OK I don't really have a good title yet but I figure I can post works in progress and other tips I've come across or other interesting things.
People that complain about KDE4
Posted 11-24-2010 at 01:10 PM by lumak
Curious... I wonder, what is it about KDE4 that people don't like? New tools? New lay out? Visually different? Resource Hog? QT4?
This is all akin to wanting Windows 7 (Aero) to function just like XP or its predecessors... sure, you may be able to make the gui and theme look and feel like the previous, but all the system tools are going to be updated.
As with all history of computing, when something significantly changes, it's going to take time for programs to adapt and be updated. This is still a transition period where programs are still going to support only QT3, and some are switching to only QT4, and some still may try and support both for a period.
If you were a windows user, what would you complain about? Would you expect Microsoft to stay stagnate and unchanging? How far back do you expect backwards compatibility? If your programs didn't run on Windows 7, you would probably still use XP, that's fine. That's what you need. But you wouldn't need to complain about it. So your tool of choice here is <insert version of linux OS> It works as expected and it's what you need. Don't block progress, or the illusion that you think others see as progress.
As others have said. If you want <OS of choice> to have KDE3/Trinity then you support it. Hell, maybe if Trinity becomes its own and plays extremely nice with QT4 and the rest of <OS>, it might even be supported by <OS>. That being, it would probably have to use QT4 or make a derivative QT3 library that doesn't conflict with QT4 in anyway.
As for Slackware choosing to drop KDE3 because it was determined to be 'unmaintained' is BS. Blackbox isn't maintained (though arguably extremely stable and functions perfectly as-is). However, it is still installed with Slackware. Assuming the rules of 'maintained' status, BB should be removed and just keep Fluxbox. No. I think the real reason is QT. The ability to easily compile QT software between QT3 and QT4 on the same system take a bit of extra knowledge. For example, using PKG_CONFIG_PATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH. If you could install KDE3 along side KDE4 without /opt and have no conflicts, then there wouldn't be an issue.
//-------------
But I use fluxbox... even that hasn't had a new version in over a year. But even if Slackware dropped BB and FB support, I would probably just use Openbox. Additionally, they would probably provide binaries for Openbox if that was the case. I wouldn't be sad or complain. I would post a farewell in the designated thread and move on.
This is all akin to wanting Windows 7 (Aero) to function just like XP or its predecessors... sure, you may be able to make the gui and theme look and feel like the previous, but all the system tools are going to be updated.
As with all history of computing, when something significantly changes, it's going to take time for programs to adapt and be updated. This is still a transition period where programs are still going to support only QT3, and some are switching to only QT4, and some still may try and support both for a period.
If you were a windows user, what would you complain about? Would you expect Microsoft to stay stagnate and unchanging? How far back do you expect backwards compatibility? If your programs didn't run on Windows 7, you would probably still use XP, that's fine. That's what you need. But you wouldn't need to complain about it. So your tool of choice here is <insert version of linux OS> It works as expected and it's what you need. Don't block progress, or the illusion that you think others see as progress.
As others have said. If you want <OS of choice> to have KDE3/Trinity then you support it. Hell, maybe if Trinity becomes its own and plays extremely nice with QT4 and the rest of <OS>, it might even be supported by <OS>. That being, it would probably have to use QT4 or make a derivative QT3 library that doesn't conflict with QT4 in anyway.
As for Slackware choosing to drop KDE3 because it was determined to be 'unmaintained' is BS. Blackbox isn't maintained (though arguably extremely stable and functions perfectly as-is). However, it is still installed with Slackware. Assuming the rules of 'maintained' status, BB should be removed and just keep Fluxbox. No. I think the real reason is QT. The ability to easily compile QT software between QT3 and QT4 on the same system take a bit of extra knowledge. For example, using PKG_CONFIG_PATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH. If you could install KDE3 along side KDE4 without /opt and have no conflicts, then there wouldn't be an issue.
//-------------
But I use fluxbox... even that hasn't had a new version in over a year. But even if Slackware dropped BB and FB support, I would probably just use Openbox. Additionally, they would probably provide binaries for Openbox if that was the case. I wouldn't be sad or complain. I would post a farewell in the designated thread and move on.
