User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Fifteen years of KDE

Fifteen years of KDE

Posted Nov 3, 2011 2:24 UTC (Thu) by dlang (subscriber, #313)
In reply to: Fifteen years of KDE by nybble41
Parent article: Fifteen years of KDE

if you are going to take the tack of "KDE 4.0 is not an upgrade to KDE 3.x, it's a completely different product" then you should not call it KDE 4.0, you should call it something completely different.

For the same reason, Perl 6 should be called something else as it is not an upgrade of Perl 5

if you give it the same name, but with a higher version number, people are going to expect that the capabilities they had before would still be there, along with the new stuff. If you don't intend to provide a feature, you need to list is as a feature that's specifically being removed (and if you have a very long list of such things, expect to loose a lot of people, each one of these 'removed' or 'unimplemented in the new version' features is a regression)


(Log in to post comments)

Fifteen years of KDE

Posted Nov 3, 2011 3:41 UTC (Thu) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link]

And the rewritten successor to Windows 3.11 shouldn't have been Windows 95 (and then Windows XP, Windows Vista/7, etc.). And the successor to Mac OS 9 shouldn't have been called Mac OS X. And so on.

Face it--this sort of thing happens all the time. The name is just a brand, not a reference to a specific codebase. KDE4 is not even the first all-up rewrite of KDE. KDE 2.0 was "almost completely re-engineered"[1] from KDE 1. This happens to most projects eventually; some things can be fixed as you go, but others are more integral and require a change in the fundamental design. Either you fix the design (and port/rewrite) or the project stagnates and is eventually replaced.

[1] http://kde.org/announcements/announce-2.0.php

Fifteen years of KDE

Posted Nov 3, 2011 4:41 UTC (Thu) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

And what functionality did microsoft drop between windows 3.11 and windows 95?

The issue isn't if they are modified or if the new version is written from scratch, the issue is what things that worked on the old version break on the new version.

If few things break (Windows 3.11 to Windows 95) you get nearly everyone to upgrade (unless the hardware can't run the new version at all, mearly running it poorly didn't stop a LOT of people from upgrading)

where it breaks things, including the user interface (Windows XP to Windows Vista for example) the uptake of the new version is much lower

the fact that KDE4 is a re-write vs KDE3 is a good thing, right up until you state that a feature is lost because the developers didn't care enough to make it part of the re-write, and that it's up to the users to fix this (if it was merely missed because nobody cared enough to notice during the re-write, then reports from users that they cared about the feature should get it on the list of things to fix, it may take a bit of time, but KDE 4.x has had time now)

Fifteen years of KDE

Posted Nov 3, 2011 9:42 UTC (Thu) by BlueLightning (subscriber, #38978) [Link]

And what functionality did microsoft drop between windows 3.11 and windows 95?

Funny you should ask. One of the features they dropped (I'm sure there are more) was Windows Recorder, which allowed you to record and play back macros. A lot of people complained.

Fifteen years of KDE

Posted Nov 6, 2011 1:52 UTC (Sun) by vonbrand (guest, #4458) [Link]

It's not the same, but not even MSFT written software worked on Win95/98/Millenium and WinNT 4 (a game, in my case, "certified" to work in that environment, didn't even make it past the splash screen before hanging the machine). Ditto MSIE on the first x86_64 versions of Windows, they crashed the machine with utter reliability.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds