Today sees the release of Kubuntu 8.10 featuring the latest KDE 4.1 desktop. The Kubuntu developers have been hard at work, integrating this major new version into a completed desktop. The settings and artwork have been kept close to KDE's defaults to ensure the best face of our favourite desktop shines through. Desktop effects have been enabled by default for cards which support it thanks to the wonderful KWin and package management comes via a brand new version of Adept. Printer Applet and System Config Printer KDE were written to ensure a complete user experience, both are now part of KDE itself. Update Manager, Language Selector and plenty other tools have been reworked for KDE 4. Upgrade, download or request a free CD.
Dot Categories:
Comments
"No, we are not talking about artwork! I didn't mention the word artwork not once. Stay focused, don't put words in my mouth, reduce your imagination and read the whole thread again."
OK, here is the relevant part, and this was said by you:
"KDE4 was released almost year ago and since then I see enormous amount of eyecandy added, but you still have settings in systemsettings that doesn't work or do anything (dead checkboxes), a problem reported several times in b.k.o. In my opinion, that means it's broken. Only solution I see is that they make 4.3 release a bugfix only release (or b.k.o cleaning release)."
Are you now going to say that "eyecandy" and "artwork" are two different things?
Maybe YOU should read the entire thread....
Yes, I'm saying that artwork and eyecandy are two different things. Artwork is subset of eyecandy superset. You can do eyecandy in c++:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8wgD4gkVwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FuB4YZfC4s
EOD.
Really? Icons are C++? Desktop-backgrounds are C++? Themes are C++?
Damn, I used one of my own photographs as a desktop-background. I must be a real C++-wizard!
Aaah, sure, Gnome, XFCE, Windows & Mac OS X will get better over time, just like we. But we do have the advantage of an architecture which actually supports what we want to do - they don't. Gnome will have to spend years on re-architecturing before they can efficiently do what KDE is doing without any effort - same goes for all the other GUI's out there.
Now we've lost some time by working on these lower-level things, but it's paying off. You can't seriously argue we're not improving at least 5 times faster than for example Gnome. Just compare KDE 4.0 with 4.1 - then look at the current & previous version of Gnome. And 4.2 is going to differ from 4.1 as much as 4.0 did. Besides, developers have seen the potential of KDE's libraries already - we're having such an influx of new developers we're thinking about changing our whole development model to accomodate the growth!
We're the joke of the larger OSS community? Look who'll laugh last...
OK Jos, we cannot argue with that. The point is I have a new computer for the family and I'm trying set it up with the new Kubuntu. And... well... it is buggy and incomplete. I cannot force my family to use it. I'm installing Ubuntu with Gnome.
Rather than buying the *buntu hype, you could use a distribution that provides a stable and complete implementation. OpenSuse or Mandriva have both exelent KDE 4 offerings.
First of all, I think Kubuntu (and Suse and mandriva) should not have jumped on KDE 4 before 4.2. Second, Kubuntu has a serious lack of resources - esp it's quality process isn't up to the standard of Suse & Mandriva.
So it's more Kubuntu you have a problem with - complain to Canonical, they're ignoring KDE and are wasting their resources on Gnome. Delaying progress for the Free Desktop at large, as Gnome will never ever come even close to catching up with the proprietary competition. While KDE already has, at least architecturally speaking (and the visible part is just a matter of time).
Well, the big difference (as Jos says also) is that KDE4 is starting from a completely reworked framework, and so the number of expected breakages is huge. But on the other hand the progress will be much faster because of the excellence of that framework.
I'm trying to come up with a "real-life" analogy, but I'm having a hard time, because this issue of architecture being different from immediate user-experience is perhaps more pronounced with software than anything else.
Here's the best I can do at the moment: imagine a 2000 km race. One guy hops on the best technology available (a bicycle) and starts pedaling. Another guy spends 3 days attaching a motor to the frame of his bicycle, it causes some other problems that then need fixing, and so he starts out the race 4 days behind---and all his supporters are bemoaning the fact that he's going to be beat out by the other guy. But, even though the other guy keeps pedaling (i.e., keep getting better, too), the motorized bike wins in the end because it's so much faster. (I wince over that analogy, because for environmental reasons I try to use bicycles rather than motorized transport wherever possible!)
