PDA

View Full Version : What is the future of KDE?



Mark C
February 22nd, 2007, 10:50 AM
With ubuntu and a lot of developers supporting GNOME, what is the future of KDE? What new features might it have and will it learn from GNOME's simplicity as much as GNOME learned from KDE's complexity?

Is there a webpage that states the current ideas to be put into KDE like the one here (http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap)?

I'm trapped using it for now because of a problem (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=367197) and find it on par if not better than GNOME.

Raffo
February 22nd, 2007, 10:57 AM
The KDE team is working on KDE4. There are a lot of improvements on the way... you can follow dot.kde.org and search the web for plasma, oxygen, decibel...

Somenoob
February 22nd, 2007, 10:58 AM
I think KDE has a bright future

slayerboy
February 22nd, 2007, 11:00 AM
Personally, I prefer XFCE. Not that I have a slow computer, but because it's fast, even with the KDE and Gnome libraries enabled. After using XFCE for a while now, Gnome and KDE are too bogged down for me. XFCE basically offers the same abilities as Gnome and KDE.

runningwithscissors
February 22nd, 2007, 11:03 AM
With ubuntu and a lot of developers supporting GNOME, what is the future of KDE? What new features might it have and will it learn from GNOME's simplicity as much as GNOME learned from KDE's complexity?
KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else. A lot of the things that GNOME is now trying to standardise/stabilise had been implemented in some fashion by KDE a fairly long time ago (although thosetechnologies were very KDE-specific). aRts and DCOP are but two examples (which will be replaced by other media backends/Dbus in order to form a common base with GNOME).


Is there a webpage that states the current ideas to be put into KDE like the one here (http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap)?

I'm trapped using it for now because of a problem (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=367197) and find it on par if not better than GNOME.
The KDE 4 project's goals have been broken up into seperate chunks.
Solid (http://solid.kde.org)
Phonon (http://phonon.kde.org)
Decibel (http://decibel.kde.org)
Plasma (http://plasma.kde.org)
Oxygen (http://www.oxygen-icons.org)

Mark C
February 22nd, 2007, 11:09 AM
KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else. A lot of the things that GNOME is now trying to standardise/stabilise had been implemented in some fashion by KDE a fairly long time ago (although thosetechnologies were very KDE-specific). aRts and DCOP are but two examples (which will be replaced by other media backends/Dbus in order to form a common base with GNOME).


The KDE 4 project's goals have been broken up into seperate chunks.
Solid (http://solid.kde.org)
Phonon (http://phonon.kde.org)
Decibel (http://decibel.kde.org)
Plasma (http://plasma.kde.org)
Oxygen (http://www.oxygen-icons.org)

Wow thanks.
Now I think I'm gonna thank that problem I have too. This is just great, why didn't Canonical choose kde to be it's main DE instead of making a derivative called kubuntu?

G Morgan
February 22nd, 2007, 11:22 AM
The future of KDE on Ubuntu is limited unless more is done. KDE4 will be brilliant since it standardises around more generic technology. Most of the cool things we now have in the Linux desktop were first thought of by KDE but were replaced during the QT non-free war. If QT was always free we probably wouldn't have GNOME today.

There will certainly be more quality apps for KDE since it will have an even bigger advantage on the ease of development front.

weatherman
February 22nd, 2007, 12:11 PM
With ubuntu and a lot of developers supporting GNOME, what is the future of KDE? What new features might it have and will it learn from GNOME's simplicity as much as GNOME learned from KDE's complexity?

Is there a webpage that states the current ideas to be put into KDE like the one here (http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap)?

I'm trapped using it for now because of a problem (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=367197) and find it on par if not better than GNOME.
there's a lot of amazing stuff going on for kde4. check out some mockups here: (some of them have already been implemented):
http://www.kde-look.org/index.php?xsortmode=high&page=0
the kde planet at http://planet.kde.org
or drop by at #kde on freenode.

Jucato
February 22nd, 2007, 12:33 PM
"With ubuntu and a lot of developers supporting GNOME..."

Well, this is just not accurate. KDE is also having its own fair share of developers. True, Ubuntu is one of the most popular distros around and ships with GNOME, but there's always Kubuntu following behind it, as well as other big names like Mandriva, SUSE (umm....?), KNOPPIX, etc.

"The future of KDE on Ubuntu is limited unless more is done... If QT was always free we probably wouldn't have GNOME today."

The future of KDE on Ubuntu, which is Kubuntu, is very much stable and bright. Kubuntu is one of the leading KDE distros, and it has a very prominent standing in the KDE world.

Qt was free, but not in a license that fit the fancy of most of the people (GNU/FSF) during those times. Back then, if it wasn't GPL, it wasn't free/open source. But in a short span of time, Qt was released under a dual license, one of which is GPL (in contrast to GTK's LGPL). However, by that time, GNOME was already in existence.

Just my US$ 0.02 (even if I'm not from the US of A...)

Mark C
February 22nd, 2007, 01:12 PM
"With ubuntu and a lot of developers supporting GNOME..."

Well, this is just not accurate. KDE is also having its own fair share of developers. True, Ubuntu is one of the most popular distros around and ships with GNOME, but there's always Kubuntu following behind it, as well as other big names like Mandriva, SUSE (umm....?), KNOPPIX, etc.

"The future of KDE on Ubuntu is limited unless more is done... If QT was always free we probably wouldn't have GNOME today."

The future of KDE on Ubuntu, which is Kubuntu, is very much stable and bright. Kubuntu is one of the leading KDE distros, and it has a very prominent standing in the KDE world.

Qt was free, but not in a license that fit the fancy of most of the people (GNU/FSF) during those times. Back then, if it wasn't GPL, it wasn't free/open source. But in a short span of time, Qt was released under a dual license, one of which is GPL (in contrast to GTK's LGPL). However, by that time, GNOME was already in existence.

