Fedora 11 Preview [Archive]

drag

04-29-2009, 01:33 AM

Whatever.

I'll take ugly and works over pretty and worthless any day of the week. I know how to use Gnome, how to tweak it, and how to beat it into submission and do whatever I want. It's easy now. It does what I want, how I want, and when I want.

KDE?
Meh. If wading through 30 screens of options, half of which cause some sort of broken, ugly, poor, conflicting, or othwerise undesirable behavior is your idea of flexiblity and user friendliness... then you can keep it. I don't want any part of it.

Remember folks.. giving users a lot of crappy choices and hundreds of bits of broken functionality to choose from is not good usability. If you ever read anybody saying "Ah, ya but I don't like it. It's better to let the user to choose anyways" is somebody that should be dragged out into the street and told firmly, but in a polite manner "Stop it, your wrong.". Unless you have a solid, fully functional, standardized, default configuration with minimal brokenness then giving users lots of choices is the same as giving a user a choices between 40 guns that all point right at their feet.

Docks? AWN?
Blah. I thought OS X's dock looked cool.. that is until I actually had to use the stupid thing. Looks cool, but otherwise is a complete waste of screen space. Always the blight of every OS X user.. bringing it to Linux was the only thing that could make it worse. Always in the way.. either you loose the bottom 15% (or side or top, take your pick) of your screen or you have to choose between covering up important parts of the windows you need or loosing access to the dock altogether without relying on juggling windows around.

XCFE?
Gnome lite or GTK desktop done right? Neither. It's Gnome minus a bunch of usefulness and coherence. In actual practice only uses slightly less RAM. Sure it has better start up foot print, but that goes out the window once you actually start using lots of applications on it. If you stick to using 'pure Gnome' (that is as shipped by Gnome, not by Ubuntu) then it'll easily match XFCE.

Fluxbox? Blackbox? other 'lite' Window managers?

Nah... Keep your cryptic, oddly configured, and poorly documented configuration files to yourself. After a few years a person gets tired of having to google through mailing lists to actually get some usefulness out of the silly things. Which is what happenned with me.

Also anybody that thinks it's cool to have to learn a scripting language to use a Window manager should be dragged out into the street and told firmly 'please stop it, your wrong'. If you want to make something just for you and a couple other buddies to use.. that's fine. Just realize that it gives everybody else a huge headache to even think about using it.

etc etc etc. Line them up and I'll knock them down. There really isn't that much that is really that great out there. There is a lot to play around with a tweak to suit specific needs very well.. and there are other things that are borderline useless, but pretty to look at. But all of that really ends up to a big waste of time for most people who try them, unfortunately.

Here is the reality of the situation:

OpenBox kicks-ass.
Compiz could be better. If Metacity had a 3D compositor and supported plugins then there would really be no need for it and would do a better job.
OpenBox kicks-double-ass. It's amazing the difference decent documentation makes.

Unlike most Desktop Environments.. LXDE actually has real usefulness and a real purpose and lives up to it's promises. Not everybody can afford a decent computer and those people have real needs, too.

But when I am not using Gnome I am using Ratpoison. If your going to get a angsty desktop you might as well do it right. Ratpoison is the only one that does it right.

------------------

All the above is just ment to be taken very lightly. Everybody has their own tastes.

Oh. And Fedora 11 kicks ass.

Remember. Beauty is the in the eye of the beholder.

edit:
Just so you know what I like in a UI...
http://sanguis.bluddclot.com/share/Screenshot.png

kraftman

04-29-2009, 02:32 AM

Does someone know if KMS will work with Ati r500 in Leonidas?

@Drag

We'll see how things will look in the future, because Gnome is full of old and legacy crap. KDE guys have clean path to improve their DE thanks to new KDE 4 which is written from scratch (I suppose).

val-gaav

04-29-2009, 03:15 AM

KDE?
Meh. If wading through 30 screens of options, half of which cause some sort of broken, ugly, poor, conflicting, or othwerise undesirable behavior is your idea of flexiblity and user friendliness... then you can keep it. I don't want any part of it.

Remember folks.. giving users a lot of crappy choices and hundreds of bits of broken functionality to choose from is not good usability. If you ever read anybody saying "Ah, ya but I don't like it. It's better to let the user to choose anyways" is somebody that should be dragged out into the street and told firmly, but in a polite manner "Stop it, your wrong.". Unless you have a solid, fully functional, standardized, default configuration with minimal brokenness then giving users lots of choices is the same as giving a user a choices between 40 guns that all point right at their feet.

