23 Aug
2009
23 Aug
'09
8:06 p.m.
While I don't agree with the tone of some of the
replies you received (I
do appreciate what you are doing here) I need to respond to this
particular point.
Excellent, your opinion of the situation is by far the most informed
opinion that I expect to hear here!
I *am* developing KDE3. If you look in the PPA that I
maintain, you will
see a whole slew of my patches that add new features, fix old bugs, and
generally keep the code compilable and functional as the backend libraries
change over time.
While I was aware that you were cleaning up the bitrot to maintain
compatibility with certain libraries as time moves on, I did not
realize that you are performing actual bugfixes and adding new
features. However, that is great for KDE users of [k]Ubuntu, not KDE
in general. I would argue that you are maintaining Kubuntu. Have you
considered contacting a KDE representative and releasing KDE 3.5.11 or
even KDE 3.6? Would you like me to see exactly how that would be done?
My intention is not to belittle the effort that you are investing for
the community. Quite the opposite, believe me, I respect your effort,
your time, and your dedication more than most. And those who don't,
will, should the day come when you can no longer maintain the project.
(tfu tfu tfu).
Now, from all appearances, *if* I were to stop
development then yes, KDE
would bitrot and become unusable--purely because no one else has stepped
forward to assist.
So it only takes one bus accident?
I use KDE3.5 for a different purpose than some. My
desktop is configured
to look, feel, and act like an enhanced version of Windows XP in "Classic"
mode. Like it or not, and I know many would argue with me, Microsoft had
one of the best desktop interfaces available with that release. If they
hadn't abandoned it, I would still be an avid Microsoft user.
They hadn't. Isn't it an option in Windows today? I have never used
Vista or 7, but my Windows XP VM uses the lightweight, readable
Classic interface.
Likewise, I know I will be argued with up and down on
this, but KDE4
seems, from a look-n-feel perspective only, to be a hybrid of Windows
Vista and the latest Mac OS. I hate those two operating systems. In
almost every design choice. Period.
I have not used the two OSes that you compare KDE 4 to, but I very
much enjoy KDE 4.3. We are branching into three fronts, so I will
separate them:
1) What it looks like:
I agree that KDE 4 looks like Mac and Vista. That does not bother me
as I have no grudge against those systems.
2) How it is operated:
I do not know how Vista / OS-X are operated, but I find KDE 4.3 to be
less intuitive than KDE 3.5. This is a point in which the KDE 3
holdouts can help! The KDE devs, and even myself, are so used to KDE
4. after working with it for so long that we don't see what is not
intuitive anymore. Let me know what you find unintuitive (like the
panel configuration) and I will file bugs on it. This is very
important, and only the KDE 3 holdouts can help here.
3) What it can do:
I can do everything in KDE 4.3 that I could in KDE 3. I may do some of
them differently, but all can get done. However, for _you_ it might be
different, and I need to know what is missing for _you_ in KDE 4.
I am not alone here. Many engineers I have talked
with do not like the
new interface. There are some of us who use a GUI simply because more
information can be placed on it, and many tasks made faster, than the
command line. Gnome and KDE4 don't have very much *useful* and *relevant*
information on the screen at any given time. These people have also
mentioned that the interface has a clunky feel, that they are having
difficulty just getting basic tasks done in a streamlined, efficient
fashion. Simply, more clicks required in the UI per task == more time
wasted.
I would love to hear the details. If you prefer off-list, I'm here. If
you write off list then please write to the address kb9vqf at
dotancohen d o t c o m. Thanks.
The clunkiness has a direct impact on this. The DE
should recede into the
background, not constantly push its way into the foreground. When it
shoves its way into the users programs, in the form of excessively large
menu bars, taskbars, and buttons, valuable screen space is stolen from the
user's application, forcing more scrolling, window management operations,
and application menu use inside the user's program.
