Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 30th Oct 2007 20:50 UTC, submitted by diegocg
KDE "The KDE Community is happy to release the fourth Beta for KDE 4.0. This Beta aimed at further polishing of the KDE codebase and we would love to start receiving feedback from testers. As KDE has largely has been in bugfix mode, this latest Beta aims to encourage testers to have a look at it to help us find and solve the remaining problems and bugs. Besides the stabilization of the codebase, some minor features have been added, including but not limited to much work on Plasma, the KDE 4 desktop shell. Sebastian Kugler notes: 'The improvements have been huge, and plasma is much closer to what it needs to be before the release. I am confident we will be able to finish it and present a very usable plasma to our userbase with KDE 4.0. We will then be able to extend on that and present truly innovative desktop interfaces throughout the KDE 4 lifecycle.'"
Order by: Score:
impressed
by mcduck on Tue 30th Oct 2007 21:11 UTC
mcduck
Member since:
2005-11-23

I'm getting more and more impressed by the KDE team!

Especially Plasma is going to be great.

Reply Score: 9

So guess it is time...
by korpenkraxar on Tue 30th Oct 2007 21:17 UTC
korpenkraxar
Member since:
2005-09-10

for me to download and compile the little beast. And so should you! Especially if that fugly taskbar panel pisses you off, or if you find Dolphin to be a feature-neutered bastard child of Konqueror and Finder, or expect KWin to be embarrassingly unable to match Compiz Fusion - this is you chance to make a difference :-)

Edit: For those humor-less people who mods down comments you do not understand at first sight, what the above means in clear text is: don't just sit around here at OSNews and complain about stuff you do not like in some arbitrary screenshot, download it and give constructive feedback to the KDE devs! And that goes for you Windows/Mac users as well :-)

Edited 2007-10-30 21:35

Reply Score: 17

RE: So guess it is time...
by aliquis on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:04 UTC in reply to "So guess it is time..."
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Apple doesn't listen to feedback or care about users comments or ideas so why do it?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: So guess it is time...
by korpenkraxar on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:50 UTC in reply to "RE: So guess it is time..."
korpenkraxar Member since:
2005-09-10

Because KDE4 will eventually run on Macs as well :-)

Reply Score: 4

I just don't like it.
by systyrant on Tue 30th Oct 2007 21:23 UTC
systyrant
Member since:
2007-01-18

Maybe it'll grow on me after it's released, but I just don't like the new look that well. Some parts of it are OK, some are better than OK, and some remind me of Vista.

I'll reserve final judgment until it's released, but based on the screenshot I've seen of the beta versions I'm just not liking the looks.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I just don't like it.
by ari-free on Tue 30th Oct 2007 21:55 UTC in reply to "I just don't like it."
ari-free Member since:
2007-01-22

and some remind me of Vista.
-
I assume those are the parts you don't like. ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: I just don't like it.
by systyrant on Wed 31st Oct 2007 19:43 UTC in reply to "RE: I just don't like it."
systyrant Member since:
2007-01-18

Well, I don't like the task bar or the little glass looking thing around what I assume are widgets. It's that glass looking thing around the widgets that reminds me of vista.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I just don't like it.
by cyclops on Tue 30th Oct 2007 21:58 UTC in reply to "I just don't like it."
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"OK, some are better than OK, and some remind me of Vista."

Which parts...Just wondering about the vague comment. It can't be the desktop analogy that you are referring to, so what particularly about Vista.

To me it looks like a less kartoony(giggle) KDE3 with some slick improvements.

Reply Score: 1

v RE: I just don't like it.
by ssa2204 on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:04 UTC in reply to "I just don't like it."
RE[2]: I just don't like it.
by No it isnt on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:07 UTC in reply to "RE: I just don't like it."
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

1. It's not done yet.
2. It's still fully themeable.

You don't really have a point.

Reply Score: 14

RE[2]: I just don't like it.
by butters on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:43 UTC in reply to "RE: I just don't like it."
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

But I highly doubt this is going to change, or at least I have no confidence it will.


Everything else you say is understandable at this point, but you have be absolutely ignorant of the technical foundations of KDE4 and Plasma to suggest that the UI is going nowhere.

KDE4 has nothing but potential, and I mean that in the most literal sense. Its current state reflects the fact that less than 10% of the overall work has gone into the UI. The above quoted statement is the equivalent of saying that Python is an awful programming language because all my first program does is display "Hello World!".

KDE4 probably won't compete with KDE3 or GNOME2 as a desktop UI for another 6-12 months. But as a desktop development platform, it blows them out of the water today. That's why the UI is going to develop rapidly, with an unprecedented amount of diversity and participation. That's why KDE4 will scale up to media centers and down to smartphones better than any other desktop framework.

To avoid this becoming a complete joke and embarrassment they will need to overall (sic) this UI completely.


That's what this whole KDE4 process was about. They decided that the time was right to abandon their aging codebase derived from KDE2 and undertake a complete rewrite to position KDE for a new era of the free software desktop. It is a complete overhaul, bringing the freshest and most innovative free software technology to market just as the business dynamics in the client space are beginning to shift.

What is means to be a "desktop environment" is changing as the PC and post-PC client takes on new sizes, shapes, and roles. KDE4 is a bold attempt to take the desktop wherever it wants to go over the next decade, and I believe that it's an approach that will pay off decisively.

Just give it time.

Edited 2007-10-30 22:45

Reply Score: 20

RE[2]: I just don't like it.
by superstoned on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:28 UTC in reply to "RE: I just don't like it."
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

I'm sorry. I just had to look up the screenshot in the announcement. Look at it, reread your comment, look at it again.