That really means you have not used new KDE as FYI per default it works a lot better then default GNOME ... That's why nobody is crying when distros like Ubuntu and Fedora change Gnomes defaults, themes etc. On the other hand change something in KDE and you will get a bunch of angry users asking why the distro goes away from upstream defaults ...

For example: Cannonical new notifications were welcomed in GNOME, but Kubuntu community is against them and most people do not want to see them included in Karmic. Why ? because KDE already has a nice notification system.

susikala

04-29-2009, 04:07 AM

Hey, let's not take sides.

--

Fact is, (X)Ubuntu starts here in about 20 seconds from GRUB and then works like a charm, Kubuntu needs like 40 seconds and is afterwards sluggish as hell. KDE is bloat without end.

So yeah, GNOME is bloated, but not to the point it's not usable.

greg

04-29-2009, 04:25 AM

We'll see how things will look in the future, because Gnome is full of old and legacy crap. KDE guys have clean path to improve their DE thanks to new KDE 4 which is written from scratch (I suppose).

Not really, GNOME just uses another development model. While you haven't seen much of it from a user point-of-view, GNOME was thoroughly cleaned up over the last major releases. A lot of old and deprecated libraries have been removed, a lot of subsystems replaced by something more modern, etc. The difference is that it didn't happen in one big chunk (and with a lot of hype). Now GNOME 3 will be all about making the user experience better, I suppose. Of course there's still some old cruft in GNOME 2, but the preparation work done so far will make the transition smoother.

BTW: In fact, much of the software that makes using a Unix desktop worthwile and is also used by KDE (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) is more or less from the GNOME camp. I don't have anything against KDE, but it's not as innovative as the hype makes it out be, and GNOME sure isn't "obsolete". Stop trolling.

kraftman

04-29-2009, 05:02 AM

BTW: In fact, much of the software that makes using a Unix desktop worthwile and is also used by KDE (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) is more or less from the GNOME camp. I don't have anything against KDE, but it's not as innovative as the hype makes it out be, and GNOME sure isn't "obsolete". Stop trolling.

To not trolling I shouldn't mention Gnome uses legacy stuff? You said a lot of old and deprecated libraries have been removed, but not all. Here's nice article:

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/12068_3812616_1/GNOME-vs-KDE-Which-Has-the-Evolutionary-Advantage.htm

If KDE 4 isn't innovative Gnome isn't at all. Btw. Firefox, GIMP (not sure about this one), Thunderbird, OpenOffice aren't Gnome.

@Susikala

KDE maybe bloated in Kubuntu, because there are some scripts which make it sluggish. Try KDE in Arch Linux it's way faster.

val-gaav

04-29-2009, 05:51 AM

BTW: In fact, much of the software that makes using a Unix desktop worthwile and is also used by KDE (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) is more or less from the GNOME camp. I don't have anything against KDE, but it's not as innovative as the hype makes it out be, and GNOME sure isn't "obsolete". Stop trolling.

Let's look on new things in gnome 3.0 (taken from Gnome 3.0 site wiki):

Gnomeshell = plasma

Changing the way we access documents (via a journal, like GNOME Zeitgeist): having to deal with a filesystem in their daily work is not what makes users happy -- on the contrary, they generally just want to access their documents and not to browse their hard disk. Providing new solutions to this problem (using timelines, tags, bookmarks, etc.)
=
NEPOMUK

Some obvious examples are 3D effects (with Clutter) = KDE4 has compositing and 3d efects in kwin too ...

Geoclue = Marble

So the difference here is that KDE uses already existent code (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) and have nothing against it if it's a good technology. Gnome guys will reinvent the wheel in places where KDE already has a stable and ready technology ? Maybe they just have allergy to anything with Q or K in name or from that camp ?

greg

04-29-2009, 06:26 AM

GNOME doesn't reinvent the wheel -- KDE's components simply are too KDE-specific to be useful outside of the KDE/Qt world.

And Clutter and Desktop compositing are two things you can't compare.

DoDoENT

04-29-2009, 06:52 AM

As I can see from screenshots, you've used your laptop for fedora preview installation.

Since your laptop has a similar graphics card to mine (Mobility Radeon X1400 and mine is X1600), what was the graphics 3D performance? And even more important: how long was the battery life?

val-gaav

04-29-2009, 06:53 AM

GNOME doesn't reinvent the wheel -- KDE's components simply are too KDE-specific to be useful outside of the KDE/Qt world.

