Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, features and reliability, while R14 is not there yet. By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , almost all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep R14 in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes desktop or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set of feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the stability of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It wolud have been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE, but it seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a single check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need some explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
Just one man's opinion... Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, features and reliability, while R14 is not there yet. By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , almost all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep R14 in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes desktop or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set of feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the stability of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It wolud have been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE, but it seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a single check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need some explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
Just one man's opinion... Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes, TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all, to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability, features and reliability, while R14 is not there yet. By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ , almost all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep R14 in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes desktop or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set of feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the stability of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It would have been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE, but it seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a single check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need some explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
Just one man's opinion... Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes, TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all, to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
Hi,
Of course, the introduction of the new hardware platform is not what causes problems and yes, over the time and releases, R14 will get back to the reliability of 3.5.13.2.
But with all the renaming issues (which does not improve TDE at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would have been better used for things that are not under the hood only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era, but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better (Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't means that it has removed features to MATE or that their website is unusable.
-Alexandre
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 09:02:37PM -0500, Alexandre Couture wrote:
... I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
[Alexandre continues:]
But with all the renaming issues (which does not improve TDE at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would have been better used for things that are not under the hood only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era, but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better (Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't means that it has removed features to MATE or that their website is unusable.
My preference is just the opposite. I want UI windows to look as simple as possible, so they don't distract the eye and brain from their contents, which is what's important. I want window frames to be of settable thickness, and to have settable colors for the frame and top ("handle") of 1. the selected window, and 2. all the other windows. Plus the usual widgets for min/max etc. That's _all_.
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and NO MORE.
It doesn't matter whether TDE is "appealing" to new users or not. New users don't know what's good for them. Hopefully they will eventually learn from explanations in the TDE website and forums, and other discussion areas with experienced Linux users.
I like KDE3/TDE because it doesn't distract or get in the way of perception and thinking. TDE should cater to people who _think_. That's what Unix/Linux is _for_. And KDE3/TDE may be the only DE left that does it.
Non-thinkers can waste their time and money on MS-Windows or a Mac, or on some other Linux DE like KDE4 which provides over 100 bling adjustments, but has made multiple virtual desktops -- the most important Linux feature for thinking and working -- _unusable_ (because the desktop names are not readable in the desktop-pager buttons). I use all 20 desktops, named Mail, Music, Website, Ruby, etc., each with programs running in it appropriate to its specific work, and konsoles/mcs in it pointing at relevant directories for that work. This enables me to totally switch contexts with a single trackball click. KDE4 is utterly unable to do this.
There is no reason to "modernize" a UI except to give it more actual and _needed_ functionality. If people want to see something pretty on their computer screen, they can display a picture or video in a window or in the background. It should not be part of the window structure or UI in general, because that would distract the eye and the mind during the execution of _every_ task.
I suspect that many people -- experienced Unix/Linux users -- choose TDE and stay with it because they have similar preferences. If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could actually result in a loss of users.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind. It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
On 11/16/13, Mark S Bilk mark@cosmicpenguin.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 09:02:37PM -0500, Alexandre Couture wrote:
... I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive to new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more popularity. As well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not good, changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
[Alexandre continues:]
But with all the renaming issues (which does not improve TDE at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would have been better used for things that are not under the hood only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era, but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better (Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't means that it has removed features to MATE or that their website is unusable.
My preference is just the opposite. I want UI windows to look as simple as possible, so they don't distract the eye and brain from their contents, which is what's important. I want window frames to be of settable thickness, and to have settable colors for the frame and top ("handle") of 1. the selected window, and 2. all the other windows. Plus the usual widgets for min/max etc. That's _all_.
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and NO MORE.
It doesn't matter whether TDE is "appealing" to new users or not. New users don't know what's good for them. Hopefully they will eventually learn from explanations in the TDE website and forums, and other discussion areas with experienced Linux users.
I like KDE3/TDE because it doesn't distract or get in the way of perception and thinking. TDE should cater to people who _think_. That's what Unix/Linux is _for_. And KDE3/TDE may be the only DE left that does it.
