KDE4 is excrement and KDE3s time has passed
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Jun 30, 2010 9:07 PM EDT |
Quoting:For that matter, is KDE 3.5.11's speed and stability worth doing without the innovations of the KDE 4 desktop, such as folder view, the semantic desktop, the social desktop, remotely run widgets, or arranging apps in tabs in the same window? I hate Folder View with a passion The Semantic Desktop, whatever that actually is, does nothing for me, and certainly improved nothing for me when I was attempting to use the abortion that is KDE4. |
| azerthoth Jun 30, 2010 9:38 PM EDT |
Dont pull punches, tell us how you really feel TA :) |
| gus3 Jun 30, 2010 10:00 PM EDT |
Careful what you wish for, az, you might be next. |
| dinotrac Jun 30, 2010 10:53 PM EDT |
One of these days I really will have to pick a desktop. Been living with XFce, and it's not horrible. Is pretty snappy and resource light, but just doesn't grab me. Wonder how enlightenment is doing these days...? |
| gus3 Jul 01, 2010 12:07 AM EDT |
@dino: If you think Xfce is snappy, wait until you try LXDE, especially on the second login when file I/O comes from cache. I won't say I'm in love with it. Fact is, I hardly notice it. That can be a good thing. |
| krisum Jul 01, 2010 2:04 AM EDT |
> I won't say I'm in love with it. Fact is, I hardly notice it. That can be a good thing. Exactly my experience. And lxterminal, pcmanfm make for snappy partners. |
| jacog Jul 01, 2010 3:58 AM EDT |
KDE4 is not slow, I think that is an antiquated misconception. A memory hog, sure, but not slow. I have been running a 64bit Mint with Gnome for the past few weeks, and it feels draggy compared to the 32bit KDE4 I was running before that (and soon again). What might be the cause of people's slowness is that KDE is very dependant on hardware acceleration, and might perhaps not do too well with certain video card/driver setups. But I guess soon Gnome will have that same problem. ;) |
| Ridcully Jul 01, 2010 4:03 AM EDT |
I second your thoughts Tracyanne.......I have been trying to use KDE4.4 as in the latest openSUSE version and finally decided it remains useless. I am sick of folder views, desktop views, stinking views, other views ~ I am sick of programmer's "plasmucks" which don't apply to most users of KDE4; I am sick of icons that aren't and which have to be "spannered" to make them stay where they are or whatever; I am so tired of rotten frills and pretty glitz........I simply want a useful desktop that is like KDE3.5.......and don't tell me that KDE4'S folder view is the same, it bl...dy well ISN'T. I guess Gnome is the only option I have, and thankyou so much KDE team for forcing this situation, but you got what YOU wanted. I have just sent $US20 to Timothy Pearson at the Trinity project to save KDE3.5 and I invite anyone who isn't a welded-on future Luddite of KDE4 to help this poor man with fried servers. If I can do it, surely to goodness others can !!!!!!!!! I wish it could have been more......and probably will be in a few days. |
| Alcibiades Jul 01, 2010 4:30 AM EDT |
Do agree with TA and Ridcully about KDE4, but alas, the problem is the apps! The latest versions are tied into KDE4. Its OK for the time being, but its not going to be much longer. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jul 01, 2010 5:02 AM EDT |
For my part I have switched to Gnome and installed the applications and needed libraries along with them that I became accustomed to using KDE 3.5x. on my Fedora and Mint installs. I have to give credit to Textstar and others at PCLinuxOS in general for keeping KDE 3.5x alive and usable. |
| tracyanne Jul 01, 2010 8:38 AM EDT |
The way I see it, unless Timothy Pearson can get developers of KDE applications to port their applications to KDE3, or get another bunch of developers to write replacements for all the KDE applications that have moved to KDE4, there isn't going to be much life in Trinity. There is also the aspect that QT3 is very much no longer supported, which means either another project to prolong the life of QT3, or porting Trinity to QT4. KDE3 stime has passed, I miss it, there were so many things that were better than either GNOME, which I'm now using, or KDE4, but I don't see that Trinity is much more than tilting at windmills. |
