Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?
"I like this solution and think it's very fair, no screwing up in my eyes."
Are you saying that you do not mind using proprietairy software? There is nothing wrong with that, many people do. If you are interested in only running free software, that is where the problem is.
"No it's not. It ensures that the free software community can carry on developing Qt. In that unlikely case KDE.org for example could take Qt and relicense it."
Right. And if java underwent a fundamental change today, all the free alternatives to it (sablevm, Kaffe, etc..) would just continue along without having to start back at zero?
I already made this point.
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
I like gnome - ever since I started using it after loosing my fvwm2rc :P It's just quicker to set up and considering the functionality rather friendly on the ressources.
kde - this is one I used back in the first days of linux. Back then it would never run with an adequate speed on any computer I owned. So I moved on to fvwm2. That one got me to like vim (editing the rc's) and I was really happy with the possibilities (mainly easy configuration of keybindings and being able to do as much as possible without mouse).
Now I configured my gnome so I can do whatever I could back in the fvwm times, just a little more features if I desire them. (nautilus is just freakin awesome for managing image-collection and movies)
kde I have only touched when installing linux for i.e. my mom and my girlfriend. Until gnome2.8 kde was just the more complete and better structured DE. Now they got used to it - so they stick to it.
KDE is great, but gnome's my fav. (like the themability alot - not wanting to learn kde themes right now :P )
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
To those who call kde bloated, why do you not just install the kde-base package and add stuff from there?
With debian packaging, it is not all-or-nothing.
Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?
Quote:
Originally Posted by azz
Are you saying that you do not mind using proprietairy software? There is nothing wrong with that, many people do. If you are interested in only running free software, that is where the problem is.
I prefer free software but I (have to) use propritary software if it's better suited for a given project. If I only want to use free software then Qt is no obstacle, I am not forced to use the commercial lisence, am I? I can use Qt under a free license and I can develop free software for it. Your problem is that propritary developers cannot use the free edition of Qt but have to buy the professional edition. Something which I think is only fair. But okay, if the sole aim is the biggest user base -- including propritary developers who don't give back -- then LGPL is indeed better suited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azz
Right. And if java underwent a fundamental change today, all the free alternatives to it (sablevm, Kaffe, etc..) would just continue along without having to start back at zero?
The scenario of The KDE Free Qt Foundation is that Troll Tech doesn't continue development of the Qt Free Edition. The resulting BSD relisencing of the Qt source code will ensure that free software projects like KDE sitll have a free Qt. KDE.org for example would not depend on a closed-source-for-money Qt. Free and non-free Qt would in that case of course diverge with time. The BSD lisence is not useless in this scenario, it's a very good start and a solution to that problem.
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
Well, right now I'm using KDE.
Everything in GNOME is perfect, except:
1. kioslaves definitely beats gnome-vfs. The ability to open AND save files over any kind of konqueror supported protocol (from ftp:// to pop3://) is unbeatable.
2. Kate. No GNOME editor matches it.
3. KDevelop. Anjuta ain't even close.
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
I use Gnome for the "quiet" it offers me.
KDE does have some nice features that impress me though:
Integration between Kopete & Addressbook--simple enough, but handy.
Kaudiocreator--an integrated audio ripper and one of the finest available for Linux.
Kppp-the best modem gui tool ever.
K3b--my favourite burning app on any platform.
Koffice--kword and kspread are marvelous for simple tasks, easy to navigate, and can save in OOo format.
Noatun w/ the Hayes playlist is the most discreet and transparent way to listen to tunes on linux.
I'd happily use KDE if I had a laptop that, say, ran better with Suse or Mandrake on it--but as far as the general look and feel of it...ICK. :lol: Too Willy Wonka.
KDE's very impressive from a technological standpoint with its reuse of libraries and whatnot--it runs surprisingly great on old hardware.
I like Gnome better as a DE though. It's calming--and the weather applet kicks butt. :D
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
Ralph,
I also do not want to partake in a desktop war. But I will say that any perceived KDE bloat may not be because of KDE, per. se., but rather because of the distro.
When I install SuSE or Slackware I am given the opportunity to install just about every application under the Sun. So you could end up with Konqueror, Gideon, Mozilla and FireFox for browsers, KDEOffice, ABIWord and OpenOffice for write apps., 3 or 4 editors (Vim, Emacs, gedit, nano, pico, sed, etc.), 2 or 3 graphics programmes, 3 or 4 CD burning software programmes, ... etc. You get the idea.