Total Comments 7
Comments
-
I didn't like KDE4 when it first came out, I thought it looked eye-candyish, whereas 3 looked functional. But I've got used to it now. Some people find accepting change more difficult than others.Posted 11-24-2010 at 03:57 PM by brianL 
-
I agree with you and I agree with everything that lumak wrote.Quote:Originally Posted by brianL
I didn't like KDE4 when it first came out, I thought it looked eye-candyish, whereas 3 looked functional. But I've got used to it now. Some people find accepting change more difficult than others.Posted 11-25-2010 at 02:02 AM by brixtoncalling
-
What I don't like is mainly the bloat and glitchyness. But it has gotten better and isn't too bad now.
And there is nothing wrong on my opinion with Qt4, I really like it and use a few non-KDE pure Qt4 apps, and it's what I prefer to write GUI apps with.Posted 11-25-2010 at 08:29 AM by MTK358
-
I agree that KDE 4 has gotten better. It is now actually usable. Other than problems getting Kontakt to start properly due to a timing issue relating to Akonadi, I have had no working stoppage issues relating to KDE 4 in and of itself.
The thing that bothers me about this move to these glitzy inerfaces is that they are not necessarily real progress. They do not make one more productive than what was there before, and that at the expense of higher CPU and above all GPU costs. I think we'll soon be able to fry eggs on the GPUs needed to effectively run these glitzy UIs.
What is really rediculous is that users actually start expecting the glitz. KDE unfortunately had no choice but to become glitzy.
Just try getting that to work nicely over a low-bandwidth ADSL-connection, even with NX.Posted 11-30-2010 at 10:20 PM by tragos
-
Ya'll are making a big and wrong assumption here.
You assume that people and organizations will actually tell you what is the real story about what they like or don't like and why they make a decision.
Organizations always give a rationalization for their decisions that will upset the fewest number of people, get the least amount of flack dumped on their head, cost them the least amount of money and is the hardest to produce a rebuttal to.
People will usually define their answer in terms of what I call "virtual words"--words that have no physical expression (i.e. you can't take a picture of it or measure it in any way). Love, Like, Loyalty, etc are examples of these types of words. They do this for the same reasons as organizations do. To reduce the amount of flack, questions and rebuttal of their opinions. No one can be forced to explain why they don't like chocolate, you either do or you don't--you don't have to justify it.
I think people (and me) don't like the changes in KDE is because:
People are lazy. When the number of keystrokes or mouse clicks are increased over what they are used to or the keys or where the mouse clicks are located are changed, people react rather radically. Not because they are too lazy to put with the extra few milliseconds it takes to do the new pattern but because of the massive time it takes to retrain their muscles to the new pattern. You don't think "press Ctrl C" when you want to copy highlighted text... it just happens--the same as touch typing. Changing long established keystrokes for computer users is the same as forcing a touch typist to use a keyboard with the a, e, i, o and u keys in new locations. I've used Ctrl C to copy since 1980 when I first started using an s-100 bus, cpm computer. You try to change that on me and I would quit using computers first. There are a lot of situations like this in KDE 4.
People really don't like software that twitches (makes movements when it should be still, things like Kate does when it shifts a line or two up or down when you move the mouse certain ways or insert a letter in a word at certain lines). It breaks their train of thought and slows down the workflow and makes them not trust the program.
People don't like software that doesn't produce the same results every time. Kate turned my utf-8 file into utf-16 file when I saved it and I had not made any changes in settings during that session. That took me a while to figure out and fix and really upset me because it was a very important file and loosing it was scary... Needless to say, I no longer trust kate.
People don't like having choices or abilities taken away. If for 10 years you have had the ability to turn on and off search as you type--you are going to be upset if that choice is taken away--especially if the default is on (again from Kate). And again it breaks the train of thought.
People don't like being forced or demanded to do anything. It's not explicit but lately I've been seeing a lot of this attitude by staff and moderators on some forums: If you don't like it, shut up and go back to Windows. That makes people really start looking hard for reasons to do and say bad things about and to you. Not a good idea...
Finally we have to consider something that most computer programmers and designers don't. Everyone has a different use for a computer; everyone uses computers differently; everyone solves problems differently and everyone has different aesthetic taste. Usually, and it's getting more common, programs are designed to solve problems based on the programmer's problem solving preferences and use keystrokes and mouse clicks in a manner that he or she prefers. As long as they are not being paid there is not much you can do about that, which is only fair--but it leaves me and many other people with not getting what they want. Which is why I am seriously considering paying money for UltraEdit for Linux instead of using Kate for free.
To me computer users are divided into two main groups: Those that use it for entertainment and communications (which Linux programmers are a part of since they are not getting paid), and those that use it to make money. People who make money using a computer or the people who pay people to use a computer get very upset when "new and improved" means slower. Time = money, Retraining = lots of money and changes in workflow lead to mistakes--which can be very expensive. Which is why so many small business are sticking with KDE 3.5 and are so down on KDE 4...
Those in the entertainment and communications group are not bothered by these types of changes. I often wonder if the only thing many people do with their computer is admire it and the changes they make in how it looks and then use the computer to chitter and twitter with all their friends about how "admirable" their computers are and what kinds of cute tricks it does. Whereas people like me who have spent 30 years working with computers consider them just to be a powerful tool with an incredible ability to irritate you...
One easy cure for all this is to make software "massively" configurable. That way programmer's can build the vision they have and normal people can change it around to what they want or need. KDE 4 is only vaguely configurable and then only when you can 'find' the setting to change. One size shoe does not fit all people...
On last thought kids... (I'm 70 years old and I consider anyone that isn't using a cane a kid). Probably most of the people working on developing OSS programs are under 30 years old. That group still believes they are immortal, but worse, they think you have to be in your 50s or 60s before your eyes start to go, your hands start to shake and twitch and your hearing starts downhill. Surprise kids. It starts in your 30s (do the math, that's not many years away for most of you) and how bad it gets and how soon it happens depends on how much loud music you listened to, how many hours you spent in front of a TV or computer screen, your drug and booze habits, your exercise and diet habits, etc. Why am I telling you this....
Because in a few years those icons you designed with their subtle differences will all look the same to you. Those drop down menus that require perfect horizontal mouse movements to go to the side drop down menu won't be usable by you (unless you go really, really slow) due minor shakes and twitches of your hand causing the menu above or below to pop up instead. But the most irritating one is trying to resize a window by grabbing the frame and dragging it--if your hand shakes or jerks even slightly you can not make that work and missing causes other windows to pop up instead.
Oops, I forgot the right click pop up a menu problem. I always seem to move a little when I let off or click a button which activates the top entry of the pop up menu--which always seems to be something like "Delete all", "Undo" or "Close file", things you never want to happen by accident. To make it even better, in most cases you can't change the entry or put in a blank "do nothing" entry. Easy enough to fix if the programmer realized it was a problem, but by the time they realize it is a problem (for them) they won't be doing the programming anymore--some younger person will. Why does that make me grin?....
Enjoy your future kids, it's going to be here sooner than you think....Posted 12-01-2010 at 04:58 PM by kwdaniels
-
Wow that was a long response... I think you missed the point of my post. Though it does answer the question presented at the start of the post (even though it was rhetorical). Thankyou. I should be more clear with the intent of the post at the start. Yes, There is always something to complain about in every user interface. Everything you said about KDE4 in respects to your situation is correct.
My point was that people should stop complaining about it, not only to the wrong people (e.g. placing blame on the Slackware Maintainers) but about the wrong things. KDE4 is moving in a direction that no longer supports the minimalist window manger user. It's the wrong tool for them. They shouldn't use it. There is still XFCE and LXDE use them for now. Those should remain about the same throughout their future development life cycle. Additionally for those that really care about KDE3 should help improve Trinity so that it can be installed with Slackware without interfering with anything. That being, it has to probably support QT4 and or rename all the libs and tools so that people and programs won't be confused. Part of the problem with QT3 and QT4 is that they are incompatible and can not be installed along side each other easily to support compiling programs with just ./configure && make && make install. It often requires intervention on the person compiling the software and resetting environment variables that are stupidly named the same between releases of QT libs.
And lets clear up one thing.
KDE3 is not KDE4. They are not compatible, they are not the same, they have different goals and features.
And I repeat, if somebody wants KDE3, they should help support Trinity to getting it stable and supported for future releases of their favorite distro. It's not coming back in any other way. All new software is going to use QT4 and the KDE maintainers are not looking back.
Additionally, this is probably all going to happen again when QT5 comes out. Get used to it. Things move on. Programs use more and more CPU/GPU. Computers get better.Posted 12-01-2010 at 06:27 PM by lumak
-
Yes Yes, QT is not dependent on KDE. That wasn't my point. However, I thought I was clear that KDE is heavily dependent on QT. Additionally, Dealing with multipule QT libs on one computer is annoying.
Posted 12-02-2010 at 08:47 PM by lumak
Updated 12-02-2010 at 08:48 PM by lumak
