Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Am Mon, 3 Nov 2008 12:38:30 -0400 schrieb Thomas Abthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I submit to the court of pulic opinion that KDE4 *IS* stable on FreeBSD. I would encourage you to check out the following resources while it may be supposed to be stable - it is, in my opinion, unusable. i tried to use it for several months now, and yesterday got happily divorced - our cohabitation did last for more than 8 years - and turned to xfce4. most annoying behaviour was: - used to freeze the desktop, panels, window-manager completely after ldap-server went away, no matter how long it was unreachable (i.e. a restart was enough). i think this has something to do with nsswitch.conf/libnss_ldap and dbus .. but xfce also use dbus, and here are no freezes .. - on my old (pentium3 i think) workstation at work, it used to freeze desktop etc. completely, as soon as the system load went above ~1.5, due to compiling e.g., now with xfce there is a notable slowdown, but it is still possible to work - after starting a java swing or applet application, desktop etc. freezes for several minutes - after browser hung due to flash/npviewer.bin problem, desktop etc. freezes for several minutes - startup took as long as it usually only takes for windoze systems (several minutes) conclusion: it was no longer possible to work, that is why i regard kde4 as completely unusable, at least on older systems. br, reinhard -- Save yourself! Reboot in 5 seconds! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 01:09:18PM -0700, mdh wrote: --- On Sat, 11/1/08, Rolf G Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I need to (re)configure the behaviour of som app or part of the system, I edit the appropriate config file, which takes about a minute or two... Unless you've never modified the configs for that app before, in which case you have to learn the configuration format. It also sometimes occurs that these formats and locations and whatnot are changed between released by the developers. Above and beyond that, some apps have good configuration documentation and are a breeze. Others, less so. I'm not advocating a user interface for configuring everything, but for certain things which are inherently extremely complex, such as window manager layout and behavior, it's my opinion that it really is a time-saver. For heavy-weight GUI environments like KDE and GNOME, and even feature-rich but kinda medium-weight alternatives like WindowMaker (possibly with GNUstep to make it a complete desktop environment), I agree: a GUIfied configuration utility is a dire necessity. For something at the lightweight end of the spectrum (assuming halfway decent design), such as AHWM or wmii, such a tool would just get in the way. If a user of some fancy desktop with lots of whistles and bells wants to do the same, he/she has to browse through an extensive hierarchy of categories and subcategories to get to the setting he/she wants to change. That hierarchy is more than often far from intuitive, so that very same task may take ten minutes or more. I find KDE's configuration interface to be intuitive and generally quite sane. GNOME's isn't lacking in that area either, imho, it's just lacking a lot of options that I feel ought to be tunable parameters (most of which are, but require extensive config file hacking...) My very vague recollection of KDE 3 is that it was much easier to find what I needed for configuration purposes than it is with KDE 4. Version 4 seems to either lack a lot of configuration options or hide them really well for some perverse reason. The simple fact is that I can configure my KDE desktop quicker than someone can, seeking the same granularity of modification, configure something which has no UI for configuration. This isn't too big a deal for me, or you, or likely many of the folks on this list, but for someone who is new to FreeBSD and has never hacked a window manager config file before, it likely is. They'd have to spend quite some time learning the format and locations, and finally doing the tweaking to get what they actually want from their system. You make a good point here. Maybe, if I ever get around to picking up AHWM maintenance (since its creator abandoned it), I'll create a GUI configurator. Of course, I don't really have much need for it -- but it would be absurdly easy to do, I think. Part of the reason a lot of folks use FreeBSD is for its flexibility. One can do a great deal with a FreeBSD system. It doesn't have to be taxing. There's no sense in giving out hardcore points to people who expend time and energy doing something that can be done more efficiently through a UI and without the learning curve. More efficiently and without the learning curve are not correlated, in my experience. In fact, I find that usually they each get in the other's way. Exceptions include things like Web page design. There's a far more significant learning curve for basic use of wmii than for KDE, for instance, but once one gets past the learning curve wmii is a far better productivity enhancer than KDE for many types of activity. The same goes for Vim vs. Notepad, tcsh vs. DOS, and Mutt vs. Outlook Express. In what way is the latter easier than the first? I see none... The fact is that your opinion (and mine, for that matter) are fairly subjective. I've done things both ways - I was using FreeBSD before KDE and GNOME were at all widely used, and if you wanted a decent looking desktop that functioned the way you wanted to be most productive, you had to hack a config file. That said, I just don't see how KDE's configuration system (as this is the topic at hand in this thread) is at all counterintuitive. My memory of KDE 3 is pretty sketchy, so I'll stick with KDE 4 on this one: I found KDE's configuration interface(s) very unintuitive recently. So called intuitive design is, to a significant degree, predicated upon assumptions of familiarity. Given a lack of familiarity, the time spent finding the options I needed to customize the configuration of a KDE4 GUI last week by stumbling around clicking on various things to see if that's how I find the way to adjust behavior foo was at least comparable to, if not greater than, the time I spent learning how to hack AHWM's configuration file. In fact, I'd say that easy is much less subjective than intuitive. It's
