KDE-CVS-Digest for February 13, 2004
Saturday, 14 February 2004 | Dkite
In this week's KDE-CVS-Digest: The LDAP kio-slave is improved with TSL and SSL for secure connections and SASL for authentication. KDEPIM has a new certificate manager. Work proceeds apace on the khtml XML parser and xpath libraries. Plus a large number of bug fixes in Kopete.
Comments:
Thanks Derek! - Turd Ferguson - 2004-02-14
It's too bad that they removed Konsole from the default kicker, but I guess it would come eventually. Not everyone is a power user.
Re: Thanks Derek! - Eric Laffoon - 2004-02-14
It should be noted that when answering user questions it is definitely easier to give them a few quick command lines for searching RPMs, checking whether config files are writable and things of this nature. I can't rely on their menus being laid out the same and it takes a lot longer explaining how to find Konqueror the file browser, make sure you display hidden files and go to this directory and display details or open this program... Now, this adds to the complexity of developers of having to assume people can even find a console window. Sure distros already muck this up but a lot of newbies actually seem to take the trouble to build Gentoo to learn about Linux. Why is KDE chosing to hide it's heritage? dcop kicker Panel addServiceButton konsole
Because KDE applications are getting better - anon - 2004-02-14
> Why is KDE chosing to hide it's heritage? Well, I think for the first time, KDE applications have gotten mature enough that this can be the case. For example, for a long time I used konsole for file management rather than konqueror; konq was just too slow and inefficient for me. With the improvements made in the 3.2 cycle, I've been using it more and more. The same case with kdevelop. I've historically used a terminal with vim for all my programming. kdevelop 3.0 is fantastic, and I can do things quicker in it than having to manually edit my Makefile.am's and await breakage :).. The same case with your application, Quanta. In the past, it simply wasn't worth it for me to use Quanta rather than just use a terminal and vim. With all of the improvements in Quanta made in the last year, I can call myself a proud Quanta user. The same thing was true with kmail; abiet earlier. I used to use mutt (and before that, pine) for email. When Evolution came around, I switched to it, and when KDE 3.1 came out, I switched to kmail. Simply put, many people who've used the terminal because KDE applications suck are using the KDE applications now. When KDE comes with a full set of console applications, I'm sure that the konsole would be welcome back by default in kicker.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Jadrian - 2004-02-14
"Well, I think for the first time, KDE applications have gotten mature enough that this can be the case." See for instance: Bug 35371: Ark does not handle password protected archives Anyway I don't think this is a valid justification. The majority of the desktop linux users, right now and in the near future, would probably like to have the Konsole there. Even if that wasn't the case I think the high number of users who use konsole *a lot* justifies having it there. J.A.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Spy Hunter - 2004-02-14
Anyone sophisitated to use konsole a lot should have the skills to add an icon to Kicker for it.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
That and much more, so lets remove them all let those users redo their own desktop! It just doesn't make sense. Anyway this isn't even true! I know many people who use terminal a lot but are into FVWM2, Black/Fluxbox, whatever. They have no idea how to work with KDE, they don't even know it has it's own "konsole". My guess is that if they had to use KDE they'd start cursing it because they can't even find a f*ck#ng terminal, eventualy click on kicker, see "run command", and start an xterm. Making linux user friendly is a good thing, but there is no need to make things harder to the more technical linux user, and you must agree that there are *many* of us. So why remove it, if they click it they can close it. I can agree with something like moving the konsole icon away from the others, maybe putting it on the left of the applets, but not removing it.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Phexro - 2004-02-15
If a user is 'technical' enough to use a command-line, they should be technical enough to click K->System->Terminal Program.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
Did you read my answer? First off all that is NOT true. That reasoning has two problems, using konsole-/->tech people and tech people-/-> know how to add it to kicker. But more important, even if it were true it doesn't justifie it! J.A.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Dawnrider - 2004-02-15
Oh come on. As was mentioned, it is really easy to find the terminal item in the K menu. KDE isn't in the business of removing everything and making a Windows/Mac clone "Because this user (the most moronic) doesn't like it, and refuses to learn". If this was the case, we'd have a boiled down DE like Gnome. Similarly, power users don't get everything in the same places as Fluxbox or others, either. KDE isn't here to duplicate those environments, and if that is what they want, then they can use those environments. I'm sure if they are faced with a modern Linux box running KDE and really want that functionality, they can a) Make a kicker link themselves (it really is trivial!), b) Just find it in the menu, c) Install Fluxbox instead, if they really can't be bother to even try and open the K menu. KDE is about finding a balance that suits the majority of people. A balance of usability that is close to being *right*. Linus has long said that if there are two ways of doing something which are irreconcilable, there is a better third solution out there waiting to be found. KDE is constantly looking for the third solution. Honestly, I think the terminal in the Kmenu is just right. These days, I rarely use the terminal on its own, but rather I use the one embedded into Konqi. If I need one for SSH, etc. I just open one and then have multiple tabs. My box has been running my current session for the last hundred days, and I've only clicked the terminal icon once, so it doesn't need to be so quick-start. Oh, and please mind your language.
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Trip - 2004-02-17
Nothing wrong with xterm though. If it works for you. The beauty of what you just stated: if you can't find one way, they will probably be able to find another one. Me myself I think Linux should move away from the 'if you can't type you cannot operate the system' adagio. Removing konsole from the standard desktop is good. Removing the program itself would be bad (I don't want a Resource Kit kinda thing, for those enough in the windows world to know what I mean). Yes and it is true that removing it, makes the system a bit harder for people that depend on a terminal. Then again, we are talking KDE here, where the 'D' stands for Desktop, which means mousepushing. So it is definitely sane to remove a user unfriendly powerapp from the default desktop. If nothing works, you can always press ctrl+alt+F1 ;-) Trip
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Christian - 2004-02-15
True, but far from perfect. As far as I'm concerned, I simply hate file managers. File management is really faster with CLI. The only good point for graphics file managers is they let me see a global vision of directories. I hate tree view controls too (I like using different windows and switch between them: one source, one dest, no need to scroll stupid that tree view). For kdevelop, it begins to be usable. However, it's far from finished: debugging is completely broken, many options do strictly nothing when selected, general config/options are way too close to MS .Net (what an awful thing), window management is quite annoying (too many toolbars, too many tools, not enough screen space, etc.). But now I can configure it, so it is usable. Last, hiding console will make me add it immediately of course. Exactly as if I were with W2k/XP: put it in the taskbar & desktop immediately after install. Hope KDE won't take default options as Windows: I have to invert all defaults chosen by MS designers (who fell on the head 2-3 years ago).
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Dawnrider - 2004-02-15
Have you tried Konqi with the embedded terminal emulator? It's a great combination, especially when you add tabbed file management!
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - ik - 2004-02-15
something else i just discovered in konq file manager that shows konq file management is really maturing: try to drag an image (jpeg or so) in a folder containing an image with the same filename. i don't know how long that feature already exists, but its nice ..
Re: Because KDE applications are getting better - Anthony Graham - 2004-02-17
Why don't we just have another screen on that settings wizzard, that lets you choose from: Power User: display konsole on kicker, hide help, get rid of "friendly names" like "Multimedia Player (xmms)" and put back normal names like "xmms" Normal user: hide konsole, show help, use friendly names custom.... well you know, with the checkboxes etc! Please everyone! - Anthony G
Re: Thanks Derek! - Jim Dabell - 2004-02-14
> this adds to the complexity of developers of having to assume people can even find a console window. I disagree. How hard is it to say "Hit Alt-F2, type 'konsole' with a k and hit Enter"? It seems to me it would be easier than trying to describe the right icon to click. > Sure distros already muck this up but a lot of newbies actually seem to take the trouble to build Gentoo to learn about Linux. Some beginners are interested in learning the details, yes. But that doesn't mean the default for everybody should waste valuable eye-space on something that is of little use to the average user. Being one click away from the Help Centre is useful for the average user. Being one click away from Konqueror is useful for the average user. Being one click away from something that is used to type complicated commands into the computer is *not* useful for the average user. I think that the users that would benefit from being one click away from Konsole are (or will be) in a minority and more than capable of adding it to their taskbar themselves. > Why is KDE chosing to hide it's heritage? That's a bit hyperbolic isn't it? This isn't a case of deliberately hiding a useful tool, it's a case of deciding that a tool rarely used by the average user is given too much prominence to the detriment of the overall experience. The other buttons are obviously useful. From a newbie's perspective: Click on the Home button: a window with all your files in pops up. Click on the Konqueror button: a web browser pops up with a nice introduction. Click on the Help button: A window pops up with online help in. Click on the Konsole button: A window pops up expecting you to type cryptic commands in - *blank stare from newbie*.
Re: Thanks Derek! - Mark Hannessen - 2004-02-14
I use the Konsole all the time because I do a lot of scripting and such, but this move is hardly problamatic because there is nothing stopping me from adding it back. so it is more a neutral move from my point of view. (I removed the help button because I considered THAT eye waste)
Re: Thanks Derek! - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
> Click on the Konsole button: A window pops up expecting you to type cryptic > commands in - *blank stare from newbie*. Clicks 'close' and everythings back to normal. And? From the Digest: "The key to the logic behind reasoning is that konsole users(such as myself) are a minority, and that gap will become bigger as KDE's userbase grows." A minority? That may eventualy happen but, right now? Come on! And even if we were a minority! We are still *many*! A *lot*! And we need konsole a *lot*. It's a bad move, remove it when it is really not causing much trouble. I also hate that mentality. "Everyone is dumb, lets hide the konsole". *If* it could really cause problems to people I'd say remove it, but removing something that can be so useful just because some don't know what it is? Hey every kid I knew learned DOS to play games! I'm not saying you should force people to use it... but hide it even though so many people want it to avoid "*blank stare from newbie*". Me newbie, you strange, me scared... eh!
Re: Thanks Derek! - Jim Dabell - 2004-02-15
> Clicks 'close' and everythings back to normal. And? My point isn't that it irrevocably screws up the user's session when they click it. My point is that the "one click away from using it" status is incredibly priviledged. Only the most immediately important and useful applications should have that status. Once you start throwing in random stuff that you happen to like, it dilutes the importance of the entire status. This is basic usability: make the important stuff easy to reach, but the less frequently-used, less important stuff further away so it doesn't distract. > A minority? That may eventualy happen but, right now? Come on! No, not right now. When KDE 3.3 is released. > And even if we were a minority! We are still *many*! A *lot*! And we need konsole a *lot*. I'm one of them. I always have a couple of konsole windows open. I don't consider it to be a burden at all to put konsole on the kicker when I first log into a new machine. > I also hate that mentality. "Everyone is dumb, lets hide the konsole". Usability isn't about dumb people.
Re: Thanks Derek! - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
>>> Click on the Konsole button: A window pops up expecting you to type >>> cryptic commands in - *blank stare from newbie*. >> Clicks 'close' and everythings back to normal. And? > My point isn't that it irrevocably screws up the user's session when they > click it. My point is that the "one click away from using it" status is > incredibly priviledged. Ok. Time out! Read again. What I was commenting here had *nothing* to do with the "one click way thing" does it? My argumentation is quite clear, I even use most of the principles you stated in this post to justify keeping konsole in kicker. What is the use of telling me those principles again without saying where you don't agree with me... eh. J.A.
