Popular KDE developer and Red Hat employee Bernhard “Bero” Rosenkraenzer left Red Hat today upon disagreement with their leadership direction regarding KDE. Bero cited reasons that Red Hat made KDE “crippleware” so he does not agree with this company line. We have already reported on the issue here, while Red Hat’s UI team recently posted an explanation for the much-discussed issue. In other Red Hat news, the official date for the full release of Red Hat 8 is Monday, Sep 30th.
Employee Leaves Red Hat upon Disagreement for KDE’s Crippled State
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
…Bero will probably be working for SuSE. 😉
..Bernhard. He made the right choice.
The support for RH on this matter among /.-ers and OSNEWSers is baffling. RH is not making things better or easier — they’re kludging KDE badly.
The fact is, the apps will run with all the libraries properly loaded. Ruining the UI experience will simply confuse a lot of people. You’ll constantly have to ask yourself, “OK — what’s really running here?”
I take it that Bernhard probably left after RH saw the response and ignored some of the firm objections of the authors of the software they are using.
Legal requirement for proper sportsmanship shouldn’t be a requirement for honoring the spirit of these efforts. I’m not saying you’re REQUIRED to, but their blatant disregard for it, and the fact that they are not offering any core improvement, speaks badly for them.
They should work really hard make GNOME as good as possible. I like KDE, but supporting two desktops in this market is spreading yourself too thin.
I believe the same. Red Hat should only support ONE desktop environment, be it Gnome OR KDE. A single DE is what makes sense for a desktop workstation.
However, if that happens, they SHOULD include the needed libraries to run KDE applications. You see, 90% of the GUI Linux apps, half of the apps are Qt and half are GTK+. To offer many applications that your users will be happy, you really have to support both toolkits. Even if you only offer ONE desktop environment.
You’ll constantly have to ask yourself, “OK — what’s really running here?”
Actually, that’s the question that the target audience of RedHat’s desktop is not going to ask. And that’s the whole point.
Exactly Sebastian!
RH is not going with the “Linux” way.
and there is many indication that RH is going to be
the next Microsoft,and i hope that the Linux community
will be aware of this before its too late .
> RH is not going with the “Linux” way.
Thank God, no they don’t seem to.
Eugenia, please, can you moderate down this troll?
Thanks.
RH is going to be
the next Microsoft
As I have said before, and will say again, they can’t.
For example, this posting of mine on Slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=38735&cid=4145577
– Sam
sorry , it is not a troll!
In 1990 “no one” think that Microsoft was going to be
a massive monopoly that no one can stop it .
Red Hat will never become a monopoly, just because of the way Linux and GPL works. The licensing scheme prevents someone from monopolizing Linux.
Your comment is just FUD. There is no real proof on your comment or clever statements to support your beliefs.
I hear this all of the time. It is pretty hard to be the next Microsoft when you have very little market share and the code that you base your releases on is released under the GPL.
You can include the KDE libs without including the KDE desktop, BTW. I run this way on my laptop so that I can run the KDE apps that I like.
Maybe the whole point of RED HAT doing what it’s doing with their KDE is to enhance the user experience. Let’s face it, not all of us are Linux gurus.
I am more of a KDE user, but I agree Redhat shouldn’t include the KDE desktop. Its a tough job to support two environments, it is confusing to the general user, and the whole controversy has just gotten pointless. Ordinary people who use computers don’t care about the name of the desktop, or the technology behind it. Those who do care about KDE probably have the skills to install it if they want it. And they can always use the many other desktops which are centered on KDE.
Redhat has yet to make profits. They are still struggling to break even, so the future is not very clear for them either. It would be nice to remember that as well
^nbsp; > You’ll constantly have to ask yourself, “OK — what’s really running here?”
Actually, that’s the question that the target audience of RedHat’s desktop is not going to ask. And that’s the whole point.
I disagree — my point was that, as a kludge, it won’t work as well as they expect.
There are usability differences between apps written in each of the toolkits, and whatever visual clues to these survive running one app in the other environment, help to clue users in to that and avoid confusion.
