PDA

View Full Version : Why KDE 4.1 ??



Tilex
November 23rd, 2008, 07:40 PM
Hi everyone!

I've been a Ubuntu/Kubuntu user since 2005, and I finally wiped out the Windows partition a year ago.

I love my Linux-powered machine.

My uncle wanted to try out a Linux distro so I suggested he chooses Kubuntu 8.10.

What the heck with KDE 4.1 ?? It has huge desktop icons, the K-menu is non-intuitive, and there are so many options you don't have anymore! Like you can't have a rotating background as in my Hardy version, when you go into the Desktop setting, so have half the options you had before...

I mean, I haven't seen ANY advantages to switch to KDE 4.1 despite the somewhat "eye candy" effect. Whatever.

Any thought on that? Am I missing something here? Have I installed a semi-working version of the real KDE 4 deal?

I was so confused that I told my uncle to download good ol' 8.04 with KDE 3.5.

maagimies
November 23rd, 2008, 08:07 PM
While 4.x is rather new still, I'm concerned about the lack of configurability.

That, and the new menu gets in my way.

billgoldberg
November 23rd, 2008, 08:11 PM
Because it is the newest version of the DE.

You can't expect that new distros keep using old versions of a DE.

pluviosity
November 23rd, 2008, 08:13 PM
While 4.x is rather new still, I'm concerned about the lack of configurability.

Lack of configurability? Please! KDE is all about configurability. Look at Plasma: you can have your desktop how you want. Granted, Plasma is not done yet (eg. the cashew), but good things are not rushed.

OP: if you want more info on this, look at the recurring discussions subforum because this has been discussed quite a bit.

grotto
November 23rd, 2008, 08:19 PM
KDE 3.5 was released over 3 years after 3.0 came out. It is unreasonable to expect that kind of polish in 4.1 as it is only a matter of months old.

Every update brings huge improvements. It is unfortunate that some users are so impatient.

I agree that the menu system is simply bad, however; all menu systems are bad design regardless. Though with Krunner and customizable keyboard shortcuts now working in 4.2, I find it immaterial.

Tilex
November 23rd, 2008, 08:51 PM
OK, the argument is "give it time".

I don't know much about KDE development; I thought that KDE 3.5 was a subset of KDE 4, such that the users would benefit from all KDE 3.5's functionalities PLUS some new ones.

How is this not the case then?

Ub1476
November 23rd, 2008, 08:54 PM
At least it's (the kick-off menu) better than Vista and OS X. And it keeps things in one place, unlike Gnome which has a lot of sub-menus (bad).

It can be better, but often it's a matter of getting used to it. I've been using it for awhile and find it alright.

But remember that these times, things are often made for the end user. Stupid noobs is another word for it.

Also as other have said, KDE4 is a complete rewrite of KDE3 so you can't expect everything in KDE3 for KDE4. At least not for a while. However, KDE4.2 is a big improvment, even though it's still in beta.

racoq
November 23rd, 2008, 09:37 PM
Hi everyone!

I was so confused that I told my uncle to download good ol' 8.04 with KDE 3.5.


It's good for him, if... he likes the old ugly user interface, and the tons of options and configurations, that usually scare most peoples.


I've always been a fan of gnome, but recently i really liked kde 4. KDE 3.x is to outdated, complex with to many geeky configurations, and plain ugly


This is Why you should use KDE 4

Hallvor
November 23rd, 2008, 10:09 PM
Hi everyone!

I've been a Ubuntu/Kubuntu user since 2005, and I finally wiped out the Windows partition a year ago.

I love my Linux-powered machine.

My uncle wanted to try out a Linux distro so I suggested he chooses Kubuntu 8.10.

What the heck with KDE 4.1 ?? It has huge desktop icons, the K-menu is non-intuitive, and there are so many options you don't have anymore! Like you can't have a rotating background as in my Hardy version, when you go into the Desktop setting, so have half the options you had before...