Just my US$ 0.02 (even if I'm not from the US of A...)

Hey Jucato... I'm Kawaii-Panda from #ubuntu-ph.
Nice to see you here. :)

Bloodfen Razormaw
February 22nd, 2007, 01:25 PM
KDE actually has far more developers than GNOME. GNOME is a relatively small project in comparison. KDE is, IIRC, the single largest free software project in existence, larger than even the Linux kernel.

Jucato
February 22nd, 2007, 02:18 PM
@Mark C: Hahah! I'm everywhere, man! :D

@Bloodfen: I don't think that's entirely accurate either. Both GNOME and KDE are very big international projects and projects of this nature are very hard to measure in terms of number of developers. We're not just talking about the core developers, those who have direct access to repositories or who make administrative decisions. Developers also include people who submit patches, make bugfixes, write documentation, do translations, even create artwork. Taking this into consideration, you can imagine how difficult it is to measure the number of developers working on GNOME and KDE.

ComplexNumber
February 22nd, 2007, 05:46 PM
Wow thanks.
Now I think I'm gonna thank that problem I have too. This is just great, why didn't Canonical choose kde to be it's main DE instead of making a derivative called kubuntu?
gnome was chosen because mark shuttleworth is a long time gnome developer and supporter.




KDE actually has far more developers than GNOME. GNOME is a relatively small project in comparison
do you have any proof of that?

Erunno
February 22nd, 2007, 05:55 PM
A lot of work is done on the libraries to ease the development of applications on KDE 4 so I guess we'll see even more quality apps on KDE in the future, especially once the new technologies like Decibel are adopted by application developers (might not be the case when 4.0 is released).

Okey, next question is not intended to provoke a flame-war: Would somebody explain to me why GNOME is deployed on so many business-oriented distributions instead of KDE ? I thought that thinkgs like kiosk-mode, the high modularity and network-awareness of KDE apps would make it a better choice for business enviroments.

frodon
February 22nd, 2007, 05:57 PM
KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else. A lot of the things that GNOME is now trying to standardise/stabilise had been implemented in some fashion by KDE a fairly long time ago (although thosetechnologies were very KDE-specific). aRts and DCOP are but two examples (which will be replaced by other media backends/Dbus in order to form a common base with GNOME).Without starting the debate i would like to say to those who are reading this thread that these kind of posts are opinions not facts.

Nothing more to say, peoples will always say that KDE, GNOME, XFCE or enlightenment is the best for different reasons with good or bad arguments but honnestly one is as good as the other but for different reasons, direct comparison is impossible.

Erunno
February 22nd, 2007, 06:05 PM
Without starting the debate i would like to say to those who are reading this thread that these kind of posts are opinions not facts.

Hold on, that DCOP was invented long before DBUS and DBUS is a actually heavily based on the former is, in my opinion, not an opinion but a easily checkable fact ;-)

ComplexNumber
February 22nd, 2007, 06:08 PM
Would somebody explain to me why GNOME is deployed on so many business-oriented distributions instead of KDE ?
probably because the gtk licence is more favourable to developers.

bogolisk
February 22nd, 2007, 06:49 PM
Hold on, that DCOP was invented long before DBUS and DBUS is a actually heavily based on the former is, in my opinion, not an opinion but a easily checkable fact ;-)

It's modeled after DCOP to help its adoption by KDE camp. it's wasn't a technical reason, it was a political one. Its existence on the other hand was a technical one, DCOP relies on ICE which is a no-no for a system bus.

bogolisk
February 22nd, 2007, 06:58 PM
"With ubuntu and a lot of developers supporting GNOME..."

Qt was free, but not in a license that fit the fancy of most of the people (GNU/FSF) during those times.


The problem wasn't the QT license. The problems was GPLed KDE apps. GPL forbids you to link GPL code to non-GPL code.

That made the gpled KDE apps be considered illegal to distribute in many circa, especially Debian. QT was on debian server (the non-free section) but KDE was NOT.

Just search the debian-legal archives and you will see. It wasn't fancy or emotion. It's was a legal technicality.

G Morgan
February 22nd, 2007, 08:02 PM
The problem wasn't the QT license. The problems was GPLed KDE apps. GPL forbids you to link GPL code to non-GPL code.

That made the gpled KDE apps be considered illegal to distribute in many circa, especially Debian. QT was on debian server (the non-free section) but KDE was NOT.

Just search the debian-legal archives and you will see. It wasn't fancy or emotion. It's was a legal technicality.

What about all those apps that are GPL'd but link to Windows libarary. You can distribute something that would link to something who's license says 'I will kill you' under the GPL provided that they are not distributed in a form where they are deployed together in advance. So you could not distribute a GPL'd QT app with QT under the old license but you could distribute the GPL'd app separate to QT under that license.

Debian could have distributed GPL QT apps without risk provided they didn't handle dependancy resolution for it to link against the QT library (even that might not have been an issue). A botch around it true enough but it would be legally viable. In any case I could link every QT library call to 'Hello World' and then just distribute the two as separate modules, then when a person pulls it in they just make sure they link it to the real library rather than my place holder. If anyone asks the app should deliver a series of hello worlds via stdout and be linked against that library.

G Morgan
February 22nd, 2007, 08:16 PM
Without starting the debate i would like to say to those who are reading this thread that these kind of posts are opinions not facts.

Nothing more to say, peoples will always say that KDE, GNOME, XFCE or enlightenment is the best for different reasons with good or bad arguments but honnestly one is as good as the other but for different reasons, direct comparison is impossible.

That's simply not true. There are many things you can say for or against GNOME and KDE that are direct comparisons. They are both better suited to different people and different circumstances and in order to decide who and what you make feature by feature comparisons. It would be impossible to say one is better than the other in every way shape and form of course.