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 12:48:12AM +0100, Polytropon wrote: On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:36:30 -1000, Al Plant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aloha, Try XFCE 3 or 4 for an excellent OS window manager. XFCE 3 can be turned into a CDE lookalike if it's desired. It's very lightweight and still features all the nice things you know from a UNIX X environment. Zsers coming from CDE will feel comfortable, if you take the time to tweak the settings a little bit. Correction: XFCE is very lightweight *compared to KDE and GNOME*. It's pretty hefty compared to a lot of other options -- many of which are comparable, in terms of popularity, to XFCE. In my opinion - and that's very individual, you know - WindowMaker is one of the best window managers around. Fast, lightweight, easy to configure, excellent keyboard support (that's where the other ones are lacking), ah, and did I mention it's fast? You can provide a useful (!) system even on a P1 150 MHz system with it. No joke. In the medium-to-heavy weight class, WindowMaker is definitely in my top five window managers. There's also a complete desktop environment for it comparable to KDE, GNOME, and XFCE desktop environments, in the form of the GNUstep framework and all those applications built on it. It manages to be significantly lighter on resources and better performing than KDE, GNOME, and XFCE. It's quite a bit less intuitive to people coming from MS Windows or MacOS, of course, because it emulates NeXTSTEP rather than those other OSes, but if that doesn't bother you, it's an excellent choice in my opinion. It was the first window manager I discovered that did more to stay the heck out of my way than it did to try to help me do things the way someone else decided they should be done. If the magic of the tiling window managers opens up to you, you will even be more productive. Allthough I tried several of them, their magic wouldn't open up to me... :-) I find wmii to be quite easy to pick up, in general, among tiling window managers. It also allows floating window management, and can even be configured to do that by default rather than the tiling thing, if you so desire. It's currently my second choice window manager, after AHWM (which is *not* a tiling window manager). -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Bill McKibben: The laws of Congress and the laws of physics have grown increasingly divergent, and the laws of physics are not likely to yield. pgpKEApAJPgiS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 10:21:17AM -0800, Bruce Cran wrote: And what about OS X? To me it seems it's a combination of the user-friendliness of Windows with the power of *NIX. And lots of people have moved over to using it. Unix is *very* user friendly. It's just picky about who it considers friends. I don't remember who said that first, but I find it accurate. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Malaclypse the Younger: 'Tis an ill wind that blows no minds. pgpZJa5TR22x1.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Behalf Of Bruce Cran And what about OS X? To me it seems it's a combination of the user-friendliness of Windows with the power of *NIX. And lots of people have moved over to using it. Yes, it appears to be very nice. The programmer in the next cube bought his own laptop just so he can use it, with MS-Windows running in a VM. But it can only be run on overpriced hardware available from a single supplier. Until there are multiple sources, I don't consider it worth evaluating. Bob McConnell ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On November 2, 2008 08:01:38 pm FBSD1 wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chad Perrin Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 12:40 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD? Ok now that you have all let off steam about the off topic of desktop verses ms/windows lets return the meaning of the original poster. I spent this weekend playing with kde4 as root and had problems with it not working. Could not change the displayed time to from 20.00.00 to 8:00PM When I changed the resolution from the default to 800x600 and the refresh rate to 60.0 many of the applications did not auto fit to the new setting and the change would not carry over between logons. Some times the desktop just froze up and had to do alt-ctrl-backspace to force return to command line. When I changed the font type and size to use, the change would not carry over between logons. Could not find a way to remove items from the menu. Some icons would not display at all. Koffice was missing. Not all the application use the new window format which has the option to return to menu that launched it. Only has x out to return to desktop screen. Bottom line is imho kde4 is not stable, is not ready for general use. Needs more development and testing. Should only be contained in the development ports category. I submit to the court of pulic opinion that KDE4 *IS* stable on FreeBSD. I would encourage you to check out the following resources http://freebsd.kde.org http://wiki.freebsd.org/KDE4 Certainly, if my word is not good enough, the nice folks over at PC-BSD, http://www.pcbsd.org, sure have bundled up a nice package based on FreeBSD 7 and KDE4. Thomas - -- Thomas Abthorpe | FreeBSD Committer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://people.freebsd.org/~tabthorpe -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkkPKQ0ACgkQ5Gm/jNBp8qDLVQCdFw1phHPuvEn4bCaScIKzQfXs OY0AnAzXFKTql/rM/uPFIcmKVqutv8zE =X40c -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 12:38:30 -0400 Thomas Abthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I submit to the court of pulic opinion that KDE4 *IS* stable on FreeBSD. I would encourage you to check out the following resources Stable != Usable -- Jerry [EMAIL PROTECTED] My own business always bores me to death; I prefer other people's. Oscar Wilde signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Thomas Abthorpe wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On November 2, 2008 08:01:38 pm FBSD1 wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chad Perrin Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 12:40 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD? Ok now that you have all let off steam about the off topic of desktop verses ms/windows lets return the meaning of the original poster. I spent this weekend playing with kde4 as root and had problems with it not working. Could not change the displayed time to from 20.00.00 to 8:00PM When I changed the resolution from the default to 800x600 and the refresh rate to 60.0 many of the applications did not auto fit to the new setting and the change