This can't be serious comment. I mean, back to the 1998? You mean Windows '98? Yeah, sure. Alphablending was a dirty word, back then, as where rounded corners. Big grey-land.

If you would play with Oxygen, the new KDE 4 look, you would quickly discover it is much more colorful as it seems at first sight. Yet very light on the eyes. Personally, I'm really happy with the look. After having been in KDE 4 for a while, I find it unpleasant to come back to KDE 3 - no matter which style I choose - polyester, plastik, domino, baghira, qtcurve - I've gone through all of them since I've been really running KDE 4, and they're not satisfactory compared to Oxygen.

Reply Score: 5

wait
by J.R. on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:09 UTC
J.R.
Member since:
2007-07-25

wait...what? Beta4? Wasn't there suppose to be a RC today?

Reply Score: 1

RE: wait
by superstoned on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:30 UTC in reply to "wait"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Well, remember everyone yelling KDE 4 wasn't even Alpha yet? It's not like we're running around, hands over our ears, screeming "BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH WE DON'T HEAR YOU!!!" ;)

KDE 4 really needed more people testing it, so we decided to release another beta. Nothing can be really set in stone, KDE 4.0 won't be smashing, but it should be usable. So we won't release until it is.

Dropping features isn't really possible with this release - next one will be more tightly scheduled ;-)

Reply Score: 8

RE: wait
by atriq on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:26 UTC in reply to "wait"
atriq Member since:
2007-10-18
UI Look
by thabrain on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:13 UTC
thabrain
Member since:
2005-06-29

The one thing I still don't think Linux has gotten yet is the "smooth, slick" look that Mac has.

The fonts for one thing is a detractor. I instantly change the fonts over to give more of that smooth look and feel to it.

There is a lot of potential here, and I don't advocate copying the Mac interface, but it could be an outstanding interface if it were analyzed from a visual UI point of view. GNOME has the same issue; functional, but not smooth.

BTW, I do use and appreciate Linux quite a bit.

Reply Score: 5

RE: UI Look
by cyclops on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:19 UTC in reply to "UI Look"
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"The one thing I still don't think Linux has gotten yet is the "smooth, slick" look that Mac has. "

I'm only vaugly interested but what isn't slick provide an example. Any example.

Linux has 2/3 fully functional desktops and they have all looked smooth/slick for a long time, KDE has always looked "smooth, slick" with defaults, and had a million ways to customize it to your tastes.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: UI Look
by thabrain on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:33 UTC in reply to "RE: UI Look"
thabrain Member since:
2005-06-29

As I mentioned, fonts is a good example.

The font used is jagged and raw looking, not as smooth in appearance as Mac fonts are. It detracts from the icons and menu bars, which admittedly look better in KDE 4 than before.

GNOME has the same issue to me; I instantly change the font when I load Ubuntu. While I understand that you can change things and customize easily, for a new user, first impressions are important.

The biggest complaint about KDE I have is that much of both the icons and the UI look very cartoony and not slick.(Admittedly XP looks the same; much like a Fisher-Price toy) I have to admit that KDE 4 has improved that quite a bit.

Edited 2007-10-30 22:42

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: UI Look
by leos on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: UI Look"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

GNOME has the same issue to me; I instantly change the font when I load Ubuntu.


To what?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: UI Look
by thabrain on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: UI Look"
thabrain Member since:
2005-06-29

It depends.

If I use preloaded fonts, then something like DejaVu Sans Condensed works well.

If I load my own, then a Mac font like Lucidia Grande or another Mac font.

If I use an MS font, then Segoe UI works or sometimes Arial if I use the MSTTCoreFonts package.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: UI Look
by superstoned on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:34 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: UI Look"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Some people, apparently you are one of them, are really put off by fonts. I didn't understand it until I did some reading - I guess you don't like fonts on MS either? Mac OS X, Windows and linux each use different kinds of rendering (the one linux uses is rather configurable, btw). If you're used to one, chances are you simply won't like the others.

Personally, I hate font rendering on the mac - way to fuzzy. And windows fonts are often bleeding colors, I don't like them either... But I've been using non-subpixel hinted font antialiassing for years, love it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: UI Look
by thabrain on Wed 31st Oct 2007 00:12 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: UI Look"
thabrain Member since:
2005-06-29

Some people, apparently you are one of them, are really put off by fonts.

Fonts are one example I used. To me they are a focal part of a good looking UI.

I guess you don't like fonts on MS either?
The standard fonts, no. Too jagged and hard to read on LCD's. Cleartype works much better.
Mac OS X, Windows and linux each use different kinds of rendering (the one linux uses is rather configurable, btw).

I wasn't questioning being able to change it;I'm aware of the vast amounts of config you can do. I was questioning the "first impression" factor that most users would see on installing the OS.

Personally, I hate font rendering on the mac - way to fuzzy. And windows fonts are often bleeding colors, I don't like them either... But I've been using non-subpixel hinted font antialiassing for years, love it.

I appreciate your opinon. Yours and mine differ.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: UI Look
by superstoned on Wed 31st Oct 2007 11:59 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: UI Look"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

I appreciate your opinon. Yours and mine differ.


Which was my point. you're just used to a certain kind of fonts, and don't like other fonts. Nothing anyone can ever do about that, except from exactly copying the look of the font you like - and that's not just protected by patents, but also going to piss off many ppl who prefer the CURRENT linux fonts (cuz they are used to it).

So get over it, it's not about 'better or worse' but about 'I'm used to it'.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: UI Look
by sergiusens on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: UI Look"
sergiusens Member since:
2007-09-01

I like the fonts... meaning that I do not dislike them.

I wouldn't mind if they changed as long as I could read from them...