Nepomuk is not at all KDE specific yet gnome guys refuse to use it. That's a fact.

BTW just because GNOME devs refuse to use Qt4 doesn't mean they are not reinventing the wheel for technologies such as plasma. They are because they are going to do exactly the same but in GTK+.

susikala

04-29-2009, 07:36 AM

KDE maybe bloated in Kubuntu, because there are some scripts which make it sluggish. Try KDE in Arch Linux it's way faster.

This is hardly a good answer. One shouldn't be forced to change their distro of choice just because some desktop environment allegedly doesn't work with it well. One of the reasons I use Linux is flexibility.

That said, the latest distrowatch issue did quite prove XFCE runs much faster on Debian than on Xubuntu, but that is mainly due to all the bloat *ubuntu puts in. Again, distro-related thingy.

What I'm trying to say is that I'm sure that in comparison, GNOME is faster to load and use on Arch Linux too. If anyone prove me wrong, then I take back my accusations.

There are other considerations, too. Qt is partly proprietary, and it just gives you a crappy feeling to use something backed by a large company. Well, gives me.

And Opera (/Qt stuff) looks shit on GNOME. Which is one of the main reasons I don't use it.

val-gaav

04-29-2009, 08:12 AM

This is hardly a good answer. One shouldn't be forced to change their distro of choice just because some desktop environment allegedly doesn't work with it well. One of the reasons I use Linux is flexibility.

Did it even cross your mind that it's distro that should make it work right ? Ubuntu is a gnome centric distro so GNOME in it will always be more polished then KDE. They used KDE 4.1 tagged as for "early adopters" and many users were flustrated. Would they do the same for Gnome ? I guess not ... Fedora is also gnomecentric and they went ahead and switched to kde 4.0 even though upstream clearly said that 4.0 is a release for developers not for users ... What do you expect KDE to do then ? jump up with a stick and punish evil distros ? They can do nothing about it really ...

What I'm trying to say is that I'm sure that in comparison, GNOME is faster to load and use on Arch Linux too. If anyone prove me wrong, then I take back my accusations.
FYI KDE4 seems faster for me on debian, while debians Gnome seems the same to me as ubuntu one. Then again I'm not intending to run any benchmarks about it so take it as just "the feeling" I had.

There are other considerations, too. Qt is partly proprietary, and it just gives you a crappy feeling to use something backed by a large company. Well, gives me.
WTF ? Qt4 is LGPL , GTK+ is LGPL ... There are lots of large companies backing up open source ... You have anything particular against Nokia ? OK, but Qt4 is not partly proprietary it is fully free software or open source whatever you prefer to call it.

And Opera (/Qt stuff) looks shit on GNOME. Which is one of the main reasons I don't use it.
Ekhem :
http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2008/10/01/native-file-dialogs-in-gnome/
http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2008/09/05/qgtkstyle-now-part-of-qt/

If anything QT apps since a while look exactly the same on your GNOME desktop as your gtk+ apps... even file dialogs and the Cancel| OK buttons.

The other way around though you cannot get as great integration of gtk+ apps under KDE, and when I asked GTK+ devs about it they basicly said "Code it yourself" ... If anything that was the most unfriendly contact with devs I ever had.

panda84

04-29-2009, 08:24 AM

Nepomuk is not at all KDE specific yet gnome guys refuse to use it. That's a fact.

Fact?!? Huh?
http://trueg.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/xesam_vs_nepomuk/
http://pvanhoof.be/blog/index.php/2009/04/24/tracker-our-near-future-plans

bulletxt

04-29-2009, 08:28 AM

Hey guys, calm down :) I didn't want to flood this thread... I was just joking with my post. I have nothing againts GNOME and I'm happy it exists.

KDE and generally speaking QT may be technically more advanced, but who cares? We all love freedom don't we?

Let's all say it: W GNOME, W KDE, W GTK and W QT. And most importantly, W GPL!

val-gaav

04-29-2009, 08:34 AM

Fact?!? Huh?
http://trueg.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/xesam_vs_nepomuk/
http://pvanhoof.be/blog/index.php/2009/04/24/tracker-our-near-future-plans
Well that's pretty fresh news though :) dated today and yesterday ...

