“On Friday, the KDE Project released the third in a series of development previews for the upcoming KDE 4.0 release. Dubbed ‘Kludge’, the 3.80.3 release includes the Sonnet language library, the new Dolphin file manager, and the Solid hardware library.” Read on for an overview.
They still won’t commit to any firm dates, but it’s beginning to sound like a beta might be out in July with the final release occurring around Dec./Jan. Hopefully it will be out in time for the Spring ’08 distros to use.
One of the things I couldn’t stand with Konqueror was that I like my web browser to be much larger (in desktop space) than my file manager. Not a big deal, I know, but I was always resizing the thing when it ‘switched’ modes. I’m looking forward to Dolphin to fix this for me.
This summer is actually earlier than I was expecting. But I wonder now, are they going to have time to do a major overhaul with the look? People who read OSnews may know all the cool things that are going into the backend of KDE4, but if the looks don’t change a lot of people are going to see it as no big deal. Is there an artwork team for this?
Is there an artwork team for this?
http://www.oxygen-icons.org/
The Oxygen project covers all the artwork related stuff in KDE4. I believe they’re trying to get that merged in pretty soon now.
Plasma is the other big graphical change people will notice, but it is just getting started so it is hard to tell how it will end up. It sounds really neat but I think people may be disappointed because of all the hype.
Edited 2007-02-27 00:35
Having separate applications for web browsing and file browsing is a good move IMHO. This way they can focus in creating a specific interface for web browsing and another one for file management, instead of having a common one (that, yes, can be customized, but that’s not ideal and makes the menus quite big/complex).
One of the things I couldn’t stand with Konqueror was that I like my web browser to be much larger (in desktop space) than my file manager. Not a big deal, I know, but I was always resizing the thing when it ‘switched’ modes.
Did you try to use konqueror’s profiles? Just adjust the size of the window in each profile and go to settings->save view profile and check the “save window size in profile” before saving. Again, not the ideal solution, but it works for me.
Why don’t you use Dolphin now, you don’t need to wait for KDE4.
Probably because he needs, as much as myself, the tree file browser and a lot of nice preview plugins that use DCOP and are not present in Dolphin.
Perhaps, in this case is just my opinion, the Dolphin interface is not that good. Thanks very much, I prefer any day a bit more complex application than one that I have to sort out how to accomplish non trivial tasks. Sincerely, I don’t buy the “keep it simple at all costs” that many are marketing today (even though I agree with the KISS in general).
I know that it is something they can fix if they want. Anyway, just in case, I hope they continue maintaining konqueror on KDE 4 or even split it on two, but keep all the power it has today.
I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that Dolphin would likely get a tree view by the time KDE4.0 was released. I can’t find any reference for that now, though. Anyway, Konqueror is going to stay just like it already is, so I don’t see what the big deal is. If you can’t stand Dolphin (which is going through a lot of changes right now) just keep on using what you already are. And if for some reason you can’t stand Konqueror either, then create your own – that’s the beauty of open source software.
I agree. KDE4 needs a new fresh look, the old KDE3 plastik style + crystal icons regime is starting to feel a bit dated. Too many lines enclosing little boxes and widgets, and too many disparate colors – to my taste at least. Even some Gnome themes actually have a slicker look these days.
I hope the UI theme is paying attention to community mockups like these for inspiration:
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=28476
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=36385
While not revolutionary, they have some newness to them that would suit KDE4 nicely.
Well, the infra-structure is the most important part at this point and it looks very promising. Kudos the the KDE devs 🙂
They are already working on the looks. I glance at the commit digest every week and you can see the work on the new icon set in there.
They also started a new window/widget theme and have a programmer working with the oxygen artists on it. No idea how it looks and it’s probably under heavy work now, but I’m pretty sure they’ll release some pictures when they are satisfied with their progress.
You can see some screenshots already in my presentation (day to fosdem report -> slides -> kde 4) but they’re far from finished, have some serious graphical glitches and all in all might not even resemble the final look at all 😉
I included them mostly because it would give the KDE 4 screenshots a ‘different’ look from KDE 3.x
Do you have a link to this?
http://www.kde.org/kdeslides/fosdem2007/2007-02-poortvliet-kde4.pdf
That’s directly to my talk. And of course the dot (dot.kde.org) has more interesting information 😉
http://www.kde.org/kdeslides/
http://www.kde.org/kdeslides/fosdem2007/2007-02-poortvliet-kde4.pdf
I also made the error of looking for the fosdem page first (hey, it’s a talk at fosdem, shouldn’t the fosdem page provide slides or at least a link? Silly me). Either fosdem.org doesn’t provide the slides or they’re cunningly concealed behind some menu entry where at least I wouldn’t suspect slides. Whoever did that page should be shot or forced to actually use it for all eternity.
