Linked by suka on Thu 25th Aug 2011 22:19 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 486944
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-13
I would agree that a lot of the new interface ideas didn't really catch on. But that was never what Plasma was really about - it was about modernizing the desktop, making sure it would be maintainable, flexible, throwing out a bunch of junky code, and making it easy to add new features/ports when wanted. In that, Plasma has succeeded.
KDE 5 is simply a cleanup version of all the new stuff that got added in KDE 4 so there will be no "we will rock" sites. This has already been decided, and everyone agreed with it.
Also, if plasma was meant to give a long life to KDE, why is that KDE 5 is being announce before a Qt5 (that would require API breaking)?
It's not. KDE5 will depend on Qt5, which has already been announced.
I don't know, I simply do not care anymoure about KDE development, I run it as my defaul DE, but I simply do not use any of its features, not even the menu (just a quick launch widget for my most importants apps, but KDE3 also did that, and was much more faster).
Fair enough, but you should at least try to educate yourself before you start spouting off about it.
Edited 2011-08-26 03:08 UTC