAT is 10x better than 4.0.

I highly suggest anyone who used 4.0 and hated it, upgrade to 4.2. It is a painless and esay process (I'm a linux newb and I did it). Stability and performance is so much better

Also, know that Kubuntu is acknowledged as the worst KDE distro by popular experienced-user opine. Any other KDE distro does KDE better than Kubuntu.

[forrestcupp]

Who is this "Linus" guy and why do we give a ^%$&$#^ what OS he uses?

Here we go again! :D

You should give a ^%$&$#^ about him, but not about which DE he uses.

[Skripka]

I'm pretty sure you are joking but still, he's talking about Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux.

You shouldn't give a **** about which OS he uses or what DE, I don't.

They really need to get sarcasm markups on this board...of course that would probably overload the already overloaded servers even more.

[Firestem4]

Also, know that Kubuntu is acknowledged as the worst KDE distro by popular experienced-user opine. Any other KDE distro does KDE better than Kubuntu.

May it be the worst or not, I enjoy it. So what does it matter? I didn't want OpenSUSE or Mandriva, and I like KDE a lot more than Gnome..it seemed like a smart choice.

When I'm more experienced I will probably try out Arch. And I hear Kubuntu 9.04 is going to have some great improvements (especially with the package manager and among other programs)

[Firestem4]

They really need to get sarcasm markups on this board...of course that would probably overload the already overloaded servers even more.

They can always dump the useless and offtopic forums like Mac and Windows =P

[Giant Speck]

Here we go again! :D

You should give a ^%$&$#^ about him, but not about which DE he uses.

Not really. I don't turn on my computer and think "Wow. Linus Torvalds is such a great guy for allowing me to use an operating system based off his work."

I don't think about Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer when I log into Windows, and I don't ponder about Steve Jobs when I use my iPhone.

They're just people. They aren't gods.

[Ben Page]

I think about Billy Gates when my computer pops up the BSOD ;)

[dspari1]

Not really. I don't turn on my computer and think "Wow. Linus Torvalds is such a great guy for allowing me to use an operating system based off his work."

I don't think about Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer when I log into Windows, and I don't ponder about Steve Jobs when I use my iPhone.

They're just people. They aren't gods.

They aren't gods, but they are part of history.

For example, if your into physics, you're not going to care about Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein? If you're into economics, you're not going to care about Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, and Milton Friedman?

If you're into computers, I would imagine that you would care about who Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Linus Torvalds is and what they believed.

[Firestem4]

I think about Billy Gates when my computer pops up the BSOD ;)

You too huh?

[Skripka]

May it be the worst or not, I enjoy it. So what does it matter? I didn't want OpenSUSE or Mandriva, and I like KDE a lot more than Gnome..it seemed like a smart choice.

When I'm more experienced I will probably try out Arch. And I hear Kubuntu 9.04 is going to have some great improvements (especially with the package manager and among other programs)

The key is that you enjoy it for what it does. The problem for KDE is that it gets a massive amount of bad press here, due to the lackings of Kubuntu....people say "KDE" is slow and bloated-when in fact that is not KDE's problem.

KPackageKit-thar be demons. Synaptic is and will continue to be a more reliable tool that it is. PackageKit is less reliable than KDE4 Adept, IMHO.

[Eisenwinter]

Anyone else notice this thread isn't actually KDE 4 vs Windows 7?

Recurring discussion, regardless.

[Rokurosv]

Anyone else notice this thread isn't actually KDE 4 vs Windows 7?

Recurring discussion, regardless.

Kinda did.

IMO 7 copied stuff from KDE 4, and now KDE 4 is copying stuff from 7, like the Stasks plasmoid which I love :D.

[MasterNetra]

May it be the worst or not, I enjoy it. So what does it matter? I didn't want OpenSUSE or Mandriva, and I like KDE a lot more than Gnome..it seemed like a smart choice.

When I'm more experienced I will probably try out Arch. And I hear Kubuntu 9.04 is going to have some great improvements (especially with the package manager and among other programs)

I couldn't even get Mandriva's live cd to work on my labtop. It didn't have the visual drivers my labtop needed. And believe me it let me know. >.<


Kinda did.

IMO 7 copied stuff from KDE 4, and now KDE 4 is copying stuff from 7, like the Stasks plasmoid which I love :D.

Yea I think the only OS breed not copying everyone is mac. At least It hasn't to my knowledge.

[Eisenwinter]

Kinda did.

IMO 7 copied stuff from KDE 4, and now KDE 4 is copying stuff from 7, like the Stasks plasmoid which I love :D.
I really wouldn't call it "copying".

Copying is taking something, and making an exact clone of it.

Using something as an inspiration for your own product, is a different thing.

[Giant Speck]

Kinda did.

IMO 7 copied stuff from KDE 4, and now KDE 4 is copying stuff from 7, like the Stasks plasmoid which I love :D.


Not trying to spark a flamewar, but what I think is funny is that when I first saw KDE 4.0, I thought it looked like Vista, and then KDE 4.2 came out, and it still sort of looked like Vista. But then the first beta of Windows 7 came out, everyone said Windows 7 was copying directly from KDE 4. And then I thought to myself "if Windows 7 is copying off of KDE 4, and KDE 4 kind of looks like Vista, then isn't Windows 7 sort of copying from Vista?" :p

[Firestem4]

I have no problem with borrowing idea's from other Desktop Enviroments whether it be Mac, Windows, or *nix. Innovative idea's come out of borrowing/improving. (Its always nice to see something that doesn't work, work well in another DE)

IMO, KDE hasn't really copied Vista. KDE pretty much did away with the desktop metaphor which Windows still relies on. (Everything in 4.x+ is widget/virtualized). Its much different. (I guess for the desktop primarily)

[jimi_hendrix]

lol

personally i like the windows7 style over KDE, but gnome > all

[Ben Page]

I, on the other hand think that KDE - especially KDE4 is "borrowing" OS 10 ideas, and oxygen theme pretty much resembles Mac's default theme, Konqueror looks almost the same like Safari.
But this is only "makeup", what about the real stuff under the hood? Mac OS was (and therefore still is) based off Unix (or Linux), witch is a free OS (kernel), and then Jobs got a great idea, lets make money by upgrading a free OS - GENIUS! An he goes to that extent so only if you buy a computer from him, only then you have the right to own "his" OS! Talk about stealing...:-$

[swoll1980]

@ thread title

Every thing beats KDE4 in a vs. argument

[crl0901]

I have the Windows 7 beta setup in VirtualBox and I really like it. It's definitely a step up from Vista and it's very quick. You just gotta take some time to really learn all the features because they've actually put some really intuitive stuff in there. Right now, I dual-boot on my main desktop between Ubuntu 64 and Vista 64 Ultimate. I run OpenSUSE with KDE 3.5 on one of my laptops, and XP on the other. I tried using KDE 4.2 on my Ubuntu install and it's just way slow and unstable. I much prefer Gnome to it. So, I guess what I'm saying is, I'd definitely take Windows 7 over KDE 4, but I'd take Ubuntu with Gnome over both of them.

[Skripka]

@ thread title

Every thing beats Kubuntu in a vs. argument

Fixed it for you.

[jimi_hendrix]

I, on the other hand think that KDE - especially KDE4 is "borrowing" OS 10 ideas, and oxygen theme pretty much resembles Mac's default theme, Konqueror looks almost the same like Safari.
But this is only "makeup", what about the real stuff under the hood? Mac OS was (and therefore still is) based off Unix (or Linux), witch is a free OS (kernel), and then Jobs got a great idea, lets make money by upgrading a free OS - GENIUS! An he goes to that extent so only if you buy a computer from him, only then you have the right to own "his" OS! Talk about stealing...:-$

Mac OS is officially unix...and its his kernel, called darwin, so Jobs can sell it if he wants (linux kernel is still better :))...but there is a GNU/Darwin project

[swoll1980]

Fixed it for you.

Kubuntu(the 3.5 version) was a disgrace. The only KDE4.2 desktop I've tried was Kubuntu, so I really should reserve judgement.

[Rokurosv]

@ thread title

Every thing beats KDE4 in a vs. argument

Except KDE4 itself :D

[Skripka]

Kubuntu(the 3.5 version) was a disgrace. The only KDE4.2 desktop I've tried was Kubuntu, so I really should reserve judgement.

Try it on Arch-they do it the way it should be. Kubuntu's main problem is the Ubuntu part of it's code.

[swoll1980]

Except KDE4 itself :D

That would create a rift in space time itself, I shudder to think of the consequences

[Firestem4]

I tried using KDE 4.2 on my Ubuntu install and it's just way slow and unstable.