I mean, I haven't seen ANY advantages to switch to KDE 4.1 despite the somewhat "eye candy" effect. Whatever.

Any thought on that? Am I missing something here? Have I installed a semi-working version of the real KDE 4 deal?

I was so confused that I told my uncle to download good ol' 8.04 with KDE 3.5.

KDE 3.5 is still on the throne. KDE 4.1 lacks a lot of functionality and is less stable. It will get along and have new features added, and some day it will be the king, but for now KDE 3.5 is superior.

mips
November 23rd, 2008, 10:16 PM
OK, the argument is "give it time".

I don't know much about KDE development; I thought that KDE 3.5 was a subset of KDE 4, such that the users would benefit from all KDE 3.5's functionalities PLUS some new ones.

How is this not the case then?

KDE 4 is essentially a new project departing from 3.5. They just about started with a clean slate.

DeadSuperHero
November 23rd, 2008, 10:25 PM
To be fair, though, the SVN nightly build of KDE 4.2 is amazing.

benerivo
November 23rd, 2008, 11:20 PM
KDE 3.5 is excellent. It has been very easily dropped by many distros on the basis that it is 'outdated'. As of now, I would say it is the best desktop out there. PCLinuxOS have kept it for their 2009 release for a reason. If kde4 was released as a separate brand new desktop environment (ie. ADE-DE), then it would still have had huge interest, but many people would still be using kde3.

To be fair i'd give kde4 some time. I'd guess it will be fully polished by 4.4.

handy
November 24th, 2008, 12:05 AM
KDE 4 is a work in progress that has got a ways to go yet.

zgornel
November 24th, 2008, 12:25 AM
I remember the days of KDE 3.1 . It was nothing like 3.5 in terms of performance, stability and features. KDE4 is still immature but has huge potential.

PS. I also had to switch to Gnome in 8.10 for at least one year while keeping KDE 3.5 on another one.

DJKPSP
November 24th, 2008, 12:58 AM
I didn't like KDE 3.5 but I switched from Gnome to KDE when it became 4.1(Kubuntu 8.10).

Changturkey
November 24th, 2008, 01:35 AM
I didn't like KDE 3.5 but I switched from Gnome to KDE when it became 4.1(Kubuntu 8.10).

Kubuntu or Ubuntu + KDE?

DJKPSP
November 24th, 2008, 01:41 AM
Kubuntu or Ubuntu + KDE?Kubuntu.

handy
November 24th, 2008, 04:09 AM
I have seen quite a few recommending the Ubuntu + KDE4 path.

Arch/KDEmod allows you to choose which parts of KDE you want to install from the modularised version, which certainly makes for a lighter & more personalised install of KDE.

Hopefully the modularisation of KDE will become available to all through the adoption of same by the KDE dev' team.

mrgnash
November 24th, 2008, 06:17 AM
I have seen quite a few recommending the Ubuntu + KDE4 path.

Arch/KDEmod allows you to choose which parts of KDE you want to install from the modularised version, which certainly makes for a lighter & more personalised install of KDE.

Hopefully the modularisation of KDE will become available to all through the adoption of same by the KDE dev' team.

You can kinda do that by installing kdebase.

handy
November 24th, 2008, 06:24 AM
You can kinda do that by installing kdebase.

There must be a reason why the KDEmod people have put so much time into development, & also why so many KDEmod users are so happy with the product. They too hope that modularisation becomes the norm for KDE so every KDE user shares the same freedom of choice that Arch/KDEmod users do.

Tilex
November 24th, 2008, 08:02 AM
They too hope that modularisation becomes the norm for KDE so every KDE user shares the same freedom of choice that Arch/KDEmod users do.

Absolutely!

And that's probably why I was concerned about the lack of functionalities KDE 4.1 possesses. I thought somehow the developpers would suddenly forget about all the "goodness" of KDE 3.5, but as long as KDE 3.5 is still offered in the next distros until KDE 4.X becomes superior (in a very broad sense), I'm in for KDE 4.

Thanks for the nice replies!