Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Aug 2009 00:12 UTC, submitted by rexstuff
KDE The KDE team has released KDE 4.3. This release comes packed with improvements and bug fixes - in fact, over the last six months, 10000 bugs were squashed, 2000 feature requests handled, and 63000 changes were checked in by 700 people. We've already talked about this new release in quite some detail last week, but let's take a look at the most important new features anyway.
Thread beginning with comment 377415
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Great!
by siride on Thu 6th Aug 2009 05:02 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Great!"
siride
Member since:
2006-01-02

You still can't explain to me why performance of every other toolkit and DE is great, only KDE 4 has problems. From my point of view, the variable is the desktop environment, and changing that variable from KDE 3.5 to KDE 4 using the same drivers, same X server on the same hardware results in drastically different performance. I vary the variable again by using GNOME, or XFCE, or Fluxbox or whatever, different compositing managers (besides KWin 4) and performance is still fine. What else am I supposed to believe, other than that KDE 4 does not make efficient use of what is otherwise decent and performant hardware?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Great!
by superstoned on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:02 in reply to "RE[7]: Great!"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Using your argumentation, say:
- Qt works fine on windows
- Qt works fine on mac
- Qt sucks on linux.

It is clearly the fault of linux, not of Qt.

The reason:
No other linux toolkit does anything more complex than paint single pixels by itself.

You can't do complex gradients and smooth animations and CSS in the toolkit with that. Think iPhone/Mac OS X like effects. Qt wants to allow the developers to do those things, and the X.org architecture promised it was possible. So they re-enginered their toolkit to be ready for the future.

Apple and Microsoft both have also re-architectured their drivers and graphical systems to do this stuff. Gnome, being 10 years behind as usual, has not. The linux graphics stack, also being 10 years behind, can't handle the cool stuff Qt wants to do - at least not properly.

Now it is Qt's fault that graphics on your system sucks? Get real...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Great!
by Hiev on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:12 in reply to "RE[8]: Great!"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Gnome, being 10 years behind as usual

I think you mean GTK, but not, you are wrong, GTK is using modern libraries like cairo and clutter, so, your argument is empty.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Great!
by siride on Thu 6th Aug 2009 13:51 in reply to "RE[8]: Great!"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Well, now we must return to a previous point of mine. I understand that the advanced stuff (translucency, krunner/plasma stuff, fancy wm effects, etc.) should probably be slow on my system. I accept that part of the argument. Strangely, I find Plasma performance to be pretty decent, though. But that's not what's at issue. If cover switch is slow, I'll just use a less graphics intensive tab switcher, or just opt to use XRender. Fine. The problem is that simple things, like redrawing a double-buffered window after exposure, or smoothly resizing windows without anything fancy in them (e.g., dialog windows), are very slow. Those don't require fancy gradients or advanced driver features. And those are what I'm complaining about and have been this whole time. And nobody gives me a straight answer as to why simple things that are fast in every other toolkit and DE -- and should be fast because they are basic -- are dog slow in Qt4 and have been getting slower, not fast, as Qt4 continues to develop.

Reply Parent Score: 2