Shark Bait

Knowledge Centers

Operating Systems

Networking & Internet

Mobile & Wireless

Security

Storage

Business Intelligence

Servers & Data Center

Computerworld Reports

Industry

See your link here

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Cyber Cynic

What do KDE 4.2 and Windows 7 have in common?

90 comments

TAGS:KDE, Linux desktop, Winodws 7
IT TOPICS:Desktops & Servers, Laptops & Netbooks, Linux, Open Source, Operating Systems, Software, Windows & Microsoft

I tried, I really did, to like KDE 4.2 I really didn't like the early versions of KDE 4. I then tried KDE 4.1. I hated it. I kept getting told by people that I just didn't get it.

OK, I thought. Maybe I didn't get it. So, I gave the last KDE 4.2 beta and release candidate another try for a month on one of my openSUSE 11.1 desktops. Historically, SUSE and KDE developers work closely with each other, so openSUSE is a great distribution for any version of KDE. Well, they may work well together, but openSUSE with KDE 4.2 doesn't work for me.

Just like Windows 7 beta, which I'm running on another PC, my fundamental problem is each desktop's fundamental interface changes. In both cases, I find that, instead of helping me to get my work done, the interfaces are actually getting in the way.

On Windows 7, it's the blasted ribbon interface. The ribbon interface isn't really new. We saw a version of it in Office 2007. And, as someone who also uses Mac OS X, I know a Microsoft rip off of Apple's Dock when I see it. But, the Dock works with the Mac desktop metaphor. On Windows 7, the ribbon just gets in my way.

Any time I spend searching for how to do something that I've been doing almost by reflex for decades is time wasted. I hate to waste time.

The same is true of KDE 4.2. What I love about KDE 3.5.x is that it gave me enormous control of both the operating system and the desktop itself. KDE 4.2 simply doesn't give me the customization power I'm used to and I want. Instead of giving me an easy access to tools, KDE 4.2 forces me to hunt them down. With both Windows 7 and KDE 4.2, I feel like I'm trying to type with boxing gloves on. Everything is simply clumsier.

No where is that more painfully clear than in Kickoff, the KDE equivalent of Windows' Start button. With Kickoff you can only show one menu level at a time. This makes navigating the menu tree a real pain-in-the-rump. Last, but not least, KDE 4.2 is still slower than KDE 3.5x.

That's not to say that KDE 4.2 doesn't have improvements over KDE 4.1. It does.

One major plus is that I can finally add icons to the desktop again. It's still a nuisance because, instead of simply placing icons on the desktop, I have to place them by using the right-click item menu. Folder View is still KDE 4's most important interface and I still dislike it. There's little Folder View can do that I hadn't done for ages with virtual desktops.

I know, of course, you can do more with Folder View than you ever could do with a virtual desktop. For example, you can set up a Folder View that contains only graphic applications and displays only graphic files. I can certainly see how that would be useful. But, what I don't see is why that functionality couldn't have just been added to KDE 3.5x.

I can say the same about other clear improvements in KDE 4.2, such as the integration of the Dolphin file manager and Ark, KDE's file archive program and the return of panel customization. Why couldn't those features have simply been added to KDE 3.5? Or, for those who absolutely love the new KDE 4 desktop metaphor, why could it have been the new desktop interface be made an option rather than a replacement for KDE 3.5?

I'm not the only one who has no love for KDE 4. As Linus 'Mr. Linux' Torvalds recently said, "I used to be a KDE user. I thought KDE 4.0 was such a disaster I switched to GNOME. I hate the fact that my right button doesn't do what I want it to do. But the whole 'break everything' model is painful for users and they can choose to use something else."

In all fairness, Torvalds hasn't tried, to the best of my knowledge, the new KDE 4.2. Still, when all is said and done, to me KDE 4.2, like the Windows 7 ribbon, is change just for the sake of change, not for the sake of making things easier for users. Personally, I'm going to stick with KDE 3.5x and start spending more time with GNOME 2.24. I think you should too.

Email this

Digg this

What People Are Saying

Add new comment

BREAK EVERYTHING!!!

Submitted by Anonymous on April 7, 2009 - 8:16 P.M.

I personally am a very new user to linux and have tried both GNOME and KDE, and I really love KDE (true!), I use it in preference to GNOME.

The best part is how you can remove your entire taskbar setup with the click of a button and then rebuild it all over again or even just spread it all over the desktop and have no taskbar at all, keeps things interesting.

REMEMBER TO LOCK YOUR WIDGETS PEOPLE!!!

Reply | Report this comment

I'm a little late to this

Submitted by Anonymous on March 15, 2009 - 8:43 P.M.

I'm a little late to this comments party...

But, sjvn, since you are still so disgusted with KDE 4 why don't you continue on with your fork idea?

I would love to see what you could do to KDE. Classic KDE could be used for years to come.
So when you get around to it I would love to use it!

Reply | Report this comment

In kde 4.2 i have found two

Submitted by Anonymous on March 12, 2009 - 8:55 P.M.

In kde 4.2 i have found two commands absolutely priceless, they do the same thing but ... alt + f2 and right click run command
i am always using that dialog to launch everything it is great. I hardly ever touch kicker. Couple that with yakuake and its a breeze for me. Everything works wonderful.

Reply | Report this comment

Resistance to change ?!? Don't think so ...

Submitted by Mickey Mouse on February 23, 2009 - 7:58 P.M.

Every time we say: “The KDE 4.2 has much more bugs in comparison with version 3.5 and Gnome” we immediately get the answer: “Well, it’s not perfect yet.” Well … d@mn it, it’s version 4.2.0 so it should bloody be by now at least as perfect as the afore mentioned two !! If that’s impossible, stop bragging about it, stop calling it 4.x.0 and put back KDE 3.5 till 4.x .gets properly fixed. That lame excuse is already annoying.

KDE drew this outrage upon themselves by insisting on calling their versions 4.x.0. Clearly there are some woolly brains out there that just don’t get it that, regardless of how much spin you put into the mix, you can’t say “for us, traffic red light means proceeding through the intersection at full speed” and expect everyone to start cheering and nodding approval. This world we live in uses axioms as guidelines and fighting them is not only futile, but self destructive too. I wonder how many more years will be necessary for this truth to dawn on KDE team ?

The distributions that dropped version 3.5 providing version 4.x only, should also be criticised sharply, even more so than KDE itself - they withdrew a perfectly good product and replaced it with a half baked one which is far, far inferior than previous version.

So now if we complain about working with a beta instead of working with a finished product, guess what, we are opposing the change !!! What a farce … Not only ridiculous, it’s plain stupid !!

If this was caught on candy camera, we would be laughing our *** out. So imagine a man which drives a perfectly good/functional Mercedes, is asked to “upgrade” to a far inferior car, albeit freshly painted, but with some wheels missing. And when he says “no way”, he is admonished for “resisting the change …”.

Lastly, what is so great about KDE 4.2 ? Yes, what is it so wonderful beside “the look” ? Does KDE 4.2 make you more productive in browsing the internet with Firefox ?? Are you getting more work done in VmWare/Virtual Box in KDE 4.2 than you were while working under 3.5 ? Or, are you more productive working with OpenOffice in KDE 4.2 than you were in KDE 3.5 ? How about Konsole or Kcalc – are you more productive working with them in KDE 4.2 ? I doubt you are. Actually, on the contrary, it will be worse. Sometime much worse. And there are many more such examples.

So at the end of the day KDE 4.2 is still mostly, if not all, about look, image, a myriad more clicks and plenty plasma crashes … and nothing else, really.

Reply | Report this comment

Personally I agree. KDE 4.2

Submitted by NR on February 22, 2009 - 6:12 A.M.

Personally I agree. KDE 4.2 is a shock for those who need to work with KDE on a daily basis. I've tried (not as must as I should) and I'm about to give up. However I must say that, for those who don't like Kickoff, you can revert it's behavior to that of a traditional menu thing. For me is that damned Konqueror FSHview (or whatever). I know (I use Gentoo) I've just installed a minimum KDE4.2, but I can't find a way to see files listed! All I can see is blocks representing files and I have to guest what's in there. It is also a time consuming task for disks. I suppose this view should be an option (I don't conceive it has the standard view mode) but my Konqueror has no other view modes available. Also my desktop icons are now in a desktop folder and most of them do not work: plain text files have decided they should (not) open with something strange rather than Kwrite. Device links, such as USB pens, do open, but I have to go to the command line to umount them. Menu options, such as Firefox, don't open from Kickoff: I have to launch them from the command line. It's a lot of small issues, together they render the whole thing unusable.

Ok, the Oxygen is a very nice theme and the whole thing looks very pretty. But what I need is to be able to use it, really...

Reply | Report this comment

KDE 4.2 is excellent

Submitted by Darryl on February 13, 2009 - 6:16 A.M.

I am disappointed about the contents both of this article and some of the responses.

Firstly, my own opinion. The KDE Developers have done a fantastic job, and I thank them for KDE 4.2. In hindsight it is very clear that the release of KDE 4.0 was not handled as well as it should be. I considered but decided to skip 4.0. I was very disappointed with 4.1, and after persevering was in fact using Gnome for a while. But now 4.2 is out I am again using KDE on all my machines. Once again applying the advantages of hindsight, I believe KDE 4.2 should have been the 4.0 release, with 4.1 being a release candidate or perhaps even a later Beta.

But I recongnise that the KDE Developers chose a brave and perilous direction. As good as KDE 3.5 was, it was showing its age. I certainly don't mourn the demise of ARTS, for example. Yes, new features could have been added to 3.5, and perhaps over time outdated and unsuccesful technologies replaced. My understanding is that the Developers considered and discarded this approach. In doing so, they placed the whole future of the project in jeopardy. Up to 4.1, this was looking like a bad decision. With 4.2, that decision is vindicated. It is not perfect by any means, but it is stable and useable. KDE is only going to get better and better. I'm looking forward to future releases as the semantic desktop and other new technologies develop.

So far as the article is concerned, I am disappointed because the criticisms made seem to stem from a resistance to change, which I find ironic in this of all areas. I too had to learn different ways of doing the same things I had been doing for years. Just like I did when I abandoned Windows for Mandrake, Mandrake for Debian and Debian for Gentoo and Archlinux. Gnome is a very good, stable desktop, and I can appreciate why many people choose to use it. Personally, I am glad to be back using KDE, and glad I have the choice.

I'm sorry for the poster who is experiencing so many difficulties with 4.2, and I suppose I too mayd share his opinion if I'd experienced those same problems. I would hope that they relate to some peculiarity of hardware or installetion which can be resolved. Otherwise he will continue to miss out on an excellent desktop.

Reply | Report this comment

should have done like GNOME & kept status quo but w/ a x.0 name

Submitted by Leo Laporte on February 17, 2009 - 8:13 P.M.

Why bother with building an infrastructure from scratch to be ready for future challenges when you can just slap more paint and mortar AND JUST CALL it x.0.
People will be thrilled when they see the 0, they'll think its new.

BTW, 4.2 is ready for my parents and they loved the Mandriva 2009 w/ KDE4.2 which replaced their PCLinuxOS 2007 w/ KDE3.5.
Both are in their 70s so Im sure their l33t skills must have made the switch easier.
My mom still knows how to install games and themes.

We changed most of the machines in our house to KDE4.2 also, especially the Ubuntu wife's Dell Mini 9 which she called utterly depressing and reminiscent of Windows 95 and the kids have no problems either w/ their laptops but they were running KDE4 on mine and knew what to expect.
More importantly, everyone was alllowed to stay with KDE3.5 if they wished. They didnt.

I still need a few more things for my work use so until they get sorted out I will be sticking to 3.5 which in case some tech people werent aware is still a pretty damn good desktop and was updated twice in 2008.
My Windows XP and Mac partitions are still using the same old desktop so I dont think being dated is a problem 3.5 has to worry about.
Once those small things are taken care of, I dont see why I shouldnt move to 4.3 this summer.

Or else....here is something revolutionarry so bear with me.... I could stay with 3.5 until 4.4 comes out in about 10-11months.

NOTHING IS FORCING ME TO CHANGE.

Of course, they should have just called KDE4 but in reality have just changed the wallpaper on a tweaked 3.6 because now is more important than the future.
You wouldnt believe how many people are fooled by these simple tricks.

I use KDE, E17, XCFE, WinXP and Mac during a typical day so Im not a fundamentalist like some who fear change.
KDE4.2 works.
You might not like using it just like I might not like the Mac interface but free software gives you a choice. Heck, KDE gives you a choice.

Reply | Report this comment

okay, i don't think its fair

Submitted by itchy8me on February 8, 2009 - 4:17 P.M.

okay,

i don't think its fair to give kde 4 the rip so fast. kde 3.5.10 is a mature desktop enviroment, kde 4 is a rewrite. granted there are many things that are missing in 4 that where in 3, but its a bloody rewrite, give it some time, you dont expect your kids to walk from day one do you?

Reply | Report this comment

in regards to your Windows 7

Submitted by craig0r on February 6, 2009 - 9:29 A.M.

in regards to your Windows 7 comments, uh, wtf. You know the ribbon isn't part of Windows 7, right? It's in Office 2007, Paint and Wordpad. It's not part of the operating system, and has nothing to do with the OSX dock, so clearly you DON'T know a mac rip-off when you see it, nor do you seem to have any more than a generally fundamental grasp of what an operating system is.

Maybe you're referring to the new taskbar as being a dock rip-off, which I can come closer to agreeing with, but if you understood the Windows desktop environment and the OSX desktop environment, you might not be so quick to call it a straight rip-off. OSX is Application-centric and Windows is Window-centric, and under the hood, the taskbar and dock are still really quite different.

Reply | Report this comment

I think what he was trying

Submitted by ManjyomeThunder on February 10, 2009 - 7:54 P.M.

I think what he was trying to say is that most of the apps included with Windows, which are associated with Windows itself, such as Paint and Wordpad, as well as the newer Windows 7 betas of the Windows Live applications, use the Ribbon interface, which in all honesty is quite an annoying change for those of us who are used to menus, and makes things more difficult.

Also, the dock is very OS X like, all instances of an application are grouped together by default and can be accessed by right clicking. No name is shown with the larger icons, and you can pin non-running apps to the dock, which will become their respective windows when they are run.

Reply | Report this comment