would not carry over between logons. Some times the desktop just froze up and had to do alt-ctrl-backspace to force return to command line. When I changed the font type and size to use, the change would not carry over between logons. Could not find a way to remove items from the menu. Some icons would not display at all. Koffice was missing. Not all the application use the new window format which has the option to return to menu that launched it. Only has x out to return to desktop screen. Bottom line is imho kde4 is not stable, is not ready for general use. Needs more development and testing. Should only be contained in the development ports category. I submit to the court of pulic opinion that KDE4 *IS* stable on FreeBSD. I would encourage you to check out the following resources http://freebsd.kde.org http://wiki.freebsd.org/KDE4 Certainly, if my word is not good enough, the nice folks over at PC-BSD, http://www.pcbsd.org, sure have bundled up a nice package based on FreeBSD 7 and KDE4. Thomas I have used KDE-4 While some of the graphics are much better looking, I thought it lacked some functionality. These are minor issues but several of the old (KDE 3.5.X) control panel options were not available (or I couldn't find them) and figuring out where to set certain options was not that intuitive for me. I never found a central location for settings, it seemed that each control (menu, taskbar, etc) had it's own 'right click' sort of settings page. The small thing that truly bugged me is that I normally only display programs for the current desktop in the taskbar, but there was a small control that you could select that would display all windows on all desktops (I forget its official name). I used it alot to make sure I didn't forget something running, etc. I couldn't find this taskbar control in KDE 4. The other problems I had dealt with thrid-party programs. There is no (at least as of a few months ago) K3B for KDE-4 and no FreeBSD port of Ktorrent for KDE-4. I tried the linux port but had lots of problems. Also, to start you need to give an explicit path, something like /usr/local/kde-4/bin/startkde in the .xinitrc file. (at least I could never get anything else to work) I ultimately changed back to the 3.5.9(?) version from packages. I am using an intel quad core running amd64 FreeBSD 7.0 Release Hope this helps. Mark Moellering ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
--- On Mon, 11/3/08, Mark Moellering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mark Moellering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD? To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Monday, November 3, 2008, 12:08 PM The other problems I had dealt with thrid-party programs. There is no (at least as of a few months ago) K3B for KDE-4 and no FreeBSD port of Ktorrent for KDE-4. I tried the linux port but had lots of problems. Also, to start you need to give an explicit path, something like /usr/local/kde-4/bin/startkde in the .xinitrc file. (at least I could never get anything else to work) I ultimately changed back to the 3.5.9(?) version from packages. I am using an intel quad core running amd64 FreeBSD 7.0 Release The standard ports for ktorrent and k3b work just fine. They use the KDE3 libraries, but there's nothing to stop them from running great under a KDE4 desktop. I use them both regularly with KDE4 as my desktop. In order for them to use the KDE4 libraries, the authors of those applications will have to come up with new versions for KDE4. That has nothing to do with FreeBSD. I also use a lot of GTK based applications as well, and these run on a KDE desktop as well. The X UI library used by an application does not matter to the desktop environment/wm application except that you may get a little more integration given certain combinations in terms of them pulling theming data from the same sources, etc. - mdh ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Monday 03 November 2008 18:08:38 Mark Moellering wrote: The other problems I had dealt with thrid-party programs. There is no (at least as of a few months ago) K3B for KDE-4 and no FreeBSD port of Ktorrent for KDE-4. I tried the linux port but had lots of problems. I ultimately changed back to the 3.5.9(?) version from packages. I am using an intel quad core running amd64 FreeBSD 7.0 Release We had a similar experience and for this reason patched the kernel, using instructions found here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-jail/2008-March/000217.html Then have set up a jail with an updated kde-4 installed there. Every once in a while, we copy over the home dirs and run the jailed version, so that configs on the host system are untouched, but we still get a full experience test. Also, to start you need to give an explicit path, something like /usr/local/kde-4/bin/startkde in the .xinitrc file. (at least I could never get anything else to work) This is easily worked around by adding /usr/local/kde4/bin and /usr/local/kde4/sbin to your PATH in .profile, /etc/profile or /etc/login.conf. Lastly another annoyance is having to click the app menu for it to move to the next category, but I'm sure that's configurable somewhere (I hope). -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
I left KDE after version 2 as it then seemed to go in the wrong direction (more features / bloat?) http://www.kde.org/screenshots/kde2shots.php In fact, if 2.n would compile on 7.0 I'd have another look. Since then I've been quite a fan of XFCE but found myself slowly but surely converting to minimalism i.e. the least needed to get done what I need done! On my desktop FreeBSD this amount to about 6 jobs and for those twm fits the bill perfectly. http://81.174.174.115/twm/twmrc.htm (Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. by Antoine de Saint-Exuper.) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
they try to compete and fail. doesn't matter who did what first. today windoze gui is way more usable than kde4. this is the only thing i agree. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
A couple of things: 1. It's true -- many users require a gentler transition than simply giving up the richness of MS Windows and moving to some spare, no. they don't require transition at all. they will not learn, use kde/gnome/whatever windoze-like thing then will get back to windoze. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Since then I've been quite a fan of XFCE but found myself slowly but surely converting to minimalism i.e. the least needed to get done what I need done! On my desktop FreeBSD this amount to about 6 jobs and for those twm fits the bill perfectly. http://81.174.174.115/twm/twmrc.htm i prefer fvwm2 but GREATLY reconfigured - no windows frames, no start menus etc. just 100% of screen for use. (Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. by Antoine de Saint-Exuper.) exactly ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
