Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: KDE 4.1

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Rotterdam, Port to Europe
    Posts
    207

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    Don't worry, I am very calm and was just joking.
    I also think openSuSE 11.0 would have been much better recieved if they had waited the 5 weeks and released with a stable KDE 4.1 but still no-one knows what is on the DVD download ?
    OpenSuSE Leap 42.3 / KDE 5.8 | Intel i7 3770 | 16GBRam | 120 + 80GB SSD's | Benq 27" | DVD | PhilipsToUcam 740 | HPpsc2355p | Logitech KB & mouse | 320 +160 + 80 + 80 GB USB HDD's | Fritz!Box Fon WLAN 7360 | (V)DSL 12 MB/s | SuSE since 2001

  2. #32

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    I am sorry to hear that they are probably going to commit the same error again by releasing openSUSE11.1 before KDE4.2. I dont see any reason why the openSUSE releases have to be nearly 5 months after a stable KDE release? The idea might be that by then the KDE releases would be stable, but still people are right in being annoyed at why a major openSUSE release shipped with an unstable KDE 4.04 while they could have waited a while longer and released a more perfect openSUSE with a stable KDE4.1.

    Any comments from the developers?

  3. #33
    69_rs_ss NNTP User

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    nanosri wrote:
    > I am sorry to hear that they are probably going to commit the same error
    > again by releasing openSUSE11.1 before KDE4.2. I dont see any reason why
    > the openSUSE releases have to be nearly 5 months after a stable KDE
    > release? The idea might be that by then the KDE releases would be
    > stable, but still people are right in being annoyed at why a major
    > openSUSE release shipped with an unstable KDE 4.04 while they could
    > have waited a while longer and released a more perfect openSUSE with a
    > stable KDE4.1.
    >
    > Any comments from the developers?
    >
    >

    IANAD but why does a distro have to wait for a DE/WM before releasing
    their product? I think it is a little ridiculous to think openSUSE
    should have waited for KDE 4.1. If that was the case ten the same could
    be said for any other project and in the end the distro would never release.

    What should have really happened is that a LiveCD for KDE3 and KDE4 was
    released. That is the only issue I have about what went down and
    thankfully someone took it upon themselves to create that KDE3 LiveCD
    now. openSUS always stated from the release that KDE4 was unstable.

    Just my 2c's.

  4. #34
    clekstro NNTP User

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    I finally upgraded to 4.1 through the factory repos, and I have to agree with those arguing for waiting. Bundling OpenSuSE 11.0 with a very broken and buggy KDE 4.0.4 was a mistake... why should a distro wait for a stable version of the WM/DE? Because the system doesn't work properly or execute the advertised functions without it.

    Example:
    I'm still getting a window manager bug (with desktop effects enabled) in the relatively stable 4.1, where the minimize/maximize/close buttons in the top right corner only sometimes close on the first click, if they appear at all... Isn't closing the windows that one opens an acceptable expectation of a functioning system? Sure, I'll check the bug reports and the forums for a possible solution, but this seems pretty basic to me.

    I am a linux convert of almost 2 years, but I'm coming to discover that I love its possibilities, philosophy and charm more than its functionality. The Community continually pimps the newest versions of software that still carry glaring bugs that would not be acceptable in the operating systems that Linux is competing against. Polishing existing functions instead of competing to put the newest bling on is paramount to being taken seriously. Offering features without functionality is in my mind counterproductive.

    Of course, there is another side to this. The first thing I'll hear as to KDE's stability in 4.1 is that the first stable version comes out in several months as 4.2. But 4.0.4 was advertised already as such. Perhaps this is simply part of the community psychology: push people to try out the newest so that one can brag and so it's tested, make excuses for the current state of the software because you weren't supposed to expect it to work that well anyway.

    Second example:
    Plasma (in KDE 4.1) which should allow for the addition of new plasmoid widgets over the internet, doesn't incorporate them. They're downloaded and don't appear anywhere.

    One of these days, you have to ask yourself the question: if the software doesn't function as it should, why is it my primary OS?
    Answer: because once it's fixed it is superior.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    N40 44.977 W073 59.356
    Posts
    1,170

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    clekstro wrote:
    > I finally upgraded to 4.1 through the factory repos, and I have to agree
    > with those arguing for waiting. Bundling OpenSuSE 11.0 with a very
    > broken and buggy KDE 4.0.4 was a mistake... why should a distro wait
    > for a stable version of the WM/DE? Because the system doesn't work
    > properly or execute the advertised functions without it.
    >

    So then wouldn't it make more sense to just use the older version of the
    DE/WM? Which honestly is/was an option from the get-go. If we are going
    to wait for every stable release of say KDE, then we should wait until
    E17 is a the stable official release.
    > Example:
    > I'm still getting a window manager bug (with desktop effects enabled)
    > in the relatively stable 4.1, where the minimize/maximize/close buttons
    > in the top right corner only sometimes close on the first click, if they
    > appear at all... Isn't closing the windows that one opens an acceptable
    > expectation of a functioning system? Sure, I'll check the bug reports
    > and the forums for a possible solution, but this seems pretty basic to
    > me.
    >

