Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:08 UTC
KDE The KDE desktop environment is going cross-platform with support for the Windows and Mac OS X operating systems. In addition to porting the core KDE libraries and applications, developers are also porting popular KDE-based software like the Amarok audio player and the KOffice productivity suite.
Order by: Score:
Cross Platform
by Xaero_Vincent on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:34 UTC
Xaero_Vincent
Member since:
2006-08-18

I believe its long been known that KDE 4 was being natively ported over to OS X and Windows.

The Windows version will just get the libraries and the ability to run KDE apps, not receive the full desktop environment. I'm sure its possible to the full desktop environment but you'll probably need Cygwin and Win32 X Servers.

For those who are wondering: I believe this move is good for FOSS but bad for Linux adoption.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Cross Platform
by amaze_9 on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:37 UTC in reply to "Cross Platform"
amaze_9 Member since:
2005-11-12

I would like to challenge your opinion that porting KDE to other platforms hinders Linux adoption.

It shows people the sort of software they can expect on a full-blown Linux system.

If it wasn't for software such as The GIMP and Firefox on Windows, there would be little chance I would be using Linux full-time as I do now.

Reply Score: 18

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by robojerk on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 23:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

I would prefer to use Krita on windows over GIMP, if or when a port becomes available.

Reply Score: 8

RE[3]: Cross Platform
by MechR on Thu 24th Jan 2008 19:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Cross Platform"
MechR Member since:
2006-01-11

I'm interested too, but I'm worried whether the space reqs will be practical. The Ars Technica article said their test KDE install took ~600MB. How much will just Krita need? For comparison, IIRC the GIMP takes about 40MB (including GTK in its program folder, I think).

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by lemur2 on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 23:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I would like to challenge your opinion that porting KDE to other platforms hinders Linux adoption. It shows people the sort of software they can expect on a full-blown Linux system. If it wasn't for software such as The GIMP and Firefox on Windows, there would be little chance I would be using Linux full-time as I do now.


Likewise, I too would not have tried GNU/Linux if it were not for other FOSS programs having been ported to Windows.

Running the FOSS programs on Windows and watching the rapid improvement from version to version for programs like Mozilla/Firefox and OpenOffice, and also being exposed at the same time to "freeware" which was actually just "adware" (mostly download managers) ... I became curious as to what exactly was the essential difference between "free software" and "freeware", and how to tell them apart (so as not to waste my time with any more adware/spyware/nagware). That was exactly how I became aware of Linux, the GPL and FOSS in the first place.

From that point it was just a small step forward to switch the entire software stack on my computers over to FOSS software.

That experience almost defined the word "liberation" to me.

Reply Score: 8

v RE[3]: Cross Platform
by ecruz on Thu 24th Jan 2008 04:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Cross Platform"
RE[4]: Cross Platform
by SReilly on Thu 24th Jan 2008 09:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

I think I speak for many when asking 'what are you waffling about?'

Seriously, if you have a point to make you could try by actually explaining what it is your trying to say.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you have a hart felt and probably even valid point, it's just really hard to figure out what that possible could be.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Cross Platform
by lemur2 on Thu 24th Jan 2008 11:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

If the FSF people tell you to jump from a bridge, I know you would!
I say that because I believe that anyone that falls for the GNU/Linux charade are pretty much followers, little robots, like Moonies in a way.

Every OS has many parts, many components. Just because the GNU libraries were used in Linux, they were also many other contributors to its development, not just GNU.


WTF??

GNU has nothing at all to do with Linux.

Linux is a kernel.
http://kernel.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel

GNU is a whole range of utilities that make up a significant portion of the OS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Project
http://www.gnu.org/

This is GNU software:
http://directory.fsf.org/GNU/
(Note: there is no claim at all to the Linux kernel being made here).

GNU software makes up approximately 28% of a typical GNU/Linux distribution. The Linux kernel itself is about 3%
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html

GNU has its own kernel (but no-one uses it much):
http://directory.fsf.org/project/hurd/

There is also such a thing as GNU/Solaris:
http://www.nexenta.org/os

... the point is you can make up a working GNU system without the Linux kernel and still have something useful, but Linux without GNU is nothing.

As you well know, this charade has come about because of the megalomaniac that could not stand Linux success.


Well, everyone is entitled to an opinion, I suppose.