Reply Score: 1

RE: UI Look
by Tweek on Wed 31st Oct 2007 03:25 UTC in reply to "UI Look"
Tweek Member since:
2006-01-12

Personally I prefer linux fonts over mac OSX.
They look unpolished, they look like they were an after thought. like something was swapped out right at the end.

I also run a pretty customized but extremely simple scheme for fonts on my system. Nothing ever above 12, the bit stream verdana, sizes 8-12 for absolutely everything. Simple elegant. not blurry.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: UI Look
by tyrione on Wed 31st Oct 2007 05:34 UTC in reply to "RE: UI Look"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

Personally, Freetype is admittedly behind OS X's font system, but that's to be expected.

I don't give a rusty f*** whether the AA of on-screen fonts aren't satisfactory (they look right in either platform when configured correctly), but what I do give a rusty f*** about is stuff like XeTeX allowing me to leverage OpenType or TrueType fonts so I can produce publish quality manuscripts, journal articles, novels, etc.

I care that my PDFs are press quality. Whether someone's Xorg config and fontconfig setups are different than the next person's doesn't matter to me.

If I've got them configured correctly Freetype 2.3 gets better with every release and so does OS X's font system.

If you think OS X's fonts are blurry and low quality then you don't understand the Print Industry.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: UI Look
by andrewg on Wed 31st Oct 2007 06:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: UI Look"
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

If you think OS X's fonts are blurry and low quality then you don't understand the Print Industry.

I don't work in the print industry and I would guess that most people using Mac's don't work in the print industry. I would also guess that most people in Apples Mac target market don't work in the print industry.

Having got that out the way I really hate fonts on the Mac. And I used Tiger for over a year. The font's don't look clean and crisp. If the print industry likes fonts on the Mac thats fine just don't tell us that because the print industry likes blurry fonts that we have to want them. Apple pandering to a minority without caring about the majority of its users is typical Apple.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: UI Look
by DBAlex on Wed 31st Oct 2007 09:14 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: UI Look"
DBAlex Member since:
2006-12-31

"Apple pandering to a minority without caring about the majority of its users is typical Apple."

The minority? 99% of the print industry use Macs... Its hardly a minority of users, since OSX had PDF support throughout its ideal for this sort of work...! And these sort of people demand the best font rendering, so apple provides it - Mac font rendering is supposed to be the closest thing to a printed output - so that designers can easily proof their work.

And finally, I also have a Mac Mini with Tiger and I dont think the Fonts are blurry, I do however think that the FreeType fonts on my Linux box aren't that great... I like the BitStream fonts but they don't have the same sort of "professional" look that most OSX fonts have, plus for some reason distros allways set font size too large, 10 looks rediculous... Never had that problem with any other OS than Linux tbh.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: UI Look
by melkor on Thu 1st Nov 2007 09:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: UI Look"
melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

True, most of the print industry might use Macs, but the vast majority of Mac users don't belong to the print industry. They're generally ordinary people who couldn't give 2 flying hoots about the print industry. They use Macs so they're stylish, cool, relatively easy to use, and generally safer than MS Windows from viruses etc. Plus there's the bragging material of "I own a Mac!".

Oh, and whilst I've only used up to 10.3.8, I think the Mac fonts are blurry. I'll give you a tip - if they look blurry, they are.

Dave

PS I have 20/20 vision. Photography is a serious hobby for me, I think I can trust my eyes.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: UI Look
by BluenoseJake on Thu 1st Nov 2007 14:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: UI Look"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"The minority? 99% of the print industry use Macs"

That is not logical, just because 98% of the print industry uses Macs doesn't mean that 98% of the Mac user base is in the print industry. It's possibly under 5% of total users (I have no idea what the real percentage is).

I prefer a system that is adjustable to my needs, not a system setup for a small percentage of the user base and no way to change it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: UI Look
by Soulbender on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: UI Look"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

If you think OS X's fonts are blurry and low quality then you don't understand the Print Industry.


Maybe he's like the majority of the worlds population and don't give a damn about the print industry but cares about how the fonts look on his screen. You know, the fonts he actually reads every single day when using his computer.

Reply Score: 7

RE[4]: UI Look
by segedunum on Wed 31st Oct 2007 17:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: UI Look"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe he's like the majority of the worlds population and don't give a damn about the print industry but cares about how the fonts look on his screen. You know, the fonts he actually reads every single day when using his computer.

Windows and Macs have different philosophies on how they render fonts. Microsoft does a lot to make them legible on the screen, but sometimes they look different to what you actually print out which ruins the whole WYSIWYG concept that GUIs are based on. On the other hand, Apple keeps true to the WYSIWYG concept with the caveat that screen fonts don't always look as legible as they could.

Reply Score: 2

RE: UI Look
by atriq on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:38 UTC in reply to "UI Look"
atriq Member since:
2007-10-18

Just for the sake of accuracy, Linux isn't responsible for font rendering at that level. The people at FreeType (http://freetype.sourceforge.net/index2.html) are the ones you'd probably want to voice those concerns to.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: I just don't like it.
by DBAlex on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:16 UTC
DBAlex
Member since:
2006-12-31

Who cares if its fully themeable, it should be done correctly first time... And It does look pretty awful... the titlebar buttons just make me cringe... Looks like a bad WindowBlinds skin from 2002...

Just my opinion, just because its skinnable doesn't mean work shouldn't be put in to get it right <first time>... Personally I like GNOME and so won't be switching, I've allways found KDE to be a messy bloated GUI that was a bit too windowsesque for me but I suppose each to their own...!

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: I just don't like it.
by nutshell42 on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I just don't like it."
nutshell42 Member since:
2006-01-12

Just my opinion, just because its skinnable doesn't mean work shouldn't be put in to get it right <first time>... Personally I like GNOME and so won't be switching, I've allways found KDE to be a messy bloated GUI that was a bit too windowsesque for me but I suppose each to their own...!