Re: Thanks Derek! - Ralph Jenkin - 2004-02-16
> > this adds to the complexity of developers of having to assume people can even find a console window. > I disagree. How hard is it to say "Hit Alt-F2, type 'konsole' with a k and hit Enter"? It seems to me it would be easier than trying to describe the right icon to click. Agreed, but with the caveat that if the user chose a windows-like desktop in that first time wizard thing, ALT-F2 doesn't do a damn thing. Bugs me every time I try and fix something in my wife's account. So the least prone to error way to get a user to bring up a konsole is much the same as it is when doing windows support, K Menu -> Run Command -> konsole (very much the old start->run->command|cmd thing). > I think that the users that would benefit from being one click away from Konsole are (or will be) in a minority and more than capable of adding it to their taskbar themselves. Well, I don't know about being in a minority, but they must certainly be capable (it truly is very easy). That said, I live inside of konsole (maximized with usually 5 and on bad days 13 or more tabs open), but I don't have a konsole button on my kicker. KDE session management means my konsole is always there from last time, a new shell is a three fingered hotkey away, and a new konsole is just a ALT-F2 kon<enter> away, both of which are heaps quicker to do than grabbing my mouse to initiate something which is clearly a keyboard-centric task. > Click on the Konsole button: A window pops up expecting you to type cryptic commands in - *blank stare from newbie*. This is the most important reason for removing the konsole link from the defaults. What is your average user going to do with it? Learn to ignore it, or figure out how to remove it. About the only people seriously disadvantaged would be users who expect to be able to find a shell, but aren't used to KDE's interface paradigm (like the minimal X window manager users), and they surely will be able to at least click on the K menu, click on run, and type xterm (or rxvt, or eterm, or whatever) until someone notices what they're doing and clues them up (or they learn the awesome power of a right click on the kicker). Konsole shouldn't be a link by default for the same reason the cervisia view mode shouldn't be in the konq toolbar by default.
Re: Thanks Derek! - cobaco - 2004-02-15
so have them do alt+F2 konsole
Re: Thanks Derek! - Anonymous - 2004-02-15
GNOME 2.x is for sure not targetted at power users and even they have the terminal in the standard panel setup.
Re: Thanks Derek! - ac - 2004-02-15
KDE 3.x isn't targeted for power users either.. KDE is a DE that anybody (or rather, the largest subset of users) can use and learn.
Re: Thanks Derek! - Phexro - 2004-02-15
Actually, I think that the Konsole button is useless for advanced users as well. In my opinion, anyone who uses a commandline (or commandline apps, or someone who deals with remote sessions via telnet/ssh) frequently is going to remove the Konsole button and add a Terminal Sessions special button. Removing the Konsole button in the default install just saves a step in that process.
This is really stupid - ac - 2004-02-14
prefmenu is one of the best things in KDE! Why the hell would you remove that? This is really putting a bad foot forward. Removing Konsole is really bad step for Unix people. You know what? The distributions targetted to clueless users WONT HAVE a default KDE anyway. Do you understand that? Those people will be using Lindows or Lycoris. The UNIX people will be using default KDE. The people USING DEFAULT KDE will WANT Konsole. This is really bad for KDE usability. Really disappointed. KDE should put its best foot forward not hide more features. Already too many features are hidden, now you want to hide more? Ridiculous. Please Revert!!!!!!!
Re: This is really stupid - fault - 2004-02-14
> Please Revert!!!!!!! Please don't. Less and less people should be using konsole in a GRAPHICAL desktop environment like KDE. People who need konsole should know how to put it in anyways.
Re: This is really stupid - Marc J. Driftmeyer - 2004-02-14
I call B.S. This is the same reasoning that OS X took with Terminal.app. Unless one has the developer tools installed one doesn't get Terminal.app, amongst other quite necessary UNIX tools. What happens? Support gets inundated with redundant complaints about Applications crashing unexpectedly and people being frustrated. Time is wasted having people install Terminal.app and then launching Apps from command line only to determine a dynamic library needs a ln -s or due to an Software Update the system inadvertently overwrote custom configurations. Difference here is time is wasted for people hunting down where Konsole is and going from there. If you want to remove an Icon from Kicker, update your FAQ and educate the new user where to find each Icon and why they would need to use such an application. I would leave the defaults up to the Distribution Vendor and not the Source. Until Debian reaches a stable version of its upcoming GUI based Package Management Tool one often has to deal with installing a bunch of extra packages just to get the config tools to run outside of the Shell. If you want to be anal make two sources: End User and Developer. Sample the results of how many people actually download End User and draw some statistical conclusions as you should, objectively speaking. Having worked at NeXT and Apple you bet your butt both environments benefit from the Shell being easily accessible. What I never select is KMail, Home Icon or the Help Icon. Why? The Help system needs refinement--it's desire to launch the entire Help system versuses app specific and then giving one the option to view the entire Help system would be preferable. Once KMail gets IMAP worked out and TLS stable then I can switch from Thunderbird, or use them both, but not until then. Most of the help documentation is extremely shallow in depth and breadth. Most of the useful discoveries of KDE often come from working with Konsole. How often do your users download Source and build, say a custom Debian Set of Debs because the i386 just doesn't cut it? The Customization features are great and having them directly accessible, by category is much nicer than launching the entire Control Center. While the hell you don't call is System Preferences to spread familiarity is anyone's guess. Info Center, btw, is beautiful. Extremely useful, especially when needing to work with Kernel Configuration/Compilation settings, device settings, etc. I would rename Info Center to System Hardware Center, or something and have it grouped right with Control Center. Currently, 3.2 isn't showing any information about ALSA but Sound is working fine for me. Control Center doesn't have a minimum screen size so that the display of the name, "Control Center" is completely visible--more polish makes it seem more professional. This isn't just a KDE thing it's a GNOME/GTK thing as well. The GIMP is notorious for having to resize its views just to read everything. Very annoying and unprofessional. Something you never saw with NeXTStep/Openstep and definitely not OS X. I would work on cleaning up the seemless look n' feel before yanking icons of familiarity from Kicker.
Re: This is really stupid - fault - 2004-02-15
> I call B.S. This is the same reasoning that OS X took with Terminal.app. Unless one has the developer tools installed one doesn't get Terminal.app, amongst other quite necessary UNIX tools. Erm, relax. It isn't like konsole was removed from kdebase.
Re: This is really stupid - Tukla Ratte - 2004-02-17
> I would work on cleaning up the seemless look n' feel Go for it.
Developers: a fundamental type of user. - Carlos Woelz - 2004-02-14
While I don't agree with the wording of the parent message, I agree that simple stuff, like the default kicker setting (that distros change anyway), could reflect the average user of the KDE CVS sources. This type of user definitely uses the Konsole a lot. In the medium term it is as important to attract developers as it is important to win users. The code, dialogs and applications must have the user in mind, but the KDE CVS (I mean KDE from the source) default settings could reflect that most of its users are power users.
Re: Developers: a fundamental type of user. - fault - 2004-02-14
I can certainly understand your reasoning, but I don't think that kind of thing is what is going "woo" developers. I think instead, maturation of graphical tools such as kdevelop will have a much larger benefit for KDE in the future in terms of independent applications.
Re: This is really stupid - Manuel - 2004-02-15
Don't worry... ALT + F2, write Konsole and press Enter. Unshow the console for be friendly with the "low users". Patient, we continue to have Konsole.
Would this (Konsole icon) need an usability study? - Eleknader - 2004-02-16
Well well... If we really need objective knowledge whether Konsole shortcut should or should not be on kicker, we need a usability studu. In case this is necessary, I'll volunteer. I'll ask 100 users at our network: Do you use command prompt (console application): a) daily b) weekly c) less often d) never How's that? Guess what the results would be? Eleknader
Re: This is really stupid - arcade - 2004-02-16
"Removing Konsole is really bad step for Unix people. You know what? The distributions targetted to clueless users WONT HAVE a default KDE anyway. Do you understand that? Those people will be using Lindows or Lycoris. The UNIX people will be using default KDE." Removing Konsole is quite simply moronic. It'll only get more difficult to support people over IRC, over the phone, and so forth. Currently I usually just ask them to click on the konsole-button, do a couple of quick commands, and give me the output. When konsole is removed I need to know where the fuck it's located in the menus (for different distros .. *sigh*). I'll end up asking them to hit alt+f2 and type 'xterm' and press enter. KDE usability _suffers_ from this. Calling it an improvement is really moronic.
Re: This is really stupid - Anonymous - 2004-02-16
> I'll end up asking them to hit alt+f2 and type 'xterm' and press enter. What's suddenly wrong with Konsole? It doesn't get worse or disappears just because it's not anymore in the default panel configuration. It can't be also a spelling problem ("eggsterm" anyone)?
Re: This is really stupid - UnixPowerUser - 2004-02-16
You could also hit [alt]+[f2] and type 'konsole' instead. I just found out. Works perfect. Really cool. And, somehow, I managed to delete my current konsole from kicker and get it back. Took me 1/2 hour to succeed, though. Have forgotten how I did it. But I will practice a bit next weekend and then will be prepared for KDE's 3.3 menu cleanups. Go on guys, I don't fear a "from-the-default-kicker-removed konsole any longer... Hehe.....
libxml - claes - 2004-02-14
How does the xml and xpath support in khtml compare to the one in libxml? In this case I would think embracing libxml could be a pretty good thing. It is a candidate also in the LSB futures: http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/candidates/index.html
Re: libxml - Datschge - 2004-02-14
Is libxml in C++? If so I agree it should be embranced. If not I think KDE's C++ developers may spend less time creating an own implementation using the infrastructure KDE already offers.
Re: libxml - Jilks - 2004-02-14
There are wrappers. Libxml is used by KDE now (in its C form), btw.
Re: libxml - Datschge - 2004-02-14
In many cases wrappers are not sufficient tho. The digest this week included a read worty link regarding this topic, in case you missed it http://tinyurl.com/3bk82
these changes should be discussed on kde-core-deve - ac - 2004-02-14
>This was agreed on, on kde-core-devel/kde-usability but committing the Sorry, but where is this discussion on kde-core-devel? Discussing it on kde-usability and kde-cvs is not enough. kde-usability is a noisy mess and kde-cvs is just too high volume. Why wasn't there a proper discussion on kde-core-devel?
Re: these changes should be discussed on kde-core-deve - anon - 2004-02-14
And kde-core-devel isn't a noisy mess either? There is a ton of OT stuff there, take the recent stuff about GPL licensing (should be in kde-licensing), WhatIsText (probably in kde-usability), apollon (should be in kde-policies and kde-extragear), kmail, etc... kde-core-devel has turned into what kde-devel used to be, and what kde used to before that.. what's next? a kde-core-core-devel? This particular issue is probably best for kde-usability, rather than kde-core-devel.
Re: these changes should be discussed on kde-core-deve - chris - 2004-02-14
No usability should not be discussed in core-devel , kde-usability was created just for THAT purpose to discuss it there. So if you want to decide about usability issues , then join that mailing list. i find it more than ok to make a usability in kde-usability ! Someone in kde-core-devel should be anray if he is not subscribed to usability if they change something , waht do you think. chris
Re: these changes should be discussed on kde-core-deve - anon - 2004-02-14
> i find it more than ok to make a usability in kde-usability ! ACK. However, in this case, the maintainer of kicker (John Firebaugh), should have been CC'd.