For example KDE provides a more consistent development environment. Arts has a stable API, GStreamer does not. This (among others) makes KDE development easier which is why many people now run KDE apps on a GNOME desktop (less time wasted on inconsistent APIs). The development tools (QTdesigner, KATE, KDevelop) are also better developed.

If you want an app with tight integration with the environment you'd chose KDE since far more apps are designed with KDE in mind given that it uses QT exclusively. Most GTK apps are just made as X11 apps and yanked into GNOME with some integration work done but it cannot compare with being built from the ground up with KDE in mind. Of course this also means that KDE apps tend to do worse in GNOME than GNOME apps in KDE.

If you want a simplified environment you'd chose GNOME since it goes as far as even hard coding it so somethings cannot be changed.

GNOME is deployed more consistently.

GNOME uses GTK so enables you to develop and run closed source apps without paying a license fee.

I could probably go on forever but there are plenty of direct comparisons that can be made but it doesn't mean it's easy to say one is better than the other.

Quillz
February 22nd, 2007, 08:18 PM
I think KDE has a bright future
I agree. KDE 4 looks great.

ComplexNumber
February 22nd, 2007, 08:30 PM
The development tools (QTdesigner, KATE, KDevelop) are also better developed.
speak to any developer whos used glade and qtdesigner about which is the easiest to use and the most productive.


on topic, does anyone know a timescale as to when kde 4 will eventually be unveiled to the world so that it can be used in a distro?

mostwanted
February 22nd, 2007, 08:33 PM
When did the Ubuntu Forums turn into Slashdot??

People, these stupid Gnome Vs. KDE discussions about which is better at what are completely uneeded. People will choose whatever they like the best and they don't care if you think Gnome is oversimplified, KDE has the best applications, or if Gnome's licensing terms are much better than KDE's. Just let people choose for themselves and end this useless opinionated discussion.

G Morgan
February 22nd, 2007, 08:49 PM
speak to any developer whos used glade and qtdesigner about which is the easiest to use and the most productive.


on topic, does anyone know a timescale as to when kde 4 will eventually be unveiled to the world so that it can be used in a distro?

I've used both and prefer qtdesigner but then again I prefer QT. This argument could easily parallel the GNOME v KDE one though.


When did the Ubuntu Forums turn into Slashdot??

Guys, these stupid Gnome Vs. KDE discussions about which is better at what are completely uneeded. People will choose whatever they like the best and they don't care if you think Gnome is oversimplified, KDE has the best applications, or if Gnome's licensing terms are much better than KDE's. Just let people choose for themselves and end this useless opinionated discussion.

The point is that each environment is better at different things and it is important to direct people to the environment that best suits their needs. I'd almost never suggest anything other than GNOME for Ubuntu though because far more work is done on Ubuntu than Kubuntu and it shows.

deanlinkous
February 22nd, 2007, 11:43 PM
will it learn from GNOME's simplicity as much as GNOME learned from KDE's complexity?
:confused:

IYY
February 23rd, 2007, 03:56 AM
I agree. KDE 4 looks great.

KDE 4 doesn't look like anything. As far as I know, there are no screenshots of what it will actually look like, only mockups. I know that the code has been redone, but so far, nothing has been released that the average user can benefit from.

Mark C
February 23rd, 2007, 05:06 AM
speak to any developer whos used glade and qtdesigner about which is the easiest to use and the most productive.


on topic, does anyone know a timescale as to when kde 4 will eventually be unveiled to the world so that it can be used in a distro?

http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-4.0-release-plan.html :popcorn:

ComplexNumber
February 23rd, 2007, 05:27 AM
http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-4.0-release-plan.html :popcorn:
cheers. just as i thought - they don't know. kde4 = vista mark II.

luca.b
February 23rd, 2007, 08:38 AM
I strongly suggest you to read Troy Unrau's "The Road to KDE 4" series on dot.kde.org that shows the improvements being done in several areas.
I'd rather not call KDE4 "Vista Mark II". It's FUD, pure and simple. Currently the developers are aiming at a late summer release (a new development snapshot has been tagged recently, and rumors say an alpha will be out next month).

Jucato
February 23rd, 2007, 09:07 AM
http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-4.0-release-plan.html :popcorn:


Last update: 16 February 2006, David Faure

Does that give you an idea that the page has long been dead and inaccurate?

Any speculation or rumor as to when it will be released, or even when an alpha will be available are unofficial unless you see it officially announced.

Erunno
February 23rd, 2007, 09:17 AM
You get a better picture about the progress of KDE 4 if you follow the developer blogs on PlanetKDE (which contain actually useful information instead of the spamfest that is PlanetGNOME) and my impression was that the "pillars" are slowly coming together. Their respective developers post about milestones occasionaly which seem to work more or less and now need to be integrted and tested. Recently Aaron Siego had the first IRC developer meeting to finally start the work on Plasma so the bling crowd may get some much needed love after all ;-)

G Morgan
February 23rd, 2007, 12:19 PM
I strongly suggest you to read Troy Unrau's "The Road to KDE 4" series on dot.kde.org that shows the improvements being done in several areas.
I'd rather not call KDE4 "Vista Mark II". It's FUD, pure and simple. Currently the developers are aiming at a late summer release (a new development snapshot has been tagged recently, and rumors say an alpha will be out next month).

Any news on how they are going about the alpha. Is it public given the recent trend for closed development. Will they be releasing packages for popular distros or are we looking at a build from source release as is traditional.

GeneralZod
February 23rd, 2007, 12:35 PM
Any news on how they are going about the alpha. Is it public given the recent trend for closed development. Will they be releasing packages for popular distros or are we looking at a build from source release as is traditional.

