Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Jan 2009 13:46 UTC
Editorial With Windows 7 having made its grand debut, and with KDE4's vision making leaps and bounds forward with every release, we have two major software projects that have decided to implement some fairly drastic interface changes. Such changes are bound to receive some harsh criticisms - but the funny thing is, these criticisms usually come from people you least expect it from.
Permalink for comment 345756
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by cjcox on Tue 27th Jan 2009 15:56 UTC
Member since:

In all fairness, the main reason for criticism is that the KDE developers PROMOTED 4 as the end all of end alls. So 4.0, which was a radical departure missing at least (AT LEAST) 75% of the features of KDE3, when it came out, it wasn't well received (with good reason).

4.1 supposedly made life better. Why? Because it slowly started looking more like 3.x. Huh? Well.. so much for radical change. I hear that 4.2 is even close to adding back all of the missing usefulness that 3.5 had... but perhaps coming up with a NEW UI design isn't something for amateurs.

Sometimes, not even the so called "professionals". I hear a lot of people discussing how bad SUSE's "start" panel change they made to Gnome is... and how bad the YaST and Compiz setting manager panels are... BUT supposedly, these were designed based on countless trials with ACTUAL USERS.... so the UI is "good" because of that, right?

Anyhow... I find it all very interesting. I'm looking forward to KDE 4.3, where we might finally have an adequate 3.5 replacement.... of course, it will look and feel and behave more like 3.5 naturally (it might actually take many, many more versions to get there though).

Reply Score: -3