| ComputerBob Jul 01, 2010 8:44 AM EDT |
After being a loyal KDE 3.5.x user since 2006, I finally tried KDE4 (4.3.4, Debian Squeeze) this past February. Ever since that horrible experience, http://www.computerbob.com/guides/my_debian_adventure_3.php I've been happily using Xfce (Debian Squeeze). Xfce is very fast and gives me nearly the same features as KDE3.5.x. (And by the way, KDE 4.3.4 was the FIRST version of KDE4 that I ever tried, so I had no prejudices or grudges against it that were caused by having tried its earlier, even-buggier versions.) If Trinity gains enough momentum to become viable, I would probably give it a try, but I'm not willing to be one of its early adopters. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 01, 2010 8:53 AM EDT |
TA, I agree about the supposed "desktop" in KDE4. It reminds me of someone's Master's Thesis. It looks good on paper but is usually so esoteric as to be completely useless to anyone else. (An exception being Murray Rothbard's, but that's another story) What I've been doing is, like Scott and Dino, using some other display (xfce for the most part) and running the KDE applications as needed. Thank Cromm (or Stallman) that "an X app is an X app". |
| Ridcully Jul 01, 2010 9:51 AM EDT |
I am afraid my emotions got the better of me in my above posting, but the sheer frustration of trying to use KDE4 eventually did the trick.....I read ComputerBob's amazing tussle with KDE4 and I am astonished that he remained quite polite in his report. Interestingly, I still have KDE3.5 running superbly on openSUSE 11 and all my critical software is also running perfectly so at the moment I have no real need to change......if it ain't broke, why fix it ? And the later openSUSE 11.1 still supports KDE3.5, so I have at least a year or so before I need to make a decision. Generally speaking, openSUSE is amazingly cooperative in running mixed packages, so if I have to run Gnome later on, I am sure I can run some imported KDE packages if the associated libraries are also present. So far however, KDE4 remains an absolute negative as regards my future desktop manager and Gnome or Xfce seem the only options. I tend to agree that Trinity probably has only one real hope and that is a port to Qt4. If that is done, KDE3.5 could very well rise again, but otherwise, I think that ultimately it will sadly disappear. In my opinion it easily beats KDE4 solidly as regards straight forward simplicity, usability and user friendliness and I still remain astonished that the KDE team did not move KDE 3.5 to Qt4. It may have been the more difficult development path, but it would have kept a previously united community intact and prevented the "complexity for complexity's sake" that I now believe is a characteristic of KDE4. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 01, 2010 10:10 AM EDT |
Golly. Wasn't it just a little while ago people sometimes complained that KDE3 was just too complicated? Too many configuration options, too much stuff being done at all? Yet now we pine for the good old days, how KDE3 was concise, explicit and finding configuration options was relatively easy. It's kind of a bummer that OLWM has fallen by the way-side. |
| tuxchick Jul 01, 2010 10:30 AM EDT |
jacog, I can't tell if you're serious-- KDE4 isn't slow as long as you throw massive gobs of horsepower at it? Isn't that like saying '50s American cars were plenty nimble as long as you stuffed giant V8s in them? And isn't that rather Vista-ish, to require mondo hardware just to boot the computer, and never mind running any actual apps? |
| ComputerBob Jul 01, 2010 10:33 AM EDT |
Quoting:Wasn't it just a little while ago people sometimes complained that KDE3 was just too complicated? Too many configuration options, too much stuff being done at all?Those are two separate groups of users. It's not fair to lump them together. |
| azerthoth Jul 01, 2010 10:35 AM EDT |
@CB perfectly fair |
| tuxchick Jul 01, 2010 10:44 AM EDT |
It was Gnome users complaining that KDE3 was too complicated. |
| jacog Jul 01, 2010 11:04 AM EDT |
tuxchick, you are misinterpreting what I am saying. And I was being serious... clarification (I hope): Gnome on my machine is slower than KDE. It's all due to the fact that KDE uses the hardware better. On other setups the situation might well be reversed. I only have two systems at home, and have not tried both on the other machine, so I only have the one experience to speak of. |
| rijelkentaurus Jul 01, 2010 11:30 AM EDT |
Using KDE 4.4.5 on PCLOS...runs great, runs fast, runs stable. |
| ComputerBob Jul 01, 2010 11:42 AM EDT |
Quoting:Using KDE 4.4.5 on PCLOS...runs great, runs fast, runs stable.So YOU'RE the user that KDE4 works great for -- glad to finally meet you! |
| tuxchick Jul 01, 2010 11:48 AM EDT |
OK jacog, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification. |
| gus3 Jul 01, 2010 12:05 PM EDT |
Now waiddaminnit...Quoting:It's all due to the fact that KDE uses the hardware better.How's that again? What hardware is it using better? Sound card? Ancillary. Keyboard and mouse? Impossible to use better, in an environment rich in KB shortcuts. Maybe you just know the shortcuts better in KDE? RAM? All indications are that KDE4 is trying to catch up to GNOME on the bloat factor. Network? Capabilities are near parity. That leaves the display. Are you noticing a difference in rendering speed? Since the X server is using the same hardware driver for all DE's, that leaves the client side as suspect #1. Do you have compositing enabled in GNOME, but not KDE (or vice-versa)? |
| djohnston Jul 01, 2010 1:10 PM EDT |
Quoting:Wonder how enlightenment is doing these days...?e17 is coming along nicely. After all, it just went beta after, what, 7 years of alpha state? I now run it on all desktops except my old PIII, which runs LXDE. Agreeing with what Scott said, it's Texstar's touch that brings the stability. Once PCLinux switched to the KDE4 base, I quit KDE. Again, Texstar's rendition of KDE4 is very stable, but I still can't grok the "folder view, social desktop" thing. Why do I need a folder on my desktop to see the icons that should be on the desktop, not in some folder? And I really don't see Dolphin replacing the functionality that is/was already in Konqueror. You can/could make it do almost any task with use of KIO slaves. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 01, 2010 2:33 PM EDT |
> Why do I need a folder on my desktop to see the icons that should be on the desktop, not in some folder? and... > You can/could make it do almost any task with use of KIO slaves. Indeed, I think my biggest frustration with KDE4 is the abandonment of basic ideas that had been working very, very well, and making millions of users very, very happy. I, too, like that Konqueror seamlessly worked with local and remote files, of whatever type, so that they seemed to me to be "just another file". KDE4 is not merely a re-write, it's a completely different system. |
| azerthoth Jul 01, 2010 3:20 PM EDT |
Actually you dont need a folder view for icons in the desktop, either right click and make your own shortcut or go into the menu, find the app and right click on it and send it to the desktop. Tis not hard. |
| Koriel Jul 01, 2010 3:21 PM EDT |
KDE 4.4.5 on PCLinuxOS works great for me, I just love it. I have 2 fairly old machines (6 years) and KDE4 runs very fast with full eye candy on both, one is my development machine and the other my media machine and KDE4 does sterling work on both. You are not forced to use Folder view (unless Matthias Ettrich is standing behind you with a gun to your head) just switch it back to Desktop view or are folks incapable of right clicking on the desktop. I think konqueror still has the edge over dolphin in functionality but dolphin like the rest of KDE4 is maturing rapidly and will soon be more than a match. And no im not a fanboy, when KDE4 was first release it was complete and utter pants but like all things it matured and got better sure they made a huge mistake releasing it as soon as they did, but it seems to me people are still holding grudges against it. Anyways it works great for me in my dual desktop setup one desktop running in folder view the other in desktop view the best of both worlds. Chow! |
| dinotrac Jul 01, 2010 3:28 PM EDT |
Bob -- Shame on you. You clearly have forgotten that KDE4 stands for Klobber Dumb Ewesers 4fun. |
| tuxchick Jul 01, 2010 4:45 PM EDT |
Baaaa. |
| dinotrac Jul 01, 2010 5:02 PM EDT |
