Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 1st Nov 2011 21:31 UTC, submitted by Z_God
KDE Disappointed with KDE 4's performance and other shortcomings, Timothy Pearson continued KDE 3.5 development under the name Trinity. Today the first third major update of the Trinity Desktop Environment is released, providing an alternative upgrade path for KDE users who do not feel comfortable with KDE 4.
Thread beginning with comment 495276
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Thom's justified...
by lemur2 on Wed 2nd Nov 2011 05:33 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Thom's justified..."
Member since:

" The first major version (4.0) of this series was released on 11 January 2008 Above page was posted Posted by jun auza On 8/20/2008 Windows 7 was released to manufacturing on July 22, 2009, and reached general retail availability on October 22, 2009.
Yes.. At that point in time they were copying Vista with its black UI and shiny themes. I'm pretty sure he was talking about the newest versions of KDE4 trying to copy 7, but you chose to misinterpret what he was saying. "

Why doesn't he conclude that Win 7 is a copy of KDE4? Except of course for transparent window title bars, which are a UI problem utterly unique to Windows.

This conclusion would, after all, fit better with the whole "cause and effect" thingy, given the timelines.

AFAIK just about the only desktop UI feature that truly originates in Windows 7 is the Aero "snap" feature, which KDE4 has a lesser implementation of in the form of "Quick tiling (snap to edge)".

"New: Window maximizing and tiling by snapping to the screen-edges ("Quick tiling and maximization")"

If anything else has been copied, it has been copied from KDE4 to Windows 7. It is that whole "cause and effect", you see.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Thom's justified...
by Jason Bourne on Wed 2nd Nov 2011 14:39 in reply to "RE[5]: Thom's justified..."
Jason Bourne Member since:


A copy does not necessary mean it is a full clone. No. KDE 4.7 is not a full clone of Windows 7. It just tries to mimic Windows in every possible way, inserting its own stupidities.

What I meant is, KDE Team is better off cloning the whole thing after all. And why not? I even have options to make it "LOOK EXACTLY" like Windows 2000 in the style list. Isn't that just a proof that KDE cares?

I'm not going to be unfair. I have installed Kubuntu on a RECENT machine and performance was stunning. There was a frigging lag coming from "KWin". It was a millisecond, but it was there. FACTS: GNOME Shell doesn't have it, Unity doesn't have it. Neither XFCE.

After I have put some icons in the taskbar just like they are arranged in Windows 7, KDE was perfect... it's too bad I can't change the whole Kick Off menu to behave and look like the same as 7. Because that would be actually GOOD. I don't know why I have to frigging browse 4 levels to get to an application. Windows 7 Menu behaves better and is arranged better - why not copy it since the trends is obvious?

Fonts? Anyone? Why don't KDE stablish its own shiny font like Canonical did to Ubuntu? Simple things that make life easier. Larger buttons for people to click? No icon buttons for defaults? You know, KDE can be Windows 7.

It's just so stupid sometimes. This attitude: well, we're not a clone, but the copying trend is there.

I'm sure also there's a lot of KDE margarine lovers around, because everytime I say these things I get modded down. Others too. C'mon KDE margarine lovers!

And I couldn't care less who invented SNAP first, since I never use this. If Windows did copy it, it made it better at least.

Edited 2011-11-02 14:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2