So, in other words,
you don't use it and will never use it, but you nevertheless took it upon you to come here and tell us that you don't like it and will never like it.

Thanks, we are grateful for your insights.

Reply Score: 18

RE[5]: I just don't like it.
by Tweek on Wed 31st Oct 2007 03:29 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I just don't like it."
Tweek Member since:
2006-01-12

Sadly you just summed up about half the comments in this thread.

THere are legitimate complaints that occur in these discussions, but by and large, most of the non legit ones are simply people that have nothing better to do than bash a release they will never even touch because they are biased to begin with. Then they act all shocked when their needs are not catered to

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: I just don't like it.
by marcusesq on Wed 31st Oct 2007 00:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I just don't like it."
marcusesq Member since:
2006-01-18

Personally I like GNOME and so won't be switching, I've allways found KDE to be a messy bloated GUI that was a bit too windowsesque for me but I suppose each to their own...!


KDE's "messy bloated GUI" (as how YOU describe it) is great for getting work done. Gnome has a fantastic interface for non computer people who want to email friends and occasionly surf the web and dont mind opening new applications to do what you can do with a right click in KDE.
Still you can sit back happy and relax knowing that in 10 years gnome will still be looking exactly the same and, if you're really lucky, the devs will have removed even more of that ugly, bloated functionality stuff - just the way you like it!

Reply Score: 20

RE[5]: I just don't like it.
by pplwong on Wed 31st Oct 2007 18:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: I just don't like it."
pplwong Member since:
2007-05-17

Seriously, GNOME's GUI organization is much better than KDE. It's clean and simple compare to the complexity of KDE in terms of menu organization and control panel. KDE menu and control panel is more really a lot more complex than it should. They should really learn from GNOME for that.

That said, I do like KDE 4 better for is more modern UI design. But still, it holds me back from switching because of the messy and more than neccessary complexity for menu and control.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: I just don't like it.
by MamiyaOtaru on Wed 31st Oct 2007 18:53 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I just don't like it."
MamiyaOtaru Member since:
2005-11-11

They should really learn from GNOME

While certainly true in some areas, in the general case: why? So Gnome people will switch? You claim you might but I bet most Gnome people are happy with Gnome. Seriously, my concern is that they are trying too hard to appeal to Gnome users and I don't like it. I use KDE because it isn't Gnome. If it becomes Gnome, why wouldn't I just use Gnome? At least that way I wouldn't have to deal anymore with the odd app that uses a different toolkit(nvidia-settings, eclipse, etc)

I'll be (very pleasantly) surprised if they attract significant numbers of Gnome users, but in what seem like their attempts to do so they alienate at least some (I count as part of "some") KDE users.

I for one am probably stuck with KDE no matter what they do, since at least Konqueror and Dolphin have a directory tree view (personal preferences dictate the presence of one). I'm just not thrilled with the direction I perceive them to be taking, and which you (as a non-KDE user I might add) are advocating.

Example: all that constant harping (not necessarily by you) about all the "ugly" Ksomething application names. Well it's gone to their head, and sensible, descriptive stuff like KHexEdit is being replaced by Okteta. Thanks a lot. One can still see a connection with its function (and it still has a k) but the function is far less obvious. I eagerly await the renaming of kwite to skratchpad ;)

I really can't say it's not for the best in the long run. It may benefit KDE greatly. My concerns have mainly to do with my preferences and likes. That should be obvious, but people sometimes flip out if one doesn't make it clear one is expressing personal opinions ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: I just don't like it.
by diegoviola on Wed 31st Oct 2007 23:16 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I just don't like it."
diegoviola Member since:
2006-08-15

KDE is not complex, it's functional,

and GNOME is too simple that it lacks functionality, GNOME people should learn from KDE.

Edited 2007-10-31 23:23

Reply Score: 7

RE[6]: I just don't like it.
by melkor on Thu 1st Nov 2007 09:34 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I just don't like it."
melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

Just remember though: what is one man's shit, is another man's candy.

Dave

Reply Score: 0

UI look
by sirrahn on Tue 30th Oct 2007 22:56 UTC
sirrahn
Member since:
2006-07-25

I guess it is the translucent windows or edges (eg on the desktop panel in the screenshot provided) which are a little reminiscent of windows vista. This seems to be the way that most of the major desktops seem to be going - windows, OSX, KDE - maybe with the exception of Gnome?

I think it looks promising. I've never really liked the look of KDE - the toolbar always seemed to take up too much space (which is the same) and the icons and colours always seemed a bit too harsh. There is something a bit more attractive about this look to me.

Reply Score: 1

tyrione
Member since:
2005-11-21

I have still to be able to get Kkdebindings to compile cleanly.

Everything else, sans KOffice very recently with it's changes compiles.

KOffice has a nagging poppler pdf bug with krita. I'm compiling against poppler-qt4 0.6.1.

Anyone else running into these issues from SVN Trunk?

Reply Score: 2

superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

meh, yes, there is an issue with poppler, KOffice needs 0.5.4 and Okular 0.6.x... I guess they will have to fix that sometime, dunno when.

Reply Score: 2

cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

I found it doubtfull that you have a pdf bug with Krita using poppler 0.6.1, because it can't yet build against poppler 0.6.1. So, maybe there is a bug in the build system allowing it do it and then a compilation error, if cmake insist on trying to build, can you contact us at kimageshop@kde.org with the error so that we can at least fix the build ?

Reply Score: 4

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

Sorry. I consider build breaking to be a bug: at least in the build process when going from 0.6 to 0.6.1 poppler. Glad to know this is a known issue:

I just sent an email with the compilation output.