Re: these changes should be discussed on kde-core-deve - Richard Moore - 2004-02-16
When kde-usability first started its somewhat bungled approach to working with developers it caused a lot of bad feeling. There was a promise made to let developers know about discussions while they were occuring (as there are often good reasons why thing work a particular way). Sadly this promise seems not be honoured.
need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - UnixPowerUser - 2004-02-14
I agree that we Unix power users need the konsole badly. We are commandline wizards, ya know??? We can't be without! So, please, please, please: can someone who is a GUI wizard write down the exact order of mouseclicks/keystroks that brings my konsole icon back to kicker? I'm desperate for it.... KDE should not only always satisfy the newbie wishlists, it should also listen to us, who are at the center of the Unix world.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - ac - 2004-02-14
Right Click On Panel->Add->Application Button->Unknown Mess Of Menus Depending On Where You Got KDE From
Use khotkeys! - Dan - 2004-02-14
Even faster: bind konsole to a key combination using khotkeys. I think you can just enable the "Run Konsole" entry under the "Examples" group of actions (which also needs to be enabled...). OR: do the same thing under the "Menu Editor entries" group... I think the default key combo is Ctrl+Alt+t and Win+s respectively, but can be easily changed! If you use konsole a lot, this is even faster than clicking the panel... Perhaps these `hotkeys' could be enabled by default?
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - anonymous - 2004-02-14
Well even if KDE removes Konsole you can still use xterm. This voodoo to get to it: Alt-F2 xterm ENTER.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Anonymous - 2004-02-14
Hello? Nobody is talking about removing Konsole at all: Alt-F2 konsole ENTER
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - ac - 2004-02-15
For a power-user xterm is now faster and easier to access in KDE. ;=)
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - cm - 2004-02-15
I wouldn't recommed xterm over konsole to a power user, though... In fact I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - ac - 2004-02-17
Then put your money where your mouth is! Put Konsole back on Kicker. =P
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - anon - 2004-02-14
> I agree that we Unix power users need the konsole badly. We are commandline wizards, ya know??? We can't be without! If you know how to use something as advanced as konsole, you should be able to figure out how to add it to the kicker.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
Yeah f*ck them. The KPanel itself is also too cluttered, why not remove it from there too. By the way, what about moving it to kde-extragear? That is if it must be part of kde itself... (yeah I'm beeing sarcastic)
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - me - 2004-02-15
What is KPanel? Or did you mean kicker?
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
No I mean KPanel, the thing that appears when you click the K (start) button. I think that's its name.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - ac - 2004-02-15
KMenu
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - anon - 2004-02-14
" I'm desperate for it.... KDE should not only always satisfy the newbie wishlists, it should also listen to us, who are at the center of the Unix world." KDE's defaults should be optimized for intermediate users, NOT newbies, and NOT power users. I don't see many intermediate users using konsole, so I think this is a great decision.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Jadrian - 2004-02-15
"KDE's defaults should be optimized for intermediate users, NOT newbies, and NOT power users." However you must always consider them all. In this case I don't think the benifits for the intermidiate user justify the decision. "I don't see many intermediate users using konsole, so I think this is a great decision." My little sister uses it because of an ark bug. Anyway I think we should keep it because - it's not a major anoyance for newbies/intermidiate users - it's a very important app for the tech user - there are *many* tech users who will miss it - I'm pretty sure much more people will be annoyed by it's removal than happy because it isn't there. J.A.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Navindra Umanee - 2004-02-15
And how is prefsmenu not optimised for your intermediate users? prefsmenu is perfect for them in fact. And anyway where do you see these non-existent intermediate users? I watch KDE users all the time at the University. None of them are power users and almost all of them want Konsole because they want Unix. Otherwise they would be using the Windows machines. So if you're going to talk about so-called intermediate users, please back up your statements...
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Eric Laffoon - 2004-02-14
Ready? Open a konsole window... (where is it? what is it?) ;-) dcop kicker Panel addServiceButton konsole
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - achim - 2004-02-15
The more I know about dcop, the more I am frustated the I really don't know a lot... ;) I'm impressed.
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - Eric Laffoon - 2004-02-17
> The more I know about dcop, the more I am frustated the I really don't know a lot... ;) I'm impressed. Wow! I'll mark it on the calendar... finally impressed someone, must send card... there. ;-) DCOP is not so mysterious. Try this - Alt-F2 (brings up run dialog) enter "kdcop" (no quotes) and now you can explore to your heart's content. To perfect it for scripting use a console. If a listed app ends in a number it's not set to unique and can have multiple instances. you can find it on the command line like so. dcop | grep quanta [returns all instances of Quanta] Now to see what is available dcop `dcop | grep quanta` Note the backticks. That means "execute and interpret this". To see what features we have added specifically for user scripting look at dcop `dcop | grep quanta` WindowManagerIf Note "QString currentURL()" for instance tells you the current file... dcop `dcop | grep quanta` WindowManagerIf currentURL [returns] file:/home/httpd/htdocs/sites/kittyhooch/public_html/customer.php You can also read and set things from kdcop. koffice is particularly interesting, but be careful. You can really trash some settings and do other less than desirable things if you aren't paying attention. ;-)
Re: need step-by-step HOWTO bring konsole back...i - raditzman - 2004-02-16
No one got the joke??????????? :))) That's a bad sign :))
Link to patch? - anonymous - 2004-02-14
I didn't see a link to the usability patch. So prefmenu is replaced by KControl? Why? prefmenu is more usable. It is fast, convenient and you can easily access what you need. KControl is slow and bloated. You have to run it and then click around to find what you want. It's much less usable than being able to browse prefmenu. What was the explanation for replacing prefmenu with KControl?
Re: Link to patch? - fault - 2004-02-14
I think that the reasoning is that most people won't be able to find what they need through pref menu. Kcontrol has a search feature, which is very important. If you feel more comfortable using pref-menu, by all means, put it back into your panel :) (I for one like the pref menu applet in the kmenu)
Re: Link to patch? - Derek Kite - 2004-02-14
All the patch did was remove the applications from the default kicker. Konsole, khelpcenter and the prefmenu are still available. Right click on the kicker, add, and find what you like. Khelpcenter was put back. This is the default kicker. What would be the best things to have there that would be the most useful for the most users? In limited screen space? There are many things it would be neat to have on the kicker, but there isn't room. I have three users in my house. One wants simple, email, web and word processing. Never opens a konsole. Never opens help either, asks me :). Doesn't configure, again asks me (how do I get rid of that jumping thing!). Another is intermediate. Gaim, browser, xmms, etc. Rarely a konsole, only when phones me at work, 'dad, * isn't working'. I get her to open konsole, and sort it out over the phone. Or when doing something like 'emerge kazaa'. Then there is me. I have konsole open with about 5 tabs, konqueror and kmail, plus kate, quanta, kdevelop, mplayer, etc. I set things up the way I want quickly. I suspect most readers here are similar to me. Now, why should what I want be the default? I can change things easily, I know how. What does bother me with usability changes are when features and ways of working are changed. For example, kmail used to have a shortcut to select all messages, 'k' if I remember correctly. It doesn't anymore, I suppose to keep things simple. I used it all the time, and miss it. Now it's a two keystroke thing. I can live with it, but when things are taken away in the name of usability, it irks. This doesn't happen too often in KDE. As Aaron said in his comment on the list, "i'm a pretty vocal and effective advocate against the "hide it all under the carpet!" usability approach. i'm also against unecessary complexity and wasteful impositions made upon our users." So far so good. Let them do their work, see how it ends up. Aaron seems to have an idea where he wants to go. Seeing incremental changes clouds the issue. Maybe in the end it'll work better than it does now. Derek
Re: Link to patch? - anon - 2004-02-14
good post.. I agree with pretty much everything you said.
Re: Link to patch? - Navindra Umanee - 2004-02-15
> There are many things it would be neat to have on the kicker, but there isn't room. This is very inaccurate. The default kicker is smart enough to remove some of the default apps when the screen space is too small. Someone says KDE should be optimised for "intermediate" users. While this is just a meaningless mantra... why not optimise KDE for "intermediate" resolutions as well then? (keeping in mind that Kicker can drop default icons when needed) If you want to remove stuff, why not remove the filemanager? You already have a link to your $HOME on the desktop anyway. Or indeed, remove the help. Removing useful stuff is bad though. > Now, why should what I want be the default? I can change things easily, I know how. I watch a lot of people using KDE. What annoys me is how *they* don't know how to change things... Removing prefmenu does not help this and nor does removing Konsole (since all of them, University students, are using the Unix machines precisely for it -- otherwise they would be using the Windows machine).
what is going on? - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
Sorry to sound harsh, but this is completely stupid. And yes, I know I can easily add back the icon to the pannel. The fact is I shouldn't have to. First, in kde 3.2 you start making UNIX incoherent in the GUI by changing the word directory to folder. Then, you remove THE MOST USEFUL TOOL OF THEM ALL from the kicker. Why don't you just start building a new shell specifically for windows? If I wanted to work in the MS windows way I would use windows. As it is, I am more efficient working on a UNIX system, and making the UNIX GUI hide all the UNIX functionality seems to completely go against what you should be trying to do. "KDE is a powerful Open Source graphical desktop environment for Linux and Unix workstations. It combines ease of use, contemporary functionality, and outstanding graphical design with the technological superiority of the Unix operating system" Why do you care that the underlying system is UNIX anymore? Perhaps you should remove this statement from the top of kde.org because you are now going to the stage of hiding this superiority from the user. This is not flamebait - I am just horrified to see what was such a fantastic desktop going down hill quickly. Only a "Power User" uses the command line? I don't think so. If you don't like the CLI then why aren't you just sticking to windows? Surely anyone who choses Linux over windows does so at least partly because they are more efficient with the command line than their mouse?
Re: what is going on? - Henrique Pinto - 2004-02-15
> If you don't like the CLI then why aren't you just sticking to windows? Don't know. I'll ask my mother, my brother and the 630 KDE users at my school who don't even know what Konsole is. My brother isn't home right now, but my mom says that no one can even think of using Windows after they know KPat... KDE is simply superior. And it also costs way less than Windows, one of the reasons why my school switched to it. > Surely anyone who choses Linux over windows does so at least partly because > they are more efficient with the command line than their mouse? Not really. I can show you a lot of KDE users who don't know what bash is nor understand what issuing "rm -rf ~/*" at a Konsole will do. Note: The reasons for changing the term "directory" into "folder" included the fact that everyone was tired of having that discussion popping up again and again and that KDE wasn't consistent with itself by calling things which were graphically represented by a folder a "directory". If anyone can provide a "directory" icon, maybe it can be reverted...