Yes, it is a troll, to any one that has more than two brain cells is obvious that RedHat can’t be the next M$ even if they had 99% of the market share and 45$Bn in the bank. The reason is simple:
they release all their code under the GPL -> No proprietary obfuscated file formats/protocols -> No vendor lock -> No M$
Not to mention that anyone can fork RH if they want to: Mandrake and quite a few other distros started as RH forks.
So stop trolling and spreading FUD, and if you are going to do so any way, at least back it up with some fictitious facts/arguments! Otherwise you just make a fool of yourself.
And I don’t know what the hell you mean with ‘the Linux way’ but if it means something, it means OSS friendly, and RH is much more OSS friendly than Suse or Caldera. If they modify some OSS project in the way they think it’s best, that is the point in OSS, freedom to do with software whatever is best for you, not whatever the author wants!
BTW: I don’t even use Linux, much less Gnome or KDE, so I couldn’t care less about the Distro/Desktop holy wars. All in all, to be more on topic: IMHO RH has done a quite good job with null, and the desktop unification make sense to me, it will benefit most users that really don’t care so much about what desktop they are using, and the ones that care can always install the official KDE, or switch to Mandrake/Suse/whatever that is the great thing about open source: choice.
Even more on topic: Even if I don’t agree with him, Bero has my respect as a great hacker and for putting his ideals over his job, not everybody have to courage of doing that.
And to all those KDE fanatics: if you don’t like the new RH setup don’t use it! Nobody is obligating to do so! So stop whining and complaining.
\k
I’m also a 100% KDE user, but I have to say I agree with Eugenia and the others who think that redhat shouldn’t even offer KDE (except as libs).
What Redhat should focus on, aside from polishing gnome 2 — which has so much potential it makes my teeth hurt — is making sure that if/when somebody does fire up a kde program, the user’s gnome settings are respected. Clearly RedHat’s done a nice job writing identical widget styles for the two systems, and that’s good, but they should also make sure that if you pick, say, osnews as your homepage, if the user fires of konq it will open osnews also. Same with their mouse settings, localization settings, font settings, and so on.
Of course, I haven’t tried redhat null so for all I know this is already taken care of.
I’d like to say kudos to redhat, since it takes some gusto to do something as unpopular as this. It’s the Right Thing — though I personally think they’d be better off using KDE as default, and making sure Gnome 1/2 programs fit in, as the KDE framework is a delight to program and is remarkably mature.
Now, if only they’d actually send the (by and large) great patches to the KDE cvs, instead of waiting for KDE folks to find them and apply them one by one. No kudos for that one.
What I should have emphasized in paragraph 2 is that a person running gnome should never have to open KControl to set KDE options — the relevant kde configs should be modified by gnome control center and by redhat’s configurators. This way the desktop would have true integration; and there would be no distinction between the two toolkits.
RH is not going with the “Linux” way.
There is no “Linux way”. Everyone’s running in different directions.
There are usability differences between apps written in each of the toolkits, and whatever visual clues to these survive running one app in the other environment, help to clue users in to that and avoid confusion.
As you can see from their choice of applications bundled, they’ve done a great effort to flatten out usability differences. And that’s why a lot of people will think that RedHat 8 is the best “Linux” ever. And isn’t that what it’s all about: Getting Linux onto everybody’s desktop?
I guess the point everybody is whining about is that RedHat did something that the community wasn’t able to do.
If I don’t get your point, just tell me: What is the user’s gain if he/she/it has to adopt to another scheme of usability with every application that get’s installed with the system?
I say RedHat should leave out KDE entirely, and only include the Qt libs. Let people who really want to run KDE on RedHat get the “real” thing from KDE.org, or run another distro. Let GNOME2 stand on its own two (small
feet.
Only Gnome get’s installed in the default install anyway. The user has to choose the KDE installation himself.
To run KDE apps you will need the KDELibs as well. 99% of the KDE/Qt apps use both the Qt and KDE libs. By including only Qt libs you don’t gain ANYTHING.