Non-thinkers can waste their time and money on MS-Windows or a Mac, or on some other Linux DE like KDE4 which provides over 100 bling adjustments, but has made multiple virtual desktops -- the most important Linux feature for thinking and working -- _unusable_ (because the desktop names are not readable in the desktop-pager buttons). I use all 20 desktops, named Mail, Music, Website, Ruby, etc., each with programs running in it appropriate to its specific work, and konsoles/mcs in it pointing at relevant directories for that work. This enables me to totally switch contexts with a single trackball click. KDE4 is utterly unable to do this.
There is no reason to "modernize" a UI except to give it more actual and _needed_ functionality. If people want to see something pretty on their computer screen, they can display a picture or video in a window or in the background. It should not be part of the window structure or UI in general, because that would distract the eye and the mind during the execution of _every_ task.
I suspect that many people -- experienced Unix/Linux users -- choose TDE and stay with it because they have similar preferences. If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could actually result in a loss of users.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind. It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
Not to be rude, but Here Here.
I agree entirely. I use baghira for my theme. Colourful, well defined, straight to the point, yet simple. I doesn't get in the way or distracts from the work I'm doing.
I agree with Mark in that thinkers use FOSS. To compete with CSS is a mistake. I build computers and teach peopl to use them for a living. I can tell you my student base is clearly divided by thinkers and blingers. Mac and MS are for blingers who care about looks and nonesense like facebook. There's way too much blingOSs to compete with even if we wanted to. Thinkers are the future. The BlingOS fade will come crashing down because it's hollow. It's pointless to pursue it.
I work on my computer, but I also play, watch movies. My home theatre system is a GNU Linux box connected to a modern LCD TV. I don't bother using the Telli's OS because it's all bling and little function. FOSS can do anything, so long as it isn't dumbed down. I recommend people see the film Idiocracy (2006). My point in suggesting it, will become clear as you see it.
Thank you for your time,
Kate Draven
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote: <big snip>
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers, Glen
From: glen@exemail.com.au To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100 Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip> > > If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. > I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and > NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers, Glen
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid form of human beings.
My two cents ;) -Alexandre
<snip a lot of stuff :-) >
There is nothing wrong with a little bling, or updated "modern" looks, just so long as they are not forced on the user and don't interfere with well-established good work habits.
In other words, bling should be optional for those who want some.
Some like strictly utilitarian, never-changing work environments so they don't have to think about how to do things with the computer. It is all second nature, and the user can get on with his work.
Others like things a little more "interesting" and get bored seeing the same old thing day in and day out. Some people like to constantly experiment with different ways of doing things.
It's all good as long as it's just appearances and the underlying functionality is intact and those who wish to can continue working as they have been without having to undo anything. That is, once again, the bling should be optional.
And individual. Anyone who wants to trick out his or her desktop can do so now. Those who don't want any of that should not have to undo anything.
I personally have a fairly staid desktop. Different desktop images for each virtual desktop, usually a pretty picture of a pretty woman (nothing X-rated, but they sometimes make my daughter roll her eyes :), with weather and system monitor on desktop 1.
I don't get on my computer to admire a desktop.
There's no need to argue about anything here. TDE allows prettyfying already. Different themes, different icons. Whatever.
Can't we all just get along? :-)
Andy
said Andy: | <snip a lot of stuff :-) >
and snip even more . . .
| Some like strictly utilitarian, never-changing work environments so they | don't have to think about how to do things with the computer. It is all | second nature, and the user can get on with his work.
way back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, we had dos and nice little front ends/file managers such as powermenu; we had applications (and could even use, yes, graphics, though at the time if you had 1024x768x256, you were uptown). we wished our machines were a little faster, but hey . . .
and now we have fast machines, but execution isn't any faster -- i can open windows 6 for dos in a dos emulator, including loading the emulator itself, in less time than it takes the current version of word for windows to open in windows (or, to be fair, the word processor in libreoffice to open under a modern linux distribution). what have we gained? an ability to admire the appearance of our words, though i think that something has been lost in our approach to what those words actually are. i know that when i was using word/dos or textmaker i felt far more connected to the words i was writing.