Re: what is going on? - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
Hi Henrique, Thanks for your comments. I understand what you say; and I was being overly argumentative in my first post! However, I feel that KDE started to create a desktop for UNIX users. Now it is trying to take over the desktop space, ie including windows, and I feel all this is achieving is another desktop for windows users, and it will leave the unix crowd migrating to other desktops. "The reasons for changing the term "directory" into "folder" included the fact that everyone was tired of having that discussion popping up again and again" Well, here it is popping up again! Your point about directories as an icon is a good one and one I had not considered. But then again we use analogies all the time in computing, eg desktop etc etc and I think it is valid saying that a directory is analogous to a folder, and thus takes a folder icon. I feel that is better than breaking consistency with the underlying system. And how often in real life do you have a folder within a folder within a folder within a folder anyway? I would say another design problem that appeared in 3.2 is the file permission dialogue. You have to go to the advanced tab to get a sensible looking dialogue for file permissions! The normal one requires me to actually read the words. The advanced one presents things in the normal rwx format. Cheers, Paul
Re: what is going on? - anon - 2004-02-15
> The advanced one presents things in the normal rwx format. Because maybe the rwx format is unnecessarily complicated; it goes towards environments where such representations DO have reasonable value (i.e, CLIs). In a GUI environment we can afford to break away from that. It'll might annoy people who learned UNIX before they learned KDE, but the rest of us, it's just easier.
Re: what is going on? - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
Hi, "Because maybe the rwx format is unnecessarily complicated; it goes towards environments where such representations DO have reasonable value (i.e, CLIs). In a GUI environment we can afford to break away from that. It'll might annoy people who learned UNIX before they learned KDE, but the rest of us, it's just easier." I honestly believe, no matter how long I have been a UNIX user (ie pre KDE or not), that a grid of gro against rwx could not be easier to follow. I think if you had trouble following this in te grid format then you probably don't know enough about the system to be even altering file permissions anyway. And I know I am going to get flamed for this, but I think KDE should reconsider "Easy to learn, hard to use, hard to learn, easy to use". Spend 2mins understanding the grid style dialoge an it pays you back by being much faster to use once you have learnt it than the wordy thing with the droip downs. Thanks, Paul
Re: what is going on? - Göran Jartin - 2004-02-15
> should reconsider "Easy to learn, hard to use, hard to learn, easy to use". > Spend 2mins understanding the grid style dialoge an it pays you back by being > much faster to use once you have learnt it than the wordy thing with the drop downs. Couldn't agree more. Every user feels stupid somewhere in the process of learning. It's better to get it over with in a few minutes - or even hours - in the beginning, than to never get smarter. Goran J
Re: what is going on? - anon - 2004-02-15
> if you had trouble following this in te grid format then you probably don't know enough about the system to be even altering file permissions anyway. Erm, setting permissions is something that Mac and Windows folks have been doing for years... without unintuitive grids.
Re: what is going on? - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
please tell me how the grid is unintuative. If you are saying that the average person cannot use the grid, then I would say the average user also is unable to read a bus timetable. And I'm sure this is not the case. Paul
Re: what is going on? - Henrique Pinto - 2004-02-15
Hi Paul! KDE is going nowhere near being a Windows clone. It is a DE on its own, not a copy of something else. And will stay that way. Please note that I was against the change of "directory" into "folder", but most people were favorable and it happened (I even helped in the change). Your point about desktop is not really the same thing, as what we call "desktop" is represented by a "desktop" icon, while what we used to call "directory" was represented by a folder icon. You can restart the discussion if you want, but I guess you won't find anyone interested in debating it for the n-th time... I won't comment on the file permission dialog, as I also don't like it very much. But there were good reasons for changing it.
Re: what is going on? - ac - 2004-02-15
> And how often in real life do you have a folder within a folder within a folder within a folder anyway? Not much, but it would be much harder to make viable directory icons (hmm.. shaped like a phone book or something?), than just "s/directory/folder". Either way, consistancy *within* kde is the most important thing.
Re: what is going on? - Eric Laffoon - 2004-02-17
> Not really. I can show you a lot of KDE users who don't know what bash is nor understand what issuing "rm -rf ~/*" at a Konsole will do. And a good thing because it's "rm -Rf ~/*" since *nix is case sensitive. Oops... were you trying to avert disaster for the curious? ;-) Kids, don't try the above command at home! It will wipe your home directory clean! > Note: The reasons for changing the term "directory" into "folder" included the fact that everyone was tired of having that discussion popping up again and again and that KDE wasn't consistent with itself by calling things which were graphically represented by a folder a "directory". If anyone can provide a "directory" icon, maybe it can be reverted... A directory icon? that *is* funny. I pretty much looked at this and sighed. I have bigger fish to fry. Still, the concept that a synonym is too complex for the average user is sad. It seems to operate on the assumption that the people using the computer will have too much trouble with simple concepts to be able to do much anything but play video games anyway. My experience is that if someone doesn't conceptually understand a file system they are going to have a lot more trouble than this. The folder metaphor helps, but you don't nest folders six deep in your desk or softlink them to other folders so it's sort of a half assed metaphor... I'd rather see a couple paragraph visual "what's a file system?" tutorial. For my part it is that much more confusing every time I tell a user "Look in your project directory... oops, I forgot... we don't have directories any more, just folders..." (oh this is fun) "What? What happened to my directories?" I can only hope most of KDE does not get bogged down in such minutia. Our docs are changed, when asked I give the Homer Simpson blank stare and try to remember to say "folder" and hope the more experienced user is familiar with the concept of synonyms and knows I mean directory. ;-) BTW does anybody think that "bug", "error", "exception", "crash" and "core dump" might be simpler as just bug? "I got a bug dialog" "There's a problem in the bug handling routine" "The program threw a bug" "When I click this button it bugs on me" "did the program leave a bug dump?" I hope I didn't give anybody any ideas. ;-)
Re: what is going on? - Henrique Pinto - 2004-02-17
> And a good thing because it's "rm -Rf ~/*" since *nix is case sensitive. Oops... > were you trying to avert disaster for the curious? ;-) On my system, "rm -Rf ~/*" does exactly the same as "rm -rf ~/*". From the manpage: " -r, -R, --recursive remove the contents of directories recursively " And I don't think anybody here will be stupid enough to try that command... At least, most people here do know what "rm" does...
Re: what is going on? - Carlo - 2004-02-15
>I know I can easily add back the icon to the pannel. The fact is I shouldn't have to. >First, in kde 3.2 you start making UNIX incoherent in the GUI by changing the word directory to folder. You're so right. These decisions are just stupid and unnecessary.
Re: what is going on? - anon - 2004-02-15
> You're so right. These decisions are just stupid and unnecessary. And you're quite wrong :) Technical users know the difference between folders and directories. Less knowledgable users may become confused by such.
Re: what is going on? - Chris Smith - 2004-02-15
I honestly cannot believe what I'm reading... // First, in kde 3.2 you start making UNIX incoherent in the GUI // by changing the word directory to folder. Pet Peeve? Yeah, It's one of mine too. Incoherent? WTF? I don't like referring to them as folders rather than directories but you can't honestly tell me that you are unable to understand what KDE is trying to tell you when it uses the word "folder" in place of "directory"? // Then, you remove THE MOST USEFUL TOOL OF THEM ALL from the kicker. // Why don't you just start building a new shell specifically for // windows? If I wanted to work in the MS windows way I would use // windows. As it is, I am more efficient working on a UNIX system, // and making the UNIX GUI hide all the UNIX functionality seems to // completely go against what you should be trying to do. Perhaps you've missed something, but what KDE aims to be is the most efficient Desktop Environment that _anybody_ will use! For everybody that works more efficient with the console there is a person that works better without even knowing it existed, or works better without the kicker being cluttered with programs they never use. // Why do you care that the underlying system is UNIX anymore? Perhaps // you should remove this statement from the top of kde.org because // you are now going to the stage of hiding this superiority from the user. How do they "not care" that the underlying system is UNIX? Do they deny that DCOP or KPart technology is not part of the underlying system JUST because it's not accessible by the average user? Just because you need to perform an extra step to get a nice program on your default launch bar you're suddenly pointing the finger and saying that KDE is denying its roots? It's absurd. // This is not flamebait - I am just horrified to see what was such // a fantastic desktop going down hill quickly. I mean, really. Going downhill? Because of a removed icon from the default install. Get a hold of yourself man and take in some perspective on the situation. // Only a "Power User" uses the command line? I don't think so. If you // don't like the CLI then why aren't you just sticking to windows? Hey, well if you like the command line so much, why don't you use twin (http://linuz.sns.it/~max/twin/) and stick to mutt and vi? See, it's ridiculous. // Surely anyone who chooses Linux over windows does so at least partly // because they are more efficient with the command line than their mouse? Of course. Definitely not for the stability, performance and open standards etc... </sarcasm> I realize some of my comments may be classed as inflammatory but it really gets to me when people make such a huge deal out of such a small matter. So in closing, get over it and: ALT + F2; dcop kicker Panel addServiceButton konsole Cheers, Chris.
Re: what is going on? - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-15
(with regard to Chris Smith's comments) A console _is_ the most versatile and widely useful/often needed tool for users who are familiar with the underlying system; as these users are the ones who are most likely to be using a default KDE installation (not one adapted for the users of a particular OS distro) it is reasonable and only sensible to provide console in the toolbar rather than forcing these users to add it each time they install a KDE. "Hey, well if you like the command line so much, why don't you use twin ..." Alright; exaggeration of view here is presumably aimed at the "why not use `windows' idea which is also a trifle polemical. But what Paul Mitcheson said gave no grounds for inferring his preference for non-graphical tools all round. It pointed out that the removal of the one icon that give immediate access to pretty much anything one wants to launch, change, etc. is a pretty stupid way to save space on a toolbar littered with trivial one-off programs (a mere "office suite", help centre, etc) that can also easily be found in normal menus, and that have none of the universality of a console. About pettiness, I quite agree it can be annoying when tiny issues become inflated. However, the downward turn of KDE in several respects recently (names, permissions, basic window options hiding behind an "advanced" tab) gives cause for worry to the many computer-literate kde users, as a precursor to more radically dumbing-down -- hence easier to use first time, more arkward on the tenth time -- depredations to KDE. It is reasonable that the typical users of default KDE should want to put in a counter-request to discourage such change.
