Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
I updated Gentoo last night and was surprised to see KDE 4.4.0, is anyone else using it yet? I just upgraded last night and haven't really had time to check ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Administrator MikeTbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    7,864

    KDE 4.4.0 is out


    I updated Gentoo last night and was surprised to see KDE 4.4.0, is anyone else using it yet? I just upgraded last night and haven't really had time to check it out yet because we got 12 inches of snow on the ground in North Texas and I have been a busy little boy.
    I do not respond to private messages asking for Linux help, Please keep it on the forums only.
    All new users please read this.** Forum FAQS. ** Adopt an unanswered post.

    I'd rather be lost at the lake than found at home.

  2. #2
    oz
    oz is offline
    forum.guy
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    arch linux
    Posts
    18,733
    Yes, I've been running it for about 3 days, now. It's still feels rather unstable and buggy compared to Gnome, but I'll go ahead and play around with it for a while anyway.
    oz

  3. #3
    Linux Guru reed9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,651
    I have a friend I set up with Arch and KDE, so we also upgraded to 4.4.0 a couple of days ago.

    KDE continues to underwhelm me. I can't get over how slow it runs on a machine with a core 2 duo processor and 2 GB of RAM. I mean, not windows slow, but still. Give me my openbox or pekwm any day.

    And the new soprano broke krunner. For some people apparently Dolphin as well.
    FS#18260 : [soprano] breaks kde desktop

    Nepomuk continues to be the most useless resource hog I've ever seen. If anyone uses it and can tell me the appeal? I really don't get it. Maybe I'm too old, being in my early 30s now, but the whole semantic desktop thing escapes me.

  4. #4
    oz
    oz is offline
    forum.guy
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    arch linux
    Posts
    18,733
    Quote Originally Posted by reed9 View Post
    Nepomuk continues to be the most useless resource hog I've ever seen. If anyone uses it and can tell me the appeal? I really don't get it. Maybe I'm too old, being in my early 30s now, but the whole semantic desktop thing escapes me.
    Yup, I had been keeping Nepomuk disabled and was hoping for big improvements with it in the KDE 4.4.0 release but wound up having to disable it again within about 30 minutes of the upgrade. Simply put, here we are well over 2 years into KDE4 development and it's still nowhere near as stable as Gnome is on any of my computers.

    Still not giving up on it, though!
    oz

  5. #5
    Administrator MikeTbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    7,864
    Quote Originally Posted by ozar View Post
    Yes, I've been running it for about 3 days, now. It's still feels rather unstable and buggy compared to Gnome, but I'll go ahead and play around with it for a while anyway.
    I think KDE will always feel buggy compared to Gnome, in my mind that is just part of being on the bleeding edge. I think KDE is light years ahead of Gnome. I think this is a small price to pay for having the most advanced DE out there.

    Quote Originally Posted by reed9 View Post
    I have a friend I set up with Arch and KDE, so we also upgraded to 4.4.0 a couple of days ago.

    KDE continues to underwhelm me. I can't get over how slow it runs on a machine with a core 2 duo processor and 2 GB of RAM. I mean, not windows slow, but still. Give me my openbox or pekwm any day.

    And the new soprano broke krunner. For some people apparently Dolphin as well.
    FS#18260 : [soprano] breaks kde desktop

    Nepomuk continues to be the most useless resource hog I've ever seen. If anyone uses it and can tell me the appeal? I really don't get it. Maybe I'm too old, being in my early 30s now, but the whole semantic desktop thing escapes me.
    I have a Pentium Dual-Core CPU E5200 @ 2.50GHz with 2GB RAM and I have not ever noticed KDE being slow....maybe I need to try Gnome again soon, It might surprise me. I do know that Nepomuk has been troublesome in the past for me, along with Strigi which at one point was consuming 90% CPU so I disabled it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ozar View Post
    Yup, I had been keeping Nepomuk disabled and was hoping for big improvements with it in the KDE 4.4.0 release but wound up having to disable it again within about 30 minutes of the upgrade. Simply put, here we are well over 2 years into KDE4 development and it's still nowhere near as stable as Gnome is on any of my computers.