the question should be Is KDE usable at all on any OS? the answer is no, it's crappy imitation of windoze. If someone needs windoze like soft, just buy windows vista. For someone who need unix, FreeBSD is a good choice. I have to quote some random shoutbox I§vre read a long time ago: Narrow-minded is the only opinion worth expressing. You have to realize that this is the question of every user's individual needs. Some users, like for example yourself, like going deep, using the shell for tasks from everyday life, some users are more GUI-oriented and like somewhat more graphic approach to the same tasks. Saying that some software is crap just because it distantly resembles some other soft and everybody using the soft you're criticizing should use the other one instead, is just... Stupid. Even more if you compare a desktop environment to a whole OS. So, please, stop forcing your opinions to others and let them choose for themselves. (-; -- (-K JohnNy alias Partial Derivative ∂ [home] http://johnny64.fixinko.sk/ [icq] 338328204 [abandoned] [jabber] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [skype] JohnNy64-konik [abandoned] pgpsaSzgSVrW7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
You have to realize that this is the question of every user's individual needs. Some users, like for example yourself, like going deep, using the shell for tasks from everyday life, some users are more GUI-oriented and like somewhat more graphic approach to the same tasks. true. that's why there unix and there windows. don't mix. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 18:32:39 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You have to realize that this is the question of every user's individual needs. Some users, like for example yourself, like going deep, using the shell for tasks from everyday life, some users are more GUI-oriented and like somewhat more graphic approach to the same tasks. true. that's why there unix and there windows. don't mix. And what about OS X? To me it seems it's a combination of the user-friendliness of Windows with the power of *NIX. And lots of people have moved over to using it. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chad Perrin Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 12:40 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD? Ok now that you have all let off steam about the off topic of desktop verses ms/windows lets return the meaning of the original poster. I spent this weekend playing with kde4 as root and had problems with it not working. Could not change the displayed time to from 20.00.00 to 8:00PM When I changed the resolution from the default to 800x600 and the refresh rate to 60.0 many of the applications did not auto fit to the new setting and the change would not carry over between logons. Some times the desktop just froze up and had to do alt-ctrl-backspace to force return to command line. When I changed the font type and size to use, the change would not carry over between logons. Could not find a way to remove items from the menu. Some icons would not display at all. Koffice was missing. Not all the application use the new window format which has the option to return to menu that launched it. Only has x out to return to desktop screen. Bottom line is imho kde4 is not stable, is not ready for general use. Needs more development and testing. Should only be contained in the development ports category. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 12:12:25AM -0700, Yuri wrote: I tried using it but Desktop view window that was initially created when I first launched kde4 doesn't appear with the second launch. I believe KDE4 isn't ready yet. Anyone can use it without major annoyances? Yuri Well, I can answer you in the negative. So far release or vers 4 is missing things. The clock-calendar for one minor thing. And KSayIt is minus its config dialog that lets you set Speaks, select Jobs, and so on. gary ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Yuri wrote: I tried using it but Desktop view window that was initially created when I first launched kde4 doesn't appear with the second launch. I believe KDE4 isn't ready yet. Anyone can use it without major annoyances? Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Missing kde4 in current, found it only in ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-7.1-release/All/kde4-4.1.1.tbz OTRS 2.3.3 is out, but in OTRS 2.3.2 some perlmodules will not be installed, i think (Text/CSV.pm is missing). Mailscanner devel is at version 4.72.2, in ports its develversion 4.60.5_3. Perl is at 5.10, in ports is version 5.8.8, which run good. :( ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
I tried using it but Desktop view window that was initially created when I first launched kde4 doesn't appear with the second launch. I believe KDE4 isn't ready yet. Anyone can use it without major annoyances? the question should be Is KDE usable at all on any OS? the answer is no, it's crappy imitation of windoze. If someone needs windoze like soft, just buy windows vista. For someone who need unix, FreeBSD is a good choice. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
--- On Sat, 11/1/08, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD? To: Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Saturday, November 1, 2008, 11:34 AM I tried using it but Desktop view window that was initially created when I first launched kde4 doesn't appear with the second launch. I believe KDE4 isn't ready yet. Anyone can use it without major annoyances? the question should be Is KDE usable at all on any OS? the answer is no, it's crappy imitation of windoze. If someone needs windoze like soft, just buy windows vista. For someone who need unix, FreeBSD is a good choice. I rather like KDE4. I don't find that it's like Windows at all, given that Windows is an operating system and KDE4 is a development framework, application suite, and window manager. There're hefty differences there, not the least of which being that KDE4 isn't an operating system kernel. In general, I've found it to be well-maintained (some of the window managers I've used in the past went defunct when the 1-2 developers actively working on them got bored or whatever), nicely designed, attractive appearance-wise, and easy to configure. Let's face it, spending a whole bunch of hours over the course of a few weeks writing a perfect afterstep config was really cool when I was a young'un and didn't have a life to worry about, but nowadays I just want to get on with what needs doing. KDE allows me to accomplish just that, efficiently, and without leaving me unable to toggle/modify/configure certain things as GNOME does. - mdh ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