Re: what is going on? - Chris Smith - 2004-02-15
Hi Nathaniel, My main point is KDE is supposed to be what you want it to be. As you use it it fits around you like a glove so that everything that you do becomes easier. If you need constant access to the console, put the konsole button on kicker. If you need fast access to virtual desktops, bind an action or a key combo. The point being is that default KDE shouldn't be an issue to ANY user, as one of the best points of KDE is it can do what you need it to be. Cheers, Chris.
what you want it to be - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-16
Yes; agreed -- it is very configurable, and it is certainly not hard to change things like the konsole. Would you not agree, though, with the point that almost anyone using plain KDE is one of : using a non-popular distro; compiling from sources; downloading 3rd party pkg/rpm etc. and therefore is a type very likely to value consoles more than kword, help centre etc.? And that the few others using a non-adapted KDE are hardly likely to be scared by its presence? KDE can certainly be adapted very easily, but to minmise average user time taken in setting it up, the raw, default KDE might more reasonably cater for someone of a more konsoley than kwordy type. A distributor who modifies KDE can make changes just once, then all the users in an office environment can benefit -- in this case, it is not bad that the distributor once has to replace a konsole with a spreadsheet! I know this sounds awfully petty, and so this _shall_ be my last interference in the konsole debate... the reason for its mention is both that i) the average user time for configuration, over thousands of users, seems worth considering in many aspects of the default KDE ii) we worry that there may be many contented users who love the classic KDE and never bother to say so. It is common in life that only the (possibly small) population who don't like something get heard -- then if the others don't make clear their tastes too, government, KDEhq, or whatever, just never realises that something was done against the general will. So we seek to show the presence of this, perhaps large, user base. All the best, Nathaniel
Re: what is going on? - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
"Of course. Definitely not for the stability, performance and open standards etc... </sarcasm>" I think if we are honest, XP is a pretty stable system. Let's not pretend this is such an issue. If MS's best offering was win9x then your point is valid, but not any more. I also think its performance is pretty similar (in workstation use. Can't comment on server use as I have never admined a windows server) to linux. And I don't think the average user, who doesn't know how to use konsole, cares about open standards. So, I would still proclaim that people who use KDE/GNU Linux do so because they prefer the UNIX way of working. Paul
Re: what is going on? - anon - 2004-02-16
To all KDE users who don't know what a konsole is i say this: Konsole is the beginning.....the middle.....the end. Konsole is what gives solutions when everything else fails. Konsole is what stays standing when everything else falls. Konsole is what can touch the heart of your system in an unbalanced state of affection. Why would you want to remove that from your visual field. If anything, everything else has to be removed previously. This is a voice from the user base that Nathaniel Taylor was referring to earlier. I believe there are many others out there who agree that DE's where made to help the user operate his/her operating system. Even for the unexperienced, exposing them to the most powerful tools of a system is not such a bad thing. One day they might be curious enough to find out what happens if they click on this strange terminal looking icon. The fact that it is there in their face might mean that it is something worth knowing about. In any other case it will be dead and burried before it is even born.
Re: what is going on? - ac - 2004-02-16
here, here.
Re: what is going on? - Datschge - 2004-02-18
What you are talking about is what you can find on Ctrl+Alt+F1, not in Konsole.
Re: what is going on? - anon - 2004-02-18
I am not sure if you know what you are talking about, since CTRL+ALT+F1 takes you to the real console of your system, while Konsole gives you the same functionality within the graphical x-windows environment. A difference is that you can have many Konsole's in front of you together with other KDE and non-KDE applications on the side as well, but you can only get one real console once you press CTRL+ALT+F1.
Re: what is going on? - Datschge - 2004-02-18
I have no idea if you're the same anon, but following the description of "Konsole is the beginning.....the middle.....the end" and "Konsole is what can touch the heart of your system in an unbalanced state of affection" Konsole, in contrary to the real console, is hardly going to help you. When you start your system you are rather accessing the real console since Konsole is only usable when KDE and the necessary underlying system (X) is already running. And if your system is in an unbalanced state that will rather affect Konsole way more than it will ever affect the console. Has been a nice piece of prose though. ;)
Re: what is going on? - anon - 2004-02-19
I think this argument is being diverted in the wrong direction. I totally agree with you that the real console is much more robust than Konsole which requires X + KDE to run before it becomes usable. What i said was meant to be a suggestion to KDE developers and users that Konsole should not be removed from the panel menu because it may serve an important role in case of an emergency, or for a thousand other reasons which i cannot begin to enumerate. The real console obviously can act as a replacement of that but in many cases Konsole can do the job equally well without having to jump out of the graphical environment. Also, some KDE users don't even know what Konsole is, let alone the real console, so it seems easier to have an icon on the panel which executes Konsole rather than trying to explain to them the idea of real consoles that are accessed by CTRL+ALT+F1. Therefore my point is that, at least Konsole should be left where it is, and if that doesn't help when your system becomes 'unstable' then i think it is time you learned that there is much more than KDE behind that dekstop of yours.
Re: what is going on? - Datschge - 2004-02-19
I'd rather prefer MiniCLI's ability to execute commands in terminal window/Konsole being promoted more. I myself don't start Konsole on it own anymore for quite some time but often as part of a specific task (through MiniCLI or as part of Konqueror, Kate etc.) and I would think it makes more sense this way for most people.
oddness - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
hrm. they quoted my bit of humour code from an email, but didn't format it for usage in HML so the joke is completely lost. the dynamic_casts were checking for objects of type UsabilityExpert and Developer... funny that the punchline got lost, because it seems the same is happening with the kicker changes in the discussions on this forum. change sucks. it's uncomfortable. it's.. well.. CHANGE. and most of us, being regular people, don't like that. it's almost irrelevant if the change is good or not, it rarely feels good. at first. we've made enough changes to KDE over the last couple years in an attempt to streamline it that i've started to notice something of a pattern. if i ignore the bitching and listen to the reasoning, then good things happen. if there isno logic to the noise (24 karat whine), then i ignore it and when a release happens it's usually greeted with open arms by our users. as for konsole itself... we're not hiding our heritage, we're not turning our back on UNIX. personally, i have a virtual desktop dedicated to the CLI. on my dual head system i have two konsoles, on my regular single monitor system just one. each konsole has between 10 and 20 active sessions each. (ahh... tabbed konsole!) so, i'm something of a fan of konsole. so obviously i didn't thing removing it was a good idea because i am trying to make KDE perfect for me, since my profile falls within the minority of KDE users. we need to make KDE perfect for most people, and easy to change to perfection for everyone else. as for me, i know how to put Konsole on the panel pretty easily (tip: drag and drop from the K Menu!). moreover, konsole is still in kdebase. konsole is still in the kmenu. it's not going anywhere. the overwhelming majority of average computer users do not and will not have an impending need for konsole such that it deserves an entry by default on the panel. it's still easily accessable and still a valued part of KDE (esp to me =). the panel is not a billboard to advertise our operating system philosophies ("UNIX rocks because the CLI is awesome!"). in any case, these changes aren't random, nor are we trying to hide the cool features of KDE. these changes were vetted by KDE developers, including those not involved in usability; there are long discussions that preface these sorts of changes (usually covering things most people wouldn't think of immediately (myself included)). it's true that KDE is becoming easier to use, and we're doing it without cutting features and without making things opaque to configure and manage. there is a state of oversimplicity that renders a system less useful; there is a state of complexity that does much the same. KDE has traditionally leaned towards the latter, and now we're in the process of optimizing it. the goal is to end up somewhere in the middle. "This desktop is too hard, I can't use it without getting frustrated. This desktop is too featureless, I can't get my work done with it. This desktop is juuuuuuust right." - Goldilocks, 21st century
Re: oddness - ac - 2004-02-15
The problem is that you are making changes that make KDE less usable by default. 1) prefmenu is better than KControl. Now it's gone. 2) 90% of people who install KDE from source want Konsole. Removing it from Kicker makes Kicker less usable by default. The clueless masses will install Lindows anyway. 3) $HOME does not need to be on Kicker in the default settings. $HOME is already on KDesktop. 4) If you want to spend your time doing real usability work that will help KDE instead of inconveniencing users... why not clean up the mess that is KHelpCenter? You really think people want to browse a gigantic hierarchy of documentation? I hope you can listen to the argument.
Re: oddness - Peter Simonsson - 2004-02-15
>2) 90% of people who install KDE from source want Konsole. Removing it from Kicker makes Kicker less usable by default. The clueless masses will install Lindows anyway. Do you have any prof what so ever for that number? no? I didn't think so either... Just because you use the kicker icon to launch konsole doesn't mean everybody else do...
Re: oddness - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
1) it isn't gone, it's just not there by default. yes, pref menu is better for you and i, but i'm not convinced it's better for most users. a single interface seems to work better than a menu for those who are only marginally familiar with kcontrol's layout. and that isn't a newbie thing; most people don't learn the kcontrol layout even after using KDE for >1 year. the menu works best when people either want to launch a single panel, or when they know what they want (meaning no browsing). this is also a reflection of the crapiness of our current nav system in kcontrol, which isn't going to last in its current form. 2) you miss the point, which i assume is because you aren't involved in the actual discussions on the mailing lists because i covered this in detail there. i'm not concerned about people who install from source, since they can throw konsole on there in two seconds, and they are the vast minority of people who use KDE. i'd like to see a KDE that can be used in a DEFAULT configuration in a "Tier 1" OS with as LITTLE modfication as necessary. why? two reasons. first, if the OS vendor has to do less work to "fix up" KDE for shipping then KDE is cheaper for them and there is less chance they will break things. when OS vendors go mucking about they do some really stupid things, like how some OSes decided to put the tabbar in konsole at the top of the window showing a complete lack of understanding of usability when it comes to terminal apps. making KDE less expensive for the vendor also means strengthening our relationships with the vendors and even openning the doors to new ones for KDE. the other reason focusses on the user. when a person uses KDE on SUSE at work and then goes home to KDE on Mandrake, wouldn't it be great if their KDE was as identical as possible in both places? right now that won't happen because vendors feel the need to touch up a lot of things throughout KDE. by providing a better-by-default KDE we can provide a more consistent KDE experience for users between OSes. KDE as brand will be strengthened by this, and KDE as a project will end up benefiting. to think that default settings do not end up affecting binary-install users is naive. right now we are much too optimized for advanced users, the sort who can (and sometimes even do ;) install KDE from source. we're neglecting the vast majority of our users. even if they do install from binaries, they are still our users. KDE needs to start taking responsibility for all our users. they are not users of just an OS, they are users of KDE on some OS. 3) Desktop icons are an abomination. they are often obscured by windows and encourage people to manage their windows (minimize, maximize, move around) which most people are not very good at. it is PAINFUL to watch a Windows user on my KDE machines because they end up futzing with windows in odd ways to gain access to the desktop, since that is what they have been trained (incorrectly) to do. this makes desktop access inneficient AND hurts using applications due to windows often being partially offscreen or minimized. de-emphasizing the desktop icons allows users to maximize windows or keep them where they are without moving them. the desktop access button is a great feature for desktop icon users, but shows there is a fundamental flaw in the model. in contrast the panel is always available no matter how the windows are arranged, and access to your files is one of the most taken actions on the desktop. it therefore deserves to be on the panel, no questions asked. 4) "spend your time doing real usability work that will help KDE" ... huh. you really are an asshole, aren't you? i suppose KDE has just magically become more usable over the last couple years by itself... sorry, but that kind of rudeness is really hard for me to take silently. now, i have neither need nor desire for people to pat my back all the time, but boy does it get tiresome to have people be rude and ignorant to you on a rather consistent basis. (emphasis on ignorant, from which the rudeness usually springs.) as for KHelpCenter, you're right, it needs help. in fact, we were discussing issues with KHC on the cvs commit list this past week. some developers thought it was fine just as is, i provided a (short) list of things that need to be addressed (the tree of all docs showing being one of them, lack of searchability being another). but i suppose i'm not doing any real usability work with these observations, right? unfortunately i only have so many hours in the day to commit to KDE, and between working on KControl, Kicker, KsCD, KJots, KNX and then a bunch of random "this needs to be fixed" stuff around KDE i'm pretty much tied up at the moment. heh.. i'm even moving house this month, just because i have so much time. working full time and having a family leaves me with too much spare time, you see. ;-P hey, i've got an idea: why don't you help with KHC? some real usability work will get done much faster that way! of course i'm going to guess that you posted anonymously to avoid such repercusive responsibility. (grumpy? who, me? ;)
Re: oddness - Boudewijn Rempt - 2004-02-15
" most people don't learn the kcontrol layout even after using KDE for >1 year." That's because the layout changes with every release. I've been using KDE since -- was that 1.1, or 1.12, or even earlier? A bloody long time, anyway, and everytime I have to retrain my reflexes to a new kcontrol layout. Not that that's special with KDE, OS X does it, too -- and perhaps Windows, I wouldn't know. My advice would be: don't mess with menu structures, kcontrol layout, kicker contents and whatever more there is until you've got real, hard data, from observing people working, instead of asking people about what they think they do -- that's silly --. Don't mess with what's familiar -- it's familarity that breeds usability, it's changes, no matter how well intentioned, that breeds user anger. And that's from actual obersvation. You should hear and see my daughers reactions when their system is changed from under their feet. They are 8, 8 and 10, and can find their way in KControl just fine, until the order is changed once again. And my wife's opinion on some 'usability' changes between 3.1 and 3.2 is unprintable. Anyway, I'm off trying to hack affine transforms into Krita using QWMatrix now. And a Kubelka-Monk based watercolour paint colour strategy.