Here is an opposing one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
In the 1991 release notes for versions 0.01 to 0.11 of the Linux kernel (which was not released under the GNU General Public License until version 0.12), Torvalds wrote:

Sadly, a kernel by itself gets you nowhere. To get a working system you need a shell, compilers, a library etc. These are separate parts and may be under a stricter (or even looser) copyright. Most of the tools used with linux are GNU software and are under the GNU copyleft. These tools aren't in the distribution - ask me (or GNU) for more info.


You yourself said: "Every OS has many parts, many components." I agree. I would also point out that in any GNU/linux distribution, the biggest single piece by a long way is the GNU software that is included.

And now for the truly corny bit (which at least has the one redeeming feature that it shows the relative sizes of things):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gnu-and-penguin-color.png

Edited 2008-01-24 12:08 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[4]: Cross Platform
by melkor on Fri 25th Jan 2008 04:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

wtf? The FSF was successful before Linux was a twinkle in Linus' eye. That's for starters.

FSF people no more jump from bridges than Apple or Microsoft customers/users do. It's in the human nature to copy others. So, how do you lay the blame for that solely at the feet of the FSF?

It's ungrateful bastards like you who bash the FSF that really make me irate. I'll say the same to you, as I say to others - if you don't like the FSF, remove any FSF originated software from your system and go and find a nice replacement. Have fun.

This new ex Windows brigade that has hit Linux in the past few years is the worst thing to happen to Linux imho. The Linux community could have well and truly done without you lot.

Dave

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Cross Platform
by yahya on Thu 24th Jan 2008 20:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Cross Platform"
yahya Member since:
2007-03-29

Likewise, I too would not have tried GNU/Linux if it were not for other FOSS programs having been ported to Windows.


However, these almost certainly weren't kRandomUtility and kYetAnotherTetrisClone.

The killer apps, which usually win new believers over are those like Firefox, Thunderbird + Lightning, OpenOffice, GNU Emacs, Scribus (which depends on Qt, but not on KDE).

I cannot think of any KDE based application that would be impressive enough to be used for proselytizing Windows users. Maybe I've missed something, as I am mostly using GNOME or IceWM.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Cross Platform
by smitty on Thu 24th Jan 2008 20:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

I think Amarok is by far the most impressive KDE app that could pull in new users. However, a lot of people are tied to iTunes or Windows Media through DRM.

K3B is very nice, but most people get free burning software with their computer, and that wouldn't really cause someone to switch IMO.

KOffice has the potential to be very impressive, but it isn't quite there yet. I know they're planning big things for the 2.0 release.

Kontact is another app that has the potential to replace Outlook, but isn't quite there yet.

And I think Konqueror/Dolphin may end up being popular on Windows/Mac as well. Konqueror may be the 1st good Webkit browser on Windows (Safari sucks there)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Cross Platform
by yahya on Thu 24th Jan 2008 21:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Cross Platform"
yahya Member since:
2007-03-29

I think Amarok is by far the most impressive KDE app that could pull in new users. However, a lot of people are tied to iTunes or Windows Media through DRM.

[...]

And I think Konqueror/Dolphin may end up being popular on Windows/Mac as well. Konqueror may be the 1st good Webkit browser on Windows (Safari sucks there)


So for the time being, Amarok is the only serious contender. (and not yet available for KDE 4, apart from the current alpha).

Whether or not Konqueror will switch to webkit remains to be seen. My impression is that the KHTML devs are still unwilling to abandon "their" child in favour of Apple's fork. For the moment I would clearly prefer Safari for Windows, as it works with all those popular Web 2.0 sites and Konqueror doesn't, mainly because its Ecma/JavaScript engine is not state of the art.

Yes, K3B would be nice, provided all the command line tools it uses work on Windows. I believe that K3B heavily relies on HAL for Hardware detection, which if my understanding is correct would limit its platform independence.

I honestly don't believe that Koffice will make it. Honestly, KOffice has been around almost as long as KDE itself and it never really stabilised to a degree where I would entrust my valuable data to it. I don't believe it has a chance against the almightly OpenOffice.org.

Dolphin? Its basic functionality is too similar to Windows Explorer to make it a serious contender, I fail to see which killer features would tempt Windows users to use it to replace their default file manager.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Cross Platform
by anda_skoa on Fri 25th Jan 2008 00:54 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Cross Platform"
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

[
Whether or not Konqueror will switch to webkit remains to be seen. My impression is that the KHTML devs are still unwilling to abandon "their" child in favour of Apple's fork.

It is not a matter of either/or.
Given the availability of a WebKit KPart, it is just a matter of selecting which one to use for "text/html"


Yes, K3B would be nice, provided all the command line tools it uses work on Windows.

I think they do. At least cdrecord does, a friend of mine is using it in Batch scripts for automated CD burning.

I believe that K3B heavily relies on HAL for Hardware detection, which if my understanding is correct would limit its platform independence.

The point of a KDE4 version is to not to be limited by a specific implementation of hardware detection through the use of the KDE Solid framework.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Cross Platform
by setec_astronomy on Fri 25th Jan 2008 01:21 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Cross Platform"
setec_astronomy Member since:
2007-11-17

First of all: I have precisely zero experience with Microsofts Operating Systems > Windows XP SP2 / 2000 SP4, so please correct me if I get things wrong. But I definitely see potential for several KDE4 applications, like for example :

- A centralised document viewing app like Okular would be a godsend to have on MS Windows platforms at least.
I'm not familiar with the status of running evince on MS Windows, but feature wise, Okular looks more useful (at least to me).

- While probably not having a top position on most peoples priority list, there are several applications under the KDE - Education umbrella, that are either already outstanding (like for example KStars, which is complemented nicely with the already cross-platform non-kde stellarium app) or approaching a very promising state (being a physicist myself, the Step simulator, which is scheduled for KDE 4.1, is a personal favourite of mine).

- Given that the NVu project status seems to be currently "comatose", Quanta Plus *will* imho be the best dedicated (as in : not Eclipse et al) libre / gratis Web IDE.

- While KOffice was so far not in a shape to give other
Office suites like OpenOffice.org a run for their money (har har, pun intended) (e.g. import of binary MS Office formats was/is still a hit and miss game, ODF support is/was far from complete, etc.), KOffice 2.0 should - judging from my limited experiences with the current alphas - be a far better competitor. I think the close integration of a wider range of applications (compared to OpenOffice.org) and components (e.g. dedicated flow charting, project management and pixel based picture editing/creation applications and components) in combination with technologies like pigment and especially painterly is quite attractive. While I have no problems with GIMP and its UI, I know at least four MS Windows users that prefer krita over GIMP and GIMPShop and will migrate to krita once it is available for Windows. Additionally, there will - afaik, please correct me if I'm wrong - be no native (Aqua, non-X11) version of OpenOffice.org 2.x in the near future (at least not before the OpenOffice.org 3.x branch goes stable).

- Finally, I look forward to the time when I will be able to run kile, kbibtex, ktorrent, amarok, digikam and kate without cygwin or virtualisation at work.

I'm sure, others can point towards other applications, that have a chance of finding a not too small niche on MS Windows.

Side remark:

There is another aspect of this cross platform-ness of KDE 4 (and F/OSS applications in general), that is imho often overlooked, because it affects not primarily home users, but schools, universities, agencies, (local) governments and SMBs.

My pet theory is, that the availability of F/OSS applications on non-libre OSes has only little impact on the likelihood of switching in the short run. But it should allow system administrators to prepare a future switch from lets say MS Windows XP / 2000 towards Linux gracefully by converging the range of installed apps over the course of several months or even years, thus keeping the costs and risks for training / testing in a more controllable range.

EDIT: Clarified stellariums non-kde status

Edited 2008-01-25 01:23 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Cross Platform
by yahya on Fri 25th Jan 2008 10:39 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Cross Platform"
yahya Member since:
2007-03-29

First of all: I have precisely zero experience with Microsofts Operating Systems > Windows XP SP2 / 2000 SP4, so please correct me if I get things wrong. But I definitely see potential for several KDE4 applications, like for example :

- A centralised document viewing app like Okular would be a godsend to have on MS Windows platforms at least.
I'm not familiar with the status of running evince on MS Windows, but feature wise, Okular looks more useful (at least to me).


I don't believe this will be the case for many. Most users will have to deal with a single format only, i.e. PDF and they typically have the Acrobat Reader installed.

If ocular wanted to be a serious competitor, the rendering quality of poppler would have to be increased dramatically. Quite unfortunately it still fails for non-trivial layouts, which is probably one of the reasons, why the documentation for Scribus, the popular qt-based Free DTP programme, recommend Acroread for use with Scribus.

[...]
- Given that the NVu project status seems to be currently "comatose", Quanta Plus *will* imho be the best dedicated (as in : not Eclipse et al) libre / gratis Web IDE.


Nvu is dead, sure. I understand that its unofficial successor KompoZer ( http://www.kompozer.org ) is still alive. However, Quanta is something completely different.
Additionally, there will - afaik, please correct me if I'm wrong - be no native (Aqua, non-X11) version of OpenOffice.org 2.x in the near future (at least not before the OpenOffice.org 3.x branch goes stable).


