OSNews

You can note the difference trying to develop an application for each platform, for example:

Windows Vista: The use of to many archaich techniques like Messages and heavy use of interfaces.

Mac OSX: It lacks in clarity of the framework, the use of objetive C doesn't help eather.

GNOME: Despite having many bindings, the lack of a central core of shared libraries is the weak point, the code has a high coupled level, they are getting better thougt.

KDE 4: Centralized and shared libraries with a loosely coupled framework that boost the code reuse, better architecture like MV.

Is just my experience as a programmer.

Uh, what? You don't have to code in MFC or the Win32 API on windows. If you find message maps archaic and bothersome, you can always find something else that scratches your itch. Even Qt.



Define lack of clarity? As far as I am concerned, the Mac as a platform provides a wide plethora of frameworks that are widely documented and intuitive to use. Of course, one mans intuitive is another mans nightmare so YMMV. However, I do agree that the choice of Objective-C is a strange one but once you get used to the syntax and terminology, you find that it is actually quite good.

Failing all that, you can still fall back to using other libraries like Qt to program on the Mac.

I understand that this is a KDE news item and as such the KDE centric users and developers will be out in force. Even so, there is no need to spread nonsense about other platforms just to make your own look better.

p.s. I use GNOME but I don't develop for it, so I'll leave that to some GNOME developer to argue the point with you.

Uhm, just because you agree about the technical merits of one piece of software compared to another does not make one a sycophant. Before calling some one a "a self-seeking, servile flatterer; fawning parasite." (dictionary.com) try doing your own research and then give your arguments on why you disagree.

Either way, my preference is KDE, and I look forward to KDE 4.1, that's when I will make the switch from 3.5. The benefits?

Because of QT4, a lot of my favorite KDE apps will be fully functional on Windows, *nix's and OS X. That makes me very happy. Also, QT4's performance and memory footprint is much improved over previous versions, which is always a good thing.

Plasma is the GUI, and when 4.1 comes out, it will mean a much more versatile and customizable desktop, which, in my opinion has always been one of KDE's strengths over it's competitors. Compared to KDE, Windows and Gnome's customization potential is only superficial, and OS X's is almost non-existent. (I expect to get modded to hell for that statement)

Kwin, the KDE window manager, now supports compositing, which is a godsend, as Compiz can be a real pain in the butt to get working. It's gotten a lot better, but not having to change your WM to use compositing is a big win for KDE, especially in light of the competitions heavy requirements (I'm looking right at you Vista).

Solid is the hardware API that abstracts the underlying hardware APIs (Hal, Bluez and so forth) into one developer friendly and sane framework. Because of Solid, The underlying hardware technologies can be swapped out and replaced with new technology, without breaking KDE apps.

That's just the 4 major ones IMO, there is a lot more in KDE4, and when KDE 4.1 comes out, I think it's going to kick ass.

Edited 2008-04-02 22:54 UTC

Uhm, just because you agree about the technical merits of one piece of software compared to another does not make one a sycophant. Before calling some one a "a self-seeking, servile flatterer; fawning parasite." (dictionary.com) try doing your own research and then give your arguments on why you disagree.
"

Calm down and chill out. I never said I disagreed. I asked for justification, because the opinion stated was not substantiated (it since has been). The'sycophants' I referred to were those who voted up a comment that came across as mere opinion without facts. I see many posts on KDE4 threads, singing it's praises over other development platforms without little explanation why it's better.

Ironic that you ask me to give arguments, when that's what I was asking the OP to do.

For the record, I developed for a long time with Qt3 and 4 on five different platforms and loved it because of it's clean, consistent object model, great documentation and value of pragmatism over 'standard practice'. It also is the best C++ UI toolkit I have ever seen
I've seen a bit of the KDE libs, but not developed much with them.

No mod down from me, sir, and I use OSX as my main desktop, along with Kubuntu and Windows. OSX isn't very configurable for looks, but its keystroke configuration is actually the best I've seen, and I'm hoping to see certain key aspects of the dock copied.

The main thing I like about the dock in OSX is this: just because you close all windows for an application doesn't mean it's closed. It's still in the dock and running. You can Command-Tab to it at any time and nearly always, Command-N will bring up a new window.

The next benefit? Command-Tab isn't switch between windows, it's switch between applications. Command-` lets you switch between the windows of the currently running application. I started using OSX 2.5 years ago after a lot of time in Windowmaker and KDE in Linux and some Windows purgatory too, and I don't know why everyone's copying the Windows Alt-tab now.

KDE is the most configurable, as well as it should be, but the moment it can be configured to imitate this one piece of hard-set OSX behavior, I will be far more comfortable with it.