Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Aug 2009 10:43 UTC
SuSE, openSUSE SUSE Linux used to be a very KDE-centric distribution. Then Novell came around, bought SUSE and Ximian, and slowely but surely they turned the now-openSUSE distribution into effectively a GNOME-centric distribution with KDE as its sidekick. The openSUSE community, however, doesn't appear to be particularly happy with KDE being a sidekick.
Thread beginning with comment 377075
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Excuse me, but I think I have more experience with accessibility than you do given that I use it on a daily basis.
QT claims to support ATK/AT-SPI. However, Trolltech at the time of QT4's inception decided to communicate with at-spi over the Dbus protocol... which, naturally, at-spi of course didn't support and still doesn't (at-spi uses CORBA). There is work happening on this, but who knows when, or if, it will be completed. Meanwhile, QT4 apps are just as inaccessible as they always were and just as inaccessible as QT3 before them.
I do not like being called a liar, particularly by someone whose facts are blatantly misleading. This isn't the first time you've made these half-truths either. You love QT and KDE, good for you. I might love them too, if they were of any use to me. But do not misrepresent the current situation just because you like one environment and toolkit over the other.

Reply Parent Score: 3

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

QT claims to support ATK/AT-SPI. However, Trolltech at the time of QT4's inception decided to communicate with at-spi over the Dbus protocol... which, naturally, at-spi of course didn't support and still doesn't (at-spi uses CORBA). There is work happening on this, but who knows when, or if, it will be completed. Meanwhile, QT4 apps are just as inaccessible as they always were and just as inaccessible as QT3 before them

Wow. I was not aware of that. Certainly that should exclude KDE from government agencies and the bulk of private companies. In fact, I'm wondering how any Linux distro which claims to support freedom and equal opportunity for users could default to it in good faith until such time as that issue is resolved.

Reply Parent Score: 1

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Certainly that should exclude KDE from government agencies and the bulk of private companies.

Is it any wonder that the wider computing world thinks that a lot of people touting open source desktops are a bunch of masturbating monkeys? There's nothing more hilarious when you see someone absolutely steadfast in their belief that a new lick of paint on the poop deck is what's needed as water gushes in through a gaping hole below decks.

Government agencies, and especially private companies ((!) What planet are you on?), use totally inaccessible applications and set ups all the time. Why? Because they have functionality that they want. If you start touting something to them that cannot run those applications, and has no developer base whatsoever to provide them, then you'll get drop kicked out of the door before anyone even thinks that accessibility is an issue. Organisations cross accessibility bridges when they come to them, and they do it by buying in software most of the time. Now where's that potential developer platform................? There's no guarantees and there's a lot of work to do, but KDE as a default desktop cannot make the situation any worse on that front.

Has SLED or any other 'enterprise' Linux distribution's total inability to gain any traction whatsoever not sunk in anywhere? Something has to give sooner or later.

In fact, I'm wondering how any Linux distro which claims to support freedom and equal opportunity for users could default to it in good faith until such time as that issue is resolved.

1. Because he's wrong.

2. Trying to deny the inevitable and claim that we need to keep rearranging deck chairs in the meantime is not going to get OpenSuse, SLED or desktop Linux anywhere.

But........we've had this brain dead nonsense for the best part of a decade now.

Edited 2009-08-05 12:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

QT claims to support ATK/AT-SPI.

Actually I think they do.

However, Trolltech at the time of QT4's inception decided to communicate with at-spi over the Dbus protocol... which, naturally, at-spi of course didn't support and still doesn't (at-spi uses CORBA).

You can't assume that GNOME/GTK+ can switch to the new implementation that fast, however, it is one of the important tasks for GNOME 3.0 (as part of the Bonobo deprecation effort, see http://live.gnome.org/Accessibility/BonoboDeprecation)

Qt had the advantage of starting to implement its accessibility bridge on Linux at a point where it was already decided to use D-Bus instead of CORBA.

So a system using the deprecated AT-SPI setup works better with GTK based applications, a system using the newer AT-SPI setup will work better with Qt based applications. As written above, this difference will be removed in the near future when Bonobo deprecations is completed.

Reply Parent Score: 3

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

QT claims to support ATK/AT-SPI.

It does support it and more to the point it has an accessibility framework that meets requirements on many levels. Whether it is compatible with Gnome and GTK applications is another matter, but that doesn't make it inaccessible.

However, Trolltech at the time of QT4's inception decided to communicate with at-spi over the Dbus protocol...

Yes because CORBA is crap and some people need to pull their fingers out and get their D-Bus support up to scratch, but it's more an issue of application compatibility. It's more of an issue for AT-SPI and Gnome and their support of the various interfaces through D-Bus. The framework is there in Qt to support it. It's also nice when you have technology that allows you to magnify with a reasonable level of detail ;-). Just supporting AT-SPI doesn't mean you're accessible nor that your apps will use it.

which, naturally, at-spi of course didn't support and still doesn't (at-spi uses CORBA).

Actually it does (the project has been around for three years), but it means that there are two separate interface systems - one over D-Bus which Qt uses and one over CORBA that Gnome uses. Naturally that makes compatibility difficult but is orthogonal to the issue of whether a desktop is 'accessible' or not.

Mind you though, talking about supposed accessibility deficiencies seems to be some sort of mental disease that people get themselves into. As I've said, accessibility matters little when you have no applications and no functionality that people want. I daresay that there are thousands of off-the-shelf and custom applications running in governments that don't use any accessibility framework whasoever even if it is there, so Gnome's accessibility support isn't helping to win customers and users there. There are a lot of barriers to overcome before getting excited about accessibility.

You love QT and KDE, good for you.

I don't. I care about applications. I care about a development platform that will get us those applications. I care about functionality. I care about what open source desktops do with respect to competing with Windows and OS X and getting there. The current status quo we have with 'enterprise' Linux desktop distributions has totally and utterly failed to address those issues, and as such, no one uses them and no one cares. Trying to box yourself into a niche with accessibility and regulations as cover for falling totally flat in other areas is just a bit.......sad.

I might love them too, if they were of any use to me.

Whether they're of any use to you is neither here nor there. If you don't have the features and applications then no one uses you regardless. That's what counts. It's become pretty clear that we've got total stagnation on that front. Expect the situation to get ever worse.

But do not misrepresent the current situation just because you like one environment and toolkit over the other.

I'd advise you to do likewise. There is a bundle of reasons why I prefer one over the other, and it doesn't come down to blind faith and desperation when they fall short.

Reply Parent Score: 4