Nevertheless it's a good news, thank you for sharing it.

bugmenot

04-29-2009, 09:29 AM

I tested a live cd a few weeks ago and KMS worked for my X700. But doing anyhting 3d (glxgears/compiz) crashed the machine. Is this supposed to work? If not, shall I report a bug? If yes, how should I help (I could not ssh to the hard locked up machine because the crash happened in the kernel iirc).

Thanks for fedora, fedora people! :)

drag

04-29-2009, 02:17 PM

That really means you have not used new KDE as FYI per default it works a lot better then default GNOME ... That's why nobody is crying when distros like Ubuntu and Fedora change Gnomes defaults, themes etc. On the other hand change something in KDE and you will get a bunch of angry users asking why the distro goes away from upstream defaults ...

I donno. I find Ubuntu's changes irritating. But it's not hard to undo them.

If KDE does end up being better then I hope they do. I am always looking for improvements!

For example: Cannonical new notifications were welcomed in GNOME, but Kubuntu community is against them and most people do not want to see them included in Karmic. Why ? because KDE already has a nice notification system.

Well of course improvements are welcome. I expect that it was always Ubuntu's intentions to see the improvements in the notification GUI to be integrated into Gnome. That's one of the benefits for distros hacking on software... if they figure out how to do something better then they get to be the first ones to use it. :)

We'll see how things will look in the future, because Gnome is full of old and legacy crap. KDE guys have clean path to improve their DE thanks to new KDE 4 which is written from scratch (I suppose).

It's not written from scratch.. but they did make significant ABI and API changes so that KDE software needed to be ported from KDE 3 to KDE 4 in order to be integrated into KDE and take advantage of newer features.

Gnome has a lot of crust, but that crust is what allows me to use all the programs I need without having to load multiple versions of the same libraries. So it's not all that bad.

For comparision sakes.. Gnome did the KDE3-KDE4-style transition when they migrated from Gnome 1.x to Gnome 2.x. That was a very significant change that improved things quite a bit.

From my personal experience it took from Gnome 2.0 release to the Gnome 2.8 release before the desktop actually was useful again. For my own purposes, of course. And it took to about Gnome 2.12 before I switched over completely from my built-from-componants customized environments. So that was about 4 years to catch up to the level of practicality that they had with the Gnome 1.x stuff and then another year to surpass it. From 2000 for 2.0 to 2005 for 2.12.

Hopefully KDE will go faster, but I know that the KDE folks are not so much more technically brilliant then the Gnome folks to really shrink that gap by more then a year or so. When KDE 4.4 comes out or 4.6 then I'll take a very serious look at it. Right now it's more of a curiosity.

This is all for my personal uses, of course. Everybody else will have their own stuff.

Meanwhile Gnome is benefiting heavily from things like Fedora, Moblin, Meamo, Ubuntu, and things like that. These things are improving UI, reducing memory usage, and improving performance.

With Gnome 3.0 (which is not going to be a big disruptive event like Gnome 1.x to 2.x or KDE from 3.x to 4.x) they are going to trim away some legacy fat and begin integrating things like their 3D scenegraph* engine (clutter), improve integration with online services, and further improve performance.

*A scenegraph is how you keep track of objects in a 3D environment in a way that is really good for realtime-looking behavior and user interaction. They are used, most commonly, in 3D application and gaming engines.

Of course a lot of the work, such as improving 3D support, boot up time, hardware detection, Xorg configuration, and drivers, that Intel and friends are working heavily on go to benefit KDE users also. So it's all good.

I hope that KDE would end up surpasing Gnome and doing very cool and wonderful stuff. That way I get a even better desktop then I would otherwise!

susikala

04-30-2009, 03:31 AM

Man, I just tested the new preview release, and I have to say, it's fecking beautiful.

Besides being a bit sluggish as a livecd, it's really useful. And nautilus is a really excellent file browser, I haven't noticed how well it's got in the last years (though I'd wish for extractable tabs - that'd rock immensely).

But the aesthetics beat Ubuntu by wide and far, not to mention anything KDE could put against it.

hax0r

04-30-2009, 11:01 PM

kraftman

05-01-2009, 01:29 AM

ATM KDE4 has no good native QT apps, it's considerably slower than GNOME and uses 1.85x more memory compared to GNOME with the same features (~130MB vs 240MB), tested on archlinux. Who cares about the looks these days, performance and features is where it's at.