Re: oddness - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-16
i agree that changing kcontrol's layout over and over again is horrid. which is why we aren't going to do it for 3.3 =) as for "real hard data", some are collecting just that. not everything requires it, but a lot of things do. it's fun that some think all changes are random or purely the opinions of people. =) the flip side with "familiarity breeds usability" is that some things just aren't very given to breeding familiarity because they are too convoluted or used to rarely to do so. we're also going have a lot more users in 2-3 years than we do today. it would be nice to give those people something more usable than what we have today. not random poking, as you note, but purposeful and measured. we still probably won't get absolutely everything perfectly right, but we can get closer.
Re: oddness - Navindra Umanee - 2004-02-17
prefmenu is much better for browsing and finding what you need because you don't need innumerable tree/icon clicks. Instead you just browse the menu and you get a quick bird's eye view of everything. I definitely think this is more userfriendly.
Re: oddness - David - 2004-02-15
Right on Aaron. If I can still get to the Konsole, what's the bother? I can still add it to my desktop or kicker or whatever. I don't use it too often, but when I need it, it is there. I think it makes sense to try and make KDE as usable as possible from a default install. I know some people will hate this, but it is necessary. I agree. What I do not agree with is the way in which the Gnome and Ximian people in particular have tried to promote scientific usability at every turn, using what the people at Apple have done as a benchmark. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, but it isn't quite that simple. Many people out there in the business world respect Macs totally, and will respect the Gnome and Ximian Desktops themselves, but they won't be able to use them. Windows is used for a multitude of different things out there, and trying to force 'usability' at every turn is just not practical, although you should follow the guidelines. Microsoft seem to have understood this over the years. A correct balance needs to be struck and I'm sure KDE will do it.
Re: oddness - Maynard - 2004-02-15
The problem is that scientific usability is what Microsoft does as well. So does Apple and Sun for GNOME. It makes apps much more usable and friendly. Also, impressions are determine to a large extent how users perceive the userfriendliness of a desktop. For an extreme example, Imagine if your desktop came with the whole desktop littered with icons for every app. Most users want it empty, and then they add what ever they want on the dektop by themselves. That is increasing usability.
Re: oddness - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
MS and Apple do indeed practice "scientific" usability... and does microsoft or apple have their terminal app on the panel by default? nope =)
Re: oddness - David - 2004-02-15
Yes they do practice scientific 'usability', but Microsoft have learned to put a degree of flexibility into this because of the multitude of uses that Windows is put to and the number of people that use it. However, do Microsoft shove the Command Prompt into your face? No. They put it with all the other 'not-very-used-but-important-stuff' under Accessories. I think that's a strong hint. What they don't do is dictate a HIG strongly to application developers (although there are good guidelines and a HIG is no bad idea - KDE should formulate one over time, perhaps with the backing of Trolltech?) which they have to follow, otherwise their applications look completely out of place. A desktop like this looks sanitised to users, and this is something many just cannot stomach. Apple has a minority desktop share and a lot of loyal Mac enthusiasts, so they can get away with this. This is something Ximian and others around Gnome will have to learn over time, and promoting the joys of a HIG-compliance utopia gets you nowhere.
Re: oddness - Dawnrider - 2004-02-16
The trouble is, a HIG really doesn't do that much. For the majority of tasks, the KDE style guides are more than ample. That covers manuals and general good practices, but leaves room enough so that the application doesn't have to spend twice as long in development to become compliant. A more worrying thing is to have a rigidly enforced HIG which in itself causes applications to jump through hoops to be compliant; that will cause conceptual breakage of the application, which is far worse for the user. Moreover, the Gnome HIG deals with all sorts of issues, such as the height of taskbars, margins and fine tuning of objects, as well as dialog construction and other things, which KDE doesn't need to worry about, because they are all inherited, from KDE base or from QT itself. Worst of all, if application developers feel too constrained, they start trying to make themselves *unique* in other ways than their little UI tweaks, and that can be problematic. At the moment, applications tend to learn from others, interact nicely and develop unofficial guidelines from iterative improvement with competitors. I do fear that a tight HIG would force more dichotemy and break this situation. In short, guidelines good, HIG bad :)
Re: oddness - David - 2004-02-16
"The trouble is, a HIG really doesn't do that much. For the majority of tasks, the KDE style guides are more than ample. That covers manuals and general good practices, but leaves room enough so that the application doesn't have to spend twice as long in development to become compliant." Yep, I agree with that. "A more worrying thing is to have a rigidly enforced HIG which in itself causes applications to jump through hoops to be compliant; that will cause conceptual breakage of the application, which is far worse for the user." I agree again. No developer wants to have to follow a rigid set of rules to get an application looking OK, especially if it is rapidly developed. They would want some easy too follow guidelines that don't give them too much overhead though. "Moreover, the Gnome HIG deals with all sorts of issues, such as the height of taskbars, margins and fine tuning of objects, as well as dialog construction and other things, which KDE doesn't need to worry about, because they are all inherited, from KDE base or from QT itself." This is definitely true. "Worst of all, if application developers feel too constrained, they start trying to make themselves *unique* in other ways than their little UI tweaks, and that can be problematic. At the moment, applications tend to learn from others, interact nicely and develop unofficial guidelines from iterative improvement with competitors. I do fear that a tight HIG would force more dichotemy and break this situation." Yep. "In short, guidelines good, HIG bad :)" Yep.
Re: oddness - Derek Kite - 2004-02-15
'scientific usability'. That's just another way of saying I'm right, you are wrong. I haven't heard the kde usability people talk this way, which makes me think they might do the right thing. Derek
Re: oddness - David - 2004-02-16
"That's just another way of saying I'm right, you are wrong." Not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps I worded it wrongly. A very rigid HIG is just a bad idea, especially for developers. People will want guidelines though. " haven't heard the kde usability people talk this way, which makes me think they might do the right thing." Neither have I, and I think they will.
Re: oddness - Derek Kite - 2004-02-17
I think you got my point. In usability there is at best a good compromise, at worst an imposition of ones way of working on someone else. To call one way scientific is to shut down debate. I'm quite surprised at the feelings in this discussion. Somehow these things touch what people care deeply about. Or we're all raving lunatics. Or both. Derek
Re: oddness - David - 2004-02-17
"To call one way scientific is to shut down debate." Yes, wrong choice of words. Couldn't think of any other way of saying it when I was quickly tapping away. "I'm quite surprised at the feelings in this discussion. Somehow these things touch what people care deeply about. Or we're all raving lunatics. Or both." Possibly. I wasn't coming out with harsh feelings in this discussion, just what I know to be true as a developer and why I think KDE is actually heading in the right direction. I'm a power user and I'll just add Konsole to where I feel I will need it. It ain't hard. I don't understand the feelings over that.
DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-15
This discussion has included several times the sensible point that a console is an essential tool for many (the more experienced) users of systems on which KDE runs. The reply from a developer points out how easy it is to add a console icon to the toolbar, and states that some users are uncomfortable with the console, hence its removal from the default configuration. The important point here -- made by an earlier contributor but ignored by the developer -- is that IT IS ALMOST ENTIRELY THE PEOPLE WHO OFTEN WANT A CONSOLE, WANT SENSIBLE NAMES FOR DIRECTORIES, ETC. WHO WILL BE USING A DEFAULT KDE. Practically anyone not happy with a console will be using KDE as `adapted' by the likes of RedHat, Mandrake etc. These distributions make huge changes to kde layout, colours, icons, menus, toolbar and so on. They are well able to add or remove what icons they consider most suited to their users. On the other hand, the typical unix-user who likes KDE will compile betas and RC versions, and update regularly to new releases. Indeed, I venture to say that anyone using a true default KDE will be moderately conversant with the underlying system, and would find a console on the toolbar to be desirable. So it is ridiculous that these users should be forced into making changes, however simple, every time they install a new version, while users who want the changes are sheltered behind a distributor's changes anyway! The same point applies to many other "simplifying" changes that have undermined KDE's excellence in the latest release -- LET DISTRIBUTORS MAKE CHANGES TO SUIT NOVICE USERS. ___________________ Finally: there exist a plethora of oversimplified, poor-utility GUI desktops, such as those for macintosh (one mouse button, miles to travel to the menus), microsfot `windows' ("you can't change this name", explorer crashed, etc) and GNOME with its similar tendency to simplifying things for new users rather than allowing someone who is willing to learn a little to end up with a really efficient system that offers many options at once (and could therefore appear overcomplex for the first time). But people who use such a system a lot appreciate these more complex options that allow quick and powerful control. For the reason given above about default users of KDE, please keep KDE powerful, and don't drag it into the pit of friendly-to-first-time-users, simple menus and so on. Either keep it good, and let others change it, OR allow various configurations (default: complex) that let users select the styl on first login, as is already done with colours, window style etc.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Nicolas Goutte - 2004-02-15
The problem is that every distributions define what a user is and needs. So you get many many KDE variants and it is getting more and more a nightmare to support. So KDE needs to do some basic work. (The variants will still happen nevertheless.) Have a nice day!
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - ac - 2004-02-15
Get serious. There are few distributions compared to the number of users. The distributions have to do the leg work customization once at the source and then all their users will benefit. The thousands of users downloading KDE on the other hand are all inconvenienced for no good reason. There are many more users inconvenienced than distribution developers. Basically you are favoring the corporates over your own users. That isn't good and frankly doesn't bode well for KDE.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Nicolas Goutte - 2004-02-15
I must say that I have some problems to understand this answer, especially the part that users of distributions would not be supposed to be our users. I would prefer that the distributions keep their finger away from modifying KDE. Because for a user whatever he has in front of him is KDE, independently how much it has been modified. And such a user does not understand that we answer him something like: "Well, that is not KDE, it was modified, so I cannot answer you." Have a nice day!
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - ac - 2004-02-15
You have no control over what the distributions do. They will modify KDE whether you like it or not. Look at Red Hat. Look at Lindows. You have to accept that. So why not cater to your actual users, the people who download KDE and use it? As I've said the distributors only have to customise KDE once for all their users. I think it's a very simple argument, logical and easy to understand.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
all KDE users are "our" users (assuming you contribute to KDE, Mr. Anonymous; and if not they aren't YOUR users at all). i think that's a very simple argument that is logical and easy to understand. as such, i agree with your other point that we need to cater to our actual users. and no, those aren't just corporate users. they are home users and hobbyist users, too. people who install debian or gentoo. people who install SUSE and Mandrake. people who use it on Solaris and FreeBSD. the real disconnect here between you and me on this issue is our definition of KDE's target market. you seem to think that the primary target market is you and i: power user, programming UNIX geeks. and as you can see i don't agree with that. why not? because reality says most people who use KDE are not power users, programmers or UNIX geeks. i'd like to serve the real user population as KDE's primary target group. i don't think this has to come at the expense of you and i, but we need to stop being selfish for a few minutes here and think of everyone else who uses KDE. your whining about how it's going to take you 5 seconds longer to put konsole on kicker so it is where you like it, just so we can impose on the other 95% of our users it pretty sad.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Jadrian - 2004-02-16
"i'd like to serve the real user population as KDE's primary target group. i don't think this has to come at the expense of you and i, but we need to stop being selfish for a few minutes here and think of everyone else who uses KDE." Sorry Aaron, but I see it the other way around in this case. I doubt your data (5%? come on), and your resoning. Optimizing KDE for your "real user population" doesn't mean ignoring everyone else. It's not like anyones trying to impose a geeky configuration to everyone else. It's just the konsole. I'd be much more happy to get rid of stuff like "KDE-Temporary Folders" which I just mentioned some time ago in the usability mailing list. J.A.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-16
well, konsole is Geek. i'm not sure how else to say it. and the temp folders entry appears in the file dialog, not the panel. the two are completely separate issues, which may not be apparent to the casual reader given how you phrased it. we _can_ do both things ;) speaking of the file dialog, it has been changing slowly over the last few releases. items were removed from the side bar and from the toolbar. things were rearranged and made more consistent with the rest of kde. we're now using medium sized icons with better spacing in CVS. maybe we'll even have no Temp Files item in 3.3 ;-)
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Jadrian - 2004-02-16
Yes konsole is geek. And I think it is important to keep it. IMO the number of people using it should be enough, sorry but I 5% doesn't sound right. There is more to it than that though. Our sys admin, FVWM2 hardcore geek, when helping people (using kde) just clicks the konsole and works from there. Having a terminal as accessible as possible means linux/*nix users can get away without being familiar with the environment. It's a common feature, a kind of consistency in our world. No matter where you go you can take that for granted. I also think you may be to positive about the current state of linux (et al). How many clueless newbies end up using a terminal when asking for help in irc? Gui solutions depend on the environment your using, (possibly modified by your distro) and eventually distro specific tools. Command line has more chances of working everywhere, also sometimes it's simply easier to give them a command to copy paste. (Think turning off/on a firewall, yes an average user might need to do it). J.A. P.S. About the Temp Folder, you're right, not only did I phrased it bad, I'm also mixing independent matters... never mind...
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Edulix - 2004-02-15
Hi people: There's a solution for the complexity vs powerfull thing. Maybe KDE could have the option to hide some menu options, toolbars and/or toolbar buttons. The user could easily show/hide that options at will (and if you use one many times, maybe it could be shown by default). Moreover, as you've already mentioned, it could be something more to configure in the first-time login (default: all options/essential options). What do you think people?
modes to hide "complicated" things - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-15
Yes , Edulix, a very good idea; I have wanted something like this since KDE began its dumbing-down excersize.
Re: modes to hide "complicated" things - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
a good idea? hahaha... no, this is a stupid idea. go do some research about user levels sometime and then report back. not only does it not work, it's an excuse to not fix our usability. and here's a shocker: power users need usable systems, too. not every Windows and MacOS user is a computer newbie/weenie, many are vastly more qualified to claim computer expertise than you probably are. yet they use these other OSes because they are more coherent and easier to use. btw, you say KDE has begun a dumbing-down excercise. i find that highly offensive. what, exactly, has been dumbed down? which functionality has been removed or changes such that KDE is less capable, exactly? and how does making something elegant make it dumb? i always thought that clunky, inconsistent and poorly thought out things were "dumb" and that sleek well designed things were "smart". then again, maybe the world's best engineers have had it wrong all along and we should be making everything unnecessarily complex. maybe the house to my door really ought to take 20 minutes for me to open and require a manual. then again, maybe using a computer that takes months to learn and never master which is baroque with challenging "interfaces" doesn't make you a superior human, just one that gets less done in the day.
Re: modes to hide "complicated" things - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-16
Elaborate, please; why `does it not work'? KDE already has oodles of config options that are established on first login, such as whether it should have general behaviour like "unix, kde-own-brand, mac" etc., colours and decorations in the style of solaris, kde, and so on. Variation of menu levels and contents, or even some terminology, would certainly be _more_ complex than these, but what evidence do you suggest as a proper demonstration of this idea's not working? To quote your style, "what exactly will be the problem?". A FUD-style insinuation that something is impossible, and that this is well known, is not really very credible in the absence of any discussion and links to results of rational research on a project similar to KDE. Your claim that such user options imply something left unfixed is ridiculous: Some users are happy to spend a small amount of time to learn efficient and concise options that may not be immediately obvious on first sight. Some are familiar with standard user commands on the systems on which KDE runs. For these a desktop environment that is not obvious to the novice from another system/GUI will be more efficient than the simplified version --- such simplifications often in effect make menu levels deeper or replace concise letter codes and patterns with wordy menus. If for some reason KDE must extend itself to users from many other experiences and without the care to invest a little effort in learning something that soon pays for itself, then it at least shouldn't lose its charm of efficiency to its experienced users. Either give a choice of user settings, or, if this is too hard, leave the dumbing down to distributors who are aiming at a particular user base. "One size fits all" is simply not reasonable when dealing with an interface for a wide range of user needs/backgrounds/experiences/tastes. I suggested a distinction between users familiar with the unixish systems on which KDE runs -- the type of user for whom KDE was originally written -- and those who are familiar only with the other desktops (inferior in many respects of utility to an experienced user) which KDE recently has begun to try to mimic (e.g. the stupid and now corrected "log in as a different user", "New Folder" as a filename, "Advanced" properties, etc.). I don't see why you took this tangent of how "not every Windows and MacOS user is a computer newbie". Perhaps you took `novice users' as meaning novices to all computers -- or perhaps to novice users of a drug or something else wildly unrelated. Rereading my posting it is clear that it refers to those who are novices to KDE, or perhaps to the unix environment in general. A dumbing-down excersize -- highly offensive! Well, yes, it annoys me too. though perhaps offensive is not the first word I would choose for it. An example of a recent (3.2.0) depredation on KDE is the changing of the permissions dialogue in konqueror: The original version was a sensible grid allowing obvious selection of any combination of the full set of permissions. This has the further advantage of being really clear at the first glance to someone who has a bit of experience with it, as the pattern of checked boxes is very memorable and resembles closely the single-row output of the ls -l command. The new version has three drop-down menus to drop-down and select on, each of which has several words that one needs to analyse (instead of the really concise r w x), plus a choice of whether a file is [presumably means "is desired to be"] executable. It _still_ doesn't give as many possibilities as the simple 3x3 boxes, and of course doesn't show special bits. The original version is still there, hiding behind that absurd misnomer "advanced", which has popped up all over the new KDE in places where "further", "more" or "rather basic but we thought another menu level would be jolly" would make a lot more sense. So, of course it is still possible to use the permissions interface as before, but one is made to take an extra step each time or to rely on the limited scope and slow human-interaction speed of the new dialogue. These sorts of reductions in long-term speed and scope for a possible saving in initial learning time, together with the word "advanced" for something that isn't, are a classic example of dumbing-down. "> maybe the house to my door ..." What? But if this means what it must, then I should point out that in the case you try to analogise (presumably an element of KDE that requires from some users a little thought or the manual/help-button on first use) the better house-door situation to choose for your analogy would be one where a minute is required to read and understand a perhaps non-obvious system, but this system then can be used with much improved utility for years to come (e.g. the permissions thing, above). It is indeed a modern folly to want everything immediately with no effort, and the consequence to efficiency over a long time is often a reduction. Of course there may be some cases where a changed interface is an improvement for all users: it just happens that the various changes complained about here are NOT in this category. Please don't succumb to this silly demand, but keep KDE _powerful_ (as it claims to be in its blurb). "and how does making something elegant make it dumb?" In itself, it doesn't (what a surprise). But this is a rather strange question for you to ask if you imagine it to have any relevance to the current thread! The fact is, changes such as the permissions dialogue and "advanced" buttons have _not_ made anything elegant -- they have simply made it ugly, clunky, less effective, and .... dumb (in that Germanic and American sense in which it is meant in the phrase "dumbing down"). Some other changes such as sub-menus for the create-new option in konqueror _do_ seem more elegant and just as efficient and clear, and therefore are good. Spending development work on making things like khtml render properly (i.e. catch up with Safari peoples' help and with gecko) or kword be reliable (else adapt OpenOffice rather than reinventing the wheel again) would surely be much more worthwhile to practically all users than pseudo-simplifying interface aspects that can so much more easily be messed up by distributors if they want them that way. Finally, I _do_ appreciate the work that has gone into KDE; it is still for many uses much the best of all the many desktops I have met. So thank you for your work; my complaints/suggestions are intended to prevent a barrage of complaints of "it's too difficult" causing the destruction of clear, unix-like and sensible KDE components in the absence of any noise from the other side of the argument. And I don't just disbelieve you about the impossibility of different user modes, I am simply interested in what real reasons there are against the idea.