While you can control it somewhat in SuSE, a newbie is more likely to install everything in Slackware. You are given three choices with RedHat but one may be tempted to install Workstation instead of Desktop or Server instead of Workstation. This could be considered bloat by many. And since KDE has better games, you just know that a lot of people installed them all.
I spent many hours deleting apps and libraries from SuSE whereas I spent many hours adding apps to Ubuntu. The difference is that I picked and chose as I went along, so I had more fun. I don't ever remember changing window themes, mouse pointers, icon themes or window borders with KDE. It came with Crystal Blue and that's basically all I ever used.
I loved KDE, but I outgrew it with Ubuntu.
If Hoary goes and integrates their web browser into the OS like Konqueror is integrated into KDE, chances are that I will never upgrade from Warty. I like my Fire Fox, tyvm, and do not what to change over to another browser. At this time.
For people who really do know KDE, though, KDE is probably faster than GNOME. Chances are your system isn't bloated with every app under the Sun.
I don't worry about such things when I have a P4 3 GHz processor and 2G of memory, though. Heck, it runs pretty darn well on my P1.5 with 512MB of mem. (As do most Linux distros). Yes, I just plainly prefer GNOME over KDE. To each his own. Choice is good. But I refuse to be converted back.
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
[QUOTE=piedamaro]Wrong. Maybe you mean redhat 7.2.
Redhat 5.2 shipped with an alpha release of gnome, gnome-libs were at version 0.30
Hey there,
Actually, I think that gnome 1.4 was in version 6.0 of redhat.
scoon
Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallijonn
Ralph,
I also do not want to partake in a desktop war. But I will say that any perceived KDE bloat may not be because of KDE, per. se., but rather because of the distro.
When I install SuSE or Slackware I am given the opportunity to install just about every application under the Sun. So you could end up with Konqueror, Gideon, Mozilla and FireFox for browsers, KDEOffice, ABIWord and OpenOffice for write apps., 3 or 4 editors (Vim, Emacs, gedit, nano, pico, sed, etc.), 2 or 3 graphics programmes, 3 or 4 CD burning software programmes, ... etc. You get the idea.
While you can control it somewhat in SuSE, a newbie is more likely to install everything in Slackware. You are given three choices with RedHat but one may be tempted to install Workstation instead of Desktop or Server instead of Workstation. This could be considered bloat by many. And since KDE has better games, you just know that a lot of people installed them all.
I spent many hours deleting apps and libraries from SuSE whereas I spent many hours adding apps to Ubuntu. The difference is that I picked and chose as I went along, so I had more fun. I don't ever remember changing window themes, mouse pointers, icon themes or window borders with KDE. It came with Crystal Blue and that's basically all I ever used.
I loved KDE, but I outgrew it with Ubuntu.
If Hoary goes and integrates their web browser into the OS like Konqueror is integrated into KDE, chances are that I will never upgrade from Warty. I like my Fire Fox, tyvm, and do not what to change over to another browser. At this time.
For people who really do know KDE, though, KDE is probably faster than GNOME. Chances are your system isn't bloated with every app under the Sun.
I don't worry about such things when I have a P4 3 GHz processor and 2G of memory, though. Heck, it runs pretty darn well on my P1.5 with 512MB of mem. (As do most Linux distros). Yes, I just plainly prefer GNOME over KDE. To each his own. Choice is good. But I refuse to be converted back.
Good point. I hated KDE until I tried Xandros, a large part of it due to Konqueror's replacement ;)
Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?
" If I only want to use free software then Qt is no obstacle, I am not forced to use the commercial lisence, am I"
The point is it is the same software. How can it be both free and commercial at the same time? You either feel software should be free and you will fight to keep it free (GPL) or you do not (non-free) You cannot say that you beleive in both.
Which brings me to your other point. If Trollteck thought that it was in it's advantage to close off Qt, do you actually think that the free (forked) version would be able to compete with the proprietairy version? Don't you think that the proprietairy version would have all the features that make it indispensable. It would not be cloesed off otherwise. The developers of the now-BSD-licenced Qt libraries would be left in the dust holding sheets of obsolete source code.
This is my opinion based on the fact that Trolltech cannot sustain the Open Source stance that they presently have. They either go all the way or their word is not worth bupkus.