So the deal is that only one DE should be included in Red Hat, but the Qt/KDE libs necessary (modified in a way to look and behave the same as GTK+ apps) should be included as well in order to run all this trackload of apps available.
Brings into question the whole notion of wether or not individual distros will focus on KDE or GNOME and which might pair out as being more/less popular. Maybe Gnome/KDE will be better; maybe it wont. Maybe another desktop env will crop up in the future.
Red Hat seems to be putting a lot of focus around the Linux desktop as are a lot of other distros and it seems a vital part of the Red Hat business model. I don’t see why Bernhard would leave his job in light of what he feels was a poor choice (in my own word here) in desktop envrionments. I just think that leaving for something as uncertain as a GUI/desktop environment would not be my first choice.
I don’t know if Anonymous was trolling or not. Despite the fact that I disagree with him about Redhat becoming a monopoly, I know there are many people who have this fear regarding Redhat, logical or not. I think it is very unbecoming to ask that someone’s post be moderated down because another poster disagrees with it. All that need be done is to counter the claim with facts and logical arguments (and that was done). If Anonymous was some lone wolf nutcase, that would be one thing. However, he is not alone. As I said above, there are many who fear what he fears. Rather than repress or censor these people, it would be better to get it out in the open and show how this would not happen.
Red Hat can somewhat become the “microsoft of linux”, but not the “microsoft of the computing world”. This “monopoly” of the linux world can get them 1% of the computing market. Big deal. You still get to choose, as GPL will never entirely allow Red Hat to become excessively big.
It is this confusion around the needed libraries for differing applications that is one of the biggest hurdles to the average user getting to grips with Linux. RH is simply trying to make it transparent to the avreage user who doesn’t want to be bothered with dependencies etc. but only wants a system that works with the minimum amount of effort from them. The ‘expert’ or Linux devotee will have the necessary skill set to change it as required or can go for a different distribution.
When I am wordprocessing or desk top publishing or programming or anything else, I don’t want to be bothered with what libraries I need for a particular program I am using I simply want to concentrate on the task at hand. Even as a geek I want an OS that will let me install my progams with a minimum of effort, taking care of any dependencies automatically, so that I can get on with my work/play seemlessly. Linux, RH included still has a way to go, but RH is making a step in the right direction.
By the way, what is the Linux way. I thought the Linux way was all about choice and flexibility, yet it seems, according to some as if it is some religious experience, grow up, it is a bunch of code used to operate a computer, nothing else.
All of the various major distros have made great strides over the last couple of years in simplifying the installation process becuase of the difficulties faced when installing. They are part of the way there, and, probably over the next couple of years it will improve even more, RH is simply taking another step along this route without changing any of the core functionality of it’s distro. Watch the others follow.
I’m glad RedHat is doing this! KDE offers code freely. Maybe RedHat is doing an odd experiment, but they have freedom to do create their own interpretation of KDE.
If they didn’t want their system to be “crippled,” they should not have agreed with Stallman to make it Free.
Characterization the comment of othres as “just FUD”
is – some time- no more than “dogmatical thinking ”
If some one in 1990 use his spontaneity and forecast from
the indication ( not from “real proof or clever statements” , because in the beginig of a monopoly there is no “real proof or clever statements” !)if some one forecast that “Microsoft will become a monopoly”
his thought will be described as “just FUD”!!
RH is “business firm”,and they have a”share holder”, they will know how to make use of tricky methods to triumph over The licensing scheme (exactly like what Microsoft did to the “law” that prevent business firm from abusing there
monopoly !).
And business firm always have lawyer better than the government!
I hope that Redhat gets huge. It would be great to see a company that has the intrests if Free software as a real power in the software world. Say what you want about Redhat, but it is one of the few commercial distros nowdays that doesn’t require the user to sign some silly NDA.
I agree. As a developer for various UNIXs, I use GNOME & GTK. GNOME is or soon will be the default desktop for HP-UX, AIX, Solaris. GNOME 2 is wonderful and allows both great Free software & commercial apps as it is LGPL. I think GNOME is the future and RedHat should go with it and not waste time supporting KDE. Most end users are going to want to run OpenOffice (GTK), Evolution (GTK) and something like Mozilla or Galeon, which fit in nicely to GNOME.
Red Hat has arguably done more for linux than any other commercial entity, save possibly IBM
Everybody complains about RPMs, but RedHat achieved something that many thought would never happen…they’ve created a standard to develop for. As a Linux software developer, you are a fool if you do not at least test your software under Red Hat. Red Hat is the standard, and they will be for a long time. They are one of the few distros with long term potential.
Also, the KDE folks are a bunch whiny little babies….wahhh wahhh RedHat took the stuff we gave to everyone for free and changed it in a perfectly legal way…wahhh wahhh
This is absolutely ludicrous…that would be like Red Hat crying about Mandrake and all of the other little Red Hat forks that have been made over the years.
Guess what, if you don’t like others changing your software, don’t GPL it…simple as that
It’s Red Hat’s right to ignore or cripple KDE if they want to…Does SuSE give Gnome much support?
-bytes256
Regarding which desktop environment to support, Redhat has every right to support whatever they want. But this is a risky decision, because by supporting GNOME only, you are locking out people who like to use KDE (like me for example).
You may say, yeah but you can download KDE yourself and make it run, but that should be the job of people who prepare the distribution. I may have to go through lots of pain to get the KDE run. One library is missing, that program is missing etc etc … A linux distribution is not much different a windows version for me. Everything should run in harmony, without a need for figuring out what’s going on. Any person who suggest “you can do that” doesn’t think that I don’t want to and I don’t have to and I don’t have time to. I can have my custom distribution too, I don’t do that, instead I use Debian, Mandrake, Redhat … So if redhat makes a choice, it will be automatically my choice too. This of course reminds Microsoft, because Microsoft’s choice also becomes my choice, but in Windows case I always had the choice to install it by myself without any pain. Just install Netscape, and there you have it.
Redhat will not be guilty, if they give a mechanism to use KDE without any pain in my desktop. Otherwise it just means that they are kinda preventing me from using KDE.
Saying that you don’t have to use Redhat, or Redhat is open source so anybody can change it is not enough to make Redhat innocent.
The only reasonable explanation about Redhat’s decision may be that they want to have a sort of unified desktop in linux. They want to do that by supporting Gnome only. In that case, I would say that, Redhat should act with others. Making that decision by yourself will isolate you, because it seems to me KDE is more likely to win this war.
It just seems to me that most KDE apps come with KDE so you might as well get the KDElibs there too. That and too many KDE apps that don’t come with KDE target some arbitrary version < the curent one. Maybe the situation has/will improve(d), but that is where I was coming from.
That and a number of TheKompany’s apps are Qt only. So are apps built with Kylix (or does it include a specific Qt statically built into its own libs?).
If GNOME2 takes off in the corporate world, I can see compainies using Qt (much nicer API) but conforming to the GNOME HIG. KDE apps will (should) conform to the KDE style guide.
This is absolutely ludicrous…that would be like Red Hat crying about Mandrake and all of the other little Red Hat forks that have been made over the years.
Guess what, if you don’t like others changing your software, don’t GPL it…simple as that
It’s Red Hat’s right to ignore or cripple KDE if they want to…
I don’t know that the KDE folks are disputing what Red Hat has the right to do, but even though KDE licenses their code under a scheme that allows RH to do this, why does it preclude them from being concerned about what might happen to the perception of their code if the RH scheme doesn’t work really well?
What can’t they be concerned that RH will confuse, in their customer’s minds, the value and core behavior of KDE if RH changes it and still call it KDE? KDE is a trademarked name, as is Red Hat. Go talk to some ISO CDR resellers and ask them about Red Hat’s attitude about people downloading their ISOs and selling them as “burned from Red Hat .iso’s”. Not very GPL like, is it — but they have the right to do that.
Why do you (and others in this discussion) insist that the only right the KDE developers possess in this matter is to shut up?
[would love a preview button on OSNEWS, btw]
Red Hat is in a lose-lose situation at this point when it comes to the KDE people…they can change it and still call it KDE (pisses em off b/c it doesn’t act like default KDE) or they can strip the name KDE outta everything and call it something else (RDE or RHDE for example) and then the KDE folks really really bitch b/c they’re not giving them credit
the KDE people are gonna be pissed off no matter what so where’s Red Hat at fault here…they’d be bitched at even more for NOT including KDE
-bytes256
You know Eugenia I’m a bit mad about you, you said we should expect your RH Null usability review, so maybe RH could improve it a bit more
Red Hat is in a lose-lose situation at this point when it comes to the KDE people…they can change it and still call it KDE or they can strip the name KDE outta everything and call it something else…the KDE people are gonna be pissed off no matter what
I totally agree – and this is one of the main reasons why the GPL is so poor. Everyone has their own way of looking at it, and the moment a part of the license doesn’t agree with their way of thinking they bitch.
I think Null looks awesome, I haven’t had chance to try it out yet, but come monday when i can download RH8 i will install it and give it a look over.
I don’t understand why KDE have got a problem with RH – Lycoris and Lindows have both modified KDE. I would love to see RH ship their distro with both GNOME and “RDE” — i can see the flame wars now….! ;o)
Ok KDE have done a great job creating a good desktop evironment, but why kick up a fuss when someone starts making a bit of money out of their hard work? I honestly don’t understand why KDE have this attitude problem and please please anyone from KDE come on down and give me a damn good reason for the bitching. I mean c’mon, we want to see mass take-up of linux on the desktop – surely supporting RH is better than bitching – after all, look at the major contenders focusing on a desktop orientated product and oh look, there’s KDE….it’s not like they’re being left out. If they feel so annoyed at another company changing their stuff then stop distributing under the GPL and start chargin distros to include it — then see how far that gets you KDE… ;o)
To be perfectly honest, I’d much rather see RH stick with GNOME and include the necessary libraries to get KDE apps running. Actually, what I’d rather see is all of the DE/WM organisations pull together and create a UnitedDesktopWM where the best bits from all of them are pulled together and advanced on, while those very same DE organisations plod on with their own thing and continue releases etc….
I look at the stock KDE and i think “yuk”….I look at the stock GNOME and think “nice”…but neither of them really have that ‘nice feel’ and multi million dollar usability testing of explorer.exe — what RH has done is attempted to add a little explorer to both environments then tried to make them look the same so the average Joe User at work sat at his PC doesn’t think twice whether he’s using GNOME, KDE, “RDE” or whatever…..and that I think is an excellent move on RH’s behalf, and good luck to them.
My £0.02GBP
With all of these distros adding their own hooks to Gnome & KDE, is there really such a thing as just ‘KDE’ and ‘Gnome’ anymore? Or should we be referring instead to “Mandrake’s KDE” or “Redhat’s Gnome”? Hell, I loaded Mandrake 9.0 RC3 over the weekend and I have no idea how close to ‘pure’ KDE & Gnome are in Mandrake 9.
As for making the desktops similiar, I think they should go the opposite direction and make them as different as possible. Mandrake uses the desktop background for both desktops by default, and I found it a little disorienting at first. I couldn’t imagine would it would be like if the skins/menus or whatever were the same. If you’re going to have two different desktops, what’s the point in trying to make them look/act alike? Either make them different or remove one.
I meant “Mandrake uses the SAME desktop background for both desktops by default”
You’ll constantly have to ask yourself, “OK — what’s really running here?”
Yeah, because regular users look for rendering differences to notice different toolkits and respond accordingly.
RedHat is a bunch of “!#}][$##”(/& !!!
Redhat is not screwing KDE or GNOME. They are standardising the look’n feel across the different desktops to give a uniformed desktop that the average Joe or Jane User can use.
If you don’t like it, don’t bloody use it! there are a tonne of other distributions out there. Heck, UnitedLinux for example in standardising on KDE only! why don’t I hear people whindge about that? because no body gives a stuff.
