Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50

Thread: Fedora 11 Preview

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Well that's pretty fresh news though dated today and yesterday ...

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

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Die trolls, die!
    Posts
    525

    Default

    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!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    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!
    Last edited by drag; 04-29-2009 at 03:20 PM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    258

    Default

    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.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    206

    Default

    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.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    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.
    Last edited by kraftman; 05-01-2009 at 02:51 AM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    258

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    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.
    Last edited by susikala; 05-01-2009 at 07:06 AM.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by susikala View Post
    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
    Last edited by kraftman; 05-01-2009 at 09:39 AM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Radoboj, Croatia
    Posts
    155

    Default

    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 .

    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?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DoDoENT View Post
    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •