The latest beta of KDE‘s 3.2, beta 2, was released a few days ago. I installed the provided Fedora RPMs and had a look in this early pre-release version of the popular X11 desktop environment. Six screenshots are included. We look at both the strengths and the weaknesses of the DE.
KDE 3.2 offers a slew of new features, including an updated khtml engine, an SVG viewer/player kpart, better tab integration on Konqueror (which are now available for file management as well for web pages), CD burning via Konqueror, and even an addon-like technology, named Service Menus. Any user can hack together their own custom service menus and create their ideal addon menu without any C/C++ code. There is also a better Kiosk support, support for graphically connecting to Windows machines, and support for inline automatic spellchecking for some apps like kmail.
The Kontact manager has seen a lot of work and seamlessly integrates KMail, the address book, the calendar, a notes system and a Palm Pilot kpart. Together with the KGroupware project this can be a very strong point of KDE pitching itself to the corporate desktop when Kontact becomes more stable (currently, I find it to not be as much). The now included multi-IM solution, Kopete, also integrates seamlessly with the KAddressBook.
New applications include JuK, KPDF and KWallet, a universal password application and new versions for a geometry app and KStars (the very nice astronomy app). Developers would find new versions of KDevelop, Quanta, Umbrello (a UML modeler) and the inclusion of KCacheGrid for profiling KDE apps. An interesting new app is KDialog which let’s you create little GUI apps with simple shell scripting for use with simple tasks. A very handy tool that can do the job much faster than writing the equivelant C++ code.
KDE 3.2b2 had a copy of the latest beta of KOffice as well. The office suite looks pretty good, very well integrated together to all KDE apps, however I did manage to crash KSpread when loading a Gnumeric spreadsheet. Other new features include a Wi-Fi manager, a reworking of the KDE Center and a shuffling of some of the preference modules, the inclusion of KRandR to dynamically change screen resolutions, an updated Kooka version, a better “configure background” dialog etc.
KDE comes with a new theme as well, named Plastik. Plastik is one of the best themes I have seen on Unix/Linux, ever. It is simple, but on the same time very well designed, up to the point and without extra graphic bloat. It is clean and concise with the right amount of mouseOvers and colorings. It is just right, and I honestly hope that this theme becomes the default KDE theme instead of the hideous Keramik (remember, most of the users don’t change the defaults, so it is important to serve them the best solution each time, in this case Plastik).
There are a few more nice UI touches on 3.2, like a new vertical widget showing on the left bar of Konqueror, Quanta or KDevelop which auto-expands. Also, I love the bouncing icon when loading an app (also I believe that should be the default behavior). The Kicker modules now don’t have a visible grabbing point; you need to place your mouse on the left of each module to get it to show and that results in a cleaner-looking Kicker. The context menus on the desktop have now being cleaned up and while there is still quite a number of menu entries in there, the situation is a bit better than before. The Trash’s context menu is now just right too.
What are the best feature of KDE 3.2 in my opinion? Speed. Definitely way faster than any Gnome installation on my AthlonXP, even Slackware’s. The KDE applications seem snappy, they load fast enough, and the widget/UI performance and responsiveness is far better than GTK+’s.
I am certainly impressed by KDE’s ability to have all these new and old features integrated well together. There is an immense work put behind KDE and it shows. But it shows for the wrong reasons: too much UI and application bloat.
We have beat this issue to death for years now, and while the KDE team has actively made a lot of effort this time around to clean up a few things, the problem does remain. Konqueror’s context menu is a mess, why would I want to zip a web page or use Cervicia with it, is beyond me. And the main menu itself it just has way too many options. Konqueror is the Frankenstein of file managers, made of so many Kparts that the end result is just not good. Options of other Kparts are appearing on the main and context menu etc.
Additionally, there are too many apps shipping with KDE. This results in a huge KDE menu (while other options have been stripped out of KMenu in this version). I don’t need four text editors in the same submenu (Kate, KWrite, Kedit and Kommander-something), I need one. While each one of the four have a bit different specialty (e.g. Kate is a good programmer’s text editor) the fact remains, there should be one solution offered. KDevelop should do the rest of the job for the programmers. The second-tier applications should be offered separately via KDE’s web site for those who want them, instead of bloating the main KDE distribution.
And then there is the still terrible Kontrol Center. The KDE project seems to have acknowledged the problem because they now offer custom Konqueror views (like Gnome’s “Start Here”) and so this new trick gives the impression to the user that their control panel is leaner. But it is not. It is an… eye illusion and if you actually load the normal Kontrol Center you will get even a bigger tree with more modules than on KDE 3.1. The problem is not just that there are too many modules there, but there are two more problems: 1. Each module has 2-5 tabs full of widgets and stuff. TOO many options, too confusing as to what is where, too much bloat for features that are redundant for the vast majority of people. Too much detail. 2. There is no integration between modules. For example, there should have been a single module for keyboard and mice, with one tab for each with some basic must-have options there. Another example is that we have the theme-related modules spawn on several modules under “Appearance,” ranging from icons, color, style, etc., etc., instead of getting a single panel for all these related items with the most needed options listed there.
Some of the options found on preference dialogs should not be there at all, but work automatically. For example, I used a white-ish background image and then I couldn’t read the text on the desktop icons. KDE should have either detect the background image color and automatically adjust its icon text color all by itself, or do it the “easy way” as Windows does it and apply a dark text shadow by default. Currently, the user has to literally search on panels after panels where the “show text shadow” option is hidden (FYI, is on a panel after you clicked “advanced” on the background image panel) and when you actually find it next to more redundant options and you set the shadow as ON, it just doesn’t look good and sharp. It looks like a “mountzoura,” as we say in Greece: a blot.
Also, I would advocate for some Qt UI changes, e.g., expanding a few pixels the space between words on the application menus. Currently, they read like a sentence instead of being wisely spaced out. Also a soft line that separates the menu from the toolbars and the toolbars from each other would have been nice too, as currently they look like they have all been thrown out together with no easy way for the eye to distinguish them fast enough. See one of my screenshots to see what I mean.
Another thing I dislike is that “settings” menu that most KDE apps have, where they list 3-4 different “Configure” options in addition to the “Configure the application” option. All these configures are confusing and severely bloat the app menu; they should not be there at all. For example, the “configure toolbars” should be accessible by right-clicking the toolbars themselves for example, a-la OSX or Epiphany. The “configure the app” should be just called “Settings” and put under the Edit menu when applicable. (“Configure” is a verb and as I said in the past,is like ordering someone to do something that has never done before. UIs is about psychology too and the right wording is important).
All the above might sound like nit-picking, but rest-assured, pixel pushing, looks, user psychology and usability is a huge part of any desktop environment. And KDE is one.
KDE is great. It has the best underlying technology today compared to other X11-based environments. It is modern, flexible, and now, faster than ever before. But this UI bloat and general unpolishness that still plagues itself and its applications leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. What I would love to see on Unix (and I am sure others would too) is a clean, polished and HIGified environment (like Gnome) but with the speed, architecture, integration and infrastructure of KDE. Luckily for KDE, they have the advantage over Gnome. It is easier for them to streamline, strip out and clean up their current interface than Gnome to get that level or architectural quality that KDE today enjoys. Development tools are worlds better on KDE too: Qt Designer beats Glade and knocks it out in the first round.
My suggestion would be: Clean up KDE’s UI, polish the widgets at the Qt level and do some usability and accessibility testing. Then, remove most of the most redundant options from Konqueror, its menu, its preferences, and Kontrol center’s modules and move them to a KConfig panel (a-la GConf or a-la Registry) so both worlds are happy (advanced and newbie users). Only keep visible on panels the most important, basic options, the ones that guarantee a polished experience. If the KDE Project realizes that polish and simplicity is more important than all these almost-never-used and hard-to-find-in-a-chaos-of-panels options, adopt a HIG, get some usability engineers aboard, oh joy, we would have a winner. But as it stands today, the battle with Gnome will still stand as Gnome has an edge on usability direction and general UI polish. I would like it if KDE used Gnome’s HIG (which is actually one of the good points of Gnome, so re-use it, that would help the overall usability as a bonus for both DEs and freedesktop.org’s efforts).
The fact remains though, KDE is good enough for most people. It does the job. The beta still has bugs and applications crash quite a bit (I think some are Fedora-only issues actually), but it does look very promising. KDE has the right technology and tools. But it is so damned easy to develop for this platform that some people seem to… over-develop.
about configuring all those options.
KDE should emulate the Mac instead of Windows.
main menu itself it just has way too many options
As the old saying: Every coin has two sides
It’s interesting how a few years ago KDE and Gnome were like night and day, but now they seem to be moving toward each other on a lot of issues, particularly pertaining to usability and general look & feel. I am not sure whether this is a good or bad thing, but we’ll surely find out soon.
You make some good points about KDE in general. I think the points you raised about things being “cluttered” is what turned me off to KDE a long time ago. It seems the KDE philosophy is lots of icons, lots of toolbars, lots of menus, lots and lots of GUI. Gnome, on the other hand, was sort of minimalistic, especially in 1.x. I liked Gnome better for that.
Now Gnome has more menus and more icons and more toolbars, but still not quite as many as KDE. I think both DEs could take some hints from Apple’s sense of usability here. Oftentimes in UI design, less is more, way more. A toolbar (like the ones in MS’ Office XP and Kspread both) with hundreds of buttons loses its purpose because it is too difficult to find any one icon when you need it. A toolbar with few icons (think Apple Keynote) with the truly most-accessed features gets much more use and increases productivity. More specific features should just be within file menus as at least there categorization breaks down the search for a function.
But I do like the progress being made… that’s for sure.
Konqueror always has allowed you to use tabs in file or web mode since shortly after 3.0
No. The menu is just wrong. The “Most Used Applications” should come after “Actions”, and then “All Applications” (and the number of menu items under “All Applications” should not exceed seven, imho). I’m sure that this could be done by which ever distribution, but it would be so much better if KDE shipped with usable defaults.
IMHO, GUI usability is simply THE most important and most overlooked aspect in GUI software today.
–ralpht
1. Konq. has an ugly button (Return key) to the RHS of the URL bar. IMO it should’t look like that. It looks out-of-place to me.
2. This is definitely the best looking KDE I have seen. Great job!
3. Menu clutter…..why not have a global option somewhere that gives the user “basic user” or “power user” settings. This could be chosen as part of the first start-up wizard. The basic version could be like Mac OS X while the detailed gives the power user all the extra options. Presently KDE looks just too messy although I like having access to all the options.
Despite the nit picking it sounds like a 9 out of 10 to me. I’ve always looked forward to new Linux related releases and I think the next one with KDE 3.2 on Linux 2.6 is going to open some eyes if not be a break through. I bet Qt deserves some of the credit.
Gorgeous looking, for sure. However seeing the KDE Control Center reminded me why I stoppped using KDE in the first place – having to search through too many options to find the one I was looking for.
Here’s an idea. Instead of KConf (ala GConf), how about levels. Level 1 hides most options except for the absolute neccessities, and that is how KDE comes by default. Level 2 shows more and Level 3 shows them all, so tweaker aren’t left out in the cold.
> Level 1 hides most options except for the absolute neccessities, and that is how KDE comes by default. Level 2 shows more and Level 3 shows them all, so tweaker aren’t left out in the cold.
This has being discussed in the past on gnome I think, and they did tests and they decided against it. Read here more about something related: http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html
For example, the “configure toolbars” should be accessible by right-clicking the toolbars themselves for example, a-la OSX or Epiphany.
Wrong. It is bad design to make only one (not obvious) way of doing something. Many users never figure out what context menus are. It’s wrong to consign the toolbar options to just a small menu. No decently designed app does only that.
Also, you really ought to have mentioned Konqueror’s wonderful Clear Location button which should be mimiced by default by any other X-based browsers. Not having it is an embarrassment of usability because of clipboard autocopy (a good feature).