    But that can really happen in any release, even a "stable" KDE 3.5
    release. Granted as the revision numbers get higher, the less bugs there
    are/should be but you have that potential to have them or even introduce
    a few.
    > I am a linux convert of almost 2 years, but I'm coming to discover that
    > I love its possibilities, philosophy and charm more than its
    > functionality. The Community continually pimps the newest versions of
    > software that still carry glaring bugs that would not be acceptable in
    > the operating systems that Linux is competing against. Polishing
    > existing functions instead of competing to put the newest bling on is
    > paramount to being taken seriously. Offering features without
    > functionality is in my mind counterproductive.
    >

    Which is why many people like to go for distros such as SLED or Ubuntu
    LTS. They have long term support and usually have packages installed a
    few revisions behind which are much more stable. And at some point
    someone has to try and innovate as well as polish existing
    functionality. If that never happened we would all be stuck in a
    CLI-only based world.
    > Of course, there is another side to this. The first thing I'll hear as
    > to KDE's stability in 4.1 is that the first stable version comes out in
    > several months as 4.2. But 4.0.4 was advertised already as such.
    > Perhaps this is simply part of the community psychology: push people to
    > try out the newest so that one can brag and so it's tested, make excuses
    > for the current state of the software because you weren't supposed to
    > expect it to work that well anyway.
    >

    I don't remember hearing once that 4.0.x was stable at all. I actually
    remember a blog from a KDE developer stating that KDE 4.0 was not going
    to be a "stable" release and that the first stable release should be
    4.1. I think the issue is that in the fervor before the release, the
    community hyped it up so much and expected it to be as stable as 3.5
    that when it didn't happen, they started on the crucify KDE campaign.
    > Second example:
    > Plasma (in KDE 4.1) which should allow for the addition of new plasmoid
    > widgets over the internet, doesn't incorporate them. They're downloaded
    > and don't appear anywhere.
    >

    Definitely a bug that needs to be fixed.
    > One of these days, you have to ask yourself the question: if the
    > software doesn't function as it should, why is it my primary OS?
    > Answer: because once it's fixed it is superior.
    >
    >

    But how do you get from point A to point B without this in between
    period? And the DE/WM shouldn't dictate what your primary OS is as you
    can use one of hundreds of other GUI's. If a person likes KDE but thinks
    4.x doesn't function the way it should then by all means they should
    uninstall it and install 3.5.x or gnome or XFCE4, etc.

    I'm honestly not a KDE fan as I hated 3.5 but I do see the potential of
    the 4.x series and think certain people in the linux community have
    attacked the KDE developers for reasons that should have fallen on the
    distros. The distros have been making it seem like it is stable and
    ready, some even dropping KDE3 support. But the developers are getting
    attacked for it which is uncalled for.

  6. #36
    Paranoidmarvin NNTP User

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    Are the PPC packages for KDE 4.1 up yet?
    I can't seem to see them in the repos, and the one click install isn't working for me

  7. #37

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    I agree to people mentioning that it is impossible to wait for a stable release of KDE or Gnome to release the distro. Since I have just begun converting to Linux from Windows with the release of OSS11.0, I can put in some of my thoughts which could reflect the thoughts of a novice just beginning the LINUX Experience.

    After trying out the LiveCDs of Mandriva, Ubuntu and Fedora, I finally decided on OpenSuSE11 due to its out of the box security and wireless detection on my laptop, which none of the others provided without kernel upgrades. For a thinking of coming to Linux would be put-off immediately with the word "kernel upgrade". Oh GOD!! What is kernel now? How do I upgrade it? or they say you need to use NDISwrapper etc - complicated terminology for a novice.

    The OSS11.0 installation for a Windows Power User like me after partitioning my harddisk with XP dual boot was a piece of cake. Initially I installed with KDE4.04 as it was the hype of the OSS release. After a couple of days I realised that it was not for me as most of the applications crashed upon opening. I uninstalled it and installed Gnome, with which I am working now.

    But because I was a Windows power user and with common sense and some searching on the internet, I am comfortably using Linux now with Gnome. But I am sure that the Linux world also has to understand that there are people who cannot go to certain lengths to try and find something as they are not competent enough, and to whom Windows seems more attractive. When trying to capture that market, I feel that Linux has to be more bug-free upon installation. Although I agree to the fact that Linux offers people a lot of choice, most people who convert to Linux are still coming from a Windows experience where things work out of the box.

    I also agree to the fact that if there are no people to test it, then the bugs will not get fixed. Therefore, I think Linux needs to adopt a slightly different strategy - release a totally stable version where most bugs are fixed and another version which has the latest software in it. But make it a point to inform people that if they want to just install the OS and be able to use it for a few years without having to search the forums and look on the net for solutions and work-arounds, then they have to go for a specific version. This way most enthusiasts and experienced users would probably go for the version with the latest software, while the not so enthusiasts and older people would be contented with the most stable version. This could included in the OS selection screen so that it could create another category of version selection apart from just the different desktop environments or the CPU architecture.

    Anyway, this is just my opinion to keep everyone happy - the experienced users and the novices. Hope I have made some sense.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Earth - Denmark
    Posts
    10,730

    Default Re: KDE 4.1

    very good observations!
    welcome to the fold..

    --
    DenverD (Linux Counter 282315)
    A Texan in Denmark

  9. #39

    Smile Re: KDE 4.1

    Quote Originally Posted by DenverD View Post
    very good observations!
    welcome to the fold...
    Thank you!!

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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