Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 01:48 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
KDE "KDE is delighted to announce its latest set of releases, providing major updates to KDE Plasma Workspaces, KDE Applications, and the KDE Platform. Version 4.9 provides many new features, along with improved stability and performance."
Thread beginning with comment 529287
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Oh, my...
by lemur2 on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 10:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh, my..."
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

To me, it looks as if KDE developers were paralyzed with fear of changing anything in default settings and look&feel. They just keep piling new stuff on top of old one, without taking a step back to look at the result. Which is really strange, considering that they could just get together for an afternoon and with a minimum effort make KDE twice as good as it is now.

There are three problems with pushing the design process to the users:
- It makes the desktop less attractive, despite all the work that went into it, many users won't even try it.
- Design should take place before the implementation, not after it.
- Most users can't design a desktop - they are perfectly able to judge it (which is what Gnome guys forget) but they do not necessarily know *how to make* a good desktop.


The KDE developers know how to make a good desktop, and that is what they do.

It is actually up to the distributions to make it look good.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[4]: Oh, my...
by evert on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 10:27 in reply to "RE[3]: Oh, my..."
evert Member since:
2005-07-06

It is actually up to the distributions to make it look good.


No, the defaults (vanilla) should be sane and NOT ugly.

I tried to love KDE, but the looks of KDE 3 were better (IMHO) than KDE 4.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Oh, my...
by cdude on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 14:02 in reply to "RE[4]: Oh, my..."
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

I recall those candy-lock in KDE3 and before that this ugly box-lock and then there was plastik, better but still not ideal. I did not make KDE my desktop of choice cause of the default style but cause I was able to change it and everything else to what *I* think is best for *me*. I am in the middle of the desktop and not the other way around. The desktop needs to adjust to me and not me to the desktop.

Everytime I had a look at the KDE desktops of others it was all changed. From the wallpaper, to the colors to the styles and decorations up to the position of the panel. With KDE 3 and 4.

I found it near to impossible to find there a common pattern. If 50% of all your users change the panel from bottom to top and if you change the default to top and only 10% change it back to bottom then you have a point in selecting top as default. But how common is that? How common is it that such an analysis is done and such clear results are gained? Its more like 5% prefer that, 5% that, 5% don't know, 5% like both, 5% like neither of them and so on. Some even change there preference by day, night and mood. How do you end with something that everybody feels being great defaults? You cannot. What you do is to *decide* and there always will be someone who does not like that decisions. Do not try to label it as a solution if it isn't.

The problem with an approach like design first is that its WRONG on any level you can think of. First its figure out what your users like to have, make a concept how to reach that, verify you are not off and only then implement (design and code since design IS an implementation and not something abstract). The difficult part is not the design but the steps before. That is where lot fail already. Those that just ignore that steps are usually also those that believe only there taste is correct and all others are wrong. Typical ghost-driver claiming all others need to change.

Edited 2012-08-02 14:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Oh, my...
by Gone fishing on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 11:21 in reply to "RE[3]: Oh, my..."
Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

It is actually up to the distributions to make it look good.


Surely this is right, this is what the distributions should do; sort out the look and feel so the defaults for the user are well sorted, sane and give the distro an identity.

Mint has been good at this, I haven't used Mageia but that might work Mandrake always had a look and feel and I'm surprised if Opensuse is poor and buggy.

KDE, Gnome etc need to get the technology and basic functionality right for the distros to work with.

Edited 2012-08-02 11:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Oh, my...
by Beket_ on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 12:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Oh, my..."
Beket_ Member since:
2009-07-10

"To me, it looks as if KDE developers were paralyzed with fear of changing anything in default settings and look&feel. They just keep piling new stuff on top of old one, without taking a step back to look at the result. Which is really strange, considering that they could just get together for an afternoon and with a minimum effort make KDE twice as good as it is now.

There are three problems with pushing the design process to the users:
- It makes the desktop less attractive, despite all the work that went into it, many users won't even try it.
- Design should take place before the implementation, not after it.
- Most users can't design a desktop - they are perfectly able to judge it (which is what Gnome guys forget) but they do not necessarily know *how to make* a good desktop.


The KDE developers know how to make a good desktop, and that is what they do.

It is actually up to the distributions to make it look good.
"

Are the kde developers also in denial? If yes, then that would explain why kde4 is still so kitsch.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Oh, my...
by cdude on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 14:26 in reply to "RE[4]: Oh, my..."
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Are the kde developers also in denial?


The look and to some degree feel are end-user customizable. Whatever you CAN and LIKE to make out of them is part of the desktop and the freedom that is delivered to you.

If yes, then that would explain why kde4 is still so kitsch.


Good example. So, what do you prefer? Change your taste to match to the default look and feel or change the look and feel to match to your default taste?

KDE did always focus on the second and I love it more then the alternate.

Edited 2012-08-02 14:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Oh, my...
by Loreia on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 12:56 in reply to "RE[3]: Oh, my..."
Loreia Member since:
2012-01-17

The KDE developers know how to make a good desktop, and that is what they do.

It is actually up to the distributions to make it look good.


But mostly, they simply don't.
Perhaps KDE team should start paying attention to this problem. (provided that they see it as a problem in the first place)

Reply Parent Score: 2