Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:54 UTC, submitted by Elv13
Gnome "Theme development is a tedious and difficult task, and for the GTK devs to be so careless in breaking their API at every turn disrespects the many hours people put into making themes for it. [...] I was given to believe that this breakage stems from a Microsoft-like climate of preventing users from customizing their systems, and deliberately breaking the work of others so that your 'brand' is the best. Anytime I hear the word 'brand' being used in Linux, I know something valuable is being poisoned." I find the tone of this one a bit too harsh and overly negative at times, but his point still stands.
Permalink for comment 541565
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Why not use Qt?
by ssokolow on Fri 9th Nov 2012 03:00 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why not use Qt?"
ssokolow
Member since:
2010-01-21

You can use PySide with pretty much all of the exe freezing options out there now, and it has better support for Qt and all of its platforms than PyQt ATM.


Good to know. I'll have to give it a try and see if I can duplicate the kind of responsiveness Geeqie gets out of GdkPixBuf in Qt's equivalent classes.

(I have a project planned that needs a highly-responsive image tagging GUI and Geeqie is my gold standard for responsiveness while an image hasn't finished loading.)


My bad, I was referring to gObject as being essentially a gnome project, because their developers have such a level of control over it that they basically own it.


Fair enough. I've actually been meaning to track down a widget-agnostic event loop and signals system so I can move all the GTK+ dependencies in my creations into UI plugins for easy replacement with Qt.


You can turn off the zoom slider and turn on a usage text item, this is KDE after all.


I'll admit I didn't go looking as thoroughly as I should have.

Was that added since in KDE 4.4 and 4.5 or am I just too tired to be competent?


I mistook KIOSlaves for kparts. I was referring to handy things like easy disc conversion, good FTP support and their ilk.


Agreed. From KDE 3.5 to present, I've always kept Konqueror around as my FTP/SFTP/FISH/etc. client regardless of what I do with other things.

Lately, though, I haven't been using any kind of GUI client. I just use rsync. (Pull it here, edit, push... and I get a free extra backup out of it.)


I should have noted that I meant their appearance in kde and in unity. This includes the feel of the use, which seems very dated in most GTK2 apps, although it has been some time since I tried pcmanfm.


I'll admit PCManFM is a tiny bit dated in not yet supporting a breadcrumb trail address bar or showing the number of children in the size column for folders.

That aside, I'm not really sure what you mean. Maybe I just value performance too much to get comfortable enough to notice any progress that has been made.


I agree that oxygen needs a refresh, but I have been using unity, which looks just as good in Qt with unity 2D as it does in compiz.


You are aware, I hope, that Unity 2D is being end-of-lifed? Last I heard, Canonical was planning to replace it with regular Unity using software-rendered compositing in either 13.04 or 13.10.


The general feel of Qt is sleeker though, as an example razor-qt vs lxde. In my opinion, razor-qt feels slicker despite being buggier.


From the screenshots, I can see what you'd mean by looking slicker for the panels and popup notifications.

However, in some ways, my LXDE desktop is actually slicker. Most of what I see would become almost identical once I squashed those panels down to my desired height and turned off compositing and fake translucency to squeeze out more CPU cycles.

(I'm using panel graphics from a previous Lubuntu release that make LXDE's panels look a LOT like the dark Razor ones and I've customized my tray icons so they all look like monochrome carved depressions in the panel unless they're trying to get my attention)


It would be the same reason unity and kde have nicer looking window decorations than openbox.


I actually don't like those seamless window decorations. Lubuntu does offer some but I turn them off because I like the active region for the WM to be clearly distinct from the active region for the client.

(Not to mention how the default window borders don't offer enough contrast between active and inactive windows)


Also, as an aside, there is this for looking at Qt apps. It is only relatively young, but shows some promise.

http://www.qtdesktop.org/applist


I'll take a look at it but this isn't a case of "He doesn't know where to look". This is a case analogous to "He's running Vim because, with fifty-million other editors having a Vi-like mode, none of them cloned it well enough to satisfy."

Making a satisfactory knock-off of a program is very hard and, for most of my GTK+ apps, nobody has even come close to mimicking all the little features that, to other people, probably seem like pointless wastes of effort.

Reply Parent Score: 2