indeed, if i had a single wish for the linux desktop, it would be for the creation of a usable text-based desktop and suite of applications, along with the ability to switch between that desktop and TDE readily. the applications might well apply what ibm used to call "cua" for "common user access" -- consistency among menus, which linux terminal applications most definitely do not enjoy. that this late in the game there's no linux equivalent even of the old dos "edit" application is troubling. terminal applications and a linux equivalent of desqview (anybody here old enough to remember *that*?) would be great.
there was outrage 20 years ago with OS/2 and the outrageous demand that computers running it had at least 8 megs of memory. today, a *video card* with 8 megs of memory is called low-end, if you can find one at all. lord.
my point is, i guess, that we were able to do a lot with an 8088, 640k and no graphics; we were able to do more with a 386, OS/2 and 8 megs. today, with processors orders of magnitude faster and a thousand times as much memory, we're still doing the same things in the same way at the same speed. even "lightweight" systems are enormous. and as GUIs go -- DEC gave us GEM, which ran just fine on any 8088 that had a VGA card, in 1988. and on a 286 it would task switch and on a 386 would multitask. and we're still talking a meg of memory here, not multiple gigs. the multitasking, "cooperative," as in windows 3.x, rather than OS/2's more robust pre-emptive architecture, but still.
what do we have now for our trouble? bling.
sorry -- letting off steam here. it's just that the increase of speed and power of machines has done little but allow programmers and programming languages to become sloppy. object-oriented programming has failed to live up to its promise.
sure ain't what we expected!
here endeth the rant (which is not aimed at TDE folk at all -- more at the KDE4.x craporama and its philosophical equivalents).
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:25 AM, dep dep@drippingwithirony.com wrote:
what do we have now for our trouble? bling.
One of the reasons I am so glad that the Linux kernel and GNU tools are used so widely, is that the people programming for phones, for watches, for supercomputers, personal systems, are all working on what is in essence a common code base.
The power-saving techniques of the battery-dependent are used by the massive data-center-filling mega-blasters because power bills matter.
Even egotistical temper tantrums yield improvements to the central kernel functions. (scheduler)
It would be nice if that same glorious lovingly hand optimized attention was spent making the GUI code tighter, faster, cleaner. But no, because there is no one GUI.
Like the automobile, each GUI programmer, each GUI style, each GUI model-year, they change and fiddle and make things oh so very pretty without concern for such trivial matters as actually getting work done. So while you can find the Austen Mini of GUIs if you try, you're much more likely to see huge tailfins and fancy radiator caps that don't actually do anything to get the work done.
Bling. Bloat. Idle distractions.
sorry -- letting off steam here. it's just that the increase of speed and power of machines has done little but allow programmers and programming languages to become sloppy. object-oriented programming has failed to live up to its promise.
sure ain't what we expected!
Well said.
That apparent waste of resources is also why games have gotten more and more graphical, more and more focused on "frames per second", and less about actual game play.
What was done on two 5.25" floppy disks with StarFlight was spectacular. What those programmers packed into such a small space should serve to humble the people who call themselves "programmers" today, the same way taking a helicopter to the top of Mt. Everest cannot compare to the pioneers who walked the whole way.
The speed of hardware has eliminated any motivation to optimize the user's interface.
here endeth the rant (which is not aimed at TDE folk at all -- more at the KDE4.x craporama and its philosophical equivalents). -- dep
Curt-
Am Sonntag, 17. November 2013 schrieb Alexandre Couture:
From: glen@exemail.com.au To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100 Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers, Glen
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid form of human beings.
My two cents ;) -Alexandre
OMG ... "please fix the batteries of my toy for me, you inferior beeing"
nik
On Sunday 17 November 2013 14:12:07 Alexandre Couture wrote:
From: glen@exemail.com.au To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100 Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip>
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers, Glen
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid form of human beings.