    Still not giving up on it, though!
    You're a Super Trooper Oz,
    I think you are one of the most outspoken about KDE being buggy but you won't give it up.......maybe that's part of what drives the KDE team to produce.
    I do not respond to private messages asking for Linux help, Please keep it on the forums only.
    All new users please read this.** Forum FAQS. ** Adopt an unanswered post.

    I'd rather be lost at the lake than found at home.

  6. #6
    Linux Guru reed9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,651
    I should note that I do appreciate KDE's innovation and work. And I actually like KDE4 better than KDE3. Plus there are a couple of KDE apps that are truly great, k3b and digikam come to mind particularly. (Though I hate Amarok, always have. Didn't like it in KDE3, still don't like it.)

    And GNOME seems slow to me as well, though KDE feels a little more sluggish. I expect things like a terminal to open pretty much instantaneously. Konsole can take a second or so to be up and ready, which irritates me. So it depends on your definition of slow. I have a low tolerance for apps that take a noticeable amount of time to open. (I've almost completely abandoned Firefox for that reason.)

    Neither KDE or GNOME do anything for me that I can't do just as well without them, so to me they're a whole lot of bloat for little to no benefit.

  7. #7
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    16
    i think KDE 4.4 is slow because they added some new features to it which they are testing now but am sure it will be better in the future

  8. #8
    Linux User benjamin20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    jacksonville beach FL
    Posts
    317
    honestly the entire linux desktop is one big mess right now, we have kde, which is like the only non gtk dekstop experience that hasnt died off yet (there was enlightenment, people were exited about it, it just slowed and died and people moved on... or ubuntu overlooked it and therefore everyone else did too i dunno)

    gnome is, while not as bad as kde, one big mess too. they i guess now will allow c# programs into their packages, wtf,. all of their programs rely on gnome specific libraries when they really shouldnt be needed, so there seems to be this program bloat, and it use to be a lot worse, about 3-5 years ago, there was so much crap stuck in gnome specific libraries that other desktops based on gtk just lacked important functionality, bonobo, a lot of gtk widgets, just generally poorly organized libraries, you should be able to write a gtk app and it fit right into the desktop environment, not have to add in all these extra libraries just to require your app to now be part of gnome. of course kde had all the same problems and then some, so using kde apps in gnome or vice versa was a pain. now, thnaks to freedesktop.org, we have d-bus, one of the coolest simple little background services ever. standardizing of things like drag and drop and language support and things like that are making all desktops feel much more capable and interchangeable.

    and now even though gnome is moving away from the libgnome stuff, and really is working on making gnome much more modular, smaller desktops like mine, xfce, are, as i recently realized, also using some centralized common library stuff tying the apps to that desktop environment (that dirty little whore). about the only desktop that doesnt is lxde, and its kinda just a bunch of random gtk apps stuck in one package with some glue apps to make it seem more decent.

    aside from library dependencies, the desktops just aren't working in a unified maner.
    like why do we need so many window managers, we have metacity for gnome, kwm(i think) for kde, xfwm for xfce, openbox for lxde and other uses, and then compiz, for 3d stuff for everything, but now other wm's are trying to do some of the composition stuff, why cant we just add 2d only functionality to compiz, stableize it then all the desktops just use it since it does all the hard stuff for them(oh, and make a new configuration tool for it too, it kinda sucks)

    its just a lot of work being redone and everybody is doing two things right and four things wrong.
    nVidia G-Force 6600GT (bfg) pci-e: amd 64 2000+ (939): 1024 corsair ram: 2X 80gb seagate harddisk SATA: plextor cd/dvd-read/write cdrom SATA

  9. #9
    Linux Guru reed9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,651
    aside from library dependencies, the desktops just aren't working in a unified maner.
    like why do we need so many window managers, we have metacity for gnome, kwm(i think) for kde, xfwm for xfce, openbox for lxde and other uses, and then compiz, for 3d stuff for everything, but now other wm's are trying to do some of the composition stuff, why cant we just add 2d only functionality to compiz, stableize it then all the desktops just use it since it does all the hard stuff for them(oh, and make a new configuration tool for it too, it kinda sucks)
    I'm no developer, but isn't the point of the GNOME or KDE libraries in part to create a truly integrated desktop experience? I mean more than just the apps looking like they belong, but being aware of each other, so to speak, able to interact. Like the way Kopete, Kontact, and Kmail are all able to interact with each other.