I think the mockup that you linked to made by ibc is passible, but I was afraid that one of them would be eriol’s. Now, I’m all for eye candy (I use MacOS X,) but in my opinion, eriol’s mockups are unworkable, shallow glitz. I have never been able to follow what he is after.
Perhaps someone could enlighten me, and explain how the mockups he makes would be usable in practice: how they would scale to real-world usage. Not to be a hater, but I think his mockups are vastly overrated. Not that I don’t have my own faves that others probably hate ( Gentle Gnome: http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=31128 )
OK, back on topic: I think that the premise KDE has set so far through the 3-series releases has been a good one overall. The icons, though pretty bland, do a fairly good job of conveying their message. It may be time to make KDE a little prettier, but I don’t think that means breaking a clean break with the desktop paradigms that have brought us thus far. Maybe extending them, and removing some concepts in favor of other new ones, but I think that changing to a desktop like eriol’s would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
For an example of a novel idea that would probably be useful, check here: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=53580
“One of the things I couldn’t stand with Konqueror was that I like my web browser to be much larger (in desktop space) than my file manager. Not a big deal, I know, but I was always resizing the thing when it ‘switched’ modes.”
Yeah, me too. Dolphin will only be a file manager though. But I do hope that with Dolphin becoming the file manager, they can clean up Konqueror-the-browser a bit.
Not just a clever name?
These names are not coincidence. It is meant to imply the unstable nature of the releases (Krash was the previous release name).
Funny. Must be some of that dry-humor that programmers share.
As long as the “Kludge” doesn’t “Krash” then everyone should be “Ubuntu”. <– Feeble attempt at wordplay.
KDE is maybe the most “engineered”, complex and large open source project and it is showing a big maturity and quality.
Kudos KDE team!
KDE is maybe the most “engineered”…
Nah, I would venture to guess FreeBSD, OpenSolaris, Apache, Xorg, and others currently hold that title.
As far as desktop projects go though, I would say you’re probably right.
Yeap, you’re right… though I’d prefer to say that the other BSDs are more “engineered” than FreeBSD (I like the DragonFly infrastructure and the portability of NetBSD).
Yeap, you’re right… though I’d prefer to say that the other BSDs are more “engineered” than FreeBSD (I like the DragonFly infrastructure and the portability of NetBSD).
PDTA: Sorry by the double comment
Edited 2007-02-27 14:51
Yeah, to bad all major dists and Solaris and so on uses Gnome instead. There isn’t even a KDE 3.5 port for Solaris.
The following is not a pronouncement of doom. Worst case (for me) is that things continue exactly as they have for the last four years: me using Konqueror for everything. I just think a big opportunity is being missed with Dolphin.
KDE4 will only has one texteditor in the base install, which is great. But there will be two filebrowsers. I’d just use Dolphin and be happy to have separate apps for filebrowsing and web browsing, but Dolphin has no directory tree (not even as an option). But this is OK they say, because I can continue using my webbrowser to browse files, since it has a directory tree!
By not putting something into Dolphin (as an option even) that at least some people find essential to file browsing, we are left with a suboptimal filebrowser, and a webbrowser that cannot get rid of all the filebrowsing options and buttons it has since it has to continue being a filebrowser for those who are not satisfied by Dolphin.
Please, if KDE is to make a separate filebrowser, make it right, so Konqueror can focus on being a webbrowser. One usage, one app! Not this second app that does the same thing except not as well, and a first app that therefore has to continue doing everything!
Did you try to use konqueror’s profiles? Just adjust the size of the window in each profile and go to settings->save view profile and check the “save window size in profile” before saving. Again, not the ideal solution, but it works for me.
This does work for window size, but not for other things ( http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85454 ). Separate apps is ideal, I just wish the new app actually included features I need for filebrowsing
Edited 2007-02-27 02:35
most of the user have not problem to use the same application for web browser and filebrowser
Actually, i LOVE the ability of doing so.
I read that they’re just including Konqueror as the web browser, but users are free to set it as a file browser as well, it just won’t be by default. So there won’t really be two file managers.