Reply Score: 2

miro Member since:
2005-07-13

KOffice will not be released as a part of KDE 4.0, they have their own release schedule. Relax.

Reply Score: 2

Task Bar
by gamma on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:08 UTC
gamma
Member since:
2005-07-06

Visually things are improving, but I'm still confused on the task bar. It's got a blueish purple to dark grey horizontal gradient. Is this subject to change or is that how it was intended? I know the task bar is WIP, but I've seen Oxygen improve each release, but the bar has remained the same.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Task Bar
by superstoned on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:37 UTC in reply to "Task Bar"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

The taskbar really isn't anywhere close to the final look, I think. The Oxygen theme on the windows is close to what it should look like, but plasma is still moving fast.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Task Bar
by SlackerJack on Wed 31st Oct 2007 02:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Task Bar"
SlackerJack Member since:
2005-11-12

I think people are not used to seeing big changes in betas so they assume it's going to look like that in the final version. Beta is usually bug fixing, testing and not missing icons all over the place, task bar looking fudgy.

I understand your changing this throughout the betas but alot of people dont, so forgive the people saying it dont look good or finished for a beta.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Task Bar
by superstoned on Wed 31st Oct 2007 11:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Task Bar"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Well, we've tried to communicate this for months: 99% of KDE is in beta, but Plasma and some other parts should be considered more like Alpha. These components are showstoppers for 4.0, and we're working very hard to get them ready.

We call the whole 'beta' because MOST of KDE simply IS beta...

Reply Score: 2

v too bad
by p.leiner on Tue 30th Oct 2007 23:33 UTC
...
by Hiev on Wed 31st Oct 2007 00:49 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

I will reserve any opinion till I can test it.

Let's see what happens.

Reply Score: 1

its a BETA
by pixel8r on Wed 31st Oct 2007 03:02 UTC
pixel8r
Member since:
2007-08-11

and based on that, I think its looking fantastic and very promising.

KDE4 still has a lot of potential thats not yet realized so I think we all need to be patient and if we can help out, do so.

I'll be testing it out as soon as I can and hopefully I can aid in submitting bug reports. Its a chance to be part of possibly the most advanced open source desktop (just my opinion - not intended to be a troll).

Keep up the great work guys!

Reply Score: 4

RE: its a BETA
by ThawkTH on Wed 31st Oct 2007 15:35 UTC in reply to "its a BETA"
ThawkTH Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm not sure a compliment is a DE - if you believe something may be the most powerful open source desktop, you should feel free to say so!

I also believe that KDE4 is SIGNIFIGANT - It's a leap forward in many ways, and I'm not sure most Osnews readers realize just how great a change this is going to be.

KDE4 - We're waiting with bated breath!

Reply Score: 4

kde4 is looking amazing
by asdx24 on Wed 31st Oct 2007 05:30 UTC
asdx24
Member since:
2007-05-17

i hope that we will see the oxygen-styled krunner and a better panel for the new release ;)

kde4 is looking amazing all the time, keep up the great work

Reply Score: 2

Errr...
by hw-tph on Wed 31st Oct 2007 08:27 UTC
hw-tph
Member since:
2006-12-31

Confusing. A red "root" folder? Is that because that user is root? Or what does it mean?

I haven't used KDE since the 1.x days I'll have to admit. It just doesn't appeal to me.

Edited 2007-10-31 08:31

Reply Score: 1

RE: Errr...
by cyrilleberger on Wed 31st Oct 2007 08:58 UTC in reply to "Errr..."
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

No the user isn't "root" but kdedev. In the case of dolphin "root" refers to the "root directory".

Reply Score: 2

widgets
by MamiyaOtaru on Wed 31st Oct 2007 09:27 UTC
MamiyaOtaru
Member since:
2005-11-11

I'm not a fan of widgets (in the konfabulator sense, not the Qt or GTK widget set sense). That being so, I'm not entirely thrilled to see so much of the KDE4 desktop made of them. The taskbar for example: of course it will improve, but I'd much prefer to see it done in Qt and matching whatever Qt style I am using. I don't want a konfabulator widget for a taskbar. Or a pager or battery meter. I'm really not sold on plasma at all, and I don't mean the implementation, I mean the concept.

Now, people with complaints are directed to give constructive feedback but I don't think plasma is going to go away. It's an integral aspect of KDE4 that I don't like. Other people with complaints will be in a similar situation: disliking something that simply isn't going to change (though the pleasant addition of a directory tree to Dolphin does give one a glimmer of hope sometimes). We either get to suck it up or use something else.

I'll have to see what the final tally of annoyances is before I decide of course, I'm not going to be preemptive ;) But I'm surprised to even be contemplating not using KDE anymore. I'm probably best advised to wait for 4.1 before giving it a shot. Then again, as a Debian user if stop using testing and go to stable, that could be years away ;)

Reply Score: 5

RE: widgets
by superstoned on Wed 31st Oct 2007 11:54 UTC in reply to "widgets"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Well, I certainly hope plasma will be usable just like the old KDE 3 was. Kicker had applets too, you know. This time, you can drag'n'drop them to the desktop ;-)

And there are some big differences between Plasma and widgets like the konfabulator ones. To name one, an unified theme (which could probably make you happy). And from KDE 4.1 on, you can use normal KDE/Qt widgets (buttons etc) on and in plasmoids. So it is much more a 'best of both worlds', I think.

Reply Score: 3

RE: widgets
by protomank on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:26 UTC in reply to "widgets"
protomank Member since:
2006-08-03

I could not have said better.
I'm also starting to look to using gnome, fce or another desktop enviroenment instead of KDE4, but will keep using KDE apps that are very good.
But plasma... man iot's like building your DE over karamba!!