There is a downloadable alpha of OpenOffice for Quartz/Aqua. I understand that KOffice 2 is pretty much alpha, too.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Cross Platform
by Morty on Thu 24th Jan 2008 22:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
Morty Member since:
2005-07-06

I cannot think of any KDE based application that would be impressive enough to be used for proselytizing Windows users. Maybe I've missed something,


I'd say you have missed lots, the quality and diversity of KDE applications are impressive. Some of the applications in the default KDE modules are good examples, like the kdeedu module with applications like Marble, Kalzium and KStars. Koffice shows lots of promise, Krita is one application going to raise eyebrows on windows users. Kate are by many considered a better editor than Emacs and Kontact/KMail/KOrganizer compares very well against similar applications.

In addition you have the range of high quality 3rd party KDE applications. Applications like TaskJuggler, digiKam, KTorrent, Semantik, Tellico and BasKet Note Pads.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by backdoc on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 23:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
backdoc Member since:
2006-01-14

I completely agree with you. And, I just posted regarding the same issue on the other OSNews Article regarding Linux adoption. I won't repost. I'll just stick the link here: http://www.osnews.com/permalink?297455

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by computrius on Thu 24th Jan 2008 03:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
computrius Member since:
2006-03-26

"It shows people the sort of software they can expect on a full-blown Linux system. "

Thats the problem ;)

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by RawMustard on Thu 24th Jan 2008 09:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

I thinks it's all right to port GNU/Linux software to windows, as long as it runs like shit in windows like all windows software ported to GNU/Linux does ;) Hell even Firefox gets more attention and care in windows than it does GNU/Linux, sad but true ;)

As long as it gives the user a taste of what they could really have if they ran a full blown GNU/Linux OS, then it's done it's job.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Cross Platform
by lemur2 on Thu 24th Jan 2008 22:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Cross Platform"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I thinks it's all right to port GNU/Linux software to windows, as long as it runs like shit in windows like all windows software ported to GNU/Linux does ;) Hell even Firefox gets more attention and care in windows than it does GNU/Linux, sad but true ;) As long as it gives the user a taste of what they could really have if they ran a full blown GNU/Linux OS, then it's done it's job.


Just a minor quibble.

You can't readily port Linux itself to Windows. GNU software ... by all means, but Linux (the kernel) itself ... can really only replace the Windows kernel.

Your best option is to run Linux virtualized ... but then it still isn't running under Windows, is it?

There is always Cygwin ... but that is akin to "transforming" the Windows kernel to support GNUish userland code. It still isn't running Linux on Windows.

You can always set up a dual-boot system:
http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/
... but that certainly isn't running Linux on Windows, it is just having a choice of which of a number of OS'es to run on a single machine. BTW, with a dual-boot system, you can have the Linux OS see and use the Windows filesystem:
http://www.ntfs-3g.org/
... but it is far harder to have the Windows system fully supporting the Linux filesystem(s).

Just to prove that nothing in software is totally impossible, there is always coLinux:
http://www.colinux.org/

It just goes to show, doesn't it, that GNU/Linux working in with Windows goes infinitely further than Windows working in with GNU/Linux.

I mean there is Wine:
http://winehq.org/
... but of course that is not written by Microsoft, is it?

Looking at it ... it turns out that none of this "wroking together" stuff is written by Microsoft. Funny, that.

BTW ... Windows software that is truly ported to Linux runs just fine. You will probably have trouble running Windows binaries under Wine on a Linux system ... but bear in ind those binaries are Windows applications that haven't been ported to Linux ... but can still be made to run anyway.

Edited 2008-01-24 22:54 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by Coxy on Thu 24th Jan 2008 10:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
Coxy Member since:
2006-07-01

If it wasn't for software like the gimp I WOULD be using OSS / Linux.

[jest]
Wasn't the gimp created to put people off OSS and keep them using Photoshop?
[/jest]

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Cross Platform
by wirespot on Thu 24th Jan 2008 17:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Cross Platform"
wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

[jest]Wasn't the gimp created to put people off OSS and keep them using Photoshop?[/jest]


Nah. It was created as a perfectly good alternative for people who can't afford or don't want to pay a grand for Photoshop.

I know you meant it as a joke, but too many people completely disregard that aspect. The fact that most of the Windows software pool is made out of commercial applications: expensive, not open, with a deployment model that makes injecting malware a piece of cake. Whereas the opposite is true for Linux software. How's that for TCO? But of course, if you shop on torrent sites you can afford to make 1-on-1 comparisons.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Cross Platform
by unoengborg on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 23:45 UTC in reply to "Cross Platform"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

I believe this move is good for FOSS but bad for Linux adoption.


