Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Dec 2006 00:48 UTC, submitted by dumbkiwi
KDE This is a response to the article yesterday on the progress of GNOME and KDE. Aaron Seigo, a lead KDE developer, sets out the current state of progress with KDE 4, pointing out that KDE 4 is on track for a release in mid 2007. "Thom points to a quote from me that our goal is to have a 4.0 ready sometime in the first half of next year. That gives us until sometime in June and I'm still thinking we can make it."
Thread beginning with comment 195800
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

As I said, composited windowing is 2002 level technology. The technologies offered by Vista and Leopard (and even Tiger today) go way beyond that.

I suppose the root question, as an end user, would be what would the more advanced approach buy me, and would I be able to tell the difference?

Reply Parent Score: 3

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""I suppose the root question, as an end user, would be what would the more advanced approach buy me,"""

As admin of about 50 Linux desktops, I've been asking myself the same thing while reading through this thread. The conclusion I have come to is "absolutely nothing". My users need to browse the Web, send and receive email, do word processing and spreadsheets, and run a curses based accounting package. The local users do this via regular old X protocols from thin clients. The remote users come in over NX.

I'm not saying that these technologies don't have their uses. But I don't see where they mean diddly to me and my business users. And I think that the kind of users I support are probably the more common case.

Reply Parent Score: 3

rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

I think hardware-accelerated compositing technology is going to be one of the biggest steps forward in user interfaces in the last decade. Apple is just scratching the surface of what's possible with the technology. The benefits range from the aesthetics to efficiency. First of all, not-ugly is generally better than ugly, all else being equal.

Second, things like animation can allow for subtle cues that reduce the cognitive load on the user. For example, many people find multiple desktops in Virtue Desktops to be useful in a way they never found multiple desktops on other systems to be. That's because the animated transitions help them keep track of the spatial orientation of the various desktops.

Third, scalable graphics offer substantial potential for compressing large amounts of information things like Expose are just the start. Imagine an IDE that used Expose-like techniques for browsing source records, used vector graphics to display complex class and call-graph hierarchies, automatically scaling the most relevant data up to be readable and scaling less relevant data down to fit more information on the screen.

Fourth, even if you don't consider these things to be useful, you can't argue that the lower-tech approach is comparable to Vista. It might be inferior along dimensions that aren't important, but objectively it is still inferior in those dimensions.

Reply Parent Score: 5