Alexandre,
You really need to be ready to be criticised if you ask for people's opinions. No-one came across to me as rude, except just possibly yourself for this constant carping on the look of Trinity, and thus criticism of the developers.
Most of us are here because we like functionality and dislike bling. Have bling yourself if you want it. But stop trying to force it on the rest of us.
You have over time made it clear that you do not really like Trinity, since you want to destroy one of its greatest assets - it prefers functionality to bling. Last time you brought this up it was suggested to you that you should do your own fork. That would seem a very good option. You could then have it as blingy as you like, with you yourself doing the work.
Meanwhile, give yourself a treat for Christmas. Buy a new computer, install PCLinuxOS with KDE4, Gnome3 and your own fork of Trinity and bask in the bling.
Have a look some time at Knoppix-Adriane. Such things are needed. Whilst Trinity is not specifically aimed at the disabled, it is very disabled-friendly because it is so configurable. Once you have filled the world with bling, where are we to go??
My 2p Lisi
On Sunday 17 November 2013 14:12:07 Alexandre Couture wrote:
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
You would be wise to bear that last comment in mind !
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid form of human beings.
My two cents ;) -Alexandre
Your attack towards the criticism of your post doesn't do you any favors !
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Alexandre Couture wrote:
From: glen@exemail.com.au To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:17:45 +1100 Subject: Re: [trinity-users] "Improving"/"Modernizing" the Look of TDE Considered Harmful
Thanks, Mark.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 15:17:24 Mark S Bilk wrote:
<big snip> > > If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. > I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and > NO MORE.
+1 for this and all the other "Good Stuff"(tm) that you wrote.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old
I will see your 68 and raise you another 10. :-)
Cheers, Glen
For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker. Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways. Are you a misfit? How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
Some respects for the others is needed.
People who says that they are not superficial are the most superficial ones, because when they see someone who they think are superficial, they cannot (and don't want to) see further than the surface and they automatically think that they are the most stupid form of human beings.
My two cents ;) -Alexandre
the post didn't seem rude to me, just blunt in an American and Australian style of writing -- admittedly, it can seem rude to others.
but the reference to 'thinkers' was inept but I doubt it was meant to imply that _you_ are not a thinker!
I would rather say that the Trinity interface is "really good for thinkers," "designed for thinkers," and without prejudice to people with other preferences, it can be recommended as such.
(as an aside, I don't see the problem though in calling oneself a 'thinker'. it's not like boasting of one's humility! and it would be a blunder if I thought saying I'm not superficial is saying something deep otherwise no problem in it.)
anyway the OP can speak for himself but I hope we don't let this spoil good relations.
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
I am also interested in suggestions that enhance function.
and yes, it is time for another contribution.
F.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:44:53 Felmon Davis wrote:
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
So you concur that TDE looks old-fashioned and should change?
I am also interested in suggestions that enhance function.
So you want the look to change, but TDE to remain functional?? That is interesting. I think that in the end bling and functionality make poor companions because they appeal to different people on the whole.
For some of us bling actually hampers functionality, and the designers of bling appear to have little interest in how the thing works. (In my experience the same applies nowadays to cookers and kitchen sinks - functionality is being abandoned on the altar of bling!)
Lisi
On 11/17/2013 03:12 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
For some of us bling actually hampers functionality, and the designers
of bling appear to have little interest in how the thing works. (In my experience the same applies nowadays to cookers and kitchen sinks - functionality is being abandoned on the altar of bling!)<
Can we agree that bling needs to be subordinate to functionality/interface/workflow?
It's not that TDE doesn't have any bling -- it's that it's bling isn't the latest set of flavors of bling.
...That and that we still have a desktop instead of pretending every device is a telephone or pad.
...And what used to be considered a CPU and RAM intensive environment has, over time, mimicked other systems once considered to be bloated -- like Multics, which is insanely tiny by today's standards.
First and foremost,/I believe/ we need to not break people's workflow or settings. I'm all in favor of expanding the range of possible visual styles.
