"So yes, Konquerer itself has improved (if we look only at the "framework") and the KHTML part
as well, but for those "power users", that like Konquerer so much, the file manager part has
definitely been "dumbed down""
"Dumbed down" implies that features were intentionally removed. And that is not the case.
Those lost features are coming back as we speak.
Posted Jul 3, 2008 16:36 UTC (Thu) by mgb (guest, #3226)
[Link]
Many features were deliberately removed and are only now returning thanks to overwhelming
pressure from KDE users.
IIRC a lot of the justifications for the initial KDE 4 direction (now slowly reversed) were
made on Aaron's blog. I have to rely on my memory because Aaron's blog was recently made
invitation only (not read only).
The critics are right
Posted Jul 3, 2008 16:43 UTC (Thu) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185)
[Link]
You're taking too much credit if you think that features deliberately
removed and are implemented only because of overwhelming pressure of
users. I have an archive of all of aaron's blog entries since january
2007 and there's nothing that bears out your delusion.
The critics are right
Posted Jul 3, 2008 23:24 UTC (Thu) by quintesse (subscriber, #14569)
[Link]
"Dumbed down implies that features were intentionally removed"
You're right, that was not my intention.
I want to state that personally I'm perfectly happy with KDE 4, even with 4.0. I've been using
it since Fedora 9 came out (compiled from source and played around with it before, but not as
my main DE) and am eager to know where it will all take us. What I don't care about is the
tone discussions in "the community" (if such a singular beast exists) are taking as of late.
Pity.