I've been building the entirety of KDE4 (plus Oxygen) every day for about 2 months now; I'm not seeing much "closed" development here :confused:

I'm not sure what the packaging plan is, though, but since Kubuntu had KDE4 development snapshots last year, I don't see why not.

PS

Developers (and the very morbidly curious ;)) can try out the current KDE4 here:

http://developernew.kde.org/Getting_Started/Build/Unstable_Version

Oxygen development is currently in playground, but should be mainlined over the next couple of months or so:

svn co svn://anonsvn.kde.org/home/kde/trunk/playground/artwork/Oxygen/

G Morgan
February 23rd, 2007, 12:59 PM
I've been building the entirety of KDE4 (plus Oxygen) every day for about 2 months now; I'm not seeing much "closed" development here :confused:

I'm not sure what the packaging plan is, though, but since Kubuntu had KDE4 development snapshots last year, I don't see why not.

PS

Developers (and the very morbidly curious ;)) can try out the current KDE4 here:

http://developernew.kde.org/Getting_Started/Build/Unstable_Version

Oxygen development is currently in playground, but should be mainlined over the next couple of months or so:

svn co svn://anonsvn.kde.org/home/kde/trunk/playground/artwork/Oxygen/

Didn't say KDE were doing it just that we are seeing more behind closed doors development in OSS recently. I didn't know that there was a working desktop yet or do you run a mix of 3.5 and 4.

GeneralZod
February 23rd, 2007, 01:53 PM
Didn't say KDE were doing it just that we are seeing more behind closed doors development in OSS recently.

Ah, OK :)



I didn't know that there was a working desktop yet or do you run a mix of 3.5 and 4.

"Working" is a rather hopeful way of putting it ;) It's difficult to give a percentage weighting between usage of 3.5 and 4 code, but the visible result looks like a badly broken KDE 3.5 (e.g. - the actual desktop itself that holds wallpaper and Desktop icons was recently removed and there is nothing there now but empty space). The Desktop portion of KDE will likely be one of the last chunks to be replaced, in this case by Plasma.

luca.b
February 23rd, 2007, 02:28 PM
I'm not sure what the packaging plan is, though, but since Kubuntu had KDE4 development snapshots last year, I don't see why not.


As a matter of fact, Kubuntu.org has the announcement of the third development snapshot.

runningwithscissors
February 24th, 2007, 04:53 AM
speak to any developer whos used glade and qtdesigner about which is the easiest to use and the most productive.
I don't know about the designers, but it is generally accepted that the KDE API is way more easier to develop with compared to the myriad of generic libraries that GNOME apps use.
The only disadvantage is ABI breakage every time a new g++ release is made.

Although my own preference is for GTK+ and other C libraries, because I've never found C++ development very enjoyable. And no, I don't like PyQt either.

ComplexNumber
February 24th, 2007, 05:44 AM
I don't know about the designers, but it is generally accepted that the KDE API is way more easier to develop with compared to the myriad of generic libraries that GNOME apps use.some say that about the actual toolkit (assuming that only C++ is going to be used. the bindings for QT are not as mature as gtk for all other languages), but i wasn't talking about the toolkit.

deanlinkous
February 24th, 2007, 06:06 AM
dolphin replacing konqueror, KDE going for some simple and basic ala' gnome

jimrz
February 24th, 2007, 06:19 AM
When did the Ubuntu Forums turn into Slashdot??

People, these stupid Gnome Vs. KDE discussions about which is better at what are completely uneeded. People will choose whatever they like the best and they don't care if you think Gnome is oversimplified, KDE has the best applications, or if Gnome's licensing terms are much better than KDE's. Just let people choose for themselves and end this useless opinionated discussion.

+1 ... thank you, somebody needed to say this

maniacmusician
February 24th, 2007, 06:21 AM
dolphin replacing konqueror, KDE going for some simple and basic ala' gnome
Common misconception. Dolphin is not replacing konqueror! That would be a mad move.

Dolphin is great, but it can never offer the amazing integration that Konqueror has.

So, no, KDE is not "going for some simple and basic ala' gnome." Quite the opposite in fact.


The amount of bigotry from both sides of this is finally starting to get to me a little. Why don't you just relax. People will always use KDE, they will always use GNOME, or whatever the hell suits them best.


As per the topic of the thread; I guess that question won't be answered until KDE4 is concrete. To be honest, the hype about KDE4 is just too great, and I have a feeling that a lot of people are going to be dissapointed by it. A lot of that, I think, stems from the user-made mockups on KDE-look, and stuff like that. They paint a very nice picture, but I doubt that picture will be the reality.

As for myself, I don't hold any extremely high expectations, but I do expect it to be an improvement over the current KDE. I don't think I'll be dissapointed. If nothing else, at least the KDE developers are being extremely innovative. It may be a big huge flop, but they're giving it their all, and I respect that. It's generating great ideas and concepts, at least, to be used and improved on by future generations. But overall, I expect to be pleased by KDE4. I'm excited in a layed back kind of way.

deanlinkous
February 24th, 2007, 06:36 AM
Dolphin is not replacing konqueror! Why develop dolphin then? I think dolphin will be the default file manager and konq will be installed by default as .....????something


The amount of bigotry from both sides of this is finally starting to get to me a little. Why don't you just relax. People will always use KDE, they will always use GNOME, or whatever the hell suits them best.
are you sure it is US who needs to relax?

ComplexNumber
February 24th, 2007, 06:38 AM
I think dolphin will be the default file manager and konq will be installed by default asfrom what i gather, that seems to be the case. dolphin IS going to be the default file manager, but they are not getting rid of konqueror anytime soon. that will still be there as an option for power users.

antenna
February 24th, 2007, 06:42 AM
Common misconception. Dolphin is not replacing konqueror! That would be a mad move.

Dolphin is great, but it can never offer the amazing integration that Konqueror has.

So, no, KDE is not "going for some simple and basic ala' gnome." Quite the opposite in fact.



I'm not entirely sure of the situation, isn't Dolphin going to be used by default for a few things that Konqueror is now? I think it's somewhat fair to say they are going for basic and simple in a sense, a couple of years ago Dolphin probably wouldn't of been considered as a default app in KDE at all. I also heard they'll be going for text under icons in toolbars and a cleaner look there overall.

This isn't a bad thing at all, I think KDE would benefit from simple in a few key areas, and i'm looking forward to it, I think it could be great and perhaps make a KDE user out of me.

deanlinkous
February 24th, 2007, 06:50 AM
yes, less seperators/buttons/framelines/tabs/sidepanes/menus would be very welcome by me since those are one of my gripes about KDE is that it is just tooo busy. Not that I use KDE much but when gnome2.x first came out I used KDE for a while...

hanzomon4
February 24th, 2007, 07:19 AM
I looking to try a good kde distro I tried sabayon but didn't like it to much, any suggestions?

antenna
February 24th, 2007, 07:44 AM
I looking to try a good kde distro I tried sabayon but didn't like it to much, any suggestions?

PCLinuxOS is probably the nicest KDE default setup i've seen. I wouldn't necessarily focus on a 'kde distro' or 'gnome distro' though, a DE is just something that runs on top.. the underlying base is much more important.

FyreBrand
February 24th, 2007, 08:01 AM
Common misconception. Dolphin is not replacing konqueror! That would be a mad move.

Dolphin is great, but it can never offer the amazing integration that Konqueror has.

So, no, KDE is not "going for some simple and basic ala' gnome." Quite the opposite in fact.


The amount of bigotry from both sides of this is finally starting to get to me a little. Why don't you just relax. People will always use KDE, they will always use GNOME, or whatever the hell suits them best.


As per the topic of the thread; I guess that question won't be answered until KDE4 is concrete. To be honest, the hype about KDE4 is just too great, and I have a feeling that a lot of people are going to be dissapointed by it. A lot of that, I think, stems from the user-made mockups on KDE-look, and stuff like that. They paint a very nice picture, but I doubt that picture will be the reality.

As for myself, I don't hold any extremely high expectations, but I do expect it to be an improvement over the current KDE. I don't think I'll be dissapointed. If nothing else, at least the KDE developers are being extremely innovative. It may be a big huge flop, but they're giving it their all, and I respect that. It's generating great ideas and concepts, at least, to be used and improved on by future generations. But overall, I expect to be pleased by KDE4. I'm excited in a layed back kind of way.I agree with the silliness of arguing over DE's.

Dolphin is in KDE Base now, but it isn't the default file manager and it doesn't look like it's going to be the default as of yet. Here is a news article from dot.kde.org (http://dot.kde.org/1171837168/). It could easily be configured as the default by the user, but it seems they aren't sure just how it's going to be integrated into desktop workflow by default. So far it's thought that Konq will fire up when apps call for file management.

If anything I think Dolphin would be great for default file management when an app calls for it, but Konq would be great for general file browsing because you can head off into we searching if that's where it takes you. I'm going to try it out. I've always used Krusader for power file management.

By the way, the future of KDE is look damn damn good!

maniacmusician
February 24th, 2007, 08:32 AM
I agree that dolphin would be a good file manager when an app calls for it and konqui for general file browsing. I hadn't thought of that, but that would be an excellent implementation.

ComplexNumber
February 24th, 2007, 09:24 AM
Dolphin is in KDE Base now, but it isn't the default file manager and it doesn't look like it's going to be the default as of yet. Here is a news article from dot.kde.org (http://dot.kde.org/1171837168/). It could easily be configured as the default by the user, but it seems they aren't sure just how it's going to be integrated into desktop workflow by default. So far it's thought that Konq will fire up when apps call for file management.
wrong. you may want to bring yourself up to date with this (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2007/02/konqueror-not-vanishing-news-at-11.html) by aseigo:


what is on the plan right now is for dolphin to become the file manager that gets launched from the default panel buttons and by apps requesting to launch a file manager. and just like in kde3 you will be able to configure all of this quite easily so that it uses konqueror (or whatever other tool you prefer, e.g. krusader) instead.

luca.b
February 24th, 2007, 09:29 AM
It doesn't mean they will be going "a la gnome", as the two DEs have completely different goals (and user bases).

Personally it doesn't matter to me, I rarely use graphical file managers, I do 99% of the file operations via command line...

steven8
February 24th, 2007, 09:31 AM
Oh wow. Linus would on the IRC ASAP if KDE tried to become like gnome!

FyreBrand
February 24th, 2007, 10:25 AM
wrong. you may want to bring yourself up to date with this (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2007/02/konqueror-not-vanishing-news-at-11.html) by aseigo:
He also said this:
konqueror is a power user's application that can not be fully replaced by something like dolphin (and vice versa). they have different use cases and different target audiences. both are valid concepts and both will be sharing the vast majority of their code, sort of like how kwrite is little more than a shell around katepart.Which is referenced from the news article by the way. So it's in his blog and they may very well shift it to default, but he hasn't posted it on dot.kde yet. It still sounds like it's in committee on how exactly they are going to implement it. It's obvious Konq isn't getting replaced though. Personally I would much rather have an interface like dolphin when an app calls for file management. It seems much more suited to that.

So I guess KDE4 is a little bit more than just on the white board eh?

ComplexNumber
February 24th, 2007, 10:39 AM
He also said this:Which is referenced from the news article by the way. So it's in his blog and they may very well shift it to default, but he hasn't posted it on dot.kde yet. It still sounds like it's in committee on how exactly they are going to implement it. It's obvious Konq isn't getting replaced though. Personally I would much rather have an interface like dolphin when an app calls for file management. It seems much more suited to that.