Reply Score: 1

The new panel
by NxStY on Wed 31st Oct 2007 11:36 UTC
NxStY
Member since:
2005-11-12

The new panel looks really weird. I wonder if they're going to keep it for the release and, if not, why they made it look like that in the first place.

Reply Score: 4

RE: The new panel
by superstoned on Wed 31st Oct 2007 11:54 UTC in reply to "The new panel"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

It's temporary artwork. You don't spend 2 weeks working on temporary stuff if you've got better things to do.

Reply Score: 3

Font issues in all OSes
by gavin.mccord on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:23 UTC
gavin.mccord
Member since:
2005-09-07

Off-topic to the main subject but the following link discusses how Microsoft, Apple and Linux render fonts, and no-one does it very well.

http://antigrain.com/research/font_rasterization/index.html

Reply Score: 1

RE: Font issues in all OSes
by dylansmrjones on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:02 UTC in reply to "Font issues in all OSes"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Yeah, well - the author doesn't quite get things right. There are several options he misses, and his explanations of font rendering in Mac OS X and Linux (FreeType2) is half wrong.

And his proposed solutions are only better when compared with font rendering on Windows. Besides that he is completely missing the conflict between intelligent (smart) font rendering engines and stupid font rendering engines.

He has some interesting ideas but most of it shows that he doesn't grok fonts very well.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Font issues in all OSes
by siki_miki on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Font issues in all OSes"
siki_miki Member since:
2006-01-17

How and which part of the article?

I must agree with the author that fonts look bit dirty rendered under Linux (noticed that even before reading the article). So it's better ALSO compared to existing font rendering in Linux (article certainly isn't favoring Windows font engine).

I read some critics on the article that it will conflict with pixel-precise definitions in HTML (->html could use other technique) and won't work well with glyph caches (which I think is a price we can pay, especially with powerful CPU/GPU's)

Reply Score: 2

Plasma - GUI
by pupdawg on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:29 UTC
pupdawg
Member since:
2006-04-03

Don't take this the wrong way the I'm not complaining about anything below I'm just listing concerns. If you read this after the release of KDE4 then I'm complaining ;-)

I've read a lot about KDE4 technologies and it does sound like a good platform for Linux but I'm a bit concerned about the state of the GUi and the December release date. I should hope they are going to shape it up before release. It just looks very cheap. after seeing some of the concepts this current GUI does not look very polished at all... ruff edges missing gradients ugly toolbars + window decorations and the scroll bars and progress bars are butt ugly.

I'm hoping for this kind of polish but I don't think so considering the dec release date. I've posted this many times but for those that have not seen this great mock-up.

http://kde-look.org/CONTENT/content-pre1/60475-1.jpg

Reply Score: 2

I know I should
by zombie process on Wed 31st Oct 2007 12:59 UTC
zombie process
Member since:
2005-07-08

get off my ass and install it, but I don't think I'll have the opportunity for a while. I'm wondering if kcontrol is simply going away, because I personally cannot stand the mac-ripoff "control center" and if it's the new default, I imagine it'll take some getting used to. I also still don't get the kicker replacement - I have tried it out a few times and find it clumsy. That being said, with katapult getting better and better I rarely use kicker except for very specific things. I can't seem to convince other people to use katapult, though, and I can forsee a lot of "No, it's not like that anymore - here, look at this" conversations in my future.

Edited 2007-10-31 12:59

Reply Score: 1

Titlebar
by webarchitect on Wed 31st Oct 2007 13:48 UTC
webarchitect
Member since:
2007-03-16

I am impressed with the technology thats been built into KDE 4, the 4.0 release is really just getting the technology ready. After the 4.0 release I hope they make some serious usability improvments though.

The tilebar buttons have unclicable regions around them just like the original windows start button. They also stand out because of the shadow which is visually distracting. The titlebars aren't visually distinct, its hard to tell which is the active window.
It will be neat to see what happens with it after a few point releases.

Reply Score: 1

The Dolphin File Manager
by whittmadden on Wed 31st Oct 2007 13:57 UTC
whittmadden
Member since:
2007-10-08

I haven't used Dolphin very much, but I am not sure what advantages it has on Konqueror. So far, I do not like either for a file manager. What does Dolphin do better?

Reply Score: 1

RE: The Dolphin File Manager
by ThawkTH on Wed 31st Oct 2007 15:39 UTC in reply to "The Dolphin File Manager"
ThawkTH Member since:
2005-07-06

I've used it a bit in Kubuntu Gutsy - I believe it's all compiled against KDE3 however.

It's not too bad. Easy to use. Simpler in a lot of ways than Konq. Not nearly as polished (and I never used Konq extensively!)

I've noticed a few bugs causing crashes (many pertaining to using my NTFS partitions and dragging/dropping things between apps). I think I should start helping by filing bug reports.

KDE 4 beta 3 impressed me...and I found it almost unusable!

I might just be lazy and wait until Kubuntu packages are released!!!

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: The Dolphin File Manager
by smitty on Wed 31st Oct 2007 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE: The Dolphin File Manager"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

I think the KDE4 version of dolphin was a complete rewrite, and is much different than the KDE3 version that Kubuntu included.

Reply Score: 4

whittmadden Member since:
2007-10-08

Is it just me, or does it look ugly?

Reply Score: 0

Dolphin looks like finder
by aliquis on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:07 UTC
aliquis
Member since:
2005-07-23

Dolphin looks very much like finder, not as clean but probably more useful.

Reply Score: 1

The KDE 4.0 Release
by ShawnX on Wed 31st Oct 2007 14:36 UTC
ShawnX
Member since:
2006-08-04

What people seem to forget is, as much as we want the desktop golden and fully polished, the plumbing for KDE 4.0 had/has to be worked out.

The Plasma API plumbing is still has some issues being hashed out but once those are addressed the framework will be all there to start implementing the rest of the panel components. We already have systray, pager, task bar (needs refining), launcher buttons (in progress), the actual Desktop mimicing what kdesktop did (in terms of icons on the desktop).

It's not about how the panel looks like that matters; it's about the APIs being ready to reimplement some components of our old friend kicker has to an extent :-)

In fact, as of Yesterday Aaron just made big changes to the Krunner API so we can have a really metasearchable desktop in all sorts of zany forms.

Shawn Starr.

Reply Score: 2

screenshots
by netpython on Wed 31st Oct 2007 17:13 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06
sledgehammer89
Member since:
2006-02-02

nice to see these steps. thank you, KDE team!

Reply Score: 1

It's still ugly.
by thomas mahler on Wed 31st Oct 2007 19:01 UTC
thomas mahler
Member since:
2007-07-03

I still think KDE4.0 isn't even nearly as nice as people said it would be. After all this hype over Plasma and so on, I finally expected that this crazy ugly metal look would be gone, that fonts would be rendered much nicer and that it'd just be designed in a better way, but those icons are fugly, the way it's layouted is amateurish, generally, I think Gnome looks much more professional, simpler, more streamlined, to the point.

Don't want to start a flamewar here, but I really don't think KDE has progressed all that much when it comes to a visual point of view. Still ugly, but shiny now.

Reply Score: 1

RE: It's still ugly.
by wakeupneo on Thu 1st Nov 2007 02:59 UTC in reply to "It's still ugly."
wakeupneo Member since:
2005-07-06

ITS. NOT. FINISHED!!

Disclaimer: This comment is not directed solely at you thomas

But seriously, these types of comments are really p!ssing me off now.

And they always end with something to the effect of "...Gnome looks much more professional, simpler, more streamlined, to the point."

Fine. You like Gnome. We get it. So before you feel compelled, yet again, to let us know how much better you think Gnome is than every DE in the universe, please do us all a favour, take a deep breath and click the 'Back' button.

When it's finished...then we can debate the merits and deficiencies of both.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: It's still ugly.
by Hiev on Thu 1st Nov 2007 05:01 UTC in reply to "RE: It's still ugly."
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

It will be finished in about 40 days, how much do you think it can change?, now KDE developers say we must waith for KDE 4.1 because 4.0 is a developer release, yeah right.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: It's still ugly.
by wakeupneo on Thu 1st Nov 2007 06:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: It's still ugly."
wakeupneo Member since:
2005-07-06

That's like saying the Gimp is 'finished'. It's not. It's constantly in development like everything else OSS.

It'll be feature-locked, debugged and "released" in about 40 days.

But you're right, 4.0 is targeted primarily at developers so they can put all that new technology to good use....but that's been made clear from the start, so pretending to expect a 100% complete consumer desktop platform is disingenuous...

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: It's still ugly.
by Hiev on Thu 1st Nov 2007 14:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: It's still ugly."
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

But you're right, 4.0 is targeted primarily at developers so they can put all that new technology to good use....but that's been made clear from the start,

No, it wasn't clear from the start, it was all hype as always in KDE, and now the reality have slapped them, so, lets waith for another 7 to 8 months to see a decent realease.

That's simple dissapointing to all KDE users, I hope they learn not to overhype and get real next time.

Edited 2007-11-01 14:46

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: It's still ugly.
by Mark6 on Thu 1st Nov 2007 14:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: It's still ugly."
Mark6 Member since:
2007-10-09

No, it wasn't clear from the start, it was all hype as always in KDE, and now the reality have slapped them, so, lets waith for another 7 to 8 months to see a decent realease.

That's is simple dissapointing to all KDE users, I hope they learn not to overhype and get real next time.


No. I'm KDE user and it was clear to me from the start a I'm not disappointed.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: It's still ugly.
by Hiev on Thu 1st Nov 2007 15:20 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: It's still ugly."
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

The problem is the denial and the "I'll excuse them at any cost" syndrome.

Edited 2007-11-01 15:21

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: It's still ugly.
by Mark6 on Thu 1st Nov 2007 17:28 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: It's still ugly."
Mark6 Member since:
2007-10-09

But why I should be disappointed when I'm happy with 3.5.8? It will be done when it's done.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: It's still ugly.
by ssa2204 on Thu 1st Nov 2007 06:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: It's still ugly."
ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

40 days, is exactly why I said I have little to no confidence that things will change. I find it simply both amazing and unacceptable the attitudes that most seem to take when input is given that is not glowing praise. This is happening more and more too frequently in the past few years, dissenting voices simply are flamed. Instead, it seems that all you are allowed to do now is just kneel and praise, regardless of how horrible an idea.

It is pretty obvious that if they had taken the time to do some research and gathered opinions in the first place, they would not have this UI as it is now. At least in most discussions I have seen, this desktop is not thought of highly.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: It's still ugly.
by Richard Dale on Thu 1st Nov 2007 13:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: It's still ugly."
Richard Dale Member since:
2005-07-22

KDE is a community:

Social skills, social skills, social skills!

Of course KDE 4.0 Beta 4 isn't perfect, that's why it is a beta. Constructive criticism is welcome, but your post consists mainly of abuse. What have you really got say about improving KDE 4.0?

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: It's still ugly.
by ssa2204 on Thu 1st Nov 2007 19:40 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: It's still ugly."
ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

I do not expect perfection, even for anything that is out of beta. What I am looking at is quite simply just the user interface as it is presented now. To be quite honest, this is a UI that should never have made it out of the idea stage. Consistency, flow, ergonomics, color scheme, etc.. just about every single aspect of what I see in the previews is just all wrong in a overall sense. What I really have to ask is if they ever did any research or study to find out how this UI would be responded to by users. I simply can not accept that they ever bothered to do this. If open source software is to compete with closed systems like Windows or OSX, then they have to accept that certain practices done by commercial vendors are done for a very good reason. Why you may not like Vista, but there is a reason why a good majority of people are more than satisfied with the OS.

