KDE doesn't need (certain) users?

English Soapbox
1

I recently read a couple of journal entries from KDE developers, I think Jason Harris and Troy Unrau. While they were perhaps borderline rants, they saddened me deeply. As much as the recent vitriol that’s been spread over the status of KDE 4.x.x.

Is it common concensus amongst the KDE developers that people who use KDE are not necessary if they do not contribute something? Perhaps I misunderstand the point, but nonetheless for the first time since I used KDE so many years ago, I actually felt guilty for using KDE.

I turned to Linux some years ago for accessibility features, and ofcourse stability, and also the freedom to work how I wanted to. My partner used Mandrake, but on seeing Suse Professional 9.3 we soon had a common platform to work with. Having read Troy and Jason’s posts, all I can say in response is that I’m not a contributor. The most I have ever done is edit spelling and grammar errors in wiki pages. But I adore using KDE. There isn’t a platform out there I haven’t felt more comfortable with in a very long time. Your posts in some ways said “we don’t want or need you (users)”. For me, that’s a horrible feeling to have, regardless of how much I would deny it, my connection to KDE is as emotional as it is practical. I make no apologies for feeling that way.

We don’t evangelise, but our friends who see our openSUSE machine ask questions, and leave with the knowledge that there is more out there than they perhaps realised. Maybe it’s what you want from us (users), maybe you want more. By all means deal with the people within a community who by their very nature, are anything but a part of it, but please, don’t tell your users, people like me, that we’re not needed. It makes us feel quite horrible :frowning:

Kay

2

I don’t know Kay, it seems to me like you just made a contribution to KDE :).

Seriously, I can see some developers getting frustrated that people complain but never participate in the beta process, file request for features, or contribute code. I can especially see some becoming frustrated when there are a lot of people bashing on this or that in KDE4. Even if this is not just a brief overreaction by a couple people to some particular frustration, it is just a couple of people among the hundreds of people who develop for KDE, let alone the thousands or tens of thousands who “contribute.” It certainly is not a widespread view.

And don’t undersell the contribution of editing wikis or introducing others to the alternatives. Even if it doesn’t seem like much, making documentation clearer is very important to other users. You also never know when something that seems small leads to more. You never know where that seed you plant with someone about the alternatives leads. So, when you challenge the view about ignoring non-contributers, don’t forget to challenge any overly limited view of what constitutes a “contributer.”

3

The idea that KDE needs “contributors not users” is very evident in the 4.x release.

4

The most I have ever done is edit spelling and grammar errors in wiki pages.

but our friends who see our openSUSE machine ask questions, and leave with the knowledge that there is more out there than they perhaps realised.

Make no mistake these are contributions just because you don’t see what you do doesn’t mean you do nothing.

5

MaarteOS wrote:

> I recently read a couple of journal entries from KDE developers, I think
> Jason Harris and Troy Unrau. While they were perhaps borderline rants,
> they saddened me deeply. As much as the recent vitriol that’s been
> spread over the status of KDE 4.x.x.

You know what? This whole KDE4 thing has been botched from the beginning.
And this is perpetuated by developers that do not WANT to realize the error
of their ways (Seigo, Unrau, to name a few) even in the face of very bitter
and loud opposition.

Comments telling them ‘Give me back my desktop’ should be able to tell them
something. But no. Alas. We just carry on polishing our shiny object…

–
Ruurd

6

Using openSUSE 11.0 with KDE3 as my desktop.

To be totally honest if KDE4 continues down the lame path it has taken, I may well be looking for a different DE.

I have been using KDE as my sole DE since the late 1990’s, and I just can’t come to grips with the ugliness and lack of functionality in KDE4, not to mention the default gaudiness of it.

Do I contribute?

Well I have been “paying” for my distro’s since RedHat 5.4 throughout 7.3 and then every release of SuSE since SuSE 7.3 if they don’t like the way I contribute they kiss my lilly white arse.

So when KDE3 is killed off, and replaced by KDE4 it will be time to change. Maybe a Mac is in my future as the ugly foot DE is even more disturbing to me then KDE4

7

maybe openbox is something for you. fast. leightweight and certainly not bloated or prone to crash.

stefan

8

Introducing people to linux is a huge contribution. It is very possible that I could introduce 1 person to linux who then introduces 2 more. Then they both introduce 1 more. that is now 5 new linux users. Each could feel the need to contribute. If any of these 5 contribute, then that contribution would never have happened without you. :slight_smile: Somewhere along the line a new developer could even be introduced.
Just my opinion. Also you improve the lives of the people you introduce to linux.

9

There has been a bunch of negative reaction to KDE 4, which I said there would be. I encouraged the devs to hold off on the “official release” and to temper expectations. I also suggested that certain concepts would not go over well. The developers seem quite shocked that people aren’t completely happy with KDE 4, despite all the warnings for a good year about certain decisions that were made.

The tipping point however was a poster on KDE.org who called Aaron Siego Hitler. Aaron closed off his blog, and a bunch of developers are angry at ungrateful users now.

10

Oh, for crying out loud. There are idiots everywhere. To defer to them is to become them. And what the heck is “ungrateful” I wonder…people with concerns over where KDE is headed?

11

Oh for crying out loud. Folderview not only gives them their “desktop” back, but gives them more flexibility than they can imagine. You can not only clutter your desktop with icons, but you can make them useful by having them point to specific directories, or filtered, or pointing to kio-slave sources, or whatever.

It’s sad that Microsoft has conditioned a generation of users as to how a desktop is supposed to behave, and that every alternative is expected to follow suit.

12

Have you actually read some of the material that has been directed at Aaron? And topping it off by calling him Hitler? I’ll admit that OSS developers should have thick skins, but there are limits.

Rational criticism is valid, and vital, but lately the rhetoric on the dot, the mailing lists, and the developer blogs, has gone from being rational, to simply being zealous. It almost smacks of a campaign.

KDE4 the “platform” is groundbreaking, but as the devs have always said right from the beginning, it will take time for all of the benefits to be realized. There are people using KDE apps on Windows and OSX, which is pretty remarkable, and yet they are immune to the bickering over desktop icons and the cashew.

13

> It almost smacks of a campaign.

if so, it would not be the first time stooges hired by Redmond’s dirty
tricks department has inserted fear, uncertainty, doubt, disunity and
anti-harmony into competitor’s cauldrons…

DenverD

14

R.F. Pels wrote:

> MaarteOS wrote:
>
>> I recently read a couple of journal entries from KDE developers, I think
>> Jason Harris and Troy Unrau. While they were perhaps borderline rants,
>> they saddened me deeply. As much as the recent vitriol that’s been
>> spread over the status of KDE 4.x.x.
>
> You know what? This whole KDE4 thing has been botched from the beginning.
> And this is perpetuated by developers that do not WANT to realize the
> error of their ways (Seigo, Unrau, to name a few) even in the face of very
> bitter and loud opposition.
>
> Comments telling them ‘Give me back my desktop’ should be able to tell
> them something. But no. Alas. We just carry on polishing our shiny
> object…
>

Fine, fork KDE3 and do all the development yourself or pay someone to do it
for you, there’s nothing to stop you (except your own competence).

The damn thing’s FREE, the devs do it for the love of it and no-one is
forcing you to use it - if you don’t like, don’t use it.

I’m not wild on KDE4 myself but I’ve been through enough fashions and
paradigm shifts in IT in 30 years to be aware that things always keep
changing. I may not always like the new stuff, there may be a learning
curve but usually it evolves into something worthwhile and if it doesn’t
then it’s just evolution in action.

Alan

–
email =~ s/nospam/fudokai/

15

I don’t understand why there’s so much anger and hatred poured out to the people who work on KDE over this. Certainly calling anyone hitler is uncalled for, as I said the vitriol ejected out to developers has saddened me as much as some of their responses. It’s just as sad to see some of that angst being continued here. There really is a bigger picture out there… :wink:

While I’m still using 3.5.9, I know in time I’ll move to 4.x. It’s merely a matter of time. :slight_smile: Whether I continue to read responses and posts on planetkde.org or other sites, even here, is doubtful, it can be soul-destroying at times.

16

On 2008-06-29 00:36:03 -0400, else where
<else_where@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> said:

> Rational criticism is valid, and vital, but lately the rhetoric on the
> dot, the mailing lists, and the developer blogs, has gone from being
> rational, to simply being zealous. It almost smacks of a campaign.

QFT

–
Keith Kastorff

17

Editing a Wiki is a big thing for two reasons:

  1. Not many people read the documentation they get with their packages. People spend lot’s of time surfing the Internet. They are more likely to Google “kde4 wiki” than open the help application.

  2. Without good documentation, users will complain and you will be liable for not having articulated the features if your application. So the application will lose potential users.

You have nothing to feel bad about, you have contributed well. :slight_smile:

–

People fail to understand that KDE4 is not an evolution of KDE3, it’s a revolution. KDE have got the balls to do something different whilst everybody else complains about new/misplaced functionality (misplaced because they claim they can’t find it, when it’s really right in front of them). I for one am ready to break free from the static desktop form once KDE 4.1 is out. If you want a static desktop, choose something else other than KDE4; the alternatives aren’t going away anytime soon.

18

I think the more pinpoint issue that is people are having difficulty with the functionality of the revolution.
Most fully understand it was a leap and not a step.

19

I’m not sure every aspect of that leap is all that great however. People seem very much in two camps here. People who are critical of KDE 4 on any level are called trolls, and accused of working for a Microsoft campaign. Other people defend KDE 4 100%, and when confronted with flaws they suggest everything will be great down the road.

Here is the problem. Flaws were brought up in the 4.0 alphas and betas that weren’t addressed, and people bringing up the flaws were attacked. Flaws were brought up in the 4.0 final release, and the 4.1 beta releases. Again, flaws aren’t being corrected, and people are being attacked for bringing up flaws.

What concerns me the most isn’t the flaws themselves, but the philosophy here. I’m also concerned when I read Aaron talk about allowing configuration options is a bad thing on principle, and not giving users the option to configure their desktops how they want.

Many aspects of KDE 4 really appeal to me, such as SVG support, Solid, Nepomuk, Decibel, Sonnet, Phonon, etc.

There are some serious stability and UI concerns, and it seems no one is listening. When the devs suggest that users have no right to comment on the UI because they don’t understand it, I get worried. They suggest if you haven’t looked at the source code, then you have no right to comment on UI. That’s perposterous. Users interface directly with the UI, and a good UI should be intuitive. You shouldn’t have to read source code to understand how to interact with your desktop.

Some people foolishly claim that KDE is just another clone of OS X or Vista because of the shiny interface. First off, I think KDE 4’s Oxygen look is both fairly different from OS X and Vista. Those claims don’t make much sense. However, I think KDE 4 is becoming like Vista in some areas, in that the interface is designed for appearance over functionality. I don’t care that it looks nicer if I’m forced to jump through extra hoops to perform the same tasks I performed before.

My computer is a tool to enable me to work. It shouldn’t hinder my work. I’m all for changes that offer improvements. However, not all change is good, and when developers refuse to listen to users about UI concerns, you end up with a bad UI. I often bragged to people that one of my favorite aspects of running KDE on Linux is that if I wanted a new feature, or a change, I could request it. I daily run into issues on Windows where I’m frustrated that simple UI issues haven’t been fixed over the years, because there exists a divide between users and developers in Redmond.

I don’t want that to be the case with KDE. I may not have a choice or say in the manner however.

20

It has been said elsewhere in this forum, but the unfortunate thing with KDE4 is that several distros, notably openSUSE, have pushed it out to users as 4.0 or even 4.1 when it is still 3.9.xx. This happens a lot in my own company when R&D (= KDE4 developers) are out of step with marketing and marketing deadlines (= distro releases).

Major release numbers create expectations amongst users and the distros that include 4 are attempting to fuel the interest and somehow benefit. Their defense appears to be that “we need feedback”. However, users are disappointed by the premature functionality and instability, and are likely to reject the technology altogether before it has time to deliver.

Unfortunately the practice of premature market release in turn creates dysfunctional pressure on developers to pre-release code and name unfinished pre-release software as major versions.

It would benefit the entire community if the distros that include 4 were more candid with users and perhaps more honest with themselves about the status of 4 at the time of release, and communicate accordingly. This may head off a lot of the user backlash, simply by better management of expectations. In the minds of users KDE4 is still KDE, and the expectation is that 4.x should be better in terms of functionality and stability (and probably every other aspect) than 3.x.

My $0.02…