OSNews

4.1.4 + patches

Actually it's 4.1.3 + patches to make KDE 4.1 usable for the average SLED customer. We have a version freeze point in the development cycle that dictates the choice to take 4.1.3. If you've seen openSUSE 11.1 you know how it looks, plus a few months more bugfixing.

The patches are
* branch patches making it largely equivalent to 4.1.4
* selected backports from KDE 4.2 such as
** Plasma layouting fixes
** PowerDevil
** NetworkManager-kde4
** all of kwin desktop effects)

Plus the usual default look and feel work, Aya as Plasma theme, Ozone windeco SuSE logo as start menu etc.

Well, I have been using KDE 4.2 for the past month and have been testing it on a small group (15 people) of users and they are, for the first time, raving about a non-Microsoft product.

There are small gotchas here and there, but KDE 4 is a much better product than KDE3 ever was, even if it isn't as mature in some areas. But guess what? We can pick and choose.

For instance, we still use the kde3 version of k3b and have settled on evolution as the email client for now.

Have you actually used kde 4.2? If these were very conservative users, I would have gone to Debian and KDE 3.5.10, which is a very good and mature product, but there are lots of improvements to the overall fit and finish of the desktop in kde4 that make it more appropriate for this specific deployment.

Hope that sheds some light on my question.

Peace

It's a bit of a shame as KDE 4.2 brings a lot of goodness to the table.

It would be good to know whether SLED will eventually be upgraded to kde4.2 or 4.3 as I can't imagine sitting on 4.1 for five years.

Let me know if you think that this will be the case.

That's under consideration, is all that I can say right now.

If you are serious about a KDE SLED deployment, tell your sales contact your needs.

I'm pretty sure he means 'as opposed to Page 2 on OSNews'.

In any case, I don't really know what the answer to that question would be, or even what it could be. Someone, (Thom, I suppose) made a judgment call, and put it on the second page. Perhaps this one is a bit borderline, but even so, who really cares? If you use RSS, like me, you get front page and page 2 news all the same. And you clearly found the article, so it wasn't an impediment in that case.

I suppose I would agree, though, that this article is probably higher in importance than others found on Front page; 25 Years of Mac? Analysts indecisive (over Android)? A review of the IBM x41? A new release of one of the major Linux distros does seem, to me, at least, to be significantly higher in importance.

But then I don't have to make those judgment calls, or listen patiently to my whiny users every time they disagree over such a trivial matter. In other words: Let it go, man. Just let it go...

Page 1 stories require the submitters/editors to actually write something, and not just copy/paste a blurb from another website.

Page 2 stories are just copy/paste blurbs.

If there's no "Read More" link at the bottom of the blurb, it's not a Page 1 story.