I usually consider your posts as trolling. I think you're doing the same right now. Probably only reason why I'm using KDE are native QT apps. You see 1.85x more memory usage, because there's a cache too. KDE is known it has far more feature then Gnome and maybe that's a proof you're trolling here. Btw. when comes to resizing windows it's perfectly smooth here with radeon driver and QT apps and animation is choppy when comes to Gtk* apps (here). I have better performance with KDE4. P.S. my sister cares about looks.

susikala

05-01-2009, 06:02 AM

KDE is known it has far more feature then Gnome and maybe that's a proof you're trolling here.

That's largely admitting it's bloat. :) XFCE doesn't have all that many features and is largely usable.

GNOME takes a middle way, I think. I don't really understand Linus' critic at it. You might as well use stuff like ratpoison if you want to configure everything exactly to your tastes. I think the golden way is between overpacking stuff with features and treating the users as too dumb (where GNOME does sometimes step over the line).

Honestly, what reason is there to use KDE? Just because it's pretty? Comes at the cost of usability. Might as well use Vista.

Edit: Also, those troll accusations are I think devoid of basis, since trolling is mostly something that's related to _how_ things are said, in a provocative or insolent manner. Getting personal on someone just because they think differently is also trolling, I think.

kraftman

05-01-2009, 08:25 AM

That's largely admitting it's bloat. :) XFCE doesn't have all that many features and is largely usable.

GNOME takes a middle way, I think. I don't really understand Linus' critic at it. You might as well use stuff like ratpoison if you want to configure everything exactly to your tastes. I think the golden way is between overpacking stuff with features and treating the users as too dumb (where GNOME does sometimes step over the line).

Linus criticized it long time ago and I don't understand why you even mentioned this. Do you suggest Gnome doesn't evolve? He said something similar about KDE 4.0.

Honestly, what reason is there to use KDE? Just because it's pretty? Comes at the cost of usability. Might as well use Vista.One of the reasons is it's usable for me. Gnome isn't. I miss many features and apps (Amarok, Gwenview, Okular, Krusader, SMPlayer, Kadu, Yakuake, Konsole, KWrite, K3b) in Gnome. I can ask what reason is there to use Gnome? Just, because it's usually aesthetic, uses Gtk* and has less features? However, for you usability means something else, for me something else and that's ok. Thankfully KDE 4 is far different then Vista :P

Edit: Also, those troll accusations are I think devoid of basis, since trolling is mostly something that's related to _how_ things are said, in a provocative or insolent manner. Getting personal on someone just because they think differently is also trolling, I think.In my opinion what he said is very provocating or just stupid. I suppose it was trolling, because even Gnome users (yourself included) admit KDE has more features then Gnome. Btw. it depends what trolling means for someone. There are some definitions, but any one of them is Definition of All Definitions. I thought Drag post will end this flame, but then came Haxor and devils lawyer ;)

DoDoENT

05-01-2009, 08:40 AM

Since this thread became a GNOME vs. KDE drift, I would like to say that no one can actually say that GNOME is better than KDE and vice versa. I use both of them on two different computers, and I prefer GNOME because KDE's look reminds me too much on windows :p.

But I use a lot of KDE applications on GNOME (amarok, okular, k3b, ...) because I find them better than their GNOME equivalents (rhythmbox, evince, brasero).

I think that usually KDE applications have more features than their GNOME equivalents because it looks like it's easier to make programs with Qt and C++ than with Gtk and C (and thus developers can focus on implementing features instead of thinking on C pointers in order to avoid segmentation faults). C++ looks a lot easier to me, especially because it's object oriented, so pointers could be used only when there is a need for them.

Is there any GTK support for C++? But I mean 'real' support, not just using GTK's C functions from C++. Is there any visual designer tool for GTK applications as there is for Qt? But not GLADE, because it creates some weird xml file which has to be parsed every time window is drawn. That's slow. Is there any 'real' visual designer tool for GTK apps, which will generate C/C++ drawing code?

hax0r

05-01-2009, 12:41 PM

That's slow. Is there any 'real' visual designer tool for GTK apps, which will generate C/C++ drawing code?Yes, there is, it's called programming and reading code & manual.

hax0r

05-01-2009, 12:52 PM

I usually consider your posts as trolling. I think you're doing the same right now. Probably only reason why I'm using KDE are native QT apps. You see 1.85x more memory usage, because there's a cache too. KDE is known it has far more feature then Gnome and maybe that's a proof you're trolling here. Btw. when comes to resizing windows it's perfectly smooth here with radeon driver and QT apps and animation is choppy when comes to Gtk* apps (here). I have better performance with KDE4. P.S. my sister cares about looks.Yeah I'm a troll, I'm speaking facts. KDE and GNOME has basically same features, but other DE like XFCE have little less. 1.85x memory usage is a fact, I took caching and buffers out of the consideration. List me some good QT apps except vlc.