We've always been heavily tweakable. I could appreciate adding some carefully considered additional features and options that don't impart my workflow or force me to make aesthetic changes I don't want.
We're old school and heavily customizable. These would be counterproductive to change as they are our 'why.'
We should feature what TDE is, not run from it.
James Gholston
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:44:53 Felmon Davis wrote:
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
So you concur that TDE looks old-fashioned and should change?
I was addressing Alexandre about Glen's remarks. the 'his' refers to Glen's remarks, not Alexandre's.
I am also interested in suggestions that enhance function.
So you want the look to change, but TDE to remain functional?? That is interesting. I think that in the end bling and functionality make poor companions because they appeal to different people on the whole.
For some of us bling actually hampers functionality, and the designers of bling appear to have little interest in how the thing works. (In my experience the same applies nowadays to cookers and kitchen sinks - functionality is being abandoned on the altar of bling!)
I also concur with _your_ remarks except I know nothing about cookers and I've got no altar in my kitchen.
F.
On Sunday 17 November 2013 22:27:36 Felmon Davis wrote:
From: Felmon Davis davisf@union.edu To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Today 22:27:36 Now: 17:31 Afternoon
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:44:53 Felmon Davis wrote:
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
So you concur that TDE looks old-fashioned and should change?
I was addressing Alexandre about Glen's remarks. the 'his' refers to Glen's remarks, not Alexandre's.
That's what I thought. But you said "the OP"*, so I drew attention to it so that you could clarify it - for me and for others!!
Lisi *
anyway the OP can speak for himself but I hope we don't let this spoil good relations.
that said, I wholly concur with his opinion though.
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 09:12:07AM -0500, Alexandre Couture wrote:
... For people who think that they are thinkers, first of all, you cannot say yourself that you are a thinker.
Actually, you can, if you have sufficient understanding of thinking and consciousness, and if you can observe and think about your own mind and its functioning. Here's my summary of the process:
Critical Thinking
1 Hold your own mind and thinking processes as objects of your thinking. Gurdjieff called this "self-observation".
2 Realize that what you think is true is actually a _model_ of reality, which may be inaccurate in many ways.
3 Realize that you can _change_ that model to make it more accurate.
4 Access all the sources of information that you can find. This is essential because many sources are full of untruths (some of which may be self-serving).
5 Understand and apply the Principle of Non-Contradiction: An assertion and its negative cannot both be true.
6 Compare the information in the sources you access with your current model of reality, and use the Principle of Non-Contradiction to determine the truth and falsehood of the information in those sources and in your current model.
7 Update your model of reality so it contains the most accurate information you've found in the comparisons.
8 Goto step 1.
There are more versions here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
Second, if you were a thinker, you would not talk or write to someone in such rude, hostile and unrespectful ways.
I began by saying, "My preference is just the opposite." Not my "demands", or "the truth". I don't think I was "rude", etc.
Are you a misfit?
Some have said so. I tell the truth as clearly as I can, which sometimes gets me chased out of nine villages. 8^)
How can you talk to other humans beings while keeping some mutual trust and good relations?
By avoiding expressions of personal hostility, by using basic politeness where it doesn't compromise the truth, and by talking about ideas, not people (unless the ideas _involve_ people).
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."
-- Eleanor Roosevelt
Mark
<SNIP>
I suspect that many people -- experienced Unix/Linux users -- choose TDE and stay with it because they have similar preferences. If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could actually result in a loss of users.
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind. It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
Well said, Mark. I despise Win 7/8 for the reasons you mention. I'm just forced to use them. The ONLY thing that TDE could change is support in the kicker for larger icons (to make it more Xandros looking).
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Mark S Bilk mark@cosmicpenguin.com wrote:
If that's the way windows looked in 1995 or 2005, that's fine. I want things to look just fancy enough to be effective and NO MORE.
Back in the ancient days of yore, when graphics cards didn't do their own processing and swap space was critically important to running more than one program at a time, the idea behind the GUI was to improve the user's access to the applications.
It is the applications that are important. Is my purpose to wander through the customization lists and options? Or is it to read my email, to use "The Tao Of Programming", in the way which astonishes least?
In my opinion the KDE team more than a decade ago found a good balance between bling and getting out of the way. In the years that have passed, the system resources required to run more and more bling have become trivial. Yet that balance exists not because of computing resources, but because the more bling there is, the more of my mind is taken up perceiving that bling, rather than doing what I am here to do.
I like KDE3/TDE because it doesn't distract or get in the way of perception and thinking. TDE should cater to people who _think_. That's what Unix/Linux is _for_. And KDE3/TDE may be the only DE left that does it.
Xfce is doing quite well in that regard. Yet there is something clunky about it. Trinity still feels like it "gets out of the way" better for me.
I run Xfce on two laptops for my kids, for disk space reasons. Using the Thunar file manager makes me long for the effectiveness of Konqueror.
I was reminded of this recently when I wanted to access files in a different machine, and simply typed "fish://server/" in Konqueror and it just worked. No games, no tweaks, no fiddles. Simple functionality.
I use all 20 desktops, named Mail, Music, Website, Ruby, etc.
Yet the first thing I do is turn off such "Workspaces". I learned UNIX with olvwm and multiple desktops, and it just doesn't fit how I use it today.
I do have multiple tabs open in Konsole, each with a different purpose, so maybe we're not quite so different after all. :^)
If that's true, then "improving"/"modernizing" its UI could actually result in a loss of users.
As the KDE team did when abandoning KDE3, for example? :^)
I apologize for my bluntness here. I don't mean to tread on anyone's toes. I'm 68 years old and don't have time anymore to sugar-coat things. Linux is a superb adjunct to the human mind. It's vital for that to continue.
Mark
My first Linux was Debian in 1995, I started using KDE in 2000. It does seem that the flash-bang-bling appeals to those who, politely put, have the time to waste on it.
Many thanks to Pearson and the TDE team for keeping alive this excellent balance between bling and simplicity. Time, I guess, to make another donation.
Curt-
--snipping just everything----
..and try to bring it to this point:
I was to abandon KDE totally as I saw what the KDE4 had made of it: ALL the things I hate about Windows, was copied in there (at least that was my first impression). So TDE is the only chance to keep alive what I loved with KDE3 (BECAUSE it is al the things mentioned by others, NOT dispite).
Another note to that: my mom is 70+ (and a PC newbe since years) try to tell HER that KDE4 is the next KDE3 and she will tell you, that she more likely thinks these are totally different Computers.
Change happens, I know, but that dosen't mean it's allways good!
So if you like fancy TDE just isn't the right pass for you..
--snipping just everything----
I'm using TDE because it's the last UI which is so configurable and is so easily configurable. In many modern desktops, developers literally tell you "don't touch our UI". Sometimes they add silently "but buy a new hardware" as for example Firefox radical UI cuts in their newest invention (will be introduced to stable in few months) make it unusable in small notebooks, in which you need a match to right-click. I'm not against improving UI, but I think the first rule sould never be making it as developer think will be good, because developer has one method of working with computer and users have different. The main principle should be to offer new things as an option. Then users will choose what is best for them, their workflows and their hardware. Another example: I'm always working with files. TDE allows me to rename a file with two clicks (rename in-place option). In most modern desktop environments developers removed this option, as they think that programs for batch renaming are better. As today (and it won't change so quickly) these programs won't rename a photo according to object in the picture. Marek W.
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability,
features
and reliability, while R14 is not there yet. By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ ,
almost
all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep
R14
in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes
desktop
or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new set
of
feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the
stability
of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It would
have
been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE,
but it
seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a
single
check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need
some
explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive
to
new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more
popularity. As
well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not
good,
changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
Just one man's opinion... Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes, TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all, to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
Hi,
Of course, the introduction of the new hardware platform is not what causes problems and yes, over the time and releases, R14 will get back to the reliability of 3.5.13.2.