Instead of people flying off the handle over Redhat, how about take it like a normal adult and analyse the situation. Personally, I like the idea that gtk/qt/gnome/kde applications will have the same look in feel instead of having a spotty desktop with different look and feel depending what widget set is being used.
Joe and Jane don’t give a shit what desktop they are running. All they want to know, does it work? can they run qt or gtk foo application without too many problems? that is it.
The majority of people use either KDE or Gnome. Joe and Jane don’t care about the holy wars between the different licenses or distributions, they simply just want to get their work done. All Redhat has done is ensured that both look the same to maintain consistancy between applications as to ensure that the average user isn’t confused. Simple as that.
“If you don’t like it, don’t bloody use it! … Instead of people flying off the handle over Redhat, how about take it like a normal adult and analyse the situation.”
This coming from a guy who never passes up an opportunity to bash any product relating to MS .. “if you don’t like it, don’t bloody use it”, so why don’t you practice what you preach, Mathew?
“Personally, I like the idea that gtk/qt/gnome/kde applications will have the same look in feel”
And of course, he’s in favor of this, which is why he’s telling everybody else to chill out.
Will somebody please explain to me how Red Hat’s KDE is “crippled”? Removing About boxes doesn’t particularly strike me as ‘crippling’. At least they’re not being replaced by a “About Red Hat” box, implying that Red Hat wrote the entire thing (which is what Xandros does in their distro).
” I believe the same. Red Hat should only support ONE desktop environment, be it Gnome OR KDE. A single DE is what makes sense for a desktop workstation.
However, if that happens, they SHOULD include the needed libraries to run KDE applications. ”
To support KDE apps, you’d have to include most of KDE anyway. I bet that if Red Hat does this people will be complaining even more that they have ‘crippled’ KDE in favour of GNOME.
” You see, 90% of the GUI Linux apps, half of the apps are Qt and half are GTK+. ”
It’s not quite that simple. Most QT apps rely also on KDE. There are very few QT-only apps. To make QT useful, you need to include most of KDE. GTK+ is different. There are many GTK+-only (non-GNOME) apps, and several GNOME apps (e.g. Abiword) can be compiled without GNOME. It’s much easier to have a KDE-centric distro, because you can omit most of GNOME and still run most GTK+ apps. You can’t omit KDE and expect to run many QT apps.
Install Gentoo…. http://www.gentoo.org
Okay sorry about that, I just had to plug my new fav, OS. /me ducks….
Anyways, Redhat was my first, Redhat has my respect, and I hate QT. I do like ‘kde’s’ Ideas… But I just HATE QT its MFC knockoff. IMHO.
Why not just dump KDE and use the ICE window manager?
It’s __SO__ much faster than KDE and GNOME.
Example of my anti-Microsoft statements? people who whindge and moan about Windows, then never change? they are the people I have issues with. There are alternatives. If you’re too lazy to pick up a bloody book and read it, then tough luck. Stick to Windows and allow me to laugh at you.
As for the typical BS, “the interface isn’t intuitive”, that is yet another cop out used by lazy users not to RTFM when in doubt. What is easier? whindge, moan and say the interface is “not intuitive”(Boy do I *really* hate that term) or pick up a bloody book and bloody well learn how to use the software properly.
Of course every UI design buff will refute me, because, with out that title, they’d be off serving fries at their local greasy Joes because the IT industry would have no use for them and lack the basic fundamental skills to do any constructive beyond using buzz words like
“intuitive”, “interactive eXPerience” and other market drivel(tm)
I think the reason why a lot of Linux users are anti-MS is actually fairly simple.
If the general case is anything like me and linux users I know, basically most new linux users in the last 3-4 years started using using linux becvause they were sick of using MS before using Linux and found Linux a breath of fresh air.
Just my feelings
jason v: The fact is, the apps will run with all the libraries properly loaded. Ruining the UI experience will simply confuse a lot of people. You’ll constantly have to ask yourself, “OK — what’s really running here?”
None of the KDE developers disagree with Red Hat changing the UI – although they may not like it. Most, if not all, of them however completely disagree with the changes Red Hat made with KDE’s libraries that break binary and source compatiblity with a lot of KDE application- some of these changes don’t make sense in the first place!