DoDoENT

05-01-2009, 12:56 PM

Yes, there is, it's called programming and reading code & manual.

Very funny!

So you can see my point why most of KDE apps have more features than their GNOME equivalent. If developer spent time on implementing features instead of reading manual how to draw a button in a window, GTK programs would be more like Qt programs - with more features.

monraaf

05-01-2009, 01:00 PM

Is there any GTK support for C++? But I mean 'real' support, not just using GTK's C functions from C++. Is there any visual designer tool for GTK applications as there is for Qt? But not GLADE, because it creates some weird xml file which has to be parsed every time window is drawn. That's slow.

There are GTK bindings for many languages, including C++ and Python. Inkscape is one of the programs which uses the C++ bindings.

I don't know where you got the silly idea that Glade is slow, It's not.

Is there any 'real' visual designer tool for GTK apps, which will generate C/C++ drawing code?

AFAIK Glade used to have an option to create code, but thank god they removed it. Xml is the way to go.

DoDoENT

05-01-2009, 01:05 PM

I don't know where you got the silly idea that Glade is slow, It's not.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't XML parsing slower than compiled window drawing instructions?

I didn't say that Glade programs are slow, but just that they could be faster, if they wouldn't parse XML window drawing instruction every time.

monraaf

05-01-2009, 01:19 PM

I haven't delved into the internals of Glade, but AFAIK the XML parsing only happens on window creation, once you got your UI setup there isn't much XML parsing going on.

DoDoENT

05-01-2009, 01:28 PM

I haven't delved into the internals of Glade, but AFAIK the XML parsing only happens on window creation, once you got your UI setup there isn't much XML parsing going on.

True. Imagine an application with a lot of windows which are created and destroyed a lot.

Or imagine an application which has big windows with a lot of components (wizard maybe, or something like KDE control center).

In such applications window creation time may differ significantly if parsing XML or just drawing from code.

kraftman

05-01-2009, 01:31 PM

Yeah I'm a troll, I'm speaking facts. KDE and GNOME has basically same features, but other DE like XFCE have little less. 1.85x memory usage is a fact, I took caching and buffers out of the consideration. List me some good QT apps except vlc.

Gnome doesn't have many KDE 4 features (or maybe I should say Gnome apps doesn't have many KDE apps features). About memory I already said why its usage seems higher on KDE. XFCE in example uses much less memory then Gnome. Think about this. If you weren't trolling give me names of Gnome applications which has same or more features as those: Amarok, Kate, Krusader, Konqueror, KMail, K3b, Gwenview, Okular, Okteta, SMPlayer. What's name of plasma equivalent in Gnome (in current version)? It seems you don't have idea what are you talking about.

I need to check, but as far as I know Gtk* uses stupid pixmap handling.

NeoBrain

05-01-2009, 01:44 PM

True. Imagine an application with a lot of windows which are created and destroyed a lot.

Or imagine an application which has big windows with a lot of components (wizard maybe, or something like KDE control center).

In such applications window creation time may differ significantly if parsing XML or just drawing from code.

And what about config files?
Just imagine a huge configuration file with 1000 of options, it will take _ages_ to get loaded at runtime!

On a more serious side, it's really just open the file and read what widgets to use, the most time is spent on actually CREATING the widgets anyways :D

susikala

05-01-2009, 01:53 PM

Gnome doesn't have many KDE 4 features (or maybe I should say Gnome apps doesn't have many KDE apps features). About memory I already said why its usage seems higher on KDE. XFCE in example uses much less memory then Gnome. Think about this. If you weren't trolling give me names of Gnome applications which has same or more features as those: Amarok, Kate, Krusader, Konqueror, KMail, K3b, Gwenview, Okular, Okteta, SMPlayer. What's name of plasma equivalent in Gnome (in current version)? It seems you don't have idea what are you talking about.

I need to check, but as far as I know Gtk* uses stupid pixmap handling.