I know that analogy sounds really fake and dumb, but in software development this is pretty much the main design decision day in and day out: work on improving architecture, or start pedaling? KDE has always focused on getting the architecture right, even if that means it takes longer to get the applications working. It is possible to spend too much time reworking your architecture, but I think so far KDE has shown remarkably good taste in that balance. It's much of the reason why KDE has been so successful despite having smaller resources than other desktops.
In my estimation, KDE4 has already largely turned the corner: KDE4.1 is usable enough (even if it does have annoyances) that I think we must be entering the high-speed portion of the race.
++
"But on the other hand the progress will be much faster because of the excellence of that framework."
Really? And when will this happen? This decade?
-- kolla, Kubuntu 8.10 - for KDE4 test-bunnies!
If you compare KDE 4.0.x with 4.1.x you'll see that. 6 months and lightning-fast improvements.
yes, agree...
since i have tried KDE4.0 and seeing so much angry comments about KDE4, i have decided to take to plunge to help out with KDE development.
since now i m on the other side, i can see things differently, there are a lot of work done by the development teams. They are still trying to catch up with the features that are still missing compared to the 3.5.x counterpart.
another thing is that, as most of us work on KDE during our free time, it is actually hard to get things done quickly. i had to juggle my free time between work, family and hobby. i am determined to help KDE4 but we just have 24 hours a day and frankly I m not too good in time management either.. :-(
i'm back to fvwm since a month now.
i've been on kde last years, every day.
4.0 is not 4, is not .0 so why does it exists ? why give it that name ?
to show off, just that.
"maybe 4.2 will be ok, maybe 4.3..." could be 6.9, my problem is that actually the strange 4.1.2 thing is everywhere, kde as changed it's place from 1st choice to.. call it like you want, this version is not stable and is a mistake.
4.x is not as good as 3.x, so you went back to... fvwm??!
i agree, that's the part where i couldn't stop laughing myself ;)
Fvwm, unlike KDE3, is available on current distributions.
plasma have problems,
kate have problems,
kwin have problems,
konqueror haves problems,
dolphin have problems,
kmail have problems,
k3b is not there yet,
go back to 3.x is not easy because 4 is the 'normal' version for most distributions, so yes it could be possible, but i don't want to pay attention each times i update my dist. there were no problems while 4 was flagged 'beta'.
so yes i'm back to fvwm and all apps that could replace my usual kde ones.
laugh if you want, i've laugh too at the beginning, but time and my nerves have said stop to kde.
i really don't understand why this release have been tagged as stable.
oh, and fvwm is really great, sure not the same kind of approach at all, just not the same things at all, yes but good in many ways.
as for emacs,firefox,filezilla,amsn,graveman...
that said i hope kde, as we want to see it, will come back soon.
This has been discussed to death. Sure, we should've been more clear in the release announcement about the purpose of 4.0 (release our final, stable foundations & get the code to interested developers & users), but the name was fine.
The name was _NOT_ fine.
It should have been "KDE 4.0 Developer Release"
Because in its form it was _only_ really useful for developers.
Everybody who thinks otherwise should get the source and try to use it.
It wasn't fine. The fact that it was called a x.0 release has led almost every distro to start dropping support for the still-maintained 3.5.x branch.
4.0 was a tech preview. 4.1 is beta quality.
That's their fault, not ours. Just like pretty much all .0 releases, KDE 4.0 was still missing a lot and had many issues. Sure, it might have been a pretty rocky .0 release compared to Vista, Gnome 2.0 or Mac OS 10.0, but not by much.
Wait, where's the mod down feature? Weren't we going to implement comment moderating so comments like this would be buried?
Yes you're right. If we could mod down posts like that, we'd only have to look at things we agree with. That would surely be a utopia of free speech... for the majority.
-Ben
Actually no, but "poisonous comments" (not implying yours are, I haven't read the thread in full) have had a huge impact on developer motivation. Moderation is to keep flames and ad hominem attacks out of the way (they *did* happen in a not too distant past).
"Trolls," "poisonous comments," "flames," and "ad hominem attacks" are also useful names to call anything you disagree with, to excuse yourself from having to address the potential of merit in any such comment. They are also ways to bury people who have real frustrations, sometimes not worded exactly tactfully, but often valid and honest nonetheless.
There are two great ways to be able to excuse yourself from weighing comments on merit or writing off others' frustrations WITHOUT having to affect others' interactions and discussions:
1. Don't read threads you don't like
2. Read them, and grow up and develop a little thicker skin so you don't have to go running to mommy with tears in your eyes.
