Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Oct 2017 23:49 UTC, submitted by JRepin
KDE

Today KDE publishes this autumn's Plasma feature release, KDE Plasma 5.11. Plasma 5.11 brings a redesigned settings app, improved notifications, a more powerful task manager. Plasma 5.11 is the first release to contain the new "Vault", a system to allow the user to encrypt and open sets of documents in a secure and user-friendly way, making Plasma an excellent choice for people dealing with private and confidential information.

This screenshot of the new Vault feature with a selection in a selection because you like selections is just so KDE - and I mean that in a teasing, loving way.

Order by: Score:
One app window, two monitors, two DPIs
by Parry on Wed 11th Oct 2017 08:25 UTC
Parry
Member since:
2014-06-03

Microsoft could learn from this. One of the biggest complaints I get from our many Surface users is the DPI mess when using an external monitor.

Reply Score: 3

v Comment by x86_x64
by x86_x64 on Wed 11th Oct 2017 13:57 UTC
RE: Comment by x86_x64
by leech on Wed 11th Oct 2017 17:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by x86_x64"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

All-flat, all-bland, all-boring. KDE always was, and as far as I can see still is, just a clone of Windows GUI. They're even following this all-flat trend MS started.


KDE 4 was released before Windows 7 and Windows 7 definitely looked more like KDE 4 did than Vista or other previous environments. What's your point?

Previous to KDE4 though, it's always been very Windows-Esque, which is why I've preferred Gnome. But hey, it's all in how you want to roll, choice is good.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by x86_x64
by x86_x64 on Thu 12th Oct 2017 10:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by x86_x64"
x86_x64 Member since:
2017-10-11

What I mean, KDE does not bring anything new to the table. They don't even have their own distinct style, as compared to FluxBox, XFCE, WidowMaker, etc.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by x86_x64
by aaronb on Thu 12th Oct 2017 10:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by x86_x64"
aaronb Member since:
2005-07-06

What KDE brings to the table is that you can configure things to your needs if you want and that in its self is the KDE style.

There are going to be similarities between different desktops, but hey, if you want a desktop environment that operates solely by humming Morse code in Klingon simply find enough like minded people to make it happen...

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by x86_x64
by x86_x64 on Thu 12th Oct 2017 11:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by x86_x64"
x86_x64 Member since:
2017-10-11

Maybe it's because I used KDE too long ago, but I didn't find in any more configurable than most other Linux DEs.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by x86_x64
by aaronb on Fri 13th Oct 2017 08:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by x86_x64"
aaronb Member since:
2005-07-06

GNOME for instance takes a different approach.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by x86_x64
by grat on Fri 13th Oct 2017 18:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by x86_x64"
grat Member since:
2006-02-02

I'm guessing that was KDE 1.0? Because 3.x was ridiculously sophisticated in what you could tweak. One of the major complaints about 4.x was that all that customization went away.

KDE 4.x, especially the early releases (and probably when you last tried to use it) were pretty much a technology demonstration that all the major distros insisted on wedging into their latest release-- when it wasn't ready for primetime.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by x86_x64
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 12th Oct 2017 14:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by x86_x64"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Who gives a flying rats ass? Is it stable? Does it allow a user to be productive?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by x86_x64
by x86_x64 on Fri 13th Oct 2017 07:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by x86_x64"
x86_x64 Member since:
2017-10-11

Is it stable?

Hm, I don't think so, but I guess that's relative, depending on how high is your bar for "stable".
Does it allow a user to be productive?

Hm, no... At least not me. It's too bloated and slow to be productive.
Does that answer your questions?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by x86_x64
by richarson on Sat 14th Oct 2017 23:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by x86_x64"
richarson Member since:
2014-05-24

Funy you should say that, givne that you also said "Maybe it's because I used KDE too long ago".

Nuf said.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by Dr-ROX
by Dr-ROX on Wed 11th Oct 2017 17:15 UTC
Dr-ROX
Member since:
2006-01-03

I have a feeling Linux desktop got stuck somewhere in 2012 and doesn't progress more. KDE hasn't changed that much design assets after v4 was released, Gnome shell also got stuck to that design when it was released. Unity was also stuck. So yeah.. Like, if I boot any of these desktop environments, I'm always thrown back few years back.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Dr-ROX
by leech on Wed 11th Oct 2017 17:48 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dr-ROX"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Ha, not sure what you're referring to... it isn't like Windows has changed all that much since '95... it's just gotten ugly like everything else. The flat design is certainly terrible, I much prefer icons like Ken's Icons for the Amiga. http://www.amiga-look.org/artwork/kens-icons-v23

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Dr-ROX
by Ford Prefect on Wed 11th Oct 2017 21:14 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dr-ROX"
Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

The desktop is stuck in general, also on other platforms. I feel like most innovation on the GNU/Linux desktop happened in the realms of tiling window managers. Great stuff has come out there. However they stay in a niche.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Dr-ROX
by ThomasFuhringer on Thu 12th Oct 2017 08:17 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dr-ROX"
ThomasFuhringer Member since:
2007-01-25

Personally I wish they would go back to the time before 2012, before 'flat design' to be precise. Using a computer was much more aesthetically pleasing at that time.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Dr-ROX
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 12th Oct 2017 18:02 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dr-ROX"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Not entirely untrue. What has been overlooked its the transition to wayland, that has been huge and mostly behind the scenes.