Amarok is overrated in my opinion and is pure bloat in terms of performance, the area of sound isn't really something that's GNOME/KDE-specific (mpd, for example; I use moc).

Don't know Kate. I haven't used Krusader a lot because as I said, all my experiences with KDE ended up with trying to do something and things taking quite bloody long, which sort of takes the fun out of it. I'd say Nautilus / Thunar in that respect are much superior (especially the later, does exactly what it needs to do, nothing more, nothing less).

I do realise Webkit which is a great engine is based on KHTML, so kudos there to the KDE developers. Konqueror itself was ever slow in every test I did. I'd take Firefox over it every day or any console browser. But I do plan to switch over to Midori once it leaves alpha status (oh, the irony - it uses Webkit).

I can't be inclined to delve into every last application you mentioned, but one that indeed springs to mind positively as one of the best media players I've ever encountered is SMPlayer. It's really great, my only fault is that I try to avoid toolkit-based interfaces so using mplayer is more attractive for me. Otherwise I'd use it without thinking twice, willing even to sacrifice my wish to keep my box clean of qt-bloat.

But my post boils down to what I've already said. KDE is not essentially bad, it's just _slow_ and it bugs the crap out of me. I get more or less the same functionality without paying with so much juice for it.

At the end, cuique suum, wasn't it?

DoDoENT

05-01-2009, 01:58 PM

And what about config files?
Just imagine a huge configuration file with 1000 of options, it will take _ages_ to get loaded at runtime!

On a more serious side, it's really just open the file and read what widgets to use, the most time is spent on actually CREATING the widgets anyways :D

True. I've got the point... So, Glade isn't so bad after all :D:D:rolleyes:

kraftman

05-01-2009, 02:03 PM

Amarok is overrated in my opinion and is pure bloat in terms of performance, the area of sound isn't really something that's GNOME/KDE-specific (mpd, for example; I use moc).

Don't know Kate. I haven't used Krusader a lot because as I said, all my experiences with KDE ended up with trying to do something and things taking quite bloody long, which sort of takes the fun out of it. I'd say Nautilus / Thunar in that respect are much superior (especially the later, does exactly what it needs to do, nothing more, nothing less).

I do realise Webkit which is a great engine is based on KHTML, so kudos there to the KDE developers. Konquerer itself was ever slow in every test I did. I'd take Firefox over it every day or any console browser. But I do plan to switch over to Midori once it leaves alpha status (oh, the irony - it uses Webkit).

I can't be inclined to delve into every last application you mentioned, but one that indeed springs to mind positively as one of the best media players I've ever encountered is SMPlayer. It's really great, my only fault is that I try to avoid toolkit-based interfaces so using mplayer is more attractive for me. Otherwise I'd use it without thinking twice, willing even to sacrifice my wish to keep my box clean of qt-bloat.

But my post boils down to what I've already said. KDE is not essentially bad, it's just _slow_ and it bugs the crap out of me. I get more or less the same functionality without paying with so much juice for it.

At the end, cuique suum, wasn't it?

That's not what I asked for and I didn't ask you ;). I know Gnome quiet good :> Maybe you should try KDE 4.2.2, because I didn't notice any bugs in this release (and KDE 4.2.3 should be available in few days, because some packages are already in Arch Linux testing repo :)). QT4 isn't well accelerated on some cards yet. P.S. Dolphin is very similar to Thunar in my opinion and in some places KDE devs probably based on Gnome, because they slimmed down some apps etc.

susikala

05-01-2009, 02:13 PM

That's not what I asked for and I didn't ask you ;). I know Gnome quiet good :> Maybe you should try KDE 4.2.2, because I didn't notice any bugs in this release (and KDE 4.2.3 should be available in few days, because some packages are already in Arch Linux testing repo :)). QT4 isn't well accelerated on some cards yet. P.S. Dolphin is very similar to Thunar in my opinion and in some places KDE devs probably based on Gnome, because they slimmed down some apps etc.

Cool, I'll spin an arch install through kvm when I find some time and test it for myself. :) (I've wanted to test that distro anyway for some time now.)

Melcar

05-01-2009, 02:33 PM

I don't know, but I personally find most of the "features" in KDE apps. to be bloat. Nice to have, but ultimately don't really make the job any easier. I think that if GNOME devs. wanted to make apps. with just as many features they could, but that doesn't really fit with the GNOME "philosophy" .
It's all preference really. Arguing over which one looks better or works better is useless, since those things are highly subjective to individual opinion. They both get the job done, so in the end what matters is how the end user likes to work and interact with his DE.