Besides, unifying the looks of both desktops is exactly the point. Red Hat apparently wants people to choose between desktop based on things like features and stablity (one thing red Hat sabotag in KDE, BTW).
Anonymous: In 1990 “no one” think that Microsoft was going to be
a massive monopoly that no one can stop it .
Right….
Red Hat, unlike Microsoft, base its business on services, not on the software itself. It uses the software, which is highly commoditized, to sell services. You can fork Red Hat anytime and make you own distribution, and that is exactly what Sun and Mandrake and thousand others did. Plus, their software follow open standards that every other distro support or should support.
Having most, if not all, of their software under various open source licenses PREVENTS them from being a monopoly. Sure, many most people may use Red Hat over other distributions, it would be a DOMINANT PLAYER. Not a MONOPOLY.
linux_baby: Redhat has yet to make profits. They are still struggling to break even, so the future is not very clear for them either. It would be nice to remember that as well
At certain quarters, Red Hat did make profit. However, Red Hat would have to go down the same road as Amazon, they have to really expand before making any profits. Nobody would buy services from a small 4-5 employee company…. they buy it from big ones.
jason v: There are usability differences between apps written in each of the toolkits, and whatever visual clues to these survive running one app in the other environment, help to clue users in to that and avoid confusion.
What Red Hat is doing is mostly changin the *appreance” of KDE, just like most KDE users that uses stuff like Liquid, Keramik and so on. It wouldn’t hinder usablity, but increase the look of profesionality of the system. Things that have to do with the user interface, like icons, menus (except for one menu entry – About KDE 😉 etc. are retain, so users wouldn’t be confused.
Anonymous: I think GNOME is the future and RedHat should go with it and not waste time supporting KDE. Most end users are going to want to run OpenOffice (GTK), Evolution (GTK) and something like Mozilla or Galeon, which fit in nicely to GNOME.
OpenOffice.org DOESN’T USE GTK+. It doesn’t have ANY GTK+ extensions. It uses its OWN APIs and libraries. As for Mozilla, while official Linux packages, and most packages in Linux distributions uses GTK+ for the rendering, it is possible to use QT and Motif for it too. And there’s KMozilla which can be plug into Konqueror…
So, the best thing you can come up with is Evolution…. funny.
bytes256: Also, the KDE folks are a bunch whiny little babies….wahhh wahhh RedHat took the stuff we gave to everyone for free and changed it in a perfectly legal way…wahhh wahhh
Actually, it can be illegal. KDE considers Red Hat’s version a deviriation (because of some incompatiblities), and since the KDE trademark is owned by KDE e.V., they can sue.
bytes256: This is absolutely ludicrous…that would be like Red Hat crying about Mandrake and all of the other little Red Hat forks that have been made over the years.
Uhmmm, did Mandrake release their product with Red Hat’s brandname, yet placed in a number of incompatiblities?
Sergio: Regarding which desktop environment to support, Redhat has every right to support whatever they want. But this is a risky decision, because by supporting GNOME only, you are locking out people who like to use KDE (like me for example).
Well, they aren’t targeting people who knows the difference of GNOME and KDE, or even know what’s GNOME and KDE.
bytes256: Red Hat is in a lose-lose situation at this point when it comes to the KDE people…
I think most KDE users, and ALLL KDE developers bitching about Red Hat isn’t bitching about the looks, or the About KDE dialog per se, they are bitching about the incompatiblities caused by the Red Hat’s version, and they had demanded that Red Hat make it compatible with KDE again, or rename it.
If they care about how Red Hat changes the UI, trust me, they would be bitching about Xandros, Lycoris, ELX, Lindows etc.
JCooper: I don’t understand why KDE have got a problem with RH – Lycoris and Lindows have both modified KDE.
Neither changed KDE’s libraries in a way that it breaks compatiblity, now do they? Only Red Hat pulled this off.
JCooper: Actually, what I’d rather see is all of the DE/WM organisations pull together and create a UnitedDesktopWM where the best bits from all of them are pulled together and advanced on, while those very same DE organisations plod on with their own thing and continue releases etc….
