4.0 was really should have been another beta, while it was nice eye
candy it was significantly lacking in configuration options compared to
3.5, plus was frequently unstable. 4.1 could be considered a first
release though the update to 4.2 from what I read has finally got it to
where 4.0 ought to have been. All imho of course, however many share
the view. Mean time I've gone to the other side and quite enjoying gnome.
I'm sure google will tell you how to get to 4.2 and would be worth the
effort.
Cheers,
Roger
yuri wrote:
2009/2/21 Don Robertson wrote:
The bad:
KDE 4.1 seems less configurable than KDE 3.5. Maybe the options are
just better hidden. I need to play around a bit more to find my way.
KDE 4.2 is a lot better than 4.1. I found 4.1 was not too stable. In
4.2 you can choose themes for wigets from different themes ?
4.2 is not in the repos
There are a few things that I do not like - but I don't play about
with setting as much as I used to - well, not for desktop settings.
The things I usually adjust are for productive workflow, not aesthetics.
I usually only do it immediately after an install.
e.g. put shortcuts to the apps that I use on the panel, remove taskbar
from panel (to make room for shortcuts) and put a separate task bar at
the top of the screen.
KDE 4.1 let me put a separate taskbar at the top and remove the
taskbar from the bottom panel, but won't let me add app shortcuts to
the panel.
On 3.5 I could drag a menu item from the "start" menu onto the panel
to create the shortcut. Why oh why have the developers gone
*backwards!* in functionality?
It is worth upgrading. And the X.n+1 release is going to be great :-)))))))
Unless they go even more backwards. Wasn't there a fuss when gnome did
the same a few years back?
Yuri
