Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE Plasma 2 Technology Preview Released

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • KDE Plasma 2 Technology Preview Released

    Phoronix: KDE Plasma 2 Technology Preview Released

    The KDE development community has put out the first official technology preview of the upcoming Plasma 2 user-interface...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU0OTE

  • #2
    As long as I can turn off the graphical effects that slow down the user experience (the "start" menu seemed to have a lot of these for switching between tabs, changing selection, etc) then this is looking pretty good.

    Comment


    • #3
      I personally don't find KDE's UI as productive and clean as the one from Gnome, Unity or even MacOS. Which is not a bad thing. I guess I just don't find the old "taskbar with app names" idea attractive. It's cool they are making progress, though, I'm all for choice
      Last edited by Pseus; 12-20-2013, 04:05 PM. Reason: Grammar.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Pseus View Post
        I personally don't find KDE's UI as productive and clean as the one from Gnome, Unity or even MacOS. Which is not a bad thing. I guess I just don't find the old "taskbar with app names" idea attractive. It's cool they are making progress, though, I'm all for choice
        Kind of a contradictory statement, considering KDE's UI is of the most customizable of all of them, and in the most user-friendly ways possible too. You can set up KDE to act just like any other DE, but you can't say the same about most of the others. The only thing I don't like is some of the feature options in System Settings are a little disorganized, and, KDE is still pretty bloated.


        I never really understood why people dislike something because of the default appearance or layout. If the way the developers set it up is the only way to use it, then I can understand the problem. GNOME 3 was disliked so much not because they completely changed how GNOME is used but because there is little to no freedom in tweaking it to your preference/needs, and the only way to do it to some degree is through somewhat inconvenient tools like gconf-editor. BTW, I don't hate gnome - I personally don't prefer it, but I think it was well made for what it tries to be.

        Comment


        • #5
          4 words

          Worst user interface ever !!!!

          Wake up KDE and hire somebody

          Plasma media center is same .....

          99% of nice UI effects are Qt effects.

          Comment


          • #6
            I love KDE but I agree with Pseus that default desktop is quite outdate.

            Comment


            • #7
              I switched from Gnome to KDE exactly because I'm perfectly happy with a simple functional WinXP style desktop. PLEASE DON'T EFF IT ALL UP LIKE GNOME DID.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                The only thing I don't like is some of the feature options in System Settings are a little disorganized
                People are working on this, although AFAIK the work as not been merged into this preview, yet.

                Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                KDE is still pretty bloated.
                No, it's not. It's modular. You don't have to install everything.

                Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                GNOME 3 was disliked so much not because they completely changed how GNOME is used but because there is little to no freedom in tweaking it to your preference/needs, and the only way to do it to some degree is through somewhat inconvenient tools like gconf-editor.
                The whole sentence is just BS. There was never a Gnome release as configurable as Gnome 3. Gnome has just learned from Plasma and Firefox to its UI totally configurable via extensions: https://extensions.gnome.org/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Does it work with Wayland yet?

                  I don't like KDE because it has too many options, buttons, toolbars, menus, and settings.
                  It's overwhelming.
                  It suffers from bloat and feature creep.
                  Also I found it requires way too many clicks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                    Kind of a contradictory statement, considering KDE's UI is of the most customizable of all of them, and in the most user-friendly ways possible too. You can set up KDE to act just like any other DE, but you can't say the same about most of the others. The only thing I don't like is some of the feature options in System Settings are a little disorganized, and, KDE is still pretty bloated.
                    Not exactly. I've attempted to change KDE to look more like Unity since that style fits my workflow best (and KDE has many benefits from its various frameworks) but the end result never feels quite as polished as the DEs that specifically focus on that workflow. This is obvious and expected, but unfortunately the flexibility of KDE means that it does everything fairly well but is also not exceptional in any of those areas. This is excluding the Windows-style default desktop, which is done perfectly. (unfortunately I hate that environment)

                    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                    I never really understood why people dislike something because of the default appearance or layout. If the way the developers set it up is the only way to use it, then I can understand the problem. GNOME 3 was disliked so much not because they completely changed how GNOME is used but because there is little to no freedom in tweaking it to your preference/needs, and the only way to do it to some degree is through somewhat inconvenient tools like gconf-editor. BTW, I don't hate gnome - I personally don't prefer it, but I think it was well made for what it tries to be.
                    Which is exactly why you are a KDE user. Other people don't particularly care for lots of options and would rather have an exceptional default layout that they don't need to spend time to tweak according to their specific needs. This is where DE's like Unity/Gnome/XFCE/Cinnamon find their niche. I used to think more like you did in the past but with the newest DEs I've attempted to adapt my workflow to the environment, and after some period of adjustment I've grown quite comfortable with some of the newer ideas. (like tapping a key and filtering selections by app name, combined dock + launcher, middle clicking titlebar to lower focus, dragging titlebar to top of the screen to maximize instead of using window controls, etc)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by miskol View Post
                      4 words

                      Worst user interface ever !!!!

                      Wake up KDE and hire somebody

                      Plasma media center is same .....

                      99% of nice UI effects are Qt effects.
                      That was more than 4 words.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                        Kind of a contradictory statement, considering KDE's UI is of the most customizable of all of them, and in the most user-friendly ways possible too. You can set up KDE to act just like any other DE, but you can't say the same about most of the others.
                        Sorry, I should have mentioned I was only referring to the standard out-of-box desktop. I see no reason a user would not be able to tweak KDE to his or her liking, even mimicking other DEs. That certainly speaks good of KDE's technical accomplishments.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                          That was more than 4 words.
                          Finger counting isn't his strong suite.
                          ... Unlike DE design, that is.

                          - Gilboa
                          DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
                          SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
                          BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
                          LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by cynical View Post
                            Not exactly. I've attempted to change KDE to look more like Unity since that style fits my workflow best (and KDE has many benefits from its various frameworks) but the end result never feels quite as polished as the DEs that specifically focus on that workflow. This is obvious and expected, but unfortunately the flexibility of KDE means that it does everything fairly well but is also not exceptional in any of those areas. This is excluding the Windows-style default desktop, which is done perfectly. (unfortunately I hate that environment)
                            The main problem is that, for Plasma 1, it was very hard to make or install new shells, so it was very hard to fundamentally change how the desktop worked. You could add widgets that changed parts, but making major changes to the basic workflow was hard. Plasma Workspaces 2 is meant to fix that, it should now be much easier to make new shells and install them. So we could see a much wider variety if there is sufficient demand for it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
                              The main problem is that, for Plasma 1, it was very hard to make or install new shells, so it was very hard to fundamentally change how the desktop worked. You could add widgets that changed parts, but making major changes to the basic workflow was hard. Plasma Workspaces 2 is meant to fix that, it should now be much easier to make new shells and install them. So we could see a much wider variety if there is sufficient demand for it.
                              That's very interesting thank you for sharing. I didn't know there was such a change planned for Plasma Workspaces 2, but I'm glad to hear it. I constantly go back and try OpenSUSE and really enjoy the stability, performance of qt, having a great file manager, nepomuk/strigi, and so on. I could probably go on for hours about all of the things I enjoy about working in KDE but if the desktop doesn't feel right none of the other things matter. The tech in KDE is really amazing and I can't wait to see what new interfaces people will build with it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X