| |||||||||||||
The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica)The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica)Posted Jul 2, 2008 16:56 UTC (Wed) by mmarq (guest, #2332)Parent article: The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica)
Apart from the stability issues that will be solved along the way, i believe its the main look
& feel that is most disappointing...
I like *part* of the Oxygen icons... dislike the filesystem ones... but that can be solved
with themes.
well the main *skin* of KDE4 is disappointing, it could have been more striking if adopeted a
more *Liquid* L&F... but the plasma stuff is simply superb...
I don't like Dolphin, it should have been a WWW navigator instead, with *part* of Mozilla
extras adopteded( rejoin efforts)... Konqueror a superior file manager, would have been even
more superior with the features now in Dolphin...
Plasma, Phonon, solid, other... are simply superior, KDE has everything to succeed if it
detaches its applications & desktop of cumbersome dependencies, they are good enough to stand
by themselfs... and focus on the desktop itself, Plasma for a real 3D environment with Z
movement... and let L&F to the users.
Then complaints will stop for sure.
(how nice if parts of the underlying base of KDE 4 could be made part of a common Desktop
methaphor!!... no wonder some voices are restless!...)
(Log in to post comments)
The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica) Posted Jul 2, 2008 17:49 UTC (Wed) by macc (subscriber, #510) [Link] What in Ghu's name is so important about icons and other CompoCouture? Does it crash, does it hog the machine? Do I have to jump through hoops to get my work done? G! MACC
The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica) Posted Jul 2, 2008 18:23 UTC (Wed) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185) [Link] "Konqueror a superior file manager, would have been even more superior with the features now in Dolphin.." Since konqueror and dolphin share their file manager parts, the dolphin features are actually in konqueror, too. Like the very, very cool and usable selection + and - icons.
The critics are wrong: KDE 4 doesn't need a fork (ars technica) Posted Jul 3, 2008 9:36 UTC (Thu) by quintesse (subscriber, #14569) [Link] Yeah, but I guess he referred to the _old_ Konqueror being a superior file manager. It's like I see it as well at least. I don't like single-click GUI so I have it turned off. So what I have got left is a file manager which is actually less capable than before and with Konqueror using the new "dolphin" part for it's file management means I can't go back to the old version either. But it's okay, I'm sure it will still be improved and we'll get back to the previous level of functionality (and more). In the latest KDE versions from trunk the multi-threading of dolphin has already been greatly improved. Hopefully the slow thumbnail loading will be next (maybe they should take a look at Google's Picasa or Canon's photo management software which are able to load thumbnails at incredible speeds).
|
|||||||||||||