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 445220
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Just admit it...
by DeadFishMan on Fri 15th Oct 2010 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Just admit it..."
DeadFishMan
Member since:
2006-01-09

Sorry, it sounded a lot harsher than I intended. What I meant to say is that in some cases, the criticism of some GNOME applications or the desktop per se might be somewhat valid but it is weird that some people leave it at that, as if the alternative was not worth mentioning as in the aforementioned case of comparison between Evince and XPDF and the omission of Okular. That's all.

I certainly don't want to imply that GNOME/GTK applications are inferior by default - in fact, I am a heavy user of certain GTK apps even on Windows - and apologize if that was the impression that I gave.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Just admit it...
by WereCatf on Fri 15th Oct 2010 17:42 in reply to "RE[9]: Just admit it..."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

as if the alternative was not worth mentioning as in the aforementioned case of comparison between Evince and XPDF and the omission of Okular. That's all.

Okay, I understand your point. It could of course be that the reviewer just isn't familiar enough with the KDE-alternatives? If I was writing a review I'd probably omit mentioning them too since I have no experience of them and thus it would be unfair of me to say anything. Though yeah, there are biased people in all camps and they are sometimes willing to do almost anything to promote their own camp..

I certainly don't want to imply that GNOME/GTK applications are inferior by default - in fact, I am a heavy user of certain GTK apps even on Windows - and apologize if that was the impression that I gave.

It did sound like you were giving the impression that GTK+/GNOME apps were somehow inferior to anything else by default, but thanks for clearing up the misunderstandin! ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Just admit it...
by DeadFishMan on Fri 15th Oct 2010 17:56 in reply to "RE[10]: Just admit it..."
DeadFishMan Member since:
2006-01-09

Okay, I understand your point. It could of course be that the reviewer just isn't familiar enough with the KDE-alternatives? If I was writing a review I'd probably omit mentioning them too since I have no experience of them and thus it would be unfair of me to say anything. Though yeah, there are biased people in all camps and they are sometimes willing to do almost anything to promote their own camp..


It would be somewhat understandable if we were talking about the smaller and lesser known desktop environments available for Linux but how can one reviewer seriously ignore the *other* major desktop that, depending to whom you ask, might hold between 40-50% of the Linux desktop userbase with a straight face?

But I agree with you; it could be that they simply are not familiar with KDE and its ecosystem. It is just... I don't know... upsetting(?) that it keeps getting snubbed on these reviews and reviewers keep spreading misinformation when it is obvious that they know nothing about it.

Reply Parent Score: 2