So I guess KDE4 is a little bit more than just on the white board eh?
that doesn't say anything different from what i've been saying.
a) dolphin is going to be the default file manager
b) konqueror will still be available for the power user if they so wish, but will not be default.

EdThaSlayer
February 24th, 2007, 10:48 AM
In the long run I think that KDE will beat GNOME to dust but the only thing that keeps GNOME alive is its ingenius use of making everything *easy* to use which KDE needs to work on.

Erunno
February 24th, 2007, 11:55 AM
In the long run I think that KDE will beat GNOME to dust but the only thing that keeps GNOME alive is its ingenius use of making everything *easy* to use which KDE needs to work on.

*grabs popcorn* :popcorn:

G Morgan
February 24th, 2007, 03:09 PM
Oh wow. Linus would on the IRC ASAP if KDE tried to become like gnome!

Nah Linus wasn't annoyed by defaults. He was annoyed (rightly in my opinion) that some key functionality was hard coded into GNOME (like the response to mouse click events) and as a result could not be configured at all. It wasn't a case of installing a few tools or editing a text file it simply could not be done without patching the source code and rebuilding.

The problem is more one of miscommunication. What people like Linus were saying is that hard coding these things is simply bad design and limits the environment to the default (you don't need 25 years in the field to see that) and that makes it difficult for them to use GNOME. Of course you can't do everything at once and if the GNOME guys had said 'We would like to see this happen but don't have the man power.' then either it would be dropped or someone would have produced a patch.

Instead somebody somewhere read it as an attack on GNOMEs style of simple defaults (which it was not) and then the holy war started. What happened after is nobodies fault and it's a pity it went the way it did because there are issues with GNOME like there are with everything else on the planet and getting a debate going forward about them and producing code is the best way to move forward.

All the holy wars are a matter of miscommunication though. Everywhere it eventually breaks down to 2 groups arguing extremely different points and then getting confused and angry when the other side can't see it their way. Take the Vi/Emacs argument, you may as well argue that Sunday roasts are better than Manchester United.

deanlinkous
February 24th, 2007, 10:23 PM
In the long run I think that KDE will beat GNOME to dust but the only thing that keeps GNOME alive is its ingenius use of making everything *easy* to use which KDE needs to work on.

Well what is the long run then....how long has it already been? How much longer do we have to wait? :D

deanlinkous
February 24th, 2007, 10:31 PM
Nah Linus wasn't annoyed by defaults. He was annoyed (rightly in my opinion) that some key functionality was hard coded into GNOME (like the response to mouse click events) and as a result could not be configured at all. It wasn't a case of installing a few tools or editing a text file it simply could not be done without patching the source code and rebuilding.
Except that metacity is not hard wired into gnome. I am sure linus maintains his project and decides what it is to become and what it isn't so I would think he would understand someone else having the same control over their project.

apt-get install sawfish


What people like Linus were saying is that hard coding these things is simply bad design and limits the environment to the default (you don't need 25 years in the field to see that) and that makes it difficult for them to use GNOME.

Thats right Gnome 2.x was all a mistake and we should all go back to 1.x
Just because a large portion of users without skillz found it too confusing how dare we make it easy for those without skillz and require a technical user employ technical skillz if he wants a certain feature. Strange - I thought that WAS the purpose of free software was to be whatever someone wanted to make it not cater to only the uber:tech geeks.

FyreBrand
February 24th, 2007, 10:41 PM
In the long run I think that KDE will beat GNOME to dust but the only thing that keeps GNOME alive is its ingenius use of making everything *easy* to use which KDE needs to work on.The future of KDE has little to do with gnome or beating anything. The only future gnome and KDE have together is when some of the developers are collaborating to promote better integration which does happen.

Adamant1988
February 24th, 2007, 11:51 PM
Whatever KDE's future is. I really hope it involves a serious aesthetic overhaul. That double-thick kicker makes my eyes bleed.

bailout
February 25th, 2007, 02:58 AM
Whatever KDE's future is. I really hope it involves a serious aesthetic overhaul. That double-thick kicker makes my eyes bleed.

If you can't figure out how to change the size of the kicker panel then I suspect you should probably stick to gnome ;)

Old Pink
February 25th, 2007, 03:15 AM
KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else.

... Opinion.

ComplexNumber
February 25th, 2007, 03:31 AM
Originally Posted by runningwithscissors
KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else.... Opinion.
most of us just treated it in the same vein as claims of Linus Torvalds converting to gnome tomorrow. he needs to look at the facts.

Adamant1988
February 25th, 2007, 03:39 AM
If you can't figure out how to change the size of the kicker panel then I suspect you should probably stick to gnome ;)

I know how to change it. I just think I shouldn't have to, the default be ugly as sin.

Kindred
February 25th, 2007, 04:23 AM
The default LED clock is ugly too but as long as it is easily changed it doesn't really matter to me. Besides, the kicker panel is being replaced all together anyway.

I hope they ditch those blue coloured graphics in the control center and K3b (for example) though, having fixed colours that can't possibly adapt to a theme is just wrong. :)

Rhapsody
February 25th, 2007, 07:48 AM
I know how to change it. I just think I shouldn't have to, the default be ugly as sin.

Yeah, but that's not a proper criticism, that's just you stating an aesthetic opinion. I happen to think the kicker looks weird at the same thickness as Windows has for default (I've found normal thickness with 80% width looks best to me). Besides that, changing the thickness is a 30 second job that only needs to be done once unless you lose you configuration files or make a major KDE upgrade, neither of which are exactly common occurrences.

Adamant1988
February 25th, 2007, 08:38 AM
Yeah, but that's not a proper criticism, that's just you stating an aesthetic opinion. I happen to think the kicker looks weird at the same thickness as Windows has for default (I've found normal thickness with 80% width looks best to me). Besides that, changing the thickness is a 30 second job that only needs to be done once unless you lose you configuration files or make a major KDE upgrade, neither of which are exactly common occurrences.