KDesk

05-01-2009, 05:20 PM

Cool, I'll spin an arch install through kvm when I find some time and test it for myself. :) (I've wanted to test that distro anyway for some time now.)

Arch Linux is a really great distribution! Simple, rolling release and follows the KISS principle.

If you are going to try it, I recommend you to use KDEmod (http://kdemod.ath.cx/). it's a modular and tweaked package set of KDE with some useful additions.
You have to only add an extra repository to use it.

hax0r

05-01-2009, 07:43 PM

kraftman

05-02-2009, 01:03 AM

Arch Linux is a really great distribution! Simple, rolling release and follows the KISS principle.

If you are going to try it, I recommend you to use KDEmod (http://kdemod.ath.cx/). it's a modular and tweaked package set of KDE with some useful additions.
You have to only add an extra repository to use it.

The best Linux distro in my opinion and new KDE packages appear in Arch even before official announcement. Btw. In Kubuntu KDE is about 70% in my native language and about 30% in English. In Arch 100% native language. I wonder if it's problem for them to just use KDE localization files?

@Melcar

Can you give some examples what's bloated in KDE? I find only usefull options here. If Gnome makes the job easier it's also highly subjective. This "philosophy" just doesn't allow me to do what I want and to have what I want to have. How long were you waiting for tabs in Thunar, because it wasn't clear if it's "right path"?

However tastes are different.

P.S. I don't like when some guru decides what's best for me and treats me like an idiot. If I don't like some feature I disable or ignore it.

P.S. 2 Really bloated was KDE 3, but KDE 4 is much slimmer IMHO.

P.S. 3 Sorry for frequently editing, but I see mistakes while after posting.

EDIT:

[I don't believe they can do apps with same number of features as KDE apps, because I never experienced this] Sorry, they're able to: Exile and some another Amarok like player, GIMP, Open Office (it's not Gnome, but I thought it's hard to do KDE rich feature apps using Gtk*, because lack of some visual designer tools).

Melcar

05-02-2009, 02:42 AM

@Melcar

Can you give some examples what's bloated in KDE? I find only usefull options here. If Gnome makes the job easier it's also highly subjective. This "philosophy" just doesn't allow me to do what I want and to have what I want to have. How long were you waiting for tabs in Thunar, because it wasn't clear if it's "right path"?

However tastes are different.

P.S. I don't like when some guru decides what's best for me and treats me like an idiot. If I don't like some feature I disable or ignore it.

P.S. 2 Really bloated was KDE 3, but KDE 4 is much slimmer IMHO.

P.S. 3 Sorry for frequently editing, but I see mistakes while after posting.

.

Didn't I just specify that it's all personal opinion? Maybe you don't consider particular features "bloat" but I do. It's just the way I like to work and get things done.

kraftman

05-02-2009, 02:46 AM

Didn't I just specify that it's all personal opinion? Maybe you don't consider particular features "bloat" but I do. It's just the way I like to work and get things done.

Of course. I was just interested what specific features you don't like.

KDesk

05-02-2009, 02:02 PM

KDE is much more customizable than many DE, and of course, much more than GNOME.

For example, in GNOME you can only change some aspects of the theme, the color of the WM, of GTK and the icons. If you want more, you have to do it in some non GUI mode.

In KDE you can do anything, it is about customization!
In Dolphin (and many more apps) you can arrange (with the mouse) the position of all the panels, information, places, folders, terminal.
KDE has Plasma, which supports many widgets, also the ones from Google, OS X. Kwin has a build in compositor.
KDE uses many great technologies such as Phonon, Solid, Decibel, Nepomuk

KDE is not comparable to GNOME, the KDE apps are very integrated. Gnome doesn't even have a official music player, Rhythmbox has loosed his maintainer. You could say Banshee is the one, but it uses Mono (C#) which isn't part of Gnome it self, it isn't a "core technology", it's not integrated.

Also, some people say: "Qt is half proprietary" What??? It is about choose, you can choose if you want to use GPL, LGPL, QPL... You can use Qt with LGPL which is the same as GTK's license.

KDE has a directions to go, to evolve, thank's to the new great foundations of KDE 4 and Qt 4, it has future.

Some people choose one WM or the other DE, I choose KDE, thanks to the free/open source software you are able to choose what to use.

Let see what happens with the third version of Gnome.