Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 15th Oct 2012 23:22 UTC, submitted by OSGuy
Window Managers "The Trinity Desktop Environment (TDE) development team is pleased to announce the immediate availability of version 3.5.13.1 of the Trinity Desktop Environment. The Trinity Desktop Environment is a complete software desktop environment designed for Unix-like operating systems, intended for computer users preferring a traditional desktop model, and is free/libre software." Not the first time we mention TDE, but it's basically the continuation of KDE 3.x. There's a market for this.
Thread beginning with comment 538612
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Trinity vs. MATE
by UltraZelda64 on Mon 15th Oct 2012 23:38 UTC
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

Now, first I'll start by saying that the subject wasn't meant to be a comparison between the two. I was actually equally interested in both right from the start when KDE and GNOME decided to make such a major upgrade. Problem is, it seems that the Trinity desktop is barely getting any support; almost no distributions seem to support it in any way, let alone provide packages.

Even more disappointingly, this seems to extend to Debian--and if a package is not in Debian, then... well, that's saying something. Debian has almost everything. Yet, the MATE desktop quickly gained support from Mint, Fedora is going to be supporting it, and several other distros have been released either with MATE as an alternative to or instead of GNOME 3. I've actually lost track.

What exactly is going on? Are that many people just really happy with MATE, Cinnamon, GNOME 3, and KDE4 to care about KDE3? Or is Trinity a victim all this excess competition in Linux desktops?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Trinity vs. MATE
by ssokolow on Tue 16th Oct 2012 00:44 in reply to "Trinity vs. MATE"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

It's also possible that there's some requirement the Trinity devs have the bad luck to not meet. (eg. Maybe they don't know who to ask or maybe Debian is currently fresh out of trusted package maintainers with free time.)

Either way, it's a shame. I run their Ubuntu packages (they run their own copy of the launchpad build system) under a Lubuntu desktop and they're an excellent workaround for the KDE 4 port of BasKet Note Pads being unusably buggy and the KDE 4 port of KAudioCreator being either nonexistant or not packaged for Ubuntu.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Trinity vs. MATE
by TechGeek on Tue 16th Oct 2012 01:50 in reply to "Trinity vs. MATE"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

I think Hiev basically nailed it. While I hate the new Gnome interface, the problem is the philosophy of the design and not the technology. I suspect that there are a number of systems that Trinity doesn't work with because its based on old technology. If they had forked Gnome 3 or KDE 4 they might have been in a better spot to be added to modern distros. As with any free environment, freedom does not guarantee making the right decisions. You are free to fail just as much as you are free to succeed.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Trinity vs. MATE
by phoenix on Tue 16th Oct 2012 02:26 in reply to "Trinity vs. MATE"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

The TDE site includes repos for Debian, Ubuntu, and a bunch of others.

Unfortunately, the Ubuntu PPA packages conflict with KDE4, so you can't install them both to test. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Trinity vs. MATE
by r_a_trip on Tue 16th Oct 2012 06:45 in reply to "RE: Trinity vs. MATE"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Unfortunately, the Ubuntu PPA packages conflict with KDE4, so you can't install them both to test.


This might be one of the reasons Trinity doesn't get more love. MATE extensively renamed applications and libraries so they don't clash with the newer equivalents in Gnome 3. I can imagine that distro maintainers aren't too keen on a DE that wreaks havoc with one of the major ones.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Trinity vs. MATE
by toast88 on Tue 16th Oct 2012 08:28 in reply to "Trinity vs. MATE"
toast88 Member since:
2009-09-23

Now, first I'll start by saying that the subject wasn't meant to be a comparison between the two. I was actually equally interested in both right from the start when KDE and GNOME decided to make such a major upgrade. Problem is, it seems that the Trinity desktop is barely getting any support; almost no distributions seem to support it in any way, let alone provide packages.


There is a simple reason for that:

http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2012/10/maintaining-history-d...

The Trinity project has forked Qt3 which all major distributions are getting rid off. It's absolutely naive to think that a handful developers can maintain something as large as Qt and it's even more naive to think that Debian and Co will re-adopt Qt3 just for the sake of Trinity.

Adrian

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Trinity vs. MATE
by cyrilleberger on Tue 16th Oct 2012 12:30 in reply to "Trinity vs. MATE"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

Problem is, it seems that the Trinity desktop is barely getting any support; almost no distributions seem to support it in any way, let alone provide packages.
(...)
What exactly is going on? Are that many people just really happy with MATE, Cinnamon, GNOME 3, and KDE4 to care about KDE3? Or is Trinity a victim all this excess competition in Linux desktops?


One of the main problem of Trinity is that it does not bring much value. Unlike between Gnome 2 and 3, where there is a huge difference, you can make KDE4 looks and feel almost like KDE3, while Gnome 3 is a radical change compared to Gnome 2.

It makes me suspect that there is limited user demands for trinity in comparison to MATE. I also suspect that the interest in MATE will fade once Cinnamon has matured a little bit more.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Trinity vs. MATE
by aliquis on Wed 17th Oct 2012 04:55 in reply to "Trinity vs. MATE"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Maybe it's a good product.

Personally I just start Razor-Qt with openbox as window-manager if I want a light-weight QT desktop.

For a all bells and whistles one with massive integration and blo^wsmart functionality for banging everything together I assume KDE 4 do the better work as long as you can throw enough RAM into it.

Reply Parent Score: 3