Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Mar 2009 18:37 UTC
Permalink for comment 353110
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-07-23
Hmm, what exactly did you like about 1.x and 2.x that have degraded in 3.x? Guess not.
I had thought that 3.x was a port of 2.x to qt3 and polishing of 2.x, with almost no redesign. From my 10-year experience with KDE, I still remember the hideous days with 2.x and arts and noatun. What a release for me when we had Juk and then amarok in KDE 3. KDE 4.2, for me, has already surpassed the functionality provided by 3.5 series. And I am thrilled about the possibility of the KDE4 technologies that has still not consolidated into programs at this stage. For example, when can we associate the plasma activities with virtual desktops? and, when can we see our calendars, todos, emails, contacts, whatever, on our desktop without opening each handling application?