I can tell you one reason, during the development stage they fund continuously focus groups to get users input on every aspect of the UI. The end result is a UI that is extremely functional. Linux fanboys can rant and rave all they want about this comment, but it is a cold hard reality that average users do find Windows very easy to work with for a very good reason. The effort was put in the first place to make the UI workable. Doesn't matter a damn thing what people think of Microsoft etc.. this is the reality of this world

But as Hiev says, the "I'll excuse them at any cost syndrome" is much too rampant these days. For an OSS project to be able to compete in today's world, the attitudes of yesterday like the one above and the "well it's good enough" simply do not cut it anymore. One reason why Ubuntu is finding a lot of success is not just because it is an "easy" OS to use, but also because it has a very functional UI to work with, especially the Gnome iteration (Have not used Kubuntu in ages, so I can not comment).

So what has bothered me so much is a desktop GUI that is about a month away that, in my opinion, is not moving forward. Whatever underlying technologies they have inserted are somewhat meaningless if the front end is an un-usable mess. I understand people can say "well it's skinable, or themeable, etc.." But the point here is to release something that is spectacular from the onset. When I compare these screenshots to other interfaces we have today; SkyOS, Vista, OSX, Gnome, etc.. I do not feel that from what I see this 4 is anywhere close to being in the same boat. Yet in by every means it should be ahead of the curve.

It may very well be that come 2 months from now the final release will surprise me. Which would be a nice thing, as I stated earlier I have come to be quite annoyed with Gnome in Opensuse. The latest 10.3 does have KDE4 preview, which was not to my liking in the least bit which was disappointing. At some point a feature release of Suse is going to have KDE 4, and I personally consider my choice between bad and worse, which is sad because since 9.0 (Novell or Open, can't remember) I have seen a steady progression of improvement I come to like a lot. I hope this gives a better understanding of why I feel the way I do, and in the end it is just one persons opinion.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: It's still ugly.
by smitty on Fri 2nd Nov 2007 01:11 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: It's still ugly."
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

What is it, exactly, that you find so horrible? You do a lot of complaining, but without any details. Bad icons? Ugly colors? Bad panel? All of the above? The goal of the 4.0 desktop is parity with what you can get in 3.x series, using all the new technologies they've created. 4.1 will be much improved and have new, researched ideas. Would you say the 3.x desktop is something "that should never have made it out of the idea stage"?

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: It's still ugly.
by marcusesq on Thu 1st Nov 2007 09:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: It's still ugly."
marcusesq Member since:
2006-01-18

This is KDE. Things happen fast. Of course it would be finished quicker if they followed the gnome model and released half an OS.
I hear gnome will have complete drag & drop functionality in the file manager any day now :-)

Go you Beige Beauty!!!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: It's still ugly.
by thomas mahler on Thu 1st Nov 2007 14:35 UTC in reply to "RE: It's still ugly."
thomas mahler Member since:
2007-07-03

I knew that it'd piss off some people and I realize that it's an open source project and all that, but the release is like a month away and if they change the design radically NOW, it'll be even more hodepodge than it is now.

I'm a fan of Gnome cause they keep things simple, yet beautiful, KDE always had this ugly, 'cheap metal' design with icons that could come right out of Microsofts Design Team.

But let's stop it right here - I know it's not finished and it's still in beta, but mark my words: Nothing revolutionary is going to happen anymore. Beta 4 is pretty much how the released version will look like and it'll still be ugly. What KDE needs is a little less bling bling and a lot more subtle beauty that doesn't get in the way of the user.

We'll see how things end up - I'm pretty sure I'll be able to rest my case.

Reply Score: 0

Beta 4 Used to be RC1
by dmytro on Wed 31st Oct 2007 23:21 UTC
dmytro
Member since:
2005-07-09

This release/snapshot, now KDE 4.0 Beta 4, was previously called (on the KDE 4 schedule page) Release Candidate 1. It is nice to know that the release team made a pragmatic assessment and renamed the snapshot to Beta 4. Historically, the KDE project was overly optimistic about the schedule of KDE 4. I have a feeling that the final release will be delayed into January.

Reply Score: 1

...
by Hiev on Thu 1st Nov 2007 04:57 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

OK I just tried it, some things got better and some got worse, now if I add the pager applet to the desktop, plasma crashes big time, oh and I was welcomed with a Knotify crash window too.

And Im really dissapointed to see this bad behavior in KDE3 still in KDE4.

http://img147.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imagead0.png

Edited 2007-11-01 05:12

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: UI Look (offtopic)
by gavin.mccord on Thu 1st Nov 2007 11:46 UTC
gavin.mccord
Member since:
2005-09-07

I think I can trust my eyes


Here's just one of many sites which can prove just how wrong that is:

http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/

I particularly like the following example:

http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/lum_adelson_check_shadow/index.html

Reply Score: 1

Gnome trolls
by marcusesq on Sat 3rd Nov 2007 07:15 UTC
marcusesq
Member since:
2006-01-18

"But as Hiev says, the "I'll excuse them at any cost syndrome" is much too rampant these days."

No one apart from you sad gnome tragics are making any excuses for KDE 4. Not finished yet is not an excuse, its a fact, no matter how much you wish it wasn't so.

KDE is for us, not for you so you should be happy that you never have to use it, just as happy as I am that I will never have to use gnome.

Reply Score: 1