I do not feel that what you describe is the case with KDE 4.3. I do
not like the toolbar buttons' default to having the text shown as well
as the icon, but other than that I do not find the interface to be
excessively large.
This is a common flaw with the new direction all
desktops seem to be
heading in. They are all pretty (well, actually, the Mac OS is pretty,
while Vista and KDE4 are really ugly), and seem to work well--until you
try to use them in your job, when you have 4 clients and 2 managers
demanding you get X, Y, and Z done *NOW*. Then you find that in order to
multitask in any sensible form you will need to learn to click constantly,
everywhere, and end up purchasing a really big replacement monitor. Yet,
somehow, your old monitor was perfectly adequate under Windows XP and
KDE3.5. Your programs haven't changed. So why again is your DE forcing
you to buy new hardware and slowing you down?
I am not doubting you, but I do not perceive this problem with KDE 4.
Can you maybe send to me a screenshot of the same interface elements
in both KDE 3 and 4 for comparison (the defaults). I will take it up
on the usability list. Your assumptions and statements are correct in
the general sense, but I fail to see where that they apply to KDE 4.
I have even caused some older folks, who have used
Windows since it came
out, to switch to Linux. How? By showing them a truly better desktop
interface: Windows XP classic + some sorely needed features--in other
words, KDE3.5. They all hated where Windows was going, and Mac was too
limiting.
I have seen this too, with MS Office users flocking to OOo.
So, rant aside, try adding a "super-tiny-taskbar,
icons, buttons, and
menus" option.
I will file a bug on that, and I will mention it on the usability list.
Also make an "angular buttons option" so
that they can be
compacted on the screen the way they always were. (Actually IIRC that
last one finally does exist in KDE3).
Please be very specific, I will file a feature request.
Also, make it so that the shiny stuff can be turned
off. Menu drop
shadows are OK, but shiny rounded menus are distracting.
That is configurable in KDE 4.3.
Bring back the old KDE control center.
The KDE 4.3 System Settings has the familiar tree menu. In that
configuration, it resembles Kcontrol very well. If there are other
elements of Kcontrol that you miss, please tell me what they are.
Bring back task tray icons as plasmoid replacements.
I DON'T LIKE having
to minimize my windows (an extra click) to get at something critical like
the network manager plasmoid and then have to un-minimize them all again
when I am done (another extra click).
The network manager plasmoid could have been on your panel. In any
case, it is now in the system tray. But I understand your point in
general, however each fix needs an individual bug report. So lay 'em
on! Which functionality that you have on the panel in KDE 3 cannot be
had on the panel in KDE 4.3?
To say nothing of having to check
connectivity in another program and then go back to the plasmoid....click
click click click click....grrrr...Windows was so much better... This is
a massive waste of the user's time and is, bluntly, a really, really
stupid design decision. You NEVER want to make the users think what I
just wrote.
It is not like that anymore, at least, not for the network manager.
I like putting icons on my desktop. Only icons. Can
we turn off that
stupid cashew yet?
No. Sorry. Write to Aaron personally on that one!
The UI fonts are way too large.
So change them! I think that they're great, and of the 5-10 KDE
4.[2|3] installs that I have performed for people, the only ones who
mentioned the fonts were those who liked them.
Why can't I *easily* and *intuitively* reconfigure
something as basic as
my desktop???
Because you haven't complained to _me_ yet! Seriously, be specific
about what is unintuitive and I will file the bugs. I agreet hat KDE 4
is not yet intuitive enough but the devs are used to it: they need
_you_ to tell them what is not intuitive.
You get the point. Many of these items are design
decisions that the
developers made to "set KDE4 apart". I don't think they will be fixed
anytime soon. Feel free to surprise me though! :-)
I have been pleasantly surprised by KDE 4.2 and 4.3, the devs are
really starting to take into consideration what the users want. Just
let me know what that is.
Thanks, Timothy, I look forward to hearing the specifics.
--
Dotan Cohen
http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il