Linked by vivainio on Thu 14th Oct 2010 11:31 UTC
KDE In his lengthy and interesting blog post covering the future of Plasma, KDE's Aaron Seigo proposes Qt Quick and QML (a declarative language that embeds JavaScript) as replacement of the Graphics View architecture currently used by Plasma. This holds a promise of massive speedups and cheap effects as all paint operations become candidates for OpenGL acceleration, contrary to the aging Graphics View architecture that is still stuck with various inefficiencies caused by the underlying QPainter approach. Expressiveness and easy programmability of QML is a nice bonus, of course.
Thread beginning with comment 445112
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Just admit it...
by lemur2 on Thu 14th Oct 2010 22:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Just admit it..."
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

It's the only open source desktop competing with the proprietary competition


Precisely. This, and this alone, is the reason why you get such a lot of spiteful hate-filled criticism of KDE ... you can tell this because when you boil it down and analyse what is actually being criticised ... it is nothing.

KDE is criticised only because commercial software interests need it to be criticised.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Just admit it...
by WereCatf on Thu 14th Oct 2010 23:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Just admit it..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

KDE is criticised only because commercial software interests need it to be criticised.

Even F/OSS proponents who criticise KDE4 do it because commercial software wants them to do it? Lolwut?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Just admit it...
by lemur2 on Fri 15th Oct 2010 00:55 in reply to "RE[3]: Just admit it..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

KDE is criticised only because commercial software interests need it to be criticised. Even F/OSS proponents who criticise KDE4 do it because commercial software wants them to do it? Lolwut?


There are a lot of people who do not have much more to say other than "me too". These people are not the ones who set the direction of what is discussed, and what is not.

There are too a number of people who pretend to be F/OSS proponents but who really are not. There is even an entire website dedicated to presenting articles about F/OSS but which somehow always seems to conclude that F/OSS is lacking in some way. I have in mind the site called Linux Insider.

All that you need to look at is what KDE is criticised for, and what about KDE is ignored. You might for example get a review and pages and pages of discussion about the design of KDE notifications and the gripe that an icon does not quite line up horizontally with the notification message or somesuch ... at yet there will be no mention at all in reviews that the KDE photo manager/editor application digikam is considerably better than FSpot in every way, or that K3b has been better for many a year than any GNOME desktop CD/DVD burner. You might get an article about the "inadequacy" of Linux PDF viewers that talks about Evince and XPDF, but entirely ignores Okular.

What gives with that? Why is it so? Who is driving the discussion along the lines of absolutely trivial and often plain incorrect criticism and bitching about KDE, and almost complete suppression of mention of its benefits and advanced features?

Edited 2010-10-15 01:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4