Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th Jan 2008 14:41 UTC, submitted by superstoned
KDE "I think it's really necessary to respond to some criticism seen on the reactions to the latest OSnews article. I won't go into the article itself, imho it's rather negative, but hey. From an user's perspective, it makes sense to only review 3 or 4 parts of KDE 4 and complain about them, and ignore all the other brilliant pieces of work in there, right? On to the responses, I found this reaction by dagw to be the most typical. Well. That's painful. So, is he right? Did we make the wrong decision? Let's look at it from a broader perspective for a while. Let's see it in the Grand Scheme of Things to Come."
Permalink for comment 296014
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The KDE devs are right
by Dasher42 on Tue 15th Jan 2008 03:34 UTC
Member since:

The noise over the ways KDE 4.0.0 is incomplete is really a lot of huey. Dot-oh releases are supposed to be just a solid start. The framework that's there is impressive, and the bugs in rendering are largely from outside of KDE without a cheap workaround. This is quite acceptable. The differences between a "developer release" and a x.0.0 are just semantics. Come on.

I remember when dBase II came out, simply because Ashton-Tate knew that people avoid 1.0 releases and wanted the perception of being on the second iteration. The perception worked. That was a standard in the PC world for a long time. Hence, names and versions are really a lot of huey.

Take the product for what it's worth. It has potential to shake things up. KDE has put great design first, and it will have its rewards after wiz-bang one-offs have lost their luster.

I'm just a guy with C++ development experience, don't mind me.

Reply Score: 5