Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th May 2011 21:27 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
KDE "KDE has released a first beta of the upcoming 4.7 release of the Plasma Desktop and Netbook workspaces, the KDE Applications and the KDE Frameworks, which is planned for July 27, 2011. With API, dependency and feature freezes in place, the KDE team's focus is now on fixing bugs and further polishing new and old functionality."
Thread beginning with comment 474766
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Good for KDE
by lemur2 on Fri 27th May 2011 01:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Good for KDE"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Uh, not really, as I am fully aware that KDE doesn't provide OpenGL, I was trying to make a point, and it's a simple one: OS X is not using (or providing) the most recent version of OpenGL. Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been, but please, that huge vomit of text taken straight from the same posting that you had just linked is a little over the top, don't you think? I think perhaps you may have been drinking from the same kool-aid that myself and tyrione were slurping down, that sweet drink that makes us want to show up all the other mouthy bastards that hang around here. I'm pretty sure you probably knew what I meant, and just wanted to stir the pot a bit, and, hey, that's cool, nobody enjoys a little pot stirring more than myself, but come on, scrape the bottom of the barrel much?


Nice try, but no cigar. You aren't getting away with that.

Here is what you said:
Considering OpenGL is at version 4, they both are pretty far behind


Since KDE doesn't provide OpenGL but rather uses it (same as OSX), the fact that KDE can now work with a lower OpenGL requirement puts it far ahead of other environments (including OSX). This is an improved capability of KDE, not a retrograde one. Certainly tyrione made this mistake.

I know you didn't actually say that it was KDE that "was pretty far behind" (and so you probably didn't make the same error) ... but becasue this thread is about KDE that is the impression you seemed to be out to create.

Quoting the text in context clears up the error and removes the negative connotations tyrione was trying to establish.

Edited 2011-05-27 01:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Good for KDE
by avgalen on Fri 27th May 2011 01:53 in reply to "RE[3]: Good for KDE"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

but would it use the benefits of version 3 or 4 if the hardware supported it?
Not requiring the latest and greatest is good (IE9 not on XP...bad) but not taking advantage of the latest and greatest when it is available is bad (IE9 on 7 using DirectWrite...good)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Good for KDE
by lemur2 on Fri 27th May 2011 02:26 in reply to "RE[4]: Good for KDE"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

but would it use the benefits of version 3 or 4 if the hardware supported it? Not requiring the latest and greatest is good (IE9 not on XP...bad) but not taking advantage of the latest and greatest when it is available is bad (IE9 on 7 using DirectWrite...good)


KDE is written primarily to work on Linux, but because of the hardware abstraction layers (Phonon and Solid) it can actually work on a number of platforms.

OpenGL support on Linux is only available up to OpenGL 2.0 or 2.1 for a lot of drivers. In many cases, the driver supports only a lower version of OpenGL than the hardware of the card does.

Here is the picture for one open source driver:

http://wiki.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature

Only the closed nVidia driver, AFAIK, supports OpenGL 4. OpenGL support on Windows is also very sporadic.

Using later features of OpenGL (i.e. OpenGL 3.x and OpenGL 4.x) in this context would only make it possible to have fancier effects. In other words, more bling.

Requiring only widely available features of earlier versions (i.e. mature parts) of OpenGL in this context means faster hardware acceleration of desktop rendering, working on a wider range of hardware including legacy hardware and mobiles, but less of the really fancy bling. Using less of the available GPU hardware resources for the desktop itself leaves more available for applications.

Which approach would you rather?

Edited 2011-05-27 02:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Good for KDE
by BluenoseJake on Fri 27th May 2011 09:29 in reply to "RE[3]: Good for KDE"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Nice try, but no cigar. You aren't getting away with that.


What? Arrogant much? Your condescension isn't even worth continuing this comment.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[5]: Good for KDE
by lemur2 on Fri 27th May 2011 13:09 in reply to "RE[4]: Good for KDE"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Nice try, but no cigar. You aren't getting away with that.


What? Arrogant much? Your condescension isn't even worth continuing this comment.
"

I was going to say "Diddums" but then I realised you aren't upset at all at what you claim is my condescension, you are simply trying a different tack at misdirection and trying to take this thread away from the topic of the awesomeness of the KDE desktop.

That is actually pretty smooth. Good one.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Good for KDE
by WereCatf on Sun 29th May 2011 10:18 in reply to "RE[3]: Good for KDE"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

the fact that KDE can now work with a lower OpenGL requirement puts it far ahead of other environments (including OSX).


It really depends on how you look at it. Sure, it can run on mobile devices better than before, but then again, on desktop computers it's limiting itself to a seriously outdated feature set and could reap some nice performance boost with more modern feature set in use.

This obviously begs two questions: are there really many mobile devices which can even run full KDE experience yet only provides OpenGL ES, and would it be possible to support both OpenGL ES for mobiles for compatibility AND the full-blown OpenGL spec for more capable devices for better performance?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Good for KDE
by mgraesslin on Sun 29th May 2011 14:19 in reply to "RE[4]: Good for KDE"
mgraesslin Member since:
2011-04-07

This obviously begs two questions: are there really many mobile devices which can even run full KDE experience yet only provides OpenGL ES


The OpenGL ES support is primarily for Plasma Active which is exactly not a "full KDE experience". Furthermore OpenGL ES is also a requirment for Wayland, so ES support was not primarily added only for mobile devices.

and would it be possible to support both OpenGL ES for mobiles for compatibility AND the full-blown OpenGL spec for more capable devices for better performance?

Well that's what we are doing. The desktop system uses OpenGL and OpenGL ES needs to be enabled as a compile time option. But don't expect that OpenGL gives you a better performance than OpenGL ES, I would say the opposite is true.

Btw. it doesn't make much sense to raise requirements to OpenGL 3 or 4. They hardly provide anything we need and that can be used with OpenGL 2 plus the additional extensionsion.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Good for KDE
by lemur2 on Mon 30th May 2011 04:48 in reply to "RE[4]: Good for KDE"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"the fact that KDE can now work with a lower OpenGL requirement puts it far ahead of other environments (including OSX).
It really depends on how you look at it. Sure, it can run on mobile devices better than before, but then again, on desktop computers it's limiting itself to a seriously outdated feature set and could reap some nice performance boost with more modern feature set in use. This obviously begs two questions: are there really many mobile devices which can even run full KDE experience yet only provides OpenGL ES, and would it be possible to support both OpenGL ES for mobiles for compatibility AND the full-blown OpenGL spec for more capable devices for better performance? "

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTUwMQ

From the author:
http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2011/05/plasma-compositor-and...

"The Compositor received a new OpenGL compositor based on OpenGL 2.x or OpenGL ES 2.0. Our default rendering nowadays uses the programmable pipeline instead of fixed functionality as in 4.6. In order to support the programmable pipeline quite some parts had to be rewritten and got optimized at the same time. Overall this brings a vast performance improvement for all users. From my experience this can even be increased when using the OpenGL ES 2.0/EGL backend"

Reply Parent Score: 2