I’m guessing you mean standards. Both GNOME and KDE – the heavyweighs, is moving towards better compatiblity via Free Desktop standards. They are too technically different to mix’n’match between components, I think standards in the way to go. It would make both KDE and GNOME more compatible, and both desktops would be then judged on how it looks, how it acts, how stable it is etc.
Matthew Gardiner: Heck, UnitedLinux for example in standardising on KDE only!
IIRC, UL doesn’t standardize on any desktop, it is just that all four companies have investments in KDE.
BTW, I had used Null for a few weeks, stop using it because it is not that finished. Can’t wait till Sept 30th.
IIRC, UL doesn’t standardize on any desktop, it is just that all four companies have investments in KDE.
—
The whole point of UL was to go beyond the LFS standard, and standardise the desktop etc so that there is a uniform way of doing things if or when they decide to take on the desktop market.
Personally, I think it will not get beyond the server space. Companies who rely on qt, and wish to make a commercial product will be faced with payments being made to trolltech. These companies will then look at gtk2 and gtk2mm and see that it supports what it needs, and thus, make KDE support pretty much pointless, hence the reason Redhat:
1) Chose Gnome over KDE, thus allowing them, at a later date, develop proprietary commercial applications building on the gtk2 library without incuring any extra costs.
2) There are alot more C developers than C++ developers in the *NIX community, thus, greater mind share.
Anonymous: The whole point of UL was to go beyond the LFS standard, and standardise the desktop etc so that there is a uniform way of doing things if or when they decide to take on the desktop market.
UL, IIRC, doesn’t standardize on any desktop because it wasn’t made for the desktop/workstation primarily. However, we would soon find out as soon the specifications come out.
However, what LSB deals now, mainly, is the directory structure. What UL deals with is that plus standard software versions between each distribution. For example, UL 1 could come with kernel 2.4.19, and all UL distros would come with that, even if 2.4.20 is out. This is to ensure binary compatiblity between distributions.
Anonymous: Companies who rely on qt, and wish to make a commercial product will be faced with payments being made to trolltech.
For many companies, $2000 is nothing, especially coming from a platform where development tools cost that much (Windows). Plus, as Linux’s popularity continue to rise, you would find more people using QT and it allows them to target both Windows and Linux platforms at the same time without incuring extra cost in development.
Probably people would use GTK+, especially shareware companies that would one day sprout on Linux. But as theKompany had proven, it isn’t impossible for a shareware company, which had no venture capital at that, to use Qt in commercial apps.
So in the end, when ISVs start taking notice of Linux (when it breaks the 5% barrier, I guess), Qt would become the more affordable choice because it cuts down development time and amount of developers needed.
Anonymous: 2) There are alot more C developers than C++ developers in the *NIX community, thus, greater mind share.
This would prove to be insignificant later on when commercial developers from Mac OS and Windows start making versions for Linux. Most Linux/UNIX developers target the geek market or the server market.
If that’s the real reason why he is leaving RedHat than i think he’s a lier. Why the hell he’s leaving after job is done and after people showed their disagreement? Why not BEFORE he started to make KDE changes? I really don’t like that kind of people – they do something and when people rage about it they start raging to and shout it’s not their fault, it’s their cheif’s fault.
Lier = liar
Interesting point there, never thought of it myself.
But then again, it could be in another senario where Bero was trying to convince his bosses to decripple KDE, and since it is going to be released on Monday, I’ll bet he quit after realizing he couldn’t do anything to save the day.
So in the end, he quit. Just an theory, I guess we would never know.
how come you whine when a company rties to satisfy the development cycle and bring in desktop users.
unproductive whineing…
If I’m here to do something productive…. I wouldn’t be here in the first place 🙂
My comments are legitimate user’s opinions and experience.
so kde loses a developer paid for by redhat – my guess is that they’ll hire another gnome guy instead.
I doubt that, Red Hat also needs a KDE employee. Otherwise who is gonna do RH’s dirty work? 🙂