I use KDE 4.2 on a very old laptop that could run xp JUST fast enough that I woudldn't take a sledgehammer to it (of course until a few programs were installed...then I felt like throwing it off the empire state building)

Anyways, KDE runs very fast on this laptop, So I'm curious if the computer you tried running KDE 4.2 was as dilapidated as mine, It should have been faster.

[crl0901]

I use KDE 4.2 on a very old laptop that could run xp JUST fast enough that I woudldn't take a sledgehammer to it (of course until a few programs were installed...then I felt like throwing it off the empire state building)

Anyways, KDE runs very fast on this laptop, So I'm curious if the computer you tried running KDE 4.2 was as dilapidated as mine, It should have been faster.

It's not brand new but it's definitely not dilapidated. It's one I built myself, contains an Intel E6600, 4GB DDR2-800 ram, 500GB HD and an 8800GTS video card. When I say slow, I mean in comparison to Gnome.

[Skripka]

When I say slow, I mean in comparison to Gnome.

Canonical et al do virtually nothing to make a good showing with Kubuntu-I do mean that.

Kubuntu is slow and bloated because Ubuntu is slow and bloated...Kubuntu is just worse off-since Ubuntu is written with Gnome in mind. Kubuntu is unstable because Canonical doesn't take KDE into consideration when they are writing Ubuntu up. Surprise surprise, Kubuntu doesn't run well.

None of the above are KDE's problem or their responsibility.

If you want a valid experience with KDE to compare, run KDE on Arch and Gnome on Arch. It is no surprise that a one legged man cannot win an @$$ kicking contest.

[Firestem4]

It's not brand new but it's definitely not dilapidated. It's one I built myself, contains an Intel E6600, 4GB DDR2-800 ram, 500GB HD and an 8800GTS video card. When I say slow, I mean in comparison to Gnome.

Oh, ok. I had thought you meant otherwise.

This laptop I believe is 1gig of ram, 1.3ghz procressor and a 30 gig hard drive. Not very impressive lol.

I only tried GNOME using the Ubuntu Live-CD but I really enjoyed KDE more. GNOME reminds me of MAC waaay to much. Although I understand why GNOME is faster than KDE, Its not nearly as heavy and filled with eye-candy (from the start)

[crl0901]

Oh, ok. I had thought you meant otherwise.

This laptop I believe is 1gig of ram, 1.3ghz procressor and a 30 gig hard drive. Not very impressive lol.

I only tried GNOME using the Ubuntu Live-CD but I really enjoyed KDE more. GNOME reminds me of MAC waaay to much. Although I understand why GNOME is faster than KDE, Its not nearly as heavy and filled with eye-candy (from the start)

Yeah, to each their own I guess. I like the simplistic look of Gnome.

[Eisenwinter]

Sigh.

This has turned into another GNOME vs KDE thread.

[Skripka]

Sigh.

This has turned into another GNOME vs KDE thread.

It isn't like it was much better destined from the OP ;)

[Firestem4]

To be fair I did post my 2 cents concerning KDE and Vista/7. lol

[Name change]

KDE4 all the way :D
It's really good and it's getting better.

I guess you could call me a KDE fanboy, as right now I use KDE4.2.1 on Arch and it's not as perfect as KDE4.2 (strange) and I still like it and nothing that I came across in last year and a half of using it didn't made me use anything else (well I used KDE3 when KDE4 was already available for Hardy)

[MasterNetra]

That would create a rift in space time itself, I shudder to think of the consequences

Nah trying to think about in detail would just make your head explode thats all.


KDE4 all the way :D
It's really good and it's getting better.

I guess you could call me a KDE fanboy, as right now I use KDE4.2.1 on Arch and it's not as perfect as KDE4.2 (strange) and I still like it and nothing that I came across in last year and a half of using it didn't made me use anything else (well I used KDE3 when KDE4 was already available for Hardy)

@I guess you could call me a KDE fanboy

I would of never guessed! :p

[Dekkon]

Fixed it for you.

+1

KDE is the only reason I even use Linux. Everything else is minimalistic, which is too simple for my tastes. I just want something that runs decent, great blend of features and simplicity, and looks very nice, with great icon set. KDE seems to following Mac in some ways, but staying away in the same perspective.