El día Saturday, November 01, 2008 a las 04:34:38PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar escribió: I tried using it but Desktop view window that was initially created when I first launched kde4 doesn't appear with the second launch. I believe KDE4 isn't ready yet. Anyone can use it without major annoyances? the question should be Is KDE usable at all on any OS? the answer is no, it's crappy imitation of windoze. If someone needs windoze like soft, just buy windows vista. For someone who need unix, FreeBSD is a good choice. I disagree concerning KDE windoze; I'm using KDE 3.5.8 and it is a very good and stable desktop, even for kernel folks and hackers; I run it with FreeBSD 7.0R on my daily work laptop; In August I've ported in a test machine from the ports KDE 4.1.0 and it was to unstable for daily usage, at least at this time; matthias -- Matthias Apitz Manager Technical Support - OCLC GmbH Gruenwalder Weg 28g - 82041 Oberhaching - Germany t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e [EMAIL PROTECTED] - w http://www.oclc.org/ http://www.UnixArea.de/ b http://gurucubano.blogspot.com/ A computer is like an air conditioner, it stops working when you open Windows Una computadora es como aire acondicionado, deja de funcionar si abres Windows ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. all of them does exactly what's needed. windows management and menu. what else do you need to WORK? i mean work, not showing up to your friends. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. all of them does exactly what's needed. windows management and menu. what else do you need to WORK? i mean work, not showing up to your friends. O reason not the need! Our basest beggars Are in the poorest thing superfluous. Allow not nature more than nature needs, Man's life is as cheap as beast's. Thou art a lady: If only to go warm were gorgeous, Why, nature needs not what thou gorgeous wear'st, Which scarcely keeps thee warm. But, for true need-- You heavens, give me that patience, patience I need. You see me here, you gods, a poor old man, As full of grief as age, wretched in both. If it be you that stirs these daughters' hearts Against their father, fool me not so much To bear it tamely; touch me with noble anger, And let not women's weapons, water drops, Stain my man's cheeks. No, you unnatural hags! I will have such revenges on you both That all the world shall--I will do such things-- What they are, yet I know not; but they shall be The terrors of the earth. You think I'll weep. No, I'll not weep. I have full cause of weeping, but this heart Shall break into a hundred thousand flaws, Or ere I'll weep. O Fool, I shall go mad! (Lear to his daughters Goneril and Regan, King Lear, Act 2, Scene 4, lines 263-285) Sorry - couldn' resist! atb Glyn ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:57:17 + Glyn Millington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Lear to his daughters Goneril and Regan, King Lear, Act 2, Scene 4, lines 263-285) glyn, it is evident from lines 283-285 that lear used windoze. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Wojciech Puchar wrote: it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? You need desktop for Unix (Linux) to be adopted by simple users. Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. I don't want to deal command lines/config files for mundane things like finding and setting up wireless networks, playing CDs/DVDs, etc. GUI integrated with desktop would make this much less time consuming. just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. not really enough. Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? You need desktop for Unix (Linux) to be adopted by simple users. why you want unix be adopted by simple users? they already have windows - perfect for them, and exactly what they deserve Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. exactly wrong. it make my life harder. these advanced users you say don't like to read manuals and do once simple config taking few minutes. Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. they try to compete with windoze - so they behave the same way! who first learned that giving unfinished/buggy/incomplete software to users is a good (in marketing point of view) thing? Microsoft! they learn from it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Yuri wrote: Wojciech Puchar wrote: it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? You need desktop for Unix (Linux) to be adopted by simple users. Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. I don't want to deal command lines/config files for mundane things like finding and setting up wireless networks, playing CDs/DVDs, etc. GUI integrated with desktop would make this much less time consuming. If I need to (re)configure the behaviour of som app or part of the system, I edit the appropriate config file, which takes about a minute or two... If a user of some fancy desktop with lots of whistles and bells wants to do the same, he/she has to browse through an extensive hierarchy of categories and subcategories to get to the setting he/she wants to change. That hierarchy is more than often far from intuitive, so that very same task may take ten minutes or more. In what way is the latter easier than the first? I see none... just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. not really enough. Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Sincerly, Rolf Nielsen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