You are also missing what the KDE project is attempting to do, Eugenia. The KDE Project seeks not to cater to the beginning user so much as provide the best fundamental technology so that those who would prefer a simplified solution can purchase wares from integrators like Lindows, Xandros, or Lycoris. When you graduate from the bottle, it makes no sense to make you have to muck around in a registry.
Your attitude of shove every power-user setting into the registry is rejected by all the millions of Windows users who have downloaded TweakUI and its clones.
Regarding your remark about Plastik, you should have realized that changing the default theme in 3.2 would have been bad since Keramik has only been the default for ~1 year. Changing the default theme so rapidly goes against your professed belief in keeping things consistent and simple for beginners, which is why KDE will switch to Plastik in the next revision after 3.2
The main problem with menu and configuration clutter in Konqueror is that its menus and dialogs are not different when in KFM or KHTML. This is bad and ought to be changed before release.
Your remark that no one would ever want to zip or burn an HTML document is right on the money.
> It is bad design to make only one (not obvious) way of doing something.
Most users know about the context menu. The rest, won’t be attempting to change the toolbar behavor anyway.
>you really ought to have mentioned Konqueror’s wonderful Clear Location button
That’s there for years, nothing new to report. Everyone knows about this.
>Your attitude of shove every power-user setting into the registry is rejected by all the millions
It is the only way to get rid of the clutter. Advanced users will know where to find these extra options and newbies won’t have to deal with all that clutter.
>the default theme in 3.2 would have been bad since Keramik has only been the default for ~1 year.
Keramik as default was a bad decision from Day 1 IMHO.
I agree about Keramik but it’s somewhat understandable considering the environment shortly after the release of Windows XP and its absolutely horrid Luna interface (ridiculously large title bars, excessive use of bright colours, inconsistent application to older programs).
It is the only way to get rid of the clutter. Advanced users will know where to find these extra options and newbies won’t have to deal with all that clutter.
Beginning users will never use stock KDE or stock GNOME. Nor should they. Total noobs will always stick to the defaults provided to them by their beginner-friendly Unix distro.
KDE is extremely customizable, yes. Way more than gnome.
If finding an option is hard, then thats a problem of layout out the configuration or interface.
In any case, though, KDE has a good Interface philosophy, because after not too long, you get used to where is everything.
In KDE, I most of the times find the option I’m looking for..
compared to gnome, where the option I’m looking for rarely exists and I have to stick to the default.
and the geometry app are not new in 3.2 they exist in my 3.1 menu.
Like many of Eugina’s numerous nitpicks in this review, I
likewise could find quite a bit to nitpick about the review
itself – however, I was quickly able to forget my misgivings
once I read the first two paragraphs of the final part.
Those two paragraphs summed things up extremely – KDE’s got
everything necessary to be a real winner, all that’s needed
is a little more polish, and a little less clutter. While I
don’t personaly think that KDE should go nearly as far as
Gnome has gone in this direction; I do agree that a few
more focused cleanups to the UI, would make huge impact on
the usability, and very much increase those all important
first impressions for new users.
And I also believe that it becomes _very_ clear with this
release, that honestly – KDE’s foundational technologies
far outclass Gnome’s current architecture. It will be
_significantly_ easier and timely for KDE to add polish and
to focus further on usability/HIG, than it is for Gnome to
bolt/hack a comparable underlying architecture to that of
KDE’s.
The panel applets do look cleaner with their lefthand menu widgets now revealed only by mouseover.
Some questions for Eugenia
1) When you use the mouse to customize the panel height by dragging its top edge, do the panel icons now scale smoothly as in Gnome ? as I would expect by the brief mention of SVG support.
2) When the panel height is at 36 pixels, does the desktop switcher applet draw its previews to have a wierd aspect ratio with only half their expected width ?.
3) Is there an option to separate out how some of the various panel elements resize because I usually cfg just 2 or 3 desktops but they become to tiny and look silly when being stacked into 2 rows as the panel ht exceeds 35 pixels.