But with all the renaming issues (which does not improve TDE at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would have been better used for things that are not under the hood only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era, but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better (Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't means that it has removed features to MATE or that their website is unusable.
-Alexandre
If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways please let us know, I know at least I am open to this! However, we will not change TDE just for the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather ugly IMHO) or just for the sake of change--the proposed modification needs to have some solid thought behind it as to how it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level.
Tim
Hi everyone,
I have a few concerns about TDE R14 and 3.5.13.2 SRU
It seems to me that 3.5.13.2 SRU has next to perfect stability,
features
and reliability, while R14 is not there yet. By looking at this page: http://www.trinitydesktop.org/patches/ ,
almost
all I can see is that the dev team is working very hard to just keep
R14
in working conditions. Sometimes Amarok doesn't start, sometimes
desktop
or menus are unresponsive for a moment, some themes doesn't work completely and it is not like if the user would benefit from a new
set of
feature or a complete visual overhaul. I cannot see why an user would benefit from using the upcoming R14 when it is compared to the
stability
of 3.5.13.2 SRU. Everything works as it should in 3.5.13.2. It would
have
been a very good ground for improving TDE on top of it. All of this trouble is supposed to be for the integrations of QT4 parts in TDE,
but it
seems to me that in R14, it will be used nowhere, not even for a
single
check-box in a config panel. Maybe it is just me, maybe I would need
some
explanations.
I mean that if the efforts has been made to make TDE more attractive
to
new users and to modernize it, it would certainly have more
popularity. As
well as making a new ''outside'' on top of an outdated car is not
good,
changing everything under the hood and keeping the old outdated ''outside'' is certainly not better at all. I know that TDE could be better, if some attention could be thrown at things that are not just under the hood.
Just one man's opinion... Tell us what you think!
-Alexandre
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes, TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all, to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting USB flash drives.
There is a reason that we have been constantly delaying R14--that is to make sure R14 is a high quality, stable release.
Tim
Hi,
Of course, the introduction of the new hardware platform is not what causes problems and yes, over the time and releases, R14 will get back to the reliability of 3.5.13.2.
But with all the renaming issues (which does not improve TDE at all), a lot of dev time has been used, and this time would have been better used for things that are not under the hood only. The current TDE look-and-feel was great in Win XP era, but time has changed. Interfaces have evolved, sometimes for the worse (MS office ribbon...) and sometimes for the better (Win 7 and parts of KDE 4). I am sure that there is some things to do to refresh TDE, but it needs some openness from the TDE dev team.
Some pop-ups could be made less intrusive, some widgets could be made to be less Win95-like and many little details could change, just to make sure that TDE doesn't die over the time because it was frozen forever in 2005. MATE has already improved its theming and color scheme to refresh its appearance. Their website is more attractive, and it doesn't means that it has removed features to MATE or that their website is unusable.
-Alexandre
If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways please let us know, I know at least I am open to this! However, we will not change TDE just for the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather ugly IMHO) or just for the sake of change--the proposed modification needs to have some solid thought behind it as to how it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level.
Tim
I forgot this above:
As to why renaming *is* important (aside from legal concerns, user confusion, etc.), here is a bug caused solely by stomping on the KDE4 class names and utility names: http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1697 In other words, that bug would still be open if the renaming projects had not been completed.
Tim
On Sunday 17 of November 2013 07:02:46 Timothy Pearson wrote:
If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways please let us know, I know at least I am open to this! However, we will not change TDE just for the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather ugly IMHO) or just for the sake of change--the proposed modification needs to have some solid thought behind it as to how it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level.
Tim
I personally use gui style HighColor Classic (I think the standard of KDE2). Styles Plastic and Keramik are too modern for me :)
If a "modern-look" was meant in the sense of inclusion of other gui style - such as Baghira, in that it should not be a problem.
If a "modern-look" was meant in the manner of changing gui usability, it is necessary to have a reason to do it a lot better than "to new version looks different". Just as Tim says.