Re: modes to hide "complicated" things - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-16
i'm just going to reply to the bit about user levels. actually, i'm just going to link to me replying to others asking about levels ;-) http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=99616536430498&w= http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-usability&m=101408630928215&w=2
user levels don't work? - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-16
OK, thanks for the links. It is a good point that a set of a few generalised levels will surely give a lot of users things they didn't want. And a mere "old unix-style" versus "graphics only" would certainly have this potential problem even if it would solve the currently disputed problems with names permissions and konsole buttons. I shall suggest, lower down the list, a modification.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - ac - 2004-02-15
Totally agree. Unfortunately Aaron basically just said he's going to totally ignore arguments not in favor of his position. Apparently only the ones that agree with his position are logical enough. :P
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
that isn't what i said at all. if you were to actually follow threads on the mailing lists that i'm involved in you will notice a couple things: 1) i don't only agree with what agrees with me; which is to say i often arrive at different conclusions than that which i started with. your accusations that i'm unreasonable are borne of ignorance. i can excuse ignorance, but i can't excuse you drawing conclusions based on it. 2) i am usually the first to ask for corroberatory evidence when positions are taken, and i'm often the first to provide it as well. as i'm doing with Konqueror's web browsing toolbar layout, for instance. have you submitted your data yet? no? then you have nothing to complain about. 3) i only ignore arguments that have no basis. or would you rather that i listen to lunatics and morons instead of consider the well informed conclusions by people who bother to educate themselves and put some effort into it? however, i must agree that picking on me is fun, isn't it? ;-)
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
Here are the things I notice: 1. I never previously saw a post from anyone on the dot (and yes, I don't sit on the devel lists so I don't know what goes on in those) complaining about how hard kde is to use and how having the konsole button confuses them. But I do now see some support for putting it back now it is removed. 2. Same with directories/folders argument. 3. Same with the permissions dialogue. Nathaniel Taylor's suggestion of a customisation at first login seems excellent to me. Are you an old-school UNIX user? If yes, add konsole to the kicker, use directory instead of folder and make the file permissions dialogue behave sensibly. If not, remove konsole from kicker, use windows terminology and make whatever other "simplifications" you want to make. If KDE really does want to cater for everyone, then I think it is fair to assume at least two different customisation levels for user knowledge. What do people think of this suggestion? Is it a possible way forward throught these disagreements? (and no, before anyojne suggests it, I don't have time to help code it up.) Cheers, Paul
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Aaron J. Seigo - 2004-02-15
user levels don't work, but i do think that we can provide means to cater to more than one audience simultaneously through a more intelligent interface. and no, i don't mean switching the order of widgets in a control panel or removing options or even just giving up =) people willing to help gather information on Real World usage, design and implement interfaces and use-driven concepts are more than welcome, indeed *encouraged* to subscribe to the kde-usability list and start participating.
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Paul D. Mitcheson - 2004-02-15
Aaron, Are you talking about some interface which learns how the user works? Paul
Re: DEFAULT kde (konsole discussion - Eric Laffoon - 2004-02-17
Like I have time to subscribe to another list when I can't read much of the ones I'm on. I already don't get enough work done, so I hope I can trust bright guys like you to do the right thing. I know you're willing to take the heat, you know I respect you and we both know that we usually have similar opinions. So I'm just going to say a simple thing by way of reference. We need to be careful what we assume the average user won't want because it can have a way of coming back unexpectedly. For instance... people complained about the size of installed distros and many distros began not installing development packages (include files) unless you selected "developer install". This was on the assumption that most people don't compile their programs... which is true. However I get frequent questions from users who want to know what "X includes not found" or some other error means. In fact for a lot of users this becomes "passive lock in" because even though they have RPMs on a CD they can install to make it work they won't realize that or make that basic effort. While it's true that it's not that hard to execute a few clicks for users to open a console, like the install issue we're operating on the theory of either apathy or ignorance (not in a bad way) reducing the likelihood. As I've said before, to help a user it is often most reliable and straight forward to tell them to open a console and give them the commands to execute because they can get confused navigating files. It's hard to get confused copying and pasting. All of us that love the konsole now most likely discovered it at some time when we did not know it and possibly had little concept of it's power and elegance. By making this move we drive our user base in really a revisionist direction on the assumption that the use of this screen space is substantially annoying or useless. Note how much feedback this has generated. I can't help but note that if you're talking 32 x 32 icons that's 1024 pixels out of 480,000 pixels on the minimum 800x600 screen. That's 4% of a panel and 0.2% of a screen. Amazing... this is the biggest thing in KDE this week. It reminds me of the saying you can tell the size of a man by the size of a thing that makes him angry. (Often referencing a golf ball.) In any case, if I were to believe the 5% of users argument it still beats 4% of the panel in my book, not to mention whether the total number of console users grows or shrinks. At one time I didn't understand the gear shift on a car... fortunately it was not moved to the trunk to save space. We should encourage exploration here. That's my 0.2 cents ;-)
modification - Nathaniel Taylor - 2004-02-16
In the light of the above links about user levels failing because of a user's possibly very different abilities/needs in different areas: Good point -- a small number of hardwired user-settings could cause much trouble. So, why not: ** offer initial options of a (perhaps strongly marked) default -- KDE's currently favoured configuration -- and others such as very-GUI, unix-keen etc. ** make initial settings of toolbar, possibly terminology, menu depth and style, styles of various dialogues, based on the answer to this option NEW**** have a kcontrol submenu that allows aspects not easily reverted manually (e.g. konsole _is_ easy just to change) to be changed so that having selected the global configuration supposedly closest to his/her needs a user can fine-tune the KDE behaviour. Things in this menu should be various dialogue styles, un-nesting of "advanced" options, terminology, etc. The advantages: -- Presence of the fine controls in kcontrol allows a far wider user base to have a final system they really like; this is not conveniently possible now, as we can't change things like "advanced" nesting and dialogue style except in the source code. -- Presence of initial coarse settings (unix-style, very-GUI etc) reduce greatly the average time taken per user in getting the system as desired, since many aspects are then correct with one click. -- There is still no cause for the claim that anything would be hidden/unuseable ; if an option appears as missing, the relevant control to change the style of that component can readily be found. -- KDE will finally be properly configurable in every way. Being able to set one's preferred style of _every_ significant type of menu or dialogue in kcontrol would take it well on the way to configurability -- Nobody who doens't like the new options need even look at them or do anything other than agree on the default KDE settings. So these people are better off than now, while many others benefit. And, -- If two peoples' setups are so different they can't use each others' desktops, why a problem? Users should have their own settings as best suits them. So, please don't reject on grounds of splintered KDE - it is much more important that every user should not have to be bugged by hated styles of menus and so on that that every menu should be the same for all users. -- This suggested system is not very different from the initial "unix, kde, mac" options currently used - these also set fine controls to preset patterns. It just adds menu/dialogue configurability. Please comment/modify/tear-up-with-more-points/implement(!)
Directory --> Folder - Tim Vail - 2004-02-16
I do not care either way, but I wonder if this argument even happening in...any other language other than English! Tim Vail
Re: Directory --> Folder - Henrique Pinto - 2004-02-16
Some languages already did it that way before the decision was taken, some followed the decision soon after. But it's up to the translators.
QA and TQM again - James Richard Tyrer - 2004-02-16
First I am advised that the way that pop-up windows interact with tabbed browsing is a deliberate design. If you don't like this, please vote for my bug: http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73361 You also might want to read some of the developer comments there. The QA Team is starting. There appears to be an organized effort for PIM: http://kde.ground.cz/tiki-index.php?page=Quality+Team+KDE+PIM Some of this is at odds with the way that I have been told that developers work, so to start with, we can see how large the problem is. It has come to my attention that the anti-TQM ideas are also embedded in the page titled: "A KDE Bug's Life Cycle": http://bugs.kde.org/bug_status.html Specifically, bugs need to be confirmed on the current release and they should not be considered to be fixed until this is confirmed on the next stable release. So, I direct your attention to: RESOLVED / VERIFIED / CLOSED The bug has been fixed in the KDE CVS and the fix will be part of the next KDE release. Does this indicate simply optimism or also ignorance? In any case it needs to be changed. Also: Priority This field describes the importance and order in which a bug should be fixed. This field is utilized by the programmers/engineers to prioritize their work to be done. The logic of this totally escapes me. Getting back to the WIKI: The job of a Bug List Maintainer would be to review incoming reports, to try to reproduce the bugs, to gather missing information, to identify duplicates and to keep track of development in order to keep the bug list in sync with the actual development. Absolutely correct! It should then be obvious that the "Bug List Maintainer*, not the Developer should determine the priority of bugs. How should we do this -- how should it be determined who is a Bug List Maintainer and which one is assigned to a bug? Will constructive anarchy work, or is some organization needed? Someone posted that TQM had to be forced on people. Possibly, but the question is whether after it is forced on them that they ever want to go back to working without it? But, first, we need to have some QA. And, to have TQM we have to have some method, it isn't sufficient just to say that everyone is responsible to test their own work since at the present time they don't do it and some of them don't even underand that they need to. -- JRT
Re: QA and TQM again - Nicolas Goutte - 2004-02-16
If you do not like the texts then please bug Bugzilla (http://bugzilla.org/). Be careful that some of the texts were already changed in newer versions of Bugzilla, as it can be seen on Mozilla's: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bug_status.html Have a nice day!
Re: QA and TQM again - James Richard Tyrer - 2004-02-16
I think that Nicolas' point is that BugZilla doesn't say the same thing: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bug_status.html: RESOLVED A resolution has been taken, and it is awaiting verification by QA. From here bugs are either re-opened and become REOPENED, or are marked VERIFIED. VERIFIED QA has looked at the bug and the resolution and agrees that the appropriate resolution has been taken. Any zombie bugs who choose to walk the earth again must do so by becoming REOPENED. I was proceding on the assumption that the KDE version of that web page was different because it had been changed. -- JRT
Re: QA and TQM again - Datschge - 2004-02-18
No, it looks like being adapted because the version on bugs.kde.org is grossly outdated as you could easily see when checking the CVS entry. In general you should worry more about how people work regardless of some written "rules" barely anyone ever read instead thinking that "rules" and not thoughts somehow controls how people behave. That being said you do have a point that all documentation on bugs.kde.org are not adapted at all, are rather quite misleading like in your case and thus shouldn't be linked to to begin with. Considering that I wanted to tackle it a year ago but didn't get to do so for whatever reasons you can blame me for this.
Re: QA and TQM again - James Richard Tyrer - 2004-02-18
I don't want to blame you for this. Stuff on my to do list isn't getting done either. My problem with it is that I was criticized for using my professional judgment in trying to maintain bugs -- I was told that I needed to follow the page which you say is somewhat outdated. I thought that a bug with over 100 votes was somewhat important so I raised the priority 1 step from Normal to High. My bad :-( When you get around to it, do please consider the QA issues. Specifically, that a bug should not be considered fixed just because it currently works in HEAD. As the Mozilla page indicates, it is only fixed when a stable release is released that has if fixed. -- JRT
Re: QA and TQM again - Datschge - 2004-02-18
I consider the status, votes, priority and severity fields as being independent from each other. Votes are popularity driven and a good way to show interested parties which issues are "burning" for the audience. Severity is completely technical and should reflect the, well, technical severity of the issue. Priority is a tool for developers to set how soon which issue should be tackled. Status is in my opinion the only part which should be handled also by a QA team, there is the currently barely used item VERIFIED which should be used for verifying that issues are solved for real on the user's level, and the amount of UNCONFIRMED issues need to be reduced as well. Issues should continue to be marked FIXED when they happen to work in HEAD since otherwise you would need to go through all open issues at once whenever HEAD is being branched for a release, and we already don't have the manpower to handle the current amount wrt the UNCONFIRMED issues. Bugs FIXED in HEAD but not backported ideally should be mentioned as such though.
Re: QA and TQM again - Anonymous - 2004-02-21
The description of RESOLVED/VERIFIED/CLOSED differ compared to the default in older and current Bugzilla versions because the text was actually adapted to how it's used by the KDE project (having no QA department in opposite to Mozilla) - so it's not outdated.
Re: QA and TQM again - Datschge - 2004-02-22
It was adapted to the few changes done to bugzilla in the week when bugzilla had been adapted as bug tracking tool for KDE. But it retained the rule set feeling from the original bugzilla page, and as such it's grossly misleading since it doesn't reflect how KDE's bug tracker is actually used and had been used since those adaptions had been done. Anyway I pledge to update it accordingly soon.