Like it as we coded it?

Dear visitor, welcome to KDE-Forum.org. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

robome

Beginner

Posts: 5

Location: Germany

Thursday, January 31st 2008, 4:09pm

Like it as we coded it?

After looking at KDE 4 on a live CD it looks half like Vista and half like OSX to me. If you like it is a matter of taste (I don't), but configuring it is not straightforward to me.

The new start menu is clumsy and cumbersomely (click, click, scroll, click, scroll), and I found no way of configuring it. Even no way to add items. Moving to the traditional launcher would be the first thing to do--if I could (see below).
I found no way to add applications on the task bar as in 3.5. I found no way to move the pager as in 3.5, I found no way to change icon size there. Neither could I configure the font size of the digital clock.
Those items seem to be widgets one can add through this annoying yellow thing in the upper right corner. But maybe I'm to dumb, I can remove the widgets from the bar on the lower corner, but can't add them to it. Nor was I able to move, remove, resize or what else that bar.

And dolphin? I didn't like to use Konqueror as file manager, but dolphin doesn't look that great to me either. First of all it lacks a list view I was always using. And you can only split a view vertically, not horizontally.

All in all I've the impression KDE has been stripped down and the user has to like what the developers like and stick with that. I'm quite sad about that.

Robert

Go to the top of the page

Quantum

Beginner

Posts: 27

Thursday, January 31st 2008, 4:56pm

It's early in the process and they've assured us that these missing features and settings options will come as the code is developed.

But I entirely agree about the Start menu; it is far less efficient than the flyout system. Won't do at all.

Why are they copying Winduhs and OS X rather than advancing the state of the art? Are they out of ideas?

Here's a suggestion: please, PLEASE, help us realize the promise of an advanced object-oriented OS as we hoped Taligent would bring is. For the sad story please read Wikipedia about it. Object oriented components is a radical new design that revolved around the fact that we humans evolved dealing with the world as objects, that objects have inherent properties, and that they can be manipulated and assembled into larger structures modularly.

As each module has been extensively tested and has defined interface and inheritance characteristics, it is far easier to assemble a larger complex machine out of them reliably. Like assembling a word from letters, sentances from words, and novel from sentances.

Please, rather than Plastik looks and regressive interface, give us revolutionary functionality, which allows us to extend our reach beyond all others.

Go to the top of the page

Slackhead

Beginner

Posts: 17

Location: UK

Friday, February 1st 2008, 4:52pm

I have to agree with the points about the menu - it is very cumbersome to navigate through. I would also like some way to customise the taskbar. In 3.5 I have ksmoothdock installed at the bottom, with the taskbar/kicker auto-hidden at the top of the screen to keep it out the way.

I also had problems running xscreensavers on -root window. They would flicker or just not work at all.

Go to the top of the page

RobinK

Beginner

Posts: 2

Friday, February 8th 2008, 4:59am

It's not just that the start menu is cumbersome - it's misconceived.

The reason that people get lost in the mountains or jungle is that they don't know where they've been. That's what happens with the new menu system - I get lost in it because I can't tell where I've been. It's not a matter of simply "getting used to it"; it's a fundamental flaw in concept that no amount of practice will fix.

Go to the top of the page

zero_schezard

Beginner

Posts: 3

Friday, February 8th 2008, 2:26pm

The start menu really is worse...

But I disagree about "copying MacOSX". MacOSX takes a "minimalist interface" approach, which I do like, while Windows Vista looks for the other way. Every interface element on Vista is big and bloated, and in KDE4 I felt the same way.

The first thing I taught while using KDE4 is: "Somehow, my desktop seens so small"...

Go to the top of the page

Zoiked

Beginner

Posts: 5

Tuesday, February 12th 2008, 2:57am

I agree, my 1280 by 1024 looked like I was using 1024 by 786. Grrr.

Go to the top of the page

leereyno

Beginner

Posts: 7

Tuesday, February 12th 2008, 9:50am

I guess the open source model doesn't work for everything. When coders aren't equally talented as UI architects, the result is what we have here.

Gnome has long been cripple-ware in terms of the ability of the average user to configure it. From what I understand if you're willing to delve into the config files, it can actually be configured. Windows can be configured as well if you're willing to do battle with the registry.

Now comes the long anticipated KDE 4.0, which is not even usable, let alone configurable. It the dubious honor of managing to top even Vista in terms of it being a "downgrade" from the previous version.

Eye candy is nice, but I do actually want to use my computer. I have customers who expect the same.

Unless something changes, I'm soon going to be stuck having to learn how to configure gnome by hand. Either that or move to another window manager.

I hate to have to be so negative. I don't like posting rants and criticisms. However, I like seeing developers shoot their users in the foot even less.

Fix it.
Make it usable.
Make it configurable (the more the better).
Pretty pictures alone do not a UI make.

Go to the top of the page