Slavek
On Sunday 17 November 2013 14:50:45 Slávek Banko wrote:
If a "modern-look" was meant in the manner of changing gui usability, it is necessary to have a reason to do it a lot better than "to new version looks different". Just as Tim says.
Thank you too, Slávek. I really appreciate your work helping to keep Trinity the marvellous distro it is.
So three cheers for all the developers; Tim, you, and all the others. \o/ \o/ \o/
Lisi
On Sunday 17 November 2013 06:02:46 Timothy Pearson wrote:
If you think TDE can be improved in specific ways please let us know, I know at least I am open to this! However, we will not change TDE just for the sake of "modern looks" (typically rather ugly IMHO) -
hear! hear!
or just for the sake of change--the proposed modification needs to have some solid thought behind it as to how it will benefit TDE's users on a functional level.
Great! Thank you, Tim.
Lisi
If you have a galaxy S3, make sure you have Mass Storage drivers installed on the phone. for some reason Samsung keeps disabling it on their phones. My S4 is only mountable through their crapware on windows. This might not be a trinity speceific problem.
On 17 November 2013 07:55, Paul Cartwright pbcartwright@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/16/2013 03:23 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
For starters, look at the number of reported crashes from the threaded components of the 3.5.13.x series. Those reports *cannot* be fixed without the major threading changes made in TQt3 for R14.0.0. Just because something is stable on your system does not mean that it will be stable on someone else's system if threading is involved. ;-) Also keep in mind that R14 finally gets rid of HAL (and in fact uses many modern services for mounting, network management, etc.)--without those changes, TDE users would find it increasingly more difficult, if possible at all, to perform basic tasks like connecting to wireless networks and mounting USB flash drives.
I am using trinity 4:14 and I am having problems mounting my Samsung phone & tablet. I have a Samsung Galaxy S3, and when I plug it in I get thewindow to open in a New Window, and the header shows Samsung Elextronics GT-1910, when it is an SCH-1535. When I click Open in WIndow, it opens a Konq window with this in the Location: system:/media/Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd GT-I9100 Phone [Galaxy S II], GT-P7500 [Galaxy Tab 10.1] with 2 folders showing Store_0010001 and store_0020002 and an about.txt file and a summary.txt file. The summary file has this at the top:
Manufacturer: SAMSUNG Electronics Co. Ltd. Model: SCH-I535 Version: V1.0 Serial Number: blanked, it is my serial no.. Vendor Extension ID: 0x6 (1.0) Vendor Extension Description: microsoft.com: 1.0; microsoft.com/WMPPD: 11.0; microsoft.com/WMPPD: 10.0; microsoft.com/WMDRMPD:10.1; microsoft.com/playready:1.10; samsung.com/kies:2.0
here are some of the trinity packages installed..
dpkg -l|grep trinity ii kamera-trinity 4:14.0.0-r235-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr11 amd64 digital camera io_slave for Konqueror ii kappfinder-trinity 4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr30 amd64 non-KDE application finder for KDE ii kate-trinity 4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr30 amd64 advanced text editor for KDE ii kcontrol-trinity 4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr30 amd64 control center for KDE ii kdesktop-trinity 4:14.0.0-r1217-0ubuntu13.04.0+pr
-- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux User #367800 and new counter #561587
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
On 11/17/2013 08:57 AM, Calvin Morrison wrote:
If you have a galaxy S3, make sure you have Mass Storage drivers installed on the phone. for some reason Samsung keeps disabling it on their phones. My S4 is only mountable through their crapware on windows. This might not be a trinity speceific problem.
it works fine in XFCE, just not trinity..
-
Alexandre Couture -
Andy -
Baron -
Calvin Morrison -
Curt Howland -
dep -
Dr. Nikolaus Klepp -
Felmon Davis -
Frank Lienhard -
Glen Cunningham -
iadest＠o2.pl -
James Gholston -
Kate Draven -
Lisi Reisz -
Mark S Bilk -
Michael Henry -
Paul Cartwright -
Slávek Banko -
Timothy Pearson