16 Aug
2018
16 Aug
'18
6:16 a.m.
On 08/14/2018 03:01 PM, andre_debian(a)numericable.fr
wrote:
Well said
prof.
Umm, may I have me soapbox back now?
Kate
Seriously, well said.
Somebody told me on tnis list, that TDE was based
on Icewm.
(if I understood correctly).
Chuckling.... (you didn't)
That would be the same as saying KDE was based on IceWm. IceWm as well =
as
Blackbox (and its forks, Fluxbox, Openbox, etc.. -- the boxtops) were ori=
ginal
code. Neither were Qt3 based. TDE was a continuation of KDE3 based on Qt3=
.
Information and history on all are available online (Wikipedia is a good =
start).
While both IceWm and Blackbox (and its progeny) are very, very good win=
dow
managers, they are not "Desktop Environments". That is a critical distinc=
tion.
KDE and Gnome were considered desktop environments as they included a n=
ice
set of integrated desktop applications (terminals, editors, calculators, =
color
choosers, file managers, etc..) with a common look and feel provided by t=
he
toolkits they use (Qt3 in the case of KDE3 and Gtk+2 in the case of Gnome=
2, etc..)
TDE continued the mature KDE3 build on Qt3, that kde.org basically
"left-for-dead" when it went chasing this pipe-dream of Qt4 widgets makin=
g the
world a better place to live. (much as Gtk+3 did with Gtk+2/glade when it=
ran
off with GtkBuildable and css styling of objects)
TDE, in an inspired bit of forethought, was written with a somewhat too=
lkit
agnostic tqtinterface layer to prevent being limited to Qt3 only. However=
,
since KDE4 has become synonymous with "How to totally botch a desktop", t=
he
impetus on toolkit flexibility has lost a bit of necessity. Qt3 was a rob=
ust
and well written toolkit and there nothing it lacks inherently and what
security and maintenance is needed is provided in-house.
So in short, TDE was a continuation of KDE 3.5.10 which was left for de=
ad by
kde.org and relegated to desktop history. Now kde.org has abandoned KDE4 =
and
"left-it-for-dead" (though it that case, I doubt you will see anyone run =
in to
try and save it....)
Those intimately familiar with desktops, recognized what had been achie=
ved
with KDE3 was special, in terms of flexibility and efficiency and the hum=
an
factors taken into the desktop design that minimize the keystrokes or
mouse-clicks required to do a task, and how that philosophy shared by the=
team
created not only the desktop interface itself, but was also evident in ea=
ch of
the applications developed as a part of the project. KDE3 was the result =
of
that ground-up process, the desktop and all of the application that made =
up
the environment benefiting from that process in terms of usability and ef=
ficiency.
It is something that can never be captured in a "Let's move to a new to=
olkit
and port all the applications over" effort. Every time that has been
attempted, it invariably results is a "just get it ported and working... =
and
let's get a release out" mentality that cannot, and will never, achieve t=
he
same efficiency or usability that a ground-up design did. Thus KDE4 could=
n't
and Plasma never will match the elegance, the integration or the usabilty=
of
the KDE3 desktop environment.
TDE continues the best of KDE3 -- that's why you are here.
--=20
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------