Probably the most often misunderstood element of KDE4 is Plasma, the extensive widget engine that replaces the normal desktop and the Kicker panel from KDE 3.x. The entire KDE4 desktop is built up out of Plasmoids (yet another term for desk accessory), including the panel and the desktop itself - and it is the latter that has been causing quite some confusion. Where are my desktop icons? Update: Aaron Seigo has published a screencast showing how the FolderView Plasmoid behaves as a normal desktop, and how to make it so.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Writing off potential "customers" whom are interested in your project and have questions, concerns and/or suggestions as "poisonous people" is not a good strategy in my book. On the whole 5 vocal critics will give you far more useful (if perhaps a bit loud) feedback than 50 fawning fanboys
Member since:2007-02-17
Where were these critics when concerns and/or suggestions for the design of KDE 4 were actively being sought?
http://www.kde.org/getinvolved/
http://quality.kde.org/
http://quality.kde.org/develop/modules/
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
http://developer.kde.org/documentation/design/ui/index.html
http://developer.kde.org/documentation/standards/kde/style/basics/i...
http://quality.kde.org/develop/howto/howtopromo.php
http://www.kde.org/support/
Edited 2008-06-16 11:56 UTC
Member since:2006-01-04
Just read these comments and you will get what I mean:
http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2008/06/maybe-people-will-understand-pic...
Member since:2005-07-06
This is obviously not true since the KDE developer does not do this, they listen and repy to valid questions, concerns and/or suggestions.
The clue here is valid critisism. Raising again and again the same complaints and issues that have been ansvered and explained before on numourus occastions, and in many cases shown to be invalid, are not usefull in any way. And being louder does not change the facts.
When this is beeing done repeadetly by the same vocal critics. They even continue after their complaint has been shown invalid, and in many cases turns to personel attacks and insults. Labeling them as "poisonous people" are very accurate.
Member since:2008-03-17
It's one thing if potential customers have an open mind and are willing to be convinced, or be satisfied with anything less than "I DEMAND FEATURE X or else kde4 sucks".
These people are poisonous not because they are potential customers, more becasue they are positively hostile to anything that does not suit their particular desires.
Note that there are lots of people that had gennuine queries and had constructive criticism, or didn't go on a rampage when they were told feature x is not in kde4.1
Member since:2005-07-06
Writing off potential "customers" whom are interested in your project and have questions, concerns and/or suggestions as "poisonous people" is not a good strategy in my book. On the whole 5 vocal critics will give you far more useful (if perhaps a bit loud) feedback than 50 fawning fanboys
Not all criticisms are equal. Insightful, well-reasoned critiques should not be ignored (of course). But if someone is just indulging in strident whining, why make any attempt to accommodate them? Especially since (IME) the most strident are usually the least-informed.
Member since:
2006-01-04
If you want to avoid criticism from users then heading a large FOSS project is probably one of the worst tasks you can take on. I personally wish Aaron and friends had handled the criticism with a bit more grace and professionalism.
Problem is Aaron & friends are very nice people and they often respond to thick trolls or spoiled KDE3 users.
I think they should handle it more like Mark S. et al. and just ignore "I want KDE3 tweak/feature X exactly the way it was and I want it NOW!" posts and let happy KDE4 users deal with the poisonous people.
That would give them more time to deal with constructive criticism ..
Edited 2008-06-16 11:14 UTC