Why are these two options necessarily worse than the (practical) forceful silencing of dissent?
The problem is that not everyone will grow a thicker skin, especially with arguments that come back *over and over* again, sometimes even coming up with not so nice sentences about the people working on this project. In the end, there will be some damage in terms of developers abandoning the project, or reducing their commitment.
Politeness isn't outdated, you know. The problem is a lot of criticism isn't worded properly, and I think it would require 2 minutes to think, before typing, to avoid most of this problems. Since it doesn't look like this is going to happen any time soon, I welcome moderation.
""Trolls," "poisonous comments," "flames," and "ad hominem attacks" are also useful names to call anything you disagree with, to excuse yourself from having to address the potential of merit in any such comment."
Well, the thing is that in the discussions here there hasn't really been that much criticism that is useful. Fireproof Bob (for example) spent lots of time and energy telling how KDE4 sucks. But he provided ZERO tangible examples on what actually is broken and how to fix it. He made vague comments about the "direction" KDE has taken, but he gave no tangible examples of what that "direction" is and why it is wrong. Sure, he said "it's the same direction Vista has taken". And that direction would be.... what?
There is a difference between constructive criticism and just saying "it sucks". The latter should be modded to hell, the former should be cherished.
""Trolls," "poisonous comments," "flames," and "ad hominem attacks" are also useful names to call anything you disagree with, to excuse yourself from having to address the potential of merit in any such comment."
Well, the thing is that in the discussions here there hasn't really been that much criticism that is useful. Fireproof Bob (for example) spent lots of time and energy telling how KDE4 sucks. But he provided ZERO tangible examples on what actually is broken and how to fix it. He made vague comments about the "direction" KDE has taken, but he gave no tangible examples of what that "direction" is and why it is wrong. Sure, he said "it's the same direction Vista has taken". And that direction would be.... what?
There is a difference between constructive criticism and just saying "it sucks". The latter should be modded to hell, the former should be cherished.
Personally I have no problem with people that disagree with me, just those that don't add anything valuable to the discussion. And having the ability to to mod down noise would be immensely useful.
Imho, KDE 4.1 still has some minor rough corners, but 4.2 will iron out most of them (network-manager plasmoid, kde4 versions of k3b and digikam will also be available for 4.2)
The lack of future is more likely to happen for gnome... Since several releases only minor things change, and, worst is, in 2008+, who wants to develop in C? C++/Qt seem like heaven in comparison. It's just a matter of time until distros will turn their back to gnome in favour of kde.
> who wants to develop in C?
Linux kernel hackers. GNU guys. Wine team. Me.
Actually, I vastly prefer to develop in C than in C++. There are very little really useful improvements in C++, the rest are either unneeded syntactic sugar, or outright bloat magnets that shouldn't be (over)used in the first place. And the (small) benefits of using C++ are easily offset by some really nice enhancements that come with ISO C99, if you only decide to use it.
Which brings me to my main complaint.
WHY THE HELL there are no Qt bindings for the C language? Honestly, this is the most used programming language on the un*x platform. There are bindings for every little toy language any maniac likes to use, but not for C. Is it some kind of political matter, or what?
I really respect the technical excellence of the Qt toolkit, which makes me that much more angry at being forced to either use Gtk, or program in a language I don't like. Usually I choose the former, 'cause having to restrict myself to C++ is REALLY annoying.
Well, I don't know why there are no C bindings. Maybe nobody was interested enough ? You could be the one :-)
But, using C++ doesn't restrict you in any way.
You can do and use everything you can do in C also in C++ (and more).
Alex
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
Read the specs. As I said, there are many cool features in C99 that are NOT available in C++ (even as GNU extensions in GCC).
For example, tell me how to write this nice and readable code example in C++, without sacrificing its' cleanness. This is perfectly valid and correct ISO C99.
void fun(int foo, double bar, float complex tab[foo+20*sin(bar)])
{
float complex my_copy[sizeof(tab)/sizeof(float complex)];
memcpy(my_copy, tab, sizeof(tab));
another_fun(my_copy, sizeof(my_copy));
}
And if I had time, I would gladly write those damned bindings myself... But it is a s**tload of work, to write and then maintain them... I'm just amazed why each little toy language has some maniacs dedicated enough to write Qt bindings, and the language that is _THE_ most widely used on the primary open source platform doesn't.