I guess, is there something wrong with the way it is now? What would you add/subtract? With KDE anyways, it shouldn't be too difficult to do that.

My main KDE complaint is stability of the releases. I've had a number of use cases broken with updates. Reporting them is such a time suck, and the feed back I've gotten from my reports is usually months later and pretty much boils down to " that shouldn't happen, could you investigate further". Which I get it free software and everything, but I don't have the time...

Gnome is stable, works, good utils, moderate configuration. A good default choice.

I'd really like to spend some more time with sway. i3wm is pretty good, just missing the wayland protocol...

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Dr-ROX
by tidux on Thu 12th Oct 2017 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Dr-ROX"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

GNOME and KDE pushing Wayland sessions helps Sway, because most of the problems with using Sway are really down to applications or libraries not supporting Wayland properly (looking at you, QtWebEngine). This means the big DEs putting millions of eyeballs on how things work under Wayland will uncover a bunch of bugs. Once I can run a mix of Gtk, Qt, Java, and SDL/OpenGL/Vulkan windows without firing up XWayland at all, then Sway will be a really nice environment.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Dr-ROX
by ple_mono on Thu 12th Oct 2017 18:25 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dr-ROX"
ple_mono Member since:
2005-07-26

Thank GOD! When people "innovate" too much, it's because they think the desktop is somehow is gonna be the next big thing, and they need to be in front of that wave somehow. The desktop is never gonna be the next big thing. It already had that moment. We already know what works on a desktop, and frankly we don't need it to change all that much (IMHO and also, I'm looking at you windows 8/10).

There is no money to be made from with a flashy new desktop OS. We don't need flashy new stuff. We need stable tools, that look uniform, work uniformly and perform uniformly (and well). Not sexy i know. But very productive.
If you need sexy (and innovative), and wan't to be a beta tester, get one of those new mobile OSes.

Last but not least, get off my lawn and tell MS i want windows 7 back (and why not a SP2+SP3 instead of some other crazy experiment that takes 5-10 years to "mature", if ever). No one uses the "modern" (or metro) apps seriously anyway.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Dr-ROX
by ple_mono on Fri 13th Oct 2017 02:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Dr-ROX"
ple_mono Member since:
2005-07-26

Sorry if my comment came of as rude btw. It wasn't my intent. Maybe i should've included a crazy smiley or two. ;)
Also it was not pointed specifically at Dr-ROX, but more in a general direction regarding the subject.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Dr-ROX
by richarson on Sat 14th Oct 2017 23:12 UTC in reply to "Comment by Dr-ROX"
richarson Member since:
2014-05-24

Yet, when KDE 4 and Gnoe 3 happened it seemed like everyone hated innovation.

I gues it's true that you can't please everybody ;)

Reply Score: 1

Yo, Dawg, I heard you like selections.
by bryanv on Thu 12th Oct 2017 15:02 UTC
bryanv
Member since:
2005-08-26

So how about a selection inside of a selection so you can make a selection?

I just can't even.

Reply Score: 2

Why icons have to be so ugly?
by tankist on Fri 13th Oct 2017 19:06 UTC
tankist
Member since:
2007-01-19

When will UI designers get tired of this flat ugliness and return to beauty?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why icons have to be so ugly?
by Morgan on Fri 13th Oct 2017 22:43 UTC in reply to "Why icons have to be so ugly?"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Probably around the time we can all agree unequivocally on what "beauty" means.

One of the great things about running a *nix based OS (or really anything that isn't Windows/macOS/iOS) is the ability to customize and tweak it to your heart's content. There are themes for KDE to make it look like 3.x or older KDE, there are skeuomorphic icon sets so you can rock it like it's 2007, there are even BeOS, Amiga, and NeXT themes if you really want to wax nostalgic.

Or, you could forego KDE altogether and run any DE or WM you want.

I guess what I'm saying is, don't be the one to complain that there are no choices when said choices are jumping into your lap.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why icons have to be so ugly?
by zima on Sun 15th Oct 2017 13:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Why icons have to be so ugly?"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

One of the great things about running a *nix based OS (or really anything that isn't Windows [...]) is the ability to customize and tweak it to your heart's content. There are themes for KDE to make it look like 3.x or older KDE, there are skeuomorphic icon sets so you can rock it like it's 2007, there are even BeOS, Amiga, and NeXT themes if you really want to wax nostalgic.

Or, you could forego KDE altogether and run any DE or WM you want.

There's also plenty of Windows themes, skins, icon sets, and alternative shells...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why icons have to be so ugly?
by richarson on Sat 14th Oct 2017 23:15 UTC in reply to "Why icons have to be so ugly?"
richarson Member since:
2014-05-24

I actually like them, but if I didn't at least I can easily change them

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Reply Score: 1