Understood. My point is that every KDE screen shot of any distribution you see has this awful looking kicker bar in it. It's an eye-sore really. I'm not saying it needs to be as thin as the windows bar, I would just prefer it be thinner than it is. It feels like it takes up too much screen real estate. I like what Novell has done with it in their distribution though, surprisingly.

bailout
February 25th, 2007, 01:49 PM
It feels like it takes up too much screen real estate. I like what Novell has done with it in their distribution though, surprisingly.

It takes up exactly the same amount of space as the gnome default, just in one block rather than two.

Adamant1988
February 25th, 2007, 03:11 PM
It takes up exactly the same amount of space as the gnome default, just in one block rather than two.

Ok, now *read* what I wrote. I said, and I quote: "It feels like it takes up too much screen real estate". I didn't say that it actually did, and I didn't say that gnome took up less. I said that it feels like it does.

Rhapsody
February 25th, 2007, 07:09 PM
Understood. My point is that every KDE screen shot of any distribution you see has this awful looking kicker bar in it. It's an eye-sore really. I'm not saying it needs to be as thin as the windows bar, I would just prefer it be thinner than it is. It feels like it takes up too much screen real estate. I like what Novell has done with it in their distribution though, surprisingly.

Well if you know it can be resized, and know how to resize it, where's the problem? There's no way everyone's going to be satisfied by a default look, and I think criticizing a desktop environment simply because the default settings aren't to your particular tastes is rather churlish. Especially considering that endless 'tweakability' is generally considered to be among KDE's greatest strengths.

fuscia
February 25th, 2007, 07:17 PM
Understood. My point is that every KDE screen shot of any distribution you see has this awful looking kicker bar in it. It's an eye-sore really. I'm not saying it needs to be as thin as the windows bar, I would just prefer it be thinner than it is. It feels like it takes up too much screen real estate. I like what Novell has done with it in their distribution though, surprisingly.

you can make kicker any size you want, both in width and height, and you can make it invisible, if you like.

troymcdavis
February 25th, 2007, 07:54 PM
My point is that every KDE screen shot of any distribution you see has this awful looking kicker bar in it. It's an eye-sore really.
Some of us like it. In fact, judging by the screens of random users' desktops, I'd say a lot of us like it. Back when I primarily used Windows, I always made my taskbar double thick. I don't know why you think your opinion is the only one that matters--it doesn't seem to represent any large number of KDE users. Even if did, it's obviously not that big of a deal, because you're the only person who seems to think it's a big enough deal to complain over.

Adamant1988
February 25th, 2007, 08:01 PM
Well if you know it can be resized, and know how to resize it, where's the problem? There's no way everyone's going to be satisfied by a default look, and I think criticizing a desktop environment simply because the default settings aren't to your particular tastes is rather churlish. Especially considering that endless 'tweakability' is generally considered to be among KDE's greatest strengths.

yes, and I tweak it to make me happy. The point is that if I show someone a picture of Mepis, Linspire, Kubuntu, or any KDE distro they're going to be saying "Eww". The default should be less ugly is what i'm getting at.

awakatanka
February 25th, 2007, 08:09 PM
yes, and I tweak it to make me happy. The point is that if I show someone a picture of Mepis, Linspire, Kubuntu, or any KDE distro they're going to be saying "Eww". The default should be less ugly is what i'm getting at.
Not realy KDE fault, it more a fault of the distrobuilder. There some Distroś that have a better look. But i agree if the distro builder lets the KDE standaard mostly intact, it looks ugly. Hope KDE 4 does better with the eyecandy.

FyreBrand
February 25th, 2007, 08:19 PM
yes, and I tweak it to make me happy. The point is that if I show someone a picture of Mepis, Linspire, Kubuntu, or any KDE distro they're going to be saying "Eww". The default should be less ugly is what i'm getting at.Funny I didn't get that reaction at all when I presented Kubuntu at work as our Linux option for staff and public desktops. In fact I got quite an opposite reaction. The consensus is that the look is unique (in comparison to Windows) but not so strange as to scare people away. When they looked at my desktop they asked why mine looked so different. I explained that you can make it, gnome or kde, look like whatever you want.

I think they were more impressed with XFCE4 and the fact that old machines aren't as useless as they thought.

Rhapsody
February 25th, 2007, 08:19 PM
yes, and I tweak it to make me happy. The point is that if I show someone a picture of Mepis, Linspire, Kubuntu, or any KDE distro they're going to be saying "Eww". The default should be less ugly is what i'm getting at.

Unless you can actually get me some more people who share your point of view, I'm going to have to view this as you arbitrarily assuming more people agree with you than actually do. The few opinions I've gotten are very "Meh", with a lot of people not really caring very much what their operating system looks like.

weatherman
February 25th, 2007, 08:21 PM
just wanted to note that the old wiki probably isn't being updated anymore, for information look on techbase (the new, not yet officially launched kde-tech wiki):
http://developernew.kde.org/
http://developernew.kde.org/Schedules/KDE_4.0_Release_Schedule

Adamant1988
February 25th, 2007, 08:33 PM
Unless you can actually get me some more people who share your point of view, I'm going to have to view this as you arbitrarily assuming more people agree with you than actually do. The few opinions I've gotten are very "Meh", with a lot of people not really caring very much what their operating system looks like.

Well the people I try to get to switch agree that gnome is much more aesthetically pleasing by default, they like KDE more once I configure it properly, so... I suppose I could do some surveys and get some numbers and send those to the KDE folks?

