Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places, I don't follow any of the mailing lists, but I do
follow planet kde and I haven't really seen any KDE developers saying that.
I've used KDE4 beta 2 for a couple of days and it is a major improvement over 4.0.x (which I
agree wasn't really usable). If the final release is stable, then I believe I might start
using it over KDE 3.5.x.
Posted Jul 6, 2008 6:58 UTC (Sun) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)
[Link]
After all, they produced the software, they made the design decisions, so they are the least likely people in the world to think that the software or the design decisions were flawed. The users will ultimately have to decide whether to choose to run KDE 4.x or go with something else.
Developers are the wrong people to ask
Posted Jul 6, 2008 7:26 UTC (Sun) by pointwood (guest, #2814)
[Link]
I think the major issue a lot of people have been complaining loudly about is the unfinished
state that KDE 4.0 was released in. Particularly Plasma, being a very visible part of KDE4,
wasn't really ready. If they had released 4.0 as a "developers release" and made it quite
clear in the press release, etc. that this wasn't really ready for use by "normal users", then
I bet much of the flaming and discussion wouldn't have happened.
Developers are the wrong people to ask
Posted Jul 6, 2008 9:16 UTC (Sun) by Duncan (guest, #6647)
[Link]
I believe you are correct, except that I would have called 4.0 an early
tech preview.
For years, starting back on MS (before I emigrated to a land of freedom;
I'll continue to compare with them as the majority platform provider out
there) with IE 4.0 where I ran both public previews, I've been a "bleeding
edge" beta adopter, but 4.0 wasn't even beta, and certainly not even as
functional as the MS public tech previews. It wasn't bleeding edge beta,
it was ground hamburger early-alpha tech preview, the kind of stuff the
demonstrate at developer conferences and perhaps send the devs home with a
conference edition tech preview, but not even public preview level; the
kind of stuff one realistically isn't even expected to file bugs on, or to
realistically test, because there's still way more missing than there in
the first place, and filing bugs just doesn't make sense yet because
there's more bug than product!
So as soon as I actually had time to try it out and find it wasn't just me
missing the functionality, but that it actually wasn't there, I dropped
4.0 like the non-functional bits of bloody ground hamburger flying
everywhere (when compared to the more conventional "bleeding edge" beta,
at least) it actually was.
Don't get me wrong, I'm still a strong KDE user, but for now it's KDE
3.5.9, not that 3.90 early 4.x preview raw bits of meat flying everywhere
crap they labeled 4.0. I've every faith they'll get there... eventually,
but it certainly wasn't then, and I doubt it'll be what they call 4.1
(which is more likely 3.95 or 3.98, now).
Of course, the problem was one of PR. The devs had been talking up all
this fancy new technology, and everyone was hot to try it with 4.0... only
what was labeled 4.0 should have been early tech preview as I said -- a
chance to play with the new technology using still only partially
developed and working toys, nothing more. If they'd handled it that way,
I expect a lot more people would have been a lot happier with it.
But back to the present. As I said, I expect what is to be labeled 4.1 to
not even be a real .0 release yet. Actually, I expect this to be much
closer to what MS would release as public preview two. As such, as a
normally bleeding edge user and happy to be one, I expect I'll actually
find it usable now, and will actually probably take to it pretty avidly --
even if I don't expect it to be proper release quality just yet. Note
that I'm still saying "expect". I'm not crazy enough nor do I intend to
try "betas of betas", not after the versioning fiasco they already pulled,
so I'm leaving it alone. When the final 4.1 (aka 3.98, aka 4.0 public
preview two, properly versioned) comes out, I'll try it and see if it
works as I now expect it to. If so, as a proper bleeding edge beta
tester, I'll try it and file bugs on it as necessary, and I'll probably be
reasonably happy running it and working around still not quite there
functionality.
By extension, what will probably be labeled 4.2 should finally be what I'd
consider proper 4.0 release quality, something I could honestly but
cautiously recommend to non-bleeding-edge but still early adopter users.
And along about (labeled) 4.2.2 or or 4.3.0, I expect I'll finally
consider it a decent service-pack-1 normal user release.
By 4.4, /maybe/ as early as 4.3, all that hard sweat equity investment in
all that new technology will be paying off, taking the FLOSS community to
GUI heights no one, proprietary or freedom based, has ever reached before.
Yes, I believe it /will/ come, but it sure would have been a smoother ride
had this versioning and PR fiasco never happened.
Duncan
Developers are the wrong people to ask
Posted Jul 6, 2008 9:53 UTC (Sun) by pointwood (guest, #2814)
[Link]
Of course, it depends on your definitions, but I think you'll be a bit surprised by the
improvements already available in KDE 4.1. I've used KDE 4.1 beta 2 for a few days and except
for stability problems in various places, I'll rate it as fully usable. I tried 4.0 and dumped
it very quickly since I found it to be more or less completely unusable. I'm running Kubuntu
and their next release will be based on KDE 4.1.x and based on what I've seen from the beta
release, I'm not really worried.
Plasma is a highly visible component of KDE 4 and sadly it was also the most unfinished part
in KDE 4.0. It being massively improved in KDE 4.1 also makes KDE 4.1 a lot more usable. 4.1
is clearly still an early release of KDE 4 and you are correct that following releases will be
much better. Especially since by then, a lot of the major KDE applications will have been
ported to KDE 4.
Developers are the wrong people to ask
Posted Jul 7, 2008 11:34 UTC (Mon) by pointwood (guest, #2814)
[Link]