Username or EmailPassword
A lot more has been done on 4.4, here is some I remember:
Virtuoso based backend for Nepomuk. It was based moslty on Sesame backend which was java based and lots of distro's and users disabled nepomuk because of it.
timeline:/ for viewing files by timeline
Version control intergration in dolphin (svn)
Better [Auto]mounting plasmoid and features
Audioplayer, Firefox bookmarks and windowmanagement runners
3 new games (kigo, palapeli and grantier)
At least one new KDE-Educational application (dont remember more details)
html5's <video> and <audio> support for khtml
New addressbook for kdepim, based on Akonadi technology
While these are only the ones i remembered and found on 4.4's release plan, i have to say that this release includes a huge amount of polishing and performance improvements.
The user interface also looks hell more natural by proper usage of animations.
Also, there is a lot of work going on PIM suite of kde. In this release, it includes lots of UI improvements in kmail and new addressbook, but the most of the work is being done on branches, on porting kdepim to Akonadi technology.
By KDE SC 4.4 you will only 'start' to see two of KDE SC 4.x pillars: Nepomuk and Akonadi. Hopefully by 4.5 and 4.6 more applications will use these technologies.
(Im not saying that 'wait, next KDE will be awesome.' KDE is already awesome)
Gnome did not release KDE4.0. KDE did.
Release early, release often refers to the source code and to fellow developers, it doesn't mean push it unto users by making it a "release".
Still, the alpha code quality was not my main problem with 4.0.
4.0 with current code quality would still suck and 4.0 was what KDE4 was to look like in the devs' vision.
In 4.3, many of the original misfeatures are gone, shrunk or reborn to be actually useful, but that wasn't the original plan. The original plan was 4.0 with 4.4+ code inside.
Can you people please stop your whining, or go use OS X 10.0 if you think that's any better.
Sort of silly, really. When is any FOSS Linux util ready for prime time? When most distros ship. The biggest benefit of having distros, is that you get that polished group of software that is meant to work together. Having multiple distros include specific versions of software, gives you a consensus that its verifiabily ok.
I'm not excusing the KDE project for releasing something that was not ready, but adopting something major that is not being shipped with distros is asking for problems. Of course there are always exceptions to this rule, but they'd better be good ones.
My favorite feature is being able to group different application windows as tabs in one single window.
Too bad that it will be a while before OpenSuse or Mandriva actually offer a supported version with KDE 4.4.
Hm, nice, but my desktop is empty space, i dont want to do any fancy things with my desktop, or with my windows, i dont want "gadgets", i just want my software to works, a working place what Works and Works Fast! I think KDE got the vista-way, the way to nowhere..
I dunno, all the features the top post here lists look like invisible backend changes to make stuff work better (pulseaudio support, better policykit support, [new?] networkmanager frontend (the old one does NOT work in KDE with ascii-password networks)).
And hey, they worked some more on the animations again. I would still like a 'darken unresponsive window' option like Compiz had, that was genuinely useful; I wonder if they actually put that one in this time around.
Actually, at least some of the fancy stuff IS mandatory for me. I have to turn on desktop effects (as a category, but I can leave all the effects off) to not have new widget tooltips erase the portion of the screen a previous widget tooltip was displayed on. Apparently it's a bug in the implementation of X.org's X server.
Fortunately, I see no slowdown in speed with effects on. Edited 2009-12-01 00:02 UTC
There seems to be a concerted "push" going on to disparage KDE. Here is a good example:
Lots of venom but no substance whatsoever. Not one word about why that author considers KDE to be bad.
Given this apparent media push to disparage (without actual substance) an emerging desktop, it perhaps indicates where the strongest competition to the dominant incumbent desktop is coming from.
that's some pretty good newspeak. People disparaging it must mean it's good
Prior to KDE 4, people wanted KDE to just die because Gnome was better supported/more easily understandable/nicer looking/Free
The KDE 4.0 and 4.1 "beta tests" made it even worse.
Considering that KDE's developer base is increasing constantly, I doubt you have any connection with reality.
And there again, ChromeOS is used as an example of why KDE failed. If ChromeOS succeeds, that means Gnome, KDE, XFCE, E17, Windows and Mac OS X also failed.
and felt compelled to mitigate the upcoming disaster.
The Gnome team isn't progressing as fast as the KDE team and everyone can see it.
KDE4 is the modern looking desktop. Gnome looks like it is from the 90's and Ubuntu doesn't help by making its netbook remix browntastic.
Chrome OS just has a browser for an interface and the majority of Linux geeks are not about to reduce their computers to a browser. Most consumers won't be interested either.
I mean just look at this video of Gnome 3:
It's almost a parody of awful UI design.
Gnome is in trouble and its defenders can sense that.
That video is a preview of what is to come.
It's detailed on their website
Instead of watching videos, you should try it out.
I actually did. It's bundled with GNOME 2.28.
It's not my thing, but it's also not as bad as you make it sound.
I can see what an awful system they have for switching between programs.
It's counter-intuitive and the animations are annoying.
Have a look at the youtube comments, people are already talking about switching to KDE after seeing where Gnome is headed.
KDE fans should be celebrating, Gnome 3 has the potential to end the desktop war.
...and that was the most reasonable, level-headed post so far. Well done.
That's why people like Jack Wallen write these articles. They know that once a desktop environment gets a strong majority share it will become a de facto standard and developers will flock to it.
Any collaboration that exists between KDE and Gnome is for mutual benefit.
However overall neither Gnome nor KDE benefits from the existance of the other. A developer submitting a bug patch to Gnome could have been doing the same for KDE. There is a limited number of available oss developers and by dividing the existing talent pool each project is held back by the other.
I like KDE, and if I'm on Linux that's what I use, but it definitely looks like after a brief push towards simplification they are trending back to insane overconfigurability.
8 (!!) options to control animations in the interface. That is so insane it's hard to comprehend the thought process that went into it. What user in their right mind would need that fine grained control over their animations. If they don't like animated things they can turn them off. If a certain animation is annoying a significant number of people, then that animation is broken and needs to be fixed.
Anything more than a single animations on/off toggle is massive overkill.
I've just talked to the developer of the animation feature. We came to a tentative solution to reduce the clutter while at the same time not hurting the KDE SC 4.4 string freeze that's already in effect.
It will be further improved for 4.5.
I am diametrically on the other side of the spectrum.
When having to use GNOME (that is at first time log into a desktop after a clean Debian install to get KDE installed via a graphical package manager), I again and again have to find out, that I simply cannot wrap my brain around the way I am supposed to use Gnome.
Neither so with a KDE desktop as it is set up by the distributors. And here comes the difference: I CAN configure KDE to my liking, and I can do it using graphical tools. Having to search through 2000 options is by far less annoying for me, than searching through 200, then searching again through 200, and again, only to discover that what I want to configure is not configurable, leaving me frustrated and going on the internet finding a workaround for it.
That said, it bugged me BIG TIME, when the taskbar color of Fedora's KDE4.1.3 did not react to ANY color setting I tried in the control panel (and I tried ALL of them, multiple times), when it was largely advertized all over the web that taskbar color is now changeable. Aaron Seigo told me upon asking, that the taskbar color is tied to the window background color, but that most themes have set it fixed to a different color.
Well, if something is seen as different by most theme designers (like taskbar color and window background color), probably it would be a good idea to treat it as different and dedicate an option to it.
In that regard KDE4 as it is delivered by most distros is still one step away from what I really would like regarding configurability. KDE3 was the optimum for me.
"What user in their right mind would need that fine grained control over their animations."
I like to have fine grained controls to tailor the UI exactly to my taste. The only thing they should do is have presets or a slider like in KDE 3 for the level of effects, so that those who don't want to bother can make quick and easy adjustments. Edited 2009-11-30 22:37 UTC
It's obvious what they do, and there are certainly fewer options than Vista or 7 offer. I fail to see how it is at all confusing. if you only want one option, there's that one checkbox that turns it on/off globally--you can have your cake and eat it, too.
Dude, KDE SC 4.4 is still two months away. Likely that window is just tentative.
Well bad dialogs is one thing, but I think having the options to easily change detailed preferences is a plus.
Also some of the most crappy config dialogs in KDE beat the crap out of gconf-editor!
I'm all for a simple layed out desktop, clear and well readable dialogs, but I seriously detest the GNOME attitude of not even giving the options in the background to change whatever! Sometimes you have to praise yourself lucky to even have key to change in gconf. The developers (preferred) defaults are nice and all, but I since I usually don't share all their preferences I like to make my own tweaks. Edited 2009-12-01 12:08 UTC
It'd be more worrying if it was an options dialog that users were required to use initially or that they would want to use regularly. It's not a particularly nice dialog but the users won't usually see it, so I wouldn't have thought it was a big problem...
"For me, Anything more than a single animations on/off toggle is massive overkill."
There. Fixed it for ya. *
* Unless you magically represent 99.9999% percent of the KDE user-base.
KDE is hardly the only OS with those kinds of options.
OK, that's fairly well hidden in Windows 7, but so was that dialog you mention in KDE 4.
I love that dialog. I can check "show window contents while moving" and uncheck everything else. I hate all those little animations. If it was all bundled into one checkbox, I could get rid of them but be stuck with nothing but a window outline when moving windows, which is not what I want
Maybe you missed the top "Enable animations" checkbox.
Just a caveat here ... as with ANY *.0 release of FOSS software, KDE SC 4.4.0 will contain new code and features which may contain bugs. If your aim is stability above all else, do not install KDE SC 4.4.0 when it becomes available, and stick with KDE SC 4.3.4. Wait until at least after the first round of bug fixes, which will come in KDE SC 4.4.1, before upgrading to KDE SC 4.4.x.
Every time I try KDE, the default clock is set to the 24h setting. Being an American who has never joined the military, I much prefer the 12h AM/PM style clock.
I seriously had to use Google to find out how to change this setting, and that proves that it has serious UI issues. In Gnome you just right click on the clock, select Preferences and it's the top option.
To do it in KDE, you have to go into the control panel, and futz around with HH:MM:SS p or some crap.
When I first read about KDE4, I was hopefuly, because it sounded like they were going to finally make it more gnome-like and simplify the UI / control center. But oh no, it's still as cluttered and overly complicated as KDE 3.5 and Windows.
I agree with the comments above, it's as if the developers just thought "hey, I want this feature" then threw it in. Didn't really consider WHERE it should be.
i understand your point, but if you think about it, it makes way more sence the kde way.
you just configure/select your country and localization settings, and it applies to the rest.
instead of customizing every widget or applications for each setting, you just select it on the global settings, and its used for every other clock or app or widget.
think about it, what do you prefer ? to have to configure every app manually or to have a global setting that applies to all the rest ?
thinking of it in the gnome way, creating the setting in every app or widget, its way more complex.
You could still provide this setting inside each app, but have it influence the global settings (or bringing up the global settings dialog).
so , basicly , what you are arguing is that you want more options , an option to change the same thing in two ( or more ) places.
is that it ? please tell me no
KDE became a draconian desktop in terms of usability. It gets in users' way. The interface is a mix of Aero and Aqua, probably this was negotiated between developers as some wanted to make it look like Win7 and others wanted to make it look like OS X. KDE4 was an expectation to make GNOME vapour, fullfilling all desktop user needs, following the consistent and stable releases from the 3.x series. But the KDE4 unforgettable fiasco happened - and it's struggling hard to recover from it. Unless some real leaders decide to make this desktop more usable like GNOME, the future is doomed. But probably the devels don't care... they are living in another world.
So for now...
I WON'T EVEN TRY IT.
This is not about stability. It's about standards. And KDE4 set fundamental and erroneous standards for the subsequent KDE4.x releases.
you're not getting... i said standards... the thousand-entries kickoff menu... the hard work that is to find things... the miraculously elaborated dolphin panels... the inability of setting 2 panels... and don't come say I can switch views to something else... it's the default that counts...
KDE4, the KDE 4.x fiasco series....
Gnome looks like a desktop from the 90's.
The only desktop that can compete with Windows and OSX is KDE.
You can talk about the simplicity of Gnome all day but the public won't care when the desktop interface has the aesthetics of a cheap cell phone.
With Gnome 3 they have shown that they don't have what it takes to make their desktop more modern looking.
pretty right... GNOME looks very old. That's why there is this love-and-hate relationship with Linux... probably because people love and hate both GNOME & KDE.