Thanks
Brian N
Keramik as default was a bad decision from Day 1 IMHO.
I agree! Again, I do agree with you about that the Plastik theme should be default because it looks more professional than Keramik.
If you look at screenshots, there are plenty of gnome-apps in menues. And if you install all packages it’s not suprising that menues are full of apps. Installing what you need (e.g. libs,base,network, multimedia and pim), menues are much cleaner. At least when you build from source (RH-packages has been more or less br0ken a long time).
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. I don’t understand the question, possibly not.
Honestly, it’s the packager who should bother about it, not the developer. KDE is distributed in sources.
Also, I would advocate for some Qt UI changes, e.g., expanding a few pixels the space between words on the application menus. Currently, they read like a sentence instead of being wisely spaced out.
Actually the spacing is larger that those on Windows. The problem is that the font used in Menu is larger than the default in Windows. If they shrink the font size, the rendering quality will suffer, just look at the ugly text in Konqueror’s address bar in this picture
http://img.osnews.com/img/5410/kde2.png
the “www” part is significantly thicker than the rest in the sentence and even in one word – news – the w looks more like a bold font.
> Actually the spacing is larger that those on Windows. The problem is that the font used in Menu is larger than the default in Windows.
No, this is not the case. Check on this shot how much better the GTK+ app’s menu text looks compared to the Qt’s: the words are well spaced-out. On Windows the spacing is bigger than in KDE too, but their font is much smaller at the same time indeed.
http://img.osnews.com/img/5410/kde1.png
KDE menu should ignore all non-KDE applications by default which would reduce the menu bloat. You user should be force to manually add non-KDE applications to the menu.
Btw, gnome does this, which is the reason why gnome menu looks better or less bloated.
PS, more spacing who be easier on the eyes.
The three things that bother me the most about KDE at the moment are.
-Preformance. Kde 3.1 is noticeably slower than gnome2.4 on a k6-2 450Mhz.
If 3.2’s faster then good and it’s about time.
-Memory it eats the main mem (256) just loading and starts on the swap file as soon as I run an app. Gnome 2.4 usually leaves me with 30-40MB once loaded.
Hopefully 3.2 being faster uses less Memory
– Arts. It’s slow resource hungry and a pain in the neck. Why does arts require 12% to play an MP3 when XMMS is already using 10%. In Gnome with esd esd uses 1% Xmms 11% on average. Taking twice the CPU time to do the same thing is Stupid! Also when apps like mplayer aren’t set to use esd they still work alright in gnome just overridding esd. In KDE when not set to use Arts they either don’t play sound or Arts grabs the sound and stuffs it up!
Combine those problems with all the Apps I use the most being Gtk based or similar to gtk. MozillaFirebird, OO.org, xmms etc…
I see no reason to use KDE. Hopefully 3.2 will fix many of these problems if so I’ll be interested but other wise I’m sticking to gnome!
As a user of both DEs (first KDE then Gnome) I agree with your points, KDE is too bloat while gnome has poor menus but they are clear, both filemanager sucks IMHO, they are too slow (myabe is not their fault) and confusing, maybe konqueror is a little better but has too many option (and that puzzling location menu, why they didn’t called it file like the rest of the world fms)
But one of the most annoying issue IMHO is the size of QT widgets, most of time windows are opened with wrong sizes, for example the open with dialog or the file selector, and its bad to have to resize them manually in order to read all the content of the window, those windows should have a fixed size.
Thumb Up for Plastik, it should be made default (and also a gtk port would be good 🙂 its light years away from keramik
Is it possible to “stack” the buttons next to the K in current versions of KDE as shown in these screen shots or is this something new?
Ive been fiddling around for a while trying to figure this out, I have them stacked up in the system tray area, but this makes the other icons huge and butt ugly.
This is just the quick launch applet I use there, right click on the kicker and add that applet if you want it.
No, this is not the case. Check on this shot how much better the GTK+ app’s menu text looks compared to the Qt’s: the words are well spaced-out. On Windows the spacing is bigger than in KDE too, but their font is much smaller at the same time indeed.