> here will be two filebrowsers
no. here will be one file manager and one universal browser. and eventually the possibility of a “pure” web browser.
it’s sort of like complaining that we’ll have both okular and gwenview, when okular can view many types of graphic files! well, that doesn’t make gwenview unecessary since it’s a compeletely different use case and workflow.
a file manager and a universal browser present two different sets of workflows and features while addressing the needs of rather different audiences. and both sets of audiences are quite fundamental to our user base.
as a very smart man once said: make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.
(the man was some “albert einstein” guy. you’d think with all the hype around him he’d come up with some revolutionary theories about the universe or something
So, Konqueror does everything, and apparently that’s too much for some of the file browsing set. When those same people want to web browse, why will Konqueror be any better for them then? Will there be a simple web browser as well? and eventually the possibility of a “pure” web browser. I guess so. But will that be Konqueror pared down (Dolphin would have to be up to snuff as a filebrowser first)? Or will it be another app that duplicates a different part of Konqueror’s functionality?
it’s sort of like complaining that we’ll have both okular and gwenview
Of course no one would complain about KDE having both Okular and Gwenview, but they might find having both Okular and Ligature a little odd. More confusion to come when Mailody moves into KDE so there can be two email programs as well
Those “duplicates” don’t bother me at all, choice is great. I was just enjoying the idea of being free from “KDE has 3 text editors” trolls. That joy was rather short lasting is all hehe
So what, Windows has 4 text editors too:
– MS Word (at least if it came with your OS)
– Wordpad
– Notepad
– Dos-based “edit”
I never hear anyone complaining about those :o)
Edited 2007-02-27 13:00
– MS Word (at least if it came with your OS)
– Wordpad
– Notepad
– Dos-based “edit”
I never hear anyone complaining about those :o)
True, but with those it’s reasonably clear what they’re for. Word is a full word processor, Wordpad is a rich-text editor, which you could even use in case you don’t have Word, and Notepad is a plain text editor.
With KWrite and KEdit in particular, it wasn’t clear at all what the difference was between them. Kate was a different kind of editor, not strictly for editing text.
It’s clear to me… Kate is more of a swiss-army-knife text editor, such as Editpad Lite/Pro and the likes are on Windows.
Only those aren’t included by default.
For some reason, I never used Kword… always Kate, although there certainly are some things I don’t like about it. Such as asking me if I want to open a default session or a new one (which means… what exactly?). I want to type a simple text, Tux-dang-it! Keep those dialog boxes away from me, they only get in the way.
Edited 2007-02-27 14:09
For some reason, I never used Kword… always Kate, although there certainly are some things I don’t like about it. Such as asking me if I want to open a default session or a new one (which means… what exactly?). I want to type a simple text, Tux-dang-it! Keep those dialog boxes away from me, they only get in the way.
That’s because you use the wrong tool. If you just want to type some simple text, it’s KWrite you should be using, not Kate (and certainly not KWord).
I never understood why distros make Kate the default text editor.
Such as asking me if I want to open a default session or a new one (which means… what exactly?).
Those sessions are very useful if you have multiple projects with different files open, when coding, for example. And there is even a checkbox where you can select that it will not ask you again about it. Or doesn’t it work? If so, you should report a bug at http://bugs.kde.org
But anyways, like someone already said to you, Kate (KDE Advanced Text Editor) is not the right tool for your job in this case.
> but they might find having both Okular and Ligature
> a little odd
yes, that’s another case we will take care of. but as i have pointed out, the konqueror/dolphin example is not the same as this at all. it much more analogous to okular/gwenview.
More confusion to come when Mailody moves into KDE so there can be two email programs as well
Those “duplicates” don’t bother me at all, choice is great. I was just enjoying the idea of being free from “KDE has 3 text editors” trolls. That joy was rather short lasting is all hehe
Umh, no one have said that Mailody will go into KDE, no? Well, I think that KDE will not have two separate mail clients when KDE 4 will be released, but instead of having Mailody outside the base packages (in extragear). That is because Mailody still lacks a lot of functionality KMail offers (POP3 support, groupware and a lot of others) which perhaps can’t be done quickly enough so it would be release ready for KDE 4.
But anyway, these are just my 0.02e about the case, I don’t really know much about what is going on in that area at the moment.
I asked someone about Mailody and was told that no decisions had been made yet. It might completely replace KMail if they can put in all the functionality, or it might not even be used.
Dolphin has no directory tree (not even as an option).