Erunno
February 25th, 2007, 08:57 PM
Well the people I try to get to switch agree that gnome is much more aesthetically pleasing by default, they like KDE more once I configure it properly, so... I suppose I could do some surveys and get some numbers and send those to the KDE folks?

You could try but I think they'd prefer a scientifically conducted usuability study ;-) Polls are kinda meaningless in my opinion as people will vote for their preferred topic despite (or unknowingly) that it is a suboptimal solution as evidenced by millions of Windows users who just got used to their specific implementation of the desktop paradigma and will defend it as the most accesible UI on the market.

A KDE developer made some tests with removing visible borders for widgets in Akregator recently and the feedback was mostly positive. It shows that small measures can change the perception of a component it seems and from the comments I read it is mostly dependent on the widget style used in a KDE desktop. So I'd put the burden on the Kubuntu developers to come up with a desktop theme that is less "busy" (whatever that means).

G Morgan
February 26th, 2007, 04:14 PM
Except that metacity is not hard wired into gnome. I am sure linus maintains his project and decides what it is to become and what it isn't so I would think he would understand someone else having the same control over their project.

apt-get install sawfish

So the official way to configure GNOME is to remove the central piece of the environment. Why not suggest we improve Linux by installing Solaris or BSD instead.



Thats right Gnome 2.x was all a mistake and we should all go back to 1.x
Just because a large portion of users without skillz found it too confusing how dare we make it easy for those without skillz and require a technical user employ technical skillz if he wants a certain feature. Strange - I thought that WAS the purpose of free software was to be whatever someone wanted to make it not cater to only the uber:tech geeks.

Yet again this does exactly what I complain about and sets up a strawman. Simple defaults and simplified configuration tools are what GNOME should produce but that doesn't mean they have to hard code Metacity. This is where GNOME should aim for. Well configured and designed for the people without '1337 skillz' with the options available for others to alter things (by text configuration if need be) if they think context menus are a waste of time as Linus obviously does.

I do not suggest that they spend all their time catering for the KDE user base by building massive dialog sets but when some one does provide a patch that allows these things to be configured at all then please do include it. It would be totally transparent for the normal GNOME target base to install the patch Linus has produced, they would not even realise things had changed. It would be of great use to others though.

This isn't a zero sum game. You can have full configurability without hurting the target base or without them even realising they can do all the new mad stuff. Others have shown they are willing to do the work in achieving this by producing code. I can't see the problem but people should stop pretending this is a them and us situation.

G Morgan
February 26th, 2007, 04:17 PM
Of course the other option would be a fork and since the fork would be exactly the same as GNOME from a normal users point but with extra configurability buried somewhere in its bowels where more technically inclined users can enjoy themselves then what would be the result.

deanlinkous
February 26th, 2007, 05:36 PM
So the official way to configure GNOME is to remove the central piece of the environment. no just one way to do it :)
metacity is just a wm, sawfish use to be the wm of gnome but it is a swappable item, it is desgined to be swappable. Youc onsider the central piece of a environemnt to be titlebars and window borders???


Yet again this does exactly what I complain about and sets up a strawman. Simple defaults and simplified configuration tools are what GNOME should produce but that doesn't mean they have to hard code Metacity. This is where GNOME should aim for. Well configured and designed for the people without '1337 skillz' with the options available for others to alter things (by text configuration if need be) if they think context menus are a waste of time as Linus obviously does.I do agree it should be avaailable somewhere. But what happens to a text config file or especially gconf-editor when evryone gets their fav feature put in it. gconf-editor is a cool tool until it gets filled with a million options then we just end up with gnome 1.x where even a advanced user gets lost in it...I do not want to go back there myself.

G Morgan
February 26th, 2007, 05:52 PM
I thought GConf-Editor was designed as the feature dumping ground in any case (similar to about:config in Firefox) with the dialogs being the focus of the system for less interested users. I'd be happy with no option there and just doing it the old fashioned way in any case.

runningwithscissors
February 27th, 2007, 10:01 AM
KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else.
... Opinion.
Fact.
I also provided an example a bit further on in the same post. Or do you not think that the scriptability that a dcop interface provided to most KDE programs by default was worth much? Same goes for early compositing support (which, I'd admit was available with other window managers earlier, but not Metacity).

frodon
February 27th, 2007, 10:37 AM
@runningwithscissors, sorry but sentence like "KDE has usually been lightyears ahead of GNOME or anybody else" can't be anything else than an opinion, it's like windows users saying "windows has usually been lightyears ahead of linux or anybody else" and claiming that it is the fact.
It's a matter of view.

You got it ?

OldTimeTech
February 27th, 2007, 11:00 AM
I still think it goes back to what someone said early on....it's what each user likes and wants to use...I like gnome, my significant other likes KDE....would like to try XFCE sometime, just haven't gotten around to doing so.

shrimphead
February 27th, 2007, 01:53 PM
So the official way to configure GNOME is to remove the central piece of the environment. Why not suggest we improve Linux by installing Solaris or BSD instead.

{...snipped for space...}

This isn't a zero sum game. You can have full configurability without hurting the target base or without them even realising they can do all the new mad stuff. Others have shown they are willing to do the work in achieving this by producing code. I can't see the problem but people should stop pretending this is a them and us situation.

+1. Linus's patches did actually make the metacity (and the gnome control panel) more readable and configurable whilst at the same time they didn't change the defaults.

I'm all up for having "sensible defaults" as the Gnome team call it, but actually omitting functionality is just limiting to the end user. what will happen when all of these so called "normal users" decide that they want to do a particular thing and then find out that they cant? I believe that a desktop environment should have the ability to grow as it's user becomes more experienced.

Hard coding features, (such as the Metacity example) just means users to get to a certain 'peak' and because they can't progress beyond it they will look elsewhere.

arkangel
February 27th, 2007, 03:11 PM
I wouldnt worry KDE has enought user to be lost in Time