TC - Have you any wool? |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 01, 2010 5:29 PM EDT |
Just one bag. She lives down the lane. |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 01, 2010 5:30 PM EDT |
Quoting:Why do I need a folder on my desktop to see the icons that should be on the desktop, not in some folder? Why would you use a desktop at all? I switched to a tiling window manager quite some time ago. As a result: no more desktop, no more icons. It took me a week to get used to but ever since that I wonder why I ever used a desktop with icons on them. A desktop with icons has to be the most annoying file manager. It's a giant window you can't move or resize and it's always hidden behind everything else. In order to get to it you have to minimize everything. Seriously, just open you file manager to ~/Desktop and use that. It's much more useful. Or better, just use ~ instead and organize your files properly instead of dumping stuff in ~/Desktop. |
| tracyanne Jul 01, 2010 6:23 PM EDT |
Quoting:Wasn't it just a little while ago people sometimes complained that KDE3 was just too complicated? Not I. |
| Ridcully Jul 01, 2010 6:38 PM EDT |
Okay, so instead of me "swearing" at KDE4, here's a few suggestions for the KDE team that I think could change the way a very large number of "previous KDE happy users" now see KDE4: 1. Get rid of all the "views" and just have a single desktop that accepts icons or files. YOU then have the choice as to whether you want to clutter it or not. Complexity partially vanishes and I would strongly suspect speed rises. 2. Get rid of the "plasmoid" nonsense (including that ridiculous cashew) for general users, or if you absolutely must keep it for the 5% of developers who want it, divide it off as a separate module that can be switched on or off as required. Again, complexity, ...no, in this case: "over-complexity" is reduced and speed has to rise. 3. Review the menu structure for Personal Settings and compare it with KDE3.5. Now, make the KDE4 traditional menu structure a direct copy of the KDE3.5 menu and please, dear heavens, let it have the same abilities. This one is strictly re-establishing user comfort. Okay........if I can think of these things, and see they could work, why in heavens name cannot the KDE4 team ? And let me also agree with tracyanne above.......I never complained about KDE3 complexity. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 01, 2010 6:44 PM EDT |
> (including that ridiculous cashew) Still haven't figured out how that works, and honestly I don't care to learn. |
| jdixon Jul 01, 2010 6:45 PM EDT |
> Okay........if I can think of these things, and see they could work, why in heavens name cannot the KDE4 team ? You're thinking like a user. They're not only incapable of thinking like a user, they don't even care about users. As long as KDE4 does what they want, everybody else should just shut up and be happy with it. And if that isn't their attitude, they need to learn to communicate better, because that's sure what comes across. |
| tuxchick Jul 01, 2010 6:47 PM EDT |
The coolest things about KDE3 are discoverability and directness. Nobody makes as good use of right-click as KDE3, nice right-click menus all over the place for direct configuration of whatever you happen to be in. None of this goofy nonsense of having to wade through menus or fire up something like gconf. Somewhere I saw a comment that KDE4 is like an old DOOM game, where you have to traverse multiple levels and perils to find a key, and then backtrack all those levels and perils to find the door. |
| Ridcully Jul 01, 2010 6:54 PM EDT |
Given the immediate comments above, I wonder if the Trinity project is actually going the wrong way.....Perhaps they should take the KDE4 code, fork it and apply those three ideas I suggested. That starts with an overcomplex framework that is nevertheless based on Qt4 and replaces its software "bumph" with sanity......Now wouldn't that put bamboo splinters under the KDE4 fingernails. |
| azerthoth Jul 01, 2010 7:06 PM EDT |
Ridcully: 1: It already does 2: Dont use them, although I agree having a way to get rid of the cashew would be nice 3: no comment that is polite or repeatable in polite company, but in general agreement. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!