I don't think that it is bad for Linux adoption. Just imagine if you could replace the Outlook/Exchange kombo on windows with kontact and some standards base serverside komponents on windows you would lower the barrier to to adopt Linux in many companies.

Mail and calendaring is mission critical to most businesses and unless you can't do that fully cross platform, you will not even try to go cross platform, and if you are not going to go cross platform you will chose the platform with the software that best fits your business in general, and you will not switch to something cheeper in places where it otherwise would be possible.

Windows in itself have no value to the user, its just an necessary evil to run familliar windows apps. If you get familliar with KDE apps why pay for windows if you can get Linux for free?

Reply Score: 14

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by backdoc on Thu 24th Jan 2008 04:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
backdoc Member since:
2006-01-14

Windows in itself have no value to the user, its just an necessary evil to run familliar windows apps. If you get familliar with KDE apps why pay for windows if you can get Linux for free?


I think this is true. In fact, I said that in a recent post to OSNews (http://www.osnews.com/permalink?295348). It would be to open source's advantage if the OS could be more or less a commodity. Look at all of the *nix variations. They all run the same applications. But, you choose your OS based on personal preferences regarding things like security and stability. Anybody using Linux today could also be using BSD or vice versa.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Cross Platform
by unoengborg on Thu 24th Jan 2008 15:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Cross Platform"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

Have you heard of Scalix and Zimbra?


Yes, I have heard of them, and I have even tested Zimbra. The problem is that many people want a real desktop program as well as a web client, because that is what they are used with from Outlook/Exchange.
There is also the problem with personal cryptographic keys when using web clients. Many users want to have them on media that are in their own control, and not on some far away server. Another reason is that Ajax based are a bit slow if you are going to manipulate mailboxes with 20.000 or mor messages.

If you want people to change their habits you can't just offer them software that does the same thing, you need to offer software that does the same thing in a better way, doing it in a worse way is an absolute no no, even if the difference is ever so small.

However, when you combine kontact with some web based you have a windows killer. I'm not sure how well Zimbra and Kontact would work together, as far as I know kontact uses imap mailboxes for storing events, notes and todo lists, while Zimbra uses caldav if I remember correctly, but there might be some solution to that.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Cross Platform
by anda_skoa on Thu 24th Jan 2008 17:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

I'm not sure how well Zimbra and Kontact would work together, as far as I know kontact uses imap mailboxes for storing events, notes and todo lists, while Zimbra uses caldav if I remember correctly, but there might be some solution to that.


I think IMAP is only used for calendar when talking to the Kolab groupware server, otherwise IIRC GroupDAV.

For a list of currently supported groupware systems see
http://kontact.kde.org/groupwareservers.php

My guess is that support for properly documented system can be added quickly if respective requests are made

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Cross Platform
by phoenix on Fri 25th Jan 2008 00:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Cross Platform"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

There's no single, simple method for connecting Kontact to a Zimbra server. However, it is possible to access all the data in a Zimbra server from within Kontact:

* connect to the mail store via IMAP. Even gives you access to shared folders, although you do have to read the "share invite" messages in the web client to activate the shared folders

* connect to the global address list via LDAP

* connect to your personal calendar via the "Calendar in External File" resource and point it at https://<server>/home/<user>/Calendar/. You just have to share it to your e-mail address from within the web client

* connect to any shared calendars you have access to via the same method

* connect to your files/briefcase areas via Konqueror's webdav:// KIO-slave

* connect to the IM server via XMPP (or whatever the Jabber protocol is called) via Kopete

It's not an-every-joe solution, but it is possible to do for those power-users that like Kontact.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by tech10171968 on Thu 24th Jan 2008 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
tech10171968 Member since:
2007-05-22

Windows in itself have no value to the user, its just an necessary evil to run familliar windows apps. If you get familliar with KDE apps why pay for windows if you can get Linux for free?

Quoted for truth. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here, but it seems to me that the number 1 reason for people staying away from linux has to be complete unfamiliarity with the various apps (as well as the OS itself); some might not admit to that but from my experience it's been true. Most users would rather stick with the devil they know, even if that devil is constantly poking their rear ends with its pitchfork. If KDE apps do become even mildly popular then we start going down that slippery slope: "Linux has these apps, too? And it's free? Then why the hell am I paying Microsoft all this money?!?!"

That is a sentiment which will undoubtedly have the chairs flying once again in Redmond.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Cross Platform
by elsewhere on Thu 24th Jan 2008 04:17 UTC in reply to "Cross Platform"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

For those who are wondering: I believe this move is good for FOSS but bad for Linux adoption.


So by the same token, Firefox has set back the cause of linux adoption? Would the OSS community have been better served if Firefox only ran on *nix?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Cross Platform
by wirespot on Thu 24th Jan 2008 17:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Cross Platform"
wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

Actually, examples like Firefox just go to show that the issues of FOSS applications and FOSS operating systems are decoupled as far as end users are directly concerned. Of course, having a healthy desktop software stack will help a kernel become more popular (if desktop environment is something it strives for). But modern software tends to be portable. At some point, if properly made, all major kernels and OS's should be able to benefit from a common pool of applications. Things like Firefox, Thunderbird or OpenOffice are spearheading this tendency because everybody needs a browser, an email client or an office app. But they also have to be built on a portable base. This is where things like Qt/KDE or GTK come in. If the backend is portable (or ported) and the language too, at some point the rest of the software deluge follows. GTK and Qt have been portable for a long time. It was high time a desktop environment followed. I mean, how many portable desktop environments do you know? How can that not be a good thing, to be able to have as large a pool of applications (good old FOSS apps, not just any junkware) on as many platforms as possible?

Reply Score: 3

v RE: Cross Platform
by Babi Asu on Thu 24th Jan 2008 06:04 UTC in reply to "Cross Platform"
Burning question
by sbergman27 on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:36 UTC
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

But does it run KStars and Marble? ;-)

Reply Score: 7

RE: Burning question
by _LH_ on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:58 UTC in reply to "Burning question"
_LH_ Member since:
2005-07-20

But does it run KStars and Marble? ;-)


Sure it does. At least KStars is demoed in the keynote speech.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Burning question
by Pelly on Thu 24th Jan 2008 01:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Burning question"
Pelly Member since:
2005-07-07

Yes. KSTARS is included and works in Windows just as well as with your favorite Linux desktop.

20 minutes after reading the article I downloaded & installed it onto my WinXP side.

I know 20 mins is a long time but I humbly ask for consideration. I was waiting to pick up my son and was reading OSNews on my PDA Phone. It took a few minutes to get home, so any slack is appreciated.

On the plus side, I read a previous comment that stated this appryoach may not earn new users for Linux in general. I have to say that I definitely DO think this will help linux adoption.

Why? People will probably be interested in seeing Linux in action because they'd be interested in seeing the KDE Desktop in Linux. The environment it is designed for.

My hat tips to the KDE Team for their efforts.

Bravo!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Burning question
by TaterSalad on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 23:02 UTC in reply to "Burning question"
TaterSalad Member since:
2005-07-06

No way! For me its knetwalk and ksokoban FTW!

Reply Score: 3

Download link?
by sappyvcv on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:42 UTC
sappyvcv
Member since:
2005-07-06

Anyone have a download link for Windows? I don't see one.

edit: Nevermind, the download link was just a dark blue color and didn't stand out to me.

Edited 2008-01-23 22:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

v OS X?
by Brmbolec on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:53 UTC
RE: OS X?
by _LH_ on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 22:58 UTC in reply to "OS X?"
_LH_ Member since:
2005-07-20

And why would anybody use KDE on MacOSX?? That's quite beyond me... I guess it's using aging X11 and other methods of eating your memory ;)


It doesn't use X. It's native and they mostly head for native apps, not doing whole desktop.

Reply Score: 8

RE: OS X?
by Teebo on Thu 24th Jan 2008 07:04 UTC in reply to "OS X?"
Teebo Member since:
2005-07-28

Dude, you can already can use KDE 3.5 applications on OS X using X11 for _years_.

The whole point in the OS X port of KDE4 is to get rid of that X11 dependency and to have native KDE appliations on OS X that integrate more nicely.

And what the point is? Of course, the KDE applications. For example, you get a decent mail client if the rather basic OS X mail client doesn't fit your needs.

Reply Score: 7

Comment by kloty
by kloty on Wed 23rd Jan 2008 23:20 UTC
kloty
Member since:
2005-07-07

One year ago I wrote an <a href=http://www.osnews.com/story/17307/Whats_a_Multi-OS_Platform_and_How... on this topic. It's nice to see, that the ideas are becoming reality.

Reply Score: 1

Cross-platform, a welcome feature
by WereCatf on Thu 24th Jan 2008 00:26 UTC
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

Just today as I was playing World Of Warcraft I thought about disabling the in-game music and then having some audio player play music I'd rather listen to. So, I started thinking about the player then. I would have chosen Rhythmbox without a second thought if possible but it's not available for Windows..Then I tried Winamp but I found it just plain horrible. iTunes resembles Rhythmbox but for some reason it's dog slow on my PC... And I don't know of any other Windows players. AmaroK might be a good choice then since it apparently resembles Rhythmbox enough for me to feel at-home using it. And this is just an example from my own life why I find it A Good Thing (TM) that they're porting these apps for Windows too. I'm sure there are lots of other examples to be found around ;)

Reply Score: 7

brynjolf Member since:
2007-04-06

musikCube / XMPlay
but yeah no players near amaroK or rhytmbox.

Reply Score: 1

grable Member since:
2006-11-24

I recently found AIMP2. it looks like a winamp clone, but is way better imo.
http://www.aimp.ru

Edited 2008-01-24 01:48 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18
jrronimo Member since:
2006-02-28

Foobar 2000 is one of the best: http://www.foobar2000.org/

Reply Score: 1

bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

iTunes resembles Rhythmbox but for some reason it's dog slow on my PC...


Heh... now this is a sign of the the times, you know Linux and FOSS is beginning to reach critical mass when the knock offs become better than the apps they were intended to imitate...

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Score: 2

main developers for os x
by thebackwash on Thu 24th Jan 2008 02:34 UTC
thebackwash
Member since:
2005-07-06

One of the lead developers in bringing KDE to OS X for the last few YEARS has been Benjamin Reed.
http://www.racoonfink.com/

He's been truly instrumental for the KDE 3 Fink port, and has done yeoman's duty for others' benefit. If you've been benefitted by his work, (and the work of many others I'm sure in my ignorance I omit,) please give Ben a shout out. He's responsive, polite, and does a very good job.

Just wanted to express my thanks.

Charles

Reply Score: 3

2.4Go
by sanctus on Thu 24th Jan 2008 03:44 UTC
sanctus
Member since:
2005-08-31

2.4Go, well that's quite a download.

Reply Score: 1

porting tools
by Different on Thu 24th Jan 2008 04:03 UTC
Different
Member since:
2007-07-03

So what are the porting tools that can be used to port Linux apps to Windows apps in KDE ?

Reply Score: 1

RE: porting tools
by boudewijn on Thu 24th Jan 2008 07:03 UTC in reply to "porting tools"
boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

Other than a compiler and some knowledge of the platform, you don't need porting tools at all. It's mostly removing thoughtless X11'isms and unixisms, changing the library structure around a bit sometimes and when committing the changed back taking care you haven't fallen into the trap of thinking filenames are case-insensitive but case-preserving. It's a lot of work because there's so much code, but you don't need anything special. (Except for a windows or OS X system, of course).

Reply Score: 5

RE: porting tools
by aseigo on Thu 24th Jan 2008 17:49 UTC in reply to "porting tools"
aseigo Member since:
2005-07-06

So what are the porting tools that can be used to port Linux apps to Windows apps in KDE ?


that's the beauty of it: you don't really port apps. as long as you aren't using any OS specific API calls or facilities (e.g. assuming /proc filesystems, using native threading APIs or other such stuff) it's mostly just making it compile on the host compiler (e.g. visual studio or xcode). there are some differences here in there in what the compilers will accept, but other than that all of the platform specific stuff happens below the application in the libraries.

Reply Score: 5

Total replacement?
by PotajiTo on Thu 24th Jan 2008 09:41 UTC
PotajiTo
Member since:
2006-10-23

Hi, Do you think we will see a full windows shell replacement based on kde 4? I will very much like that.

Reply Score: 2

Tongue in cheek
by bolomkxxviii on Thu 24th Jan 2008 11:21 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

Finally! I can play great games like Tux Racer on Windows!

Reply Score: 1

RE: Tongue in cheek
by Narishma on Thu 24th Jan 2008 11:31 UTC in reply to "Tongue in cheek"
Narishma Member since:
2005-07-06

Tux Racer isn't a KDE application.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Tongue in cheek
by Wemgadge on Thu 24th Jan 2008 15:11 UTC in reply to "Tongue in cheek"
Wemgadge Member since:
2005-07-02

You CAN already run tuxracer on windows:

http://www.extremetuxracer.com/?download

As for all the FUD in the previous comments: The whole point of KDE4 is that developers will code for KDE4 instead of for a specific platform, because KDE4 now has an abstraction layer (phonon,solid etc.) that takes away the hard X11 dependencies.

When all the bugs are worked out you'll be able to run KDE apps on linux, windows or MacOSX trivially.

This is going to happen in a matter of months, not years.

youtube for KDE4! The Keynote linked the other day explains it all.

Reply Score: 4

pragmatism
by Gorgak on Thu 24th Jan 2008 13:07 UTC
Gorgak
Member since:
2007-05-30

Bringing free software to proprietary systems isn't just about converting people to free software.

It's often touted that open development brings us better software. And guess what; it's true! Hence, being able to use free software on prop. systems isn't just about convincing people that free software is a viable alternative - it's also important (to me, at least, already a free software "convert" for a long time) that even if I've chosen a prop. operating sytem for whatever reason, I can still use the software that I like.

Reply Score: 3

fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

I downloaded the install program and ran it. After a couple next clicks, it asked me to pick a download mirror. The list was empty. It had an add button, I clicked it and a textbox came up with the following contents:

"ftp:// "

Cool, I get to go out on the web and find doownload mirrors so I can enter them in the textbox.

Seriously, I'm a Linux user, but I have a couple Winders boxes I wanted to try this on. That was a show-stopper for me. I'm sure it would reinforce what many Windows users already think of Linux. Hopefully it was just a bad install program, and it will be fixed soon.

Reply Score: 2

aseigo Member since:
2005-07-06

Seriously, I'm a Linux user, but I have a couple Winders boxes I wanted to try this on. That was a show-stopper for me. I'm sure it would reinforce what many Windows users already think of Linux. Hopefully it was just a bad install program, and it will be fixed soon.


the installer worked fine last time i tried it, but these issues are specifically why it's a technology preview right now and not a final release.

please don't subject your "just need it to work out of the box" friends on win/mac to this just yet. it's more for those like you who can figure things out and maybe even help make it better in the meantime.

and developers who'd like to start working with the libs as well so they can have apps ready to go when we release production versions in the summer.

Reply Score: 6

miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

I have experienced this bug too. I have added some random text there, went back and forward again, the second time the list was filled with mirrors.

Reply Score: 2

fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

I have experienced this bug too. I have added some random text there, went back and forward again, the second time the list was filled with mirrors.


Thanks for the tip!

I wasn't meaning to be overly critical, but I think at least having the install work would be a high priority to get people to see the cool features of KDE on Windows. I know I want to! I'll try it again tonight.

Reply Score: 2

haha
by Redeeman on Thu 24th Jan 2008 15:33 UTC
Redeeman
Member since:
2006-03-23

lol.. so the multitude of different platforms it ran upon before was not enough to be called "cross platform" ?

Reply Score: 3

Amarok Please!
by mdoverkil on Thu 24th Jan 2008 19:29 UTC
mdoverkil
Member since:
2005-09-30

I would absolutely love to have Amarok on windows. I can't stand most of the other audio players out there for windows. No more Winamp or Itunes!

Reply Score: 1

RE: Amarok Please!
by jrronimo on Thu 24th Jan 2008 21:32 UTC in reply to "Amarok Please!"
jrronimo Member since:
2006-02-28

Foobar 2000 is known to be pretty awesome: http://www.foobar2000.org/

Reply Score: 1

RE: Amarok Please!
by lemur2 on Fri 25th Jan 2008 02:28 UTC in reply to "Amarok Please!"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I would absolutely love to have Amarok on windows. I can't stand most of the other audio players out there for windows. No more Winamp or Itunes!


Songbird?

http://www.songbirdnest.com/

You can get it for Windows right now, you don't have to wait for Amarok.

Reply Score: 2

Which Windows versions?
by nalf38 on Thu 24th Jan 2008 20:07 UTC
nalf38
Member since:
2006-09-01

There's a lot of info on the windows.kde site, but no list of minimum requirements. Will kde4 work on win2k? Does anyone know? For that matter, what about 98?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Which Windows versions?
by smitty on Thu 24th Jan 2008 20:27 UTC in reply to "Which Windows versions?"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

That's a good question. It looks like Qt4 supports Win98 and beyond, but I'm betting KDELibs probably hasn't tested on anything less than Win2000.

Reply Score: 2

Torrent please?
by Anonymous Penguin on Fri 25th Jan 2008 11:28 UTC
Anonymous Penguin
Member since:
2005-07-06

I am trying to download it for Windows. It is taking forever (I have a very fast connection). How about a torrent, as it is already the case with OS X?

Reply Score: 2