Because C people are to lazy to write it :-P ?? If it is the most used then there most be someone to write a binding, why would someone that uses another language make a binding for C people?
Anything you write in c can be compiled with a c++ compiler.
So just use the c++ libraries
As I wrote above, WRONG!
Just give it time. From a developer perspective, the KDE 4 codebase is much better, they've cleaned up the KDE 3 codebase and ready to introduce new features. It just needs more time for bugfixing.
Did you remember how long did windows xp to become stable enough? Or did you remember when OS X 10.0 first released it was like crap? Or Gnome 2.x which became stable and (a bit) usable after 2.10 or something? KDE 4.x is still less than one year, so give it time! In the meantime, you can freely use your KDE 3.X.
For me, KDE 4.1 is quite usable even though I miss some little features here and there.
It is very cleaned/fresh and pretty, but lacks some not-so-common features from KDE 3.5, this is why people hate KDE 4.
I think that KDE PIM needs more polishing.
"In the meantime, you can freely use your KDE 3.X."
Not if the distros for some reason have decided to drop it in favour of KDE4.
At home I use KDE3 on my gentoo systems, at work there was a decision on using Ubuntu, and as of 8.10 KDE3 is no longer an option. Which pisses me off really, since there are other non-KDE-related issues that are at last fixed with 8.10.
"...at work there was a decision on using Ubuntu, and as of 8.10 KDE3 is no longer an option."
Then stick with Hardy. It's going to be supported for another year.
Didn't you read the rest of that sentance?
That is unfortunate. The best you can do is tell your employer about your issues. Consider if you employer moved to Vista, you wouldn't go complain to microsoft, you would tell your boss your objections.
Why all this dodging of the point? I work in the IT department, I'm part in selecting what we use, and Ubuntu 8.10 fixes alot of this for us, but screws around anyone who are using KDE, who btw are a minority in the first place.
Why cant Ubuntu come with KDE-3.5.x as well, given that it supposed to be supported for another 18 months?! I find it really remarkable,
And just to screw things up even more, ~/.kde is used by both KDE3 and KDE4, so anyone unfortunate to switch between a hardy and intrepid will have a whole lot of mess to deal with. Thank you very much.
This is kubuntu's fault. By default kde uses .kde4
Unfortunately kubuntu is really under resourced so they can't support two desktops. Blame Canonical. If you care about the kde users then you should really go for a more DE neutral distro like suse (which btw currently offers kde 3.5 ..though I think they are dropping it in 11.1) or mandriva (dunno if they offer kde 3.5).
With your position, you could help lobby canonical for better kde support. Or not, after all the kde users are a minority (and who cares about those? :/ )
No, by default we use .kde for both KDE3 and KDE4. KDE supports the upgrading of config files between major versions. Any failures encountered after the upgrade of config files are KDE bugs, and should be reported as such.
I meant that vanilla kde uses .kde4 by default
http://apt.pearsoncomputing.net/
Pass it on!
I had a problem with KDM, had to disable it to log on, but there have been no other reports of this, and everything else has been beautiful. I'd recommend that you use it with Ubuntu, not Kubuntu. I can't vouch for how these KDE3 apps will coexist with KDE4.
Contact the administrator with any questions or concerns.
I think what we're going to see is that, as distros drop KDE3, unofficial repositories will come into existence to take up the slack.
It's shocking how much crap open source developers have to deal with. I feel for them. If I ever start contributing code to KDE (or any other OS project), remind me to never read unmoderated public comments, because it'll just destroy my motivation and infuriate me.
Of course, everyone's entitled to their opinions, but dammit, after repeating the same thing 200 times I got sick of it. If you truly think there is no future and hope for KDE4 then don't waste your time hanging around. After all, according to you, it's a lost cause.
I for one see potential in KDE4 and will continue to encourage the KDE developers in a positive way.
And that's why amateur open source is useless. Imagine a MS developer refusing to go to work just because uninformed morons have bashed Vista to death.
My opinion. Simply my opinion...
> When you have a truly visionary direction, it's hard to get people on board.
So you understand that the KDE people have a truly visionary direction. Good!
> Meanwhile, all the other desktop platforms are trooping ahead
List them, please:
* GNOME: Quite a while and all small changes. Seems in the realm of being on life support.
* Windows: Seriously dragged down by an awful code-base and a serious case of DRM sickness.
* OSX: Out of all of them, OSX seems to be the only fast-moving desktop besides KDE.