--- On Sat, 11/1/08, Rolf G Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rolf G Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD? To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Saturday, November 1, 2008, 3:27 PM Yuri wrote: Wojciech Puchar wrote: it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? You need desktop for Unix (Linux) to be adopted by simple users. Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. I don't want to deal command lines/config files for mundane things like finding and setting up wireless networks, playing CDs/DVDs, etc. GUI integrated with desktop would make this much less time consuming. If I need to (re)configure the behaviour of som app or part of the system, I edit the appropriate config file, which takes about a minute or two... Unless you've never modified the configs for that app before, in which case you have to learn the configuration format. It also sometimes occurs that these formats and locations and whatnot are changed between released by the developers. Above and beyond that, some apps have good configuration documentation and are a breeze. Others, less so. I'm not advocating a user interface for configuring everything, but for certain things which are inherently extremely complex, such as window manager layout and behavior, it's my opinion that it really is a time-saver. If a user of some fancy desktop with lots of whistles and bells wants to do the same, he/she has to browse through an extensive hierarchy of categories and subcategories to get to the setting he/she wants to change. That hierarchy is more than often far from intuitive, so that very same task may take ten minutes or more. I find KDE's configuration interface to be intuitive and generally quite sane. GNOME's isn't lacking in that area either, imho, it's just lacking a lot of options that I feel ought to be tunable parameters (most of which are, but require extensive config file hacking...) The simple fact is that I can configure my KDE desktop quicker than someone can, seeking the same granularity of modification, configure something which has no UI for configuration. This isn't too big a deal for me, or you, or likely many of the folks on this list, but for someone who is new to FreeBSD and has never hacked a window manager config file before, it likely is. They'd have to spend quite some time learning the format and locations, and finally doing the tweaking to get what they actually want from their system. Part of the reason a lot of folks use FreeBSD is for its flexibility. One can do a great deal with a FreeBSD system. It doesn't have to be taxing. There's no sense in giving out hardcore points to people who expend time and energy doing something that can be done more efficiently through a UI and without the learning curve. In what way is the latter easier than the first? I see none... The fact is that your opinion (and mine, for that matter) are fairly subjective. I've done things both ways - I was using FreeBSD before KDE and GNOME were at all widely used, and if you wanted a decent looking desktop that functioned the way you wanted to be most productive, you had to hack a config file. That said, I just don't see how KDE's configuration system (as this is the topic at hand in this thread) is at all counterintuitive. just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. not really enough. Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. I disagree on the failure part. As far as bugs being released, it happens in the closed-source world plenty, too. Consider if you will service packs for MSWindows. As a programmer in the real world, you're going to mess up. You'll make typos. Things that work well on your computers may not work well on other peoples'. Only a limited number of people actively beta test early releases of software. Consider the number of FreeBSD users running HEAD to those running RELENG_? to those running RELENG_?_? or a -RELEASE. Most people don't run HEAD all the time because they want/need a system that is stable and can't spend some number of hours each day or week or month updating their world+kernel from CVS. Yet HEAD is where bugs get introduced and, hopefully!, fixed. As far as KDE4 being untested, I'd send you over to the KDE folks to let them set you straight on that. The short of it is that you're just flat-out wrong. KDE4 runs pretty well. I've come upon two bugs in it. One is nigh-impossible to track down and deal with, but is a minor graphical issue that doesn't get in my
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Yuri wrote: Wojciech Puchar wrote: it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? You need desktop for Unix (Linux) to be adopted by simple users. Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. I don't want to deal command lines/config files for mundane things like finding and setting up wireless networks, playing CDs/DVDs, etc. GUI integrated with desktop would make this much less time consuming. just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. not really enough. Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Aloha, Try XFCE 3 or 4 for an excellent OS window manager. ~Al Plant - Honolulu, Hawaii - Phone: 808-284-2740 + http://hawaiidakine.com + http://freebsdinfo.org + + http://aloha50.net - Supporting - FreeBSD 6.* - 7.* - 8.* + email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] All that's really worth doing is what we do for others.- Lewis Carrol ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:36:30 -1000, Al Plant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aloha, Try XFCE 3 or 4 for an excellent OS window manager. XFCE 3 can be turned into a CDE lookalike if it's desired. It's very lightweight and still features all the nice things you know from a UNIX X environment. Zsers coming from CDE will feel comfortable, if you take the time to tweak the settings a little bit. XFCE 4 has turned into the third big player, right in one line with KDE and Gnome. If you don't mind ressources, XFCE 4 is really an excellent piece of software, you even won't miss dsktop effects featured by KDE or Gnome. It's very versatile in these regards. See these: http://xubuntublog.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/design-your-own-desktop-with-xfce-44/ http://xubuntublog.wordpress.com/2008/02/15/design-your-own-desktop-with-xfce-44-part-2/ In my opinion - and that's very individual, you know - WindowMaker is one of the best window managers around. Fast, lightweight, easy to configure, excellent keyboard support (that's where the other ones are lacking), ah, and did I mention it's fast? You can provide a useful (!) system even on a P1 150 MHz system with it. No joke. If the magic of the tiling window managers opens up to you, you will even be more productive. Allthough I tried several of them, their magic wouldn't open up to me... :-) -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
Wojciech Puchar wrote: Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. exactly wrong. it make my life harder. these advanced users you say don't like to read manuals and do once simple config taking few minutes. totally wrong. imagine setting up WiFi network. one mouse click opens WiFi manager window. another double-click selects network to connect. another click closes the window of WiFi manager. How in the world it can be easier to do this with config files Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. they try to compete with windoze - so they behave the same way! who first learned that giving unfinished/buggy/incomplete software to users is a good (in marketing point of view) thing? Microsoft! they learn from it. they try to compete and fail. doesn't matter who did what first. today windoze gui is way more usable than kde4. that's the only thing that matters. if kde4 were a commercial company they would have been fired or go out of business long time ago. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:43:54 -0700 Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wojciech Puchar wrote: Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. exactly wrong. it make my life harder. these advanced users you say don't like to read manuals and do once simple config taking few minutes. totally wrong. imagine setting up WiFi network. one mouse click opens WiFi manager window. another double-click selects network to connect. another click closes the window of WiFi manager. How in the world it can be easier to do this with config files Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. they try to compete with windoze - so they behave the same way! who first learned that giving unfinished/buggy/incomplete software to users is a good (in marketing point of view) thing? Microsoft! they learn from it. they try to compete and fail. doesn't matter who did what first. today windoze gui is way more usable than kde4. that's the only thing that matters. if kde4 were a commercial company they would have been fired or go out of business long time ago. I think it depends on what you want to do. For developers KDE4 provides all the features you'd want such as smart text editors, a nice terminal and lots of applications. For normal users I'm not so sure a stock KDE4 is so usable; however having recently used Ubuntu and seen what can be done with Gnome, I'm sure KDE can be configured to be just as good. Talking of Ubuntu, I believe it's now almost as easy to use as Windows, and that's for 'normal' users who don't know much about computers. There are some things that are missing: for example if for some reason it fails to automatically setup the monitor then you're kinda stuck, but all the rest works. As an example of its usability I plugged a new printer in and a few seconds later a notification popped up asking me to select settings, paper type etc. That's neat. I took some photos and plugged my SDHC card into a reader: a photo import application popped up and I could nagivate the photos and select which to copy over. It's smarts like these that really make the difference. I consider myself a power user but I do enjoy things like that being done for me, since I would much prefer to spend my time coding instead of hacking config files to import files, get stuff printed etc. Most people I know are moving from Debian to Ubuntu for the same reason - things just work. At the same time, it's nice to know that if anything does start getting in your way it's still easy to change a few settings to turn it off. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 08:49:09AM -0700, mdh wrote: I rather like KDE4. I don't find that it's like Windows at all, given that Windows is an operating system and KDE4 is a development framework, application suite, and window manager. There're hefty differences there, not the least of which being that KDE4 isn't an operating system kernel. In general, I've found it to be well-maintained (some of the window managers I've used in the past went defunct when the 1-2 developers actively working on them got bored or whatever), nicely designed, attractive appearance-wise, and easy to configure. Let's face it, spending a whole bunch of hours over the course of a few weeks writing a perfect afterstep config was really cool when I was a young'un and didn't have a life to worry about, but nowadays I just want to get on with what needs doing. KDE allows me to accomplish just that, efficiently, and without leaving me unable to toggle/modify/configure certain things as GNOME does. My preference is to simply find a window manager that acts as much like my ideal as possible in its default, unconfigured form -- and make a few minor tweaks as necessary. What I don't want is something that has a whole bunch of stuff heaped on it to cover every possible eventuality the developers envision, leaving me still wanting more, with an easy configuration interface to try to make up for the lacks. That, I'm afraid, is how KDE feels to me. Worse yet, KDE4 strikes me as significantly counter-intuitive. I'm aware that intuitive in interfaces is a matter of familiarity -- but I think it's relevant in this case, in that KDE and GNOME seem to a fair degree to have a need to cater to the familiarity of people who also use OSes like MS Windows and Apple MacOS X. While my primary sense of familiarity (and thus the intuitive) isn't with MS and Apple OSes, they do kinda fill in the secondary and tertiary spots for me; KDE4 falls into line somewhere back around 20th for me. It seems to me like it has several configuration options lacking in something like MS Windows, and lacks several that something like MS Windows has -- but has made poor trade-offs, adding less important configuration options and removing more important options, based on what I've seen so far. This view of KDE4 is based my recent experience (a few days ago) of installing and configuring PC-BSD on a laptop for a friend. PC-BSD's default version of KDE4 is a newer iteration than what's in FreeBSD ports, so it certainly isn't a matter of the default install having a slightly older minor version number and needing to be upgraded. The somewhat broken functionality is a bit of a problem, too -- such as the Plasma Desktop Folder View's inability to just show the damned icons properly, the tendency of KDE to crash and restart when I try to make certain changes with widgets unlocked, panels that might vanish from view when I try to move them but are apparently still running *somewhere*, and so on. I've never been much of a fan of KDE, ever since I discovered the joys of window managers that aren't derivative of the MS/Apple WIMP style, but KDE4 strikes me as a case of some visionary project manager stepping on his own virtual genitals. I don't know -- maybe I just don't get the new direction for KDE4. Maybe it's awesome for someone's purposes. It's terrible for mine. . . . not that I think GNOME 2.24 is any better. I'll stick with AHWM for now, long since abandoned by its developer, but so elegant in operation and configuration that it really doesn't even need any further development. It does what it needs to do, and doesn't screw around with a bunch of singing and dancing and backflips to distract me from the fact it doesn't do anything fundamentally new. Just one man's opinion. Yours is surely different. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Larry Wall: Perl is, in intent, a cleaned up and summarized version of that wonderful semi-natural language known as 'Unix'. pgpXJ9VJn0uMZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 05:04:15PM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote: El día Saturday, November 01, 2008 a las 04:34:38PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar escribió: the question should be Is KDE usable at all on any OS? the answer is no, it's crappy imitation of windoze. If someone needs windoze like soft, just buy windows vista. For someone who need unix, FreeBSD is a good choice. I disagree concerning KDE windoze; I'm using KDE 3.5.8 and it is a very good and stable desktop, even for kernel folks and hackers; I run it with FreeBSD 7.0R on my daily work laptop; My impression, over the last few years, is that the above description is backwards. MS Windows seems to be emulating KDE, rather than the other way around. Vista looked surprisingly like KDE3 when it made it into the public eye, and the rumor now is that the 7 pre-beta looks surprisingly like KDE4. As such, KDE appears to be an excellent choice for a gentle transition from MS Windows to the Unixy world -- and it may provide a better experience overall. Still . . . KDE isn't for me. Besides all that, this thread was spawned by reference to KDE4, which is significantly different in behavior than KDE3 in some insidious ways. As such, I'm not sure one's experience with KDE3 is the best litmus for whether KDE4 is or will be a good choice. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Bill McKibben: The laws of Congress and the laws of physics have grown increasingly divergent, and the laws of physics are not likely to yield. pgpsq3VL0DwrW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is KDE4 usable on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 10:43:56AM -0700, Yuri wrote: Wojciech Puchar wrote: it's SLOW and resource hungry - giving nothing else than a good look. that's why i compare it to windoze. and why you need desktop (whatever it means) at all? You need desktop for Unix (Linux) to be adopted by simple users. Also GUI makes life much easier even for advanced users. I don't want to deal command lines/config files for mundane things like finding and setting up wireless networks, playing CDs/DVDs, etc. GUI integrated with desktop would make this much less time consuming. A couple of things: 1. It's true -- many users require a gentler transition than simply giving up the richness of MS Windows and moving to some spare, productivity-enhancing user environment like some of those available on Unix systems. Luckily, Unix can accomodate many different approaches to a GUI environment, so all can be happy with what they have. That's one of the benefits of a Unix architecture, as opposed to one where the underlying OS is wedded to its desktop metaphor implementation. 2. One doesn't need a Desktop Environment to have a GUI -- a point I think you glossed over or even missed entirely. One doesn't even need the DE for GUI-based configuration. 3. The command line is not more time consuming than the GUI for most purposes. It is, in fact, *less* time consuming, as well as being more powerful and flexible, for most purposes. There are some tasks for which a GUI approach is the most effective, and there are many more for which a TUI is better. What makes the GUI easier for many people is that it doesn't tend to have as high an initial learning curve. Once you get past the initial learning curve, though, the CLI is far more productive and efficient than a GUI in most cases, at least in my experience. It's all a bit like the relative learning curves of various editing environment: http://unix.rulez.org/~calver/pictures/curves.jpg just window manager is enough, try fvwm2 maybe icewm maybe other etc. not really enough. Unfortunately open source is pretty much a failure when it comes to GUI and desktop. Any kind of GUI, look at ddd for example. Untested development-stage software (like kde4) is being released to the public for some reason. No, it isn't a failure. It's a raging success in many ways. Its only failures are in marketing, for the most part. KDE4 is buggy as hell in my experience, but it's no worse than the GUI environment for Millenium Edition. In addition to that, we in the open source world still have significant advances over the bells-and-whistles aesthetic of MS Windows, in more ways than one: 1. We have better bells and whistles. Compiz Fusion comes to mind. 2. We have better interface design. Even though Compiz Fusion is a steaming pile of unnecessary crap in my personal opinion (where UI design is concerned), it's still leagues ahead of Aero Glass for purposes of productivity enhancement (or at least refraining from getting in the way of productivity), and both GNOME and KDE4 are better than XP's UI in that regard. 3. A bunch of other GUI environments are far, far better than the typical DEs of the OSS world in terms of productivity enhancing UI design; they stay the hell out of the way while providing functionality that improves user task completion efficiency. The ddd example is kind of unfair, by the way. That's a common GNU problem, not a broader open source problem. It's my experience that the GNU project is full of people who have absolutely no idea how to design a decent interface. The GNU project is so influential, though, that once they come up with something that fits within a specific niche, the rest of the open source world seems reluctant to do anything to reach into the same niche and replace the GNU train-wreck of UI with a better UI. I mean, come on -- just look at Info Pages. What a disaster area. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Georg Hackl: American beer is the first successful attempt at diluting water. pgpbGCaMKcUlI.pgp Description: PGP signature