This has been mentioned twice in a dozen comments so far, so it seems like this is a popular complaint. I have a hard time believing that Dolphin will continue to lack a tree view for very much longer if so many users consider this a glaring omission. I don’t really see any reason why icon view is any simpler or better than tree view unless you’re in a directory where the icons are helpful in finding things quickly. This is only the case for a few media directories on a usual desktop system. Otherwise the tree and list views offer more information in less space, in a “shape” that’s easier for your eyes/brain to scan.
As for the relationship between Dolphin and Konqueror, I think that if Konqueror already has code to switch UI modes between file manager and web browser, then it should also be able to enter a simple file manager mode akin to the goals of Dolphin. After all, Dolphin is either rewriting a lot of Konqueror’s code (unlikely), or it is largely based on Konqueror’s code (more likely). The rationale behind Dolphin doesn’t seem to include issues with Konqueror’s performance or reliability, but with its interface. Dolphin should really be an alternative interface for Konqueror. There should be a simple way to toggle back and forth between simple and advanced interfaces.
And I see no real problem with this application also serving as a web browser. As long as the backend code is efficient and reliable, the interface can change on the fly, and there exists entry points (launchers) for each mode, then it seems peachy to me. Less code duplication, more integration, and the simplest possible interface for whatever the user is doing.
The class of savvy non-developers we call “power users” are the ones claiming that we should have discrete applications for each of our tasks. I disagree. The KDE project, in particular, has one of the most powerful weapons of integration we’ve seen since the web browser: KParts. Usability experts have been yammering on for years that software developers should be compartmentalizing applications such that they can be assembled into an interface that represents a logical workflow. After some remarkably unsuccessful attempts at this concept (i.e. web portals), we now have new kinds of assembled interfaces such as mashups on the web, composite applications in Lotus Notes 8, and KParts for KDE.
From another angle, usability research has found that users, especially novice ones, consider the data object more fundamental to a task than the application(s) involved. Considering this and the notion of assembling composite interfaces from discrete application components, it makes sense to associate each task with a dynamic interface that follows the data objects throughout the workflow. If the data is an image, for example, the interface might at times resemble an image viewer, a raster editor, a media cataloger, an email editor, or even a web browser (Flickr, for example). A search interface, or optionally a file manager, becomes the beginning of the workflow, and the interface dynamically responds as the user performs actions on the selected data.
The most comprehensive way to defeat issues of personal taste is to compartmentalize application components and allow the users to assemble the most useful interface for a given task. Let power users drag-n-drop components to create their ideal interfaces, and give novice users an interface that guides them through the steps of a complex task. Want a Konqueror tree view pane on the left side of a Dolphin icon view? Just “grab” it from Konqueror and stick it onto Dolphin. At the rate of progress going on in the KDE project, I’d imagine we could see drag-n-drop KParts in as little as 2 years and adaptive interfaces soon after… if they think this concept is as powerful and intuitive as I think it is.
Edited 2007-02-27 05:53
Dolphin should really be an alternative interface for Konqueror. There should be a simple way to toggle back and forth between simple and advanced interfaces.
My thoughts used to mirror yours. I figured Konqueror’s view profiles were perfectly sufficient, and I had no problem using the same app for web and file browsing. That bug I linked to shows that it doesn’t always work in practice, and Aseigo’s answer to different profiles was “as for “just needing different configs”, all i can say is that we’ve tried this.. we’ve looked into what it would take to do it “properly” and it is not pretty. sanity lies elsewhere; but please feel free to look into the code and prove us wrong =)”
I have a hard time believing that Dolphin will continue to lack a tree view
Another part of his answer to me lead to my dismay about lack of treeview (I don’t mean treeview as an alternative to icon and detailed list, I mean the left pane treeview of directories only). “@mamiyaotaru: if there is a need for a treeview, we’ll add one to dolphin. what we’re doing right now is seeing if it is really necessary given the features of the breadcrumb. maybe, maybe not. but if we can avoid a treeview that would be great as most people and trees don’t get along (it’s a human brain thing; some of (e.g. you and i, probably) somehow get around that
”
Looks like he at least would be only too happy to not add a treeview at all, so no, I am not confident it will be added.
His replies (he knows more of the internals than I) convinced me that separate apps are good, but the new separate app doesn’t look like it will fit my needs, hence my change from essentially the position you hold to my current hopefulness/dismay.
*aseigo quoted from http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2007/02/konqueror-not-vanishing-news-at-…
Edited 2007-02-27 08:13
I don’t understand why the tree view has to be removed entirely from Dolphin. Why not just have the tree-view toggle-able via a button, as it is in Windows Explorer? That way the people who need it have it, and the people who don’t need it don’t need to know it’s there.
I agree with you. If dolphin is not good enough for everybody it should be improved rather than shipping another file manager. And a treeview is of course a must.
Remember the Unix philosophy:
“Do one thing, do it well.”
If dolphin is not good enough for everybody it should be improved rather than shipping another file manager.
The “good enough” is a rather big fallacy, and a big problem usability wise. It suggest it will more or less do the job for everyone, but not being particulary well fitted for anyones work pattern. And it clearly breaks your “Do one thing, do it well”.
Because people have different work patterns and habits, it will never “do it well” for all. So rather than making a medicore application, the KDE developers makes one well suited for some users and their work pattern. They are aware of the divergence of their user base and know that it’s not a one size fits all world.
Edited 2007-02-27 09:40
And in some sense, KDE follows the unix idea more than any other desktop environment. They are making just ONE filebrowser view, in the form of a Kpart, used in Dolphin and Konqueror, both of which again just do one thing and do it well – Konqi is a universal Kpart shell, dolphin is a filebrowser shell.
> dolphin is a filebrowser shell.
dolphin is a file manager, not a browser. the difference? the former is meant to simply navigate amongst and manage the collection of files you have on your computer, the latter allows you to explore/view/interact with them in a much broader fashion.
so in that sense, konqi is more a filebrowser? as non-native, i guess i don’t (didn’t) see a diff 😉
No, konqui directly embeds stuff like pdf’s, pictures, etc. A file browser would launch another app.
than what’s the diff between a filebrowser and a filemanager? can you give examples?
I don’t want to speak for Aaron Seigo here, but this is what I think he was saying:
A file manager lets you look at the files/directories, but if you try to open a file it will always launch another app.
A browser (more generic, not just file browser) is just a wrapper ui around kparts, so it shows files, pdfs, pictures, the web, and anything else you can think of all within the same app.
Personally, I think he’s splitting hairs a little bit.
then konqueror IS a (file)browser and dolphin a filemanager… like I said.
This was my first hope, when I heard of Dolphin: That they finally produce a functioning tree view (in the left pane). That was the part of Konqueror that to my eyes was the most lacking. To show the same place left and right with regard to symlinks (as far as possible). Windows Explorer just feels better for me (and with “My Files”, there is at least one prominent file system ‘link’).
*waits patiently*
I can’t understand why konqueror is never ever shipped with altered toolbar configurations? Imho the default konqueror looks like crap, which I guess is why most people are put off by it, but you can make it look fantastic. But this has been said many a times before.
I agree, even if you didn’t put it very diplomatically by saying it looked like crap
… My biggest complaint with Konqueror is that the default buttons are small and not the easiest to identify at first, which you can fix if you switch to large icons with text labels, but then there are a bunch of buttons that have really long text labels and are just humungously way longer than they should be as a result, and you can’t fit all of the icons on the toolbar at once anymore without removing said buttons. Perhaps a solution would be to implement a “Selective text on the right” option as is featured in Windows Explorer in XP and old version of IE. Or just shorten the darn button labels.
Edited 2007-02-27 12:12
As far as I know the work cutting the length of toolbar texts are on-going right now and we will see “text under the icon” mode being the default for KDE 4. I don’t know though how it will be when KDE 4.0 will be released.
Well, here’s a valid point of critique. I’m not sure what the reasons are, but there are some forces (I call them forces, but I guess they’re persons) that have opposed changes to the default konqi UI and especially the toolbar for a long time. I have no idea why, but luckily some distributions have used the ‘simple’ konqueror profile for some time, like Kubuntu.
Stephenson says that Solid exists because of “a demand from a wide range of desktop applications to talk to a hardware
Why it reminds me some Direct-Thing? Oh nononono sorry
FTA:
Seigo says that there is “no intention” to port the entire KDE shell to Windows or Mac OS X. “This is in part because a window manager such as KWin simply has no purpose to play there, and in part because we are still also primarily interested in creating a holistic experience for the user that revolves around Free software…. While many of our powerful and popular applications will find their way to Windows and Mac OS, we still see the workspace and the improved integration it offers as the ‘value add’ we provide on Free operating systems.”
While I would appreciate the option of running a full KDE shell anywhere, anytime, this perspective makes perfect sense. I really don’t worry too much since I run Linux most of the time anyway.
Looks like they are moving away from abusing the ‘K’