    I don't begrudge the DE's from trying to build a cohesive unified whole. It's just not what I want. As long as there are good desktop agnostic apps out there, I'm happy enough.

    As for you other point, that linux is too fractured. I don't buy it. The point is choice. And the development model means there will always been fringe projects and people "scratching their own itch" out there. It's a good thing. I'm not interested in linux world domination or everyone leaving microsoft.

    I just want simple programs that do their job well, that have simple text config files, and play nice with other simple programs. More ncmpcpp, less Amarok. More like, well, the suckless project puts it well.

    Other people can have their wobbly windows and desktop snow, that's cool. Just don't try and make all of linux like that.

  10. #10
    Linux User benjamin20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    jacksonville beach FL
    Posts
    317
    the point of the desktop environments is to create a more unified desktop experience, but, i don't think that that requires a central large set of required libraries. if you look at gnomes development over the past couple of years, they have constantly been moving away from the libgnome and stuff. i think they are seeing a lot of people say they want a no bloat desktop and are leaving gnome because of that. eve release now keeps deprecating functions and libraries, apparently gnome 2.28 removed bonobo entirely and made a lot of success in getting libgnome either extracted into gtk where it should be, or completely removed like it should be. see the problem with the way it was before is that to use one simple functionality required pulling in a whole bunch of extra crap you dont need. why would a image viewer program need audio stuff loaded, or a disk partition manager need web browser material, all that does is promote bloat, even if the compiler culls the parts of a library that arent used in a program, it allows the programmer to use a functionality that may pull in a bunch of unwanted stuff. by separating out functionality into separate libraries, its much easier to focus the application. also, it makes it much simpler to write simple applications. i can make a GTK app, and it will fit right into my desktop, if its a desirable program, distributing it out to others and making it look and feel right shouldn't be difficult. i shouldn't need to know about gnome stuff in order to do it either. i think at one point in time, if you didnt make your application use gnome stuff, it would default to the default gtk settings and you would often have different looking button images, maybe even a different file selector, things like that, gnome had made custom widgets on top of gtk ones and if you didt use gnomes widgets, your program wouldn't fit in, and some users eyes are just like a bunch of middle school kids when it comes to applications that fit in.

    onto linux being to fractured, that's a tough subject "choice" is good and "choice" is bad you could have a huge debate over it and both sides could make extremely good arguments and even be both right. i tend to lean toward the lack of choice side, but i wouldn't say completely iron clad single solution. for instance, lets say, what programming language should be the only programming language allowed. i would say, that's dumb, there's a NEED to have several. now, we dont need as many as we have right now, some we need to depriciate. i think old school stuff like cobol should be considered out of the question, as it basicaly has become, you dont see and need for algol or ada or things like that that were created in a different time to suit different needs than what current general computing requires today. id say you probobly need to focus on object oriented programming style unless in very specific situations like lower level stuff where oo doesnt really make as much sense. but, where it does, you need to be using c++ or java or python. just simply because of what they can offer. C is great, but probobly should be used less, than it is, when you are using c and making heavy use of the gobject library, well, why not just use c++ where you get more compile time checking, unless of course, it makes sense to use c with gobjects, like how gtk is done that way, it makes making language binds a lot easier and you can just use gtkmm to do c++ stylized programming.

    for desktops though, its not bad to have choice either, but. lets do it right. whats the point of choice if all the choices have some major drawback. with kde you get lots of options and pretty pictures but you get buggy software and bloat, with gtk, its more balanced but still lots of unwanted bloat, xfce you lack some programs that are hard to find replacements for. instead it should be more interchangeable, use gnomes stuff but toss nautilus and use thunar instead, or hell, use k3b for cdburning. thats why freedesktop.org made(or at least early adopted) d-bus. it allows programs to talk to eachother in one unified manner. pulseaudio is another attempt to unify a commonly implemented but standardized functionality.

    i think gnome is moving this way, dont know to what extent they plan to do so, kde needs to start moving that way more too, there's a lot you cant do with just kde apps and a lot of people might prefer a gtk app over a qt one and kde would be better off allowing this to work better.
    nVidia G-Force 6600GT (bfg) pci-e: amd 64 2000+ (939): 1024 corsair ram: 2X 80gb seagate harddisk SATA: plextor cd/dvd-read/write cdrom SATA

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •