KDE 4...

[Gilboa Davara]

On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 08:32 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 11:18 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 18:20 -0400, Mike Chalmers wrote:
> > > What do y'all think of KDE 4? It doesn't seem to be as technical as
> > > KDE 3 to me, I don't like that. The system configuration lacks
> > > options, I can't figure out how to get things the way that I want
> > > them, etc. I am not saying that it is not good, though. That maybe it
> > > just needs more options.
> > > 
> > > Just wondering what y'all thought.
> > > 
> > 
> > IMHO, KDE4-release was underwhelming and shouldn't have been released
> > until it reached feature a parity with KDE 3.5.x.
> > IMO, bugs and crashes can be forgiven - but not having an option to set
> > the order of applets on a panel (only added in 4.0.3?) or change the
> > appearance of the panel was inexcusable.
> 
> I think most people would put it the other way round. I can
> (temporarily) live with not being able to order the panel applets, as
> long as the thing doesn't crash and burn.

I guess it's a matter of personal preference, then.

> 
> Reaching feature-parity with 3.5 is going to happen faster the more
> people are using it. 

Usage count != development speed.

> Fedora is meant to be a bleeding-edge distro, so
> there are always going to be some things that limp along on a wing and a
> prayer. Other distros like Ubuntu are more into stability, which is why
> Hardy Heron is still on KDE 3.5 (with an option for 4) and an older
> kernel.

I never said that F9 should have included KDE 3.5.9 instead of KDE4. Far
from it. I do plan to continue using KDE4 on my rawhide machine
(reporting bugs as I go along) - I am saying the in my view, KDE4 is not
what-I-consider sea-worthy for my day-to-day usage. (Personal
preference)

- Gilboa