Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Plasma Active Is Slimming Down KDE's KWin

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

  • Plasma Active Is Slimming Down KDE's KWin

    Phoronix: Plasma Active Is Slimming Down KDE's KWin

    Plasma Active, the KDE initiative to create a cross-device user experience from tablets to media centers and smart phones, is leading to an (optional) loss of weight for KWin, the long-standing KDE compositing window manager...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTY0NA

  • #2


    No pain no gain!

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes, I'm a KDE fan, even before the numbers were out here on Phoronix - http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...anagers1&num=1

      Still, I am at a loss why Gnome 2.x/3.0 and Unity still are the main favorites for most distros.

      I guess the political side of it should have died a decade ago when Qt went GPL and later went LGPL.

      What are the motives for retaining Gnome, seriously? Yes, seriously, as I don't understand that.

      From what I have understood KDE can do anything Gnome can do and KDE does things Gnome cannot do (e.g. the scalability of a vector graphics desktop and a lean one at that). Even if I'm a general ignoramus I am still open to counterarguments.

      Please educate me.

      Comment


      • #4
        this is pretty cool. kde getting slimmer is always a plus in my book. every time i see updates for kde and my ram usage drops while i didn't lose any important features is great for me to see.

        @sabriah
        gnome is considered the linux default. i think it's because there are more programs that use gtk than qt. i prefer kde myself. when you compare gnome2 to kde3, there isn't really much of a point in using gnome unless you want to really mess with the desktop or panels (something kde is not as flexible with). but gnome3 has a completely different approach to how people use computers. as much as i don't find gnome3 practical for my uses, i can understand why people would like it, and i approve of gnome3 trying to be different.

        i have noticed that by the end of gnome2's development, gnome has started to gear itself toward being user friendly. unfortunately, to the developers, that mostly just meant removing features from the gui. i switched to kde permanently once they started taking stuff away back in early 2009, and i'm glad i did. gnome3 is also definitely geared towards beginners.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sabriah View Post
          What are the motives for retaining Gnome, seriously? Yes, seriously, as I don't understand that.

          From what I have understood KDE can do anything Gnome can do and KDE does things Gnome cannot do (e.g. the scalability of a vector graphics desktop and a lean one at that). Even if I'm a general ignoramus I am still open to counterarguments.

          Please educate me.
          Warning, long post ahead!!

          Here's my view on the matter. I started using linux in 2006 with Fedora and Ubuntu. Both were using Gnome. In 2010 I decided to give KDE a try. It was with openSUSE 11.2. I was blown away! The amount of control it gives to the user over the desktop environment and native applications is just amazing. Besides this, Dolphin is the best file manager I've used to this day. KDE has some really nice ideas. The problem is that most of it is geared towards a specific type of workflow. If you use it on a desktop pc connected to one screen with a fast (or practically anything intel and nvidia based) GPU you will probably never have any major problems. KWin sucked ass on my Radeon HD4200. Really really slow with a few windows open. Also, if you like configuring everything to the finest detail before being able to properly use it, then you will also be fine. The problem is that I use a laptop that I need to constantly connect and disconnect from an external monitor and KWin has pathetic multimonitor support (e.g. here, here and here). Also, I got tired of having to configure everything to be able to use my system properly, and some times this involves going through cryptic configuration options that require some googling to fully understand. Besides all this there is the huge amount of visible small bugs that just make it look like an unfinished product. It's loaded with good ideas but they all seem unfinished, with the obvious example being the Activities stuff and the mess that was Akonadi and Strigi (that didn't even work, i.e. couldn't find what I was looking for) for a very long time.
          Now, after a year of KDE I'm back with Gnome (Ubuntu) because "it just works". I know this is cliché but it's true. Just the fact that I can unplug my external monitor at any time and the display shifts flawlessly to the internal screen and vice-versa is just amazing. I can concentrate on doing stuff instead of trying to debug my system and filling bug reports.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by devius View Post
            Warning, long post ahead!!

            Here's my view on the matter. I started using linux in 2006 with Fedora and Ubuntu. Both were using Gnome. In 2010 I decided to give KDE a try. It was with openSUSE 11.2. I was blown away! The amount of control it gives to the user over the desktop environment and native applications is just amazing. Besides this, Dolphin is the best file manager I've used to this day. KDE has some really nice ideas. The problem is that most of it is geared towards a specific type of workflow. If you use it on a desktop pc connected to one screen with a fast (or practically anything intel and nvidia based) GPU you will probably never have any major problems. KWin sucked ass on my Radeon HD4200. Really really slow with a few windows open. Also, if you like configuring everything to the finest detail before being able to properly use it, then you will also be fine. The problem is that I use a laptop that I need to constantly connect and disconnect from an external monitor and KWin has pathetic multimonitor support (e.g. here, here and here). Also, I got tired of having to configure everything to be able to use my system properly, and some times this involves going through cryptic configuration options that require some googling to fully understand. Besides all this there is the huge amount of visible small bugs that just make it look like an unfinished product. It's loaded with good ideas but they all seem unfinished, with the obvious example being the Activities stuff and the mess that was Akonadi and Strigi (that didn't even work, i.e. couldn't find what I was looking for) for a very long time.
            Now, after a year of KDE I'm back with Gnome (Ubuntu) because "it just works". I know this is cliché but it's true. Just the fact that I can unplug my external monitor at any time and the display shifts flawlessly to the internal screen and vice-versa is just amazing. I can concentrate on doing stuff instead of trying to debug my system and filling bug reports.
            There's a lot i agree about your comment but a lot i disagree about too. first of all, kde allows you to use multiple compositors, so if one runs slow, the other will probably work just fine. besides, compositing in general is optional, and compiz also works on kde. if you're using open source ati drivers then ya you're going to get performance problems.
            kde has AMAZING multi-desktop support, and i personally find it very easy to set up. i can see why you'd think it's not very user friendly when it comes to a temporary external display of a laptop, but if you have a fixed multi-display setup, kde has some of the best features i've ever seen.
            kde is somewhat confusing when it comes to configuring specific things (typically related to visuals and window manager interaction) but systemsettings is pretty straight-forward, imo more so than windows.
            i'm not sure what versions of kde opensuse uses, but i've found that once version 4.5 was released, it was overall very stable. the only things that screws up my kde setup is opengl compositing with open source drivers, overclocking, a program with a memory leak, or if something is causing kwin to lock up.

            to me, kde just needs some cleaning up. there is some disorganization in it and it has a little many programs that are forced to come with it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
              first of all, kde allows you to use multiple compositors, so if one runs slow, the other will probably work just fine. besides, compositing in general is optional, and compiz also works on kde.
              This is true and I didn't mentioned it in my post because I was only pointing out the factors for why it doesn't work for me. KWin without compositing is very very good and fast that's a fact, but the extra features offered by compositing are very handy to my workflow. Compiz does make KDE run very smoothly on my HD4200 as well.

              Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
              if you're using open source ati drivers then ya you're going to get performance problems.
              It was the same with OSS drivers or Catalyst. No difference whatsoever in terms of window manager performance. Other 3D applications of course were a different story. I'm not alone on this as it seems to affect several users (take a look in here, here and here)

              Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
              kde has AMAZING multi-desktop support, and i personally find it very easy to set up. i can see why you'd think it's not very user friendly when it comes to a temporary external display of a laptop, but if you have a fixed multi-display setup, kde has some of the best features i've ever seen.
              If you use two identical screens with the same orientation and positioned precisely side by side you probably won't hit into any problems. In my case I was hitting this bug, which caused maximized windows on the main screen to go behind panels that were defined as "always visible". Also, does the utility for configuring the displays already has a way of defining which is the primary screen? Does it allow for moving the displays around graphically to position them? If you disconnect one of the screens does it detect that and reconfigure the desktop to fit into the available screen alone? If it does that, does everything look correctly afterwards? These are most (but not all) the problems I had with KDE and multi-monitor setups.

              Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
              but systemsettings is pretty straight-forward, imo more so than windows.
              System Settings in KDE is obviously much more easy to use than the bunch of similar looking icons thrown together inside a window that is the windows control panel. It's also much better than the bunch of menus that was present in Gnome 2. Luckily that changed for the better in Gnome 3 and Unity.

              Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
              to me, kde just needs some cleaning up. there is some disorganization in it and it has a little many programs that are forced to come with it.
              It needs a lot of cleaning up! I would really like to be able to use KDE, but as it is I can't. The fact that as time went by I needed to use more and more gnome apps because the KDE equivalents were either too slow, buggy, incomplete or non-existent made me transition to gnome in full. Still, I use some KDE apps like the amazing Digikam and KMyMoney. Also, I use Gimp a lot and it works properly in Gnome, although the fault can be attributed in equal measures to both Kwin and Gimp in that case.
              Last edited by devius; 07-09-2011, 07:25 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                @devius as far as i'm aware there are graphical ways of moving around the screens and labeling one as primary. even if kde doesn't come with that (which i'm pretty sure it does, i haven't done multi-monitor in a half year), you can just get arandr to do that for you, which is a really small easy program with nearly no dependencies.

                systemsettings is one of the things i think needs cleaning up. like i said before, it may be better than the way windows vista/7 does it, but its still not that great.

                i really think its coincidental that you got such an unstable system, because i use stuff like gimp on my kde setup and it never crashes.

                try an nvidia setup with proprietary drivers and use the latest releases of kde and i'm sure you'll get a pretty reliable setup.

                Comment


                • #9
                  @schmidtbag The problem with Gimp and KDE isn't stability. I can't complain about stability in KDE as it's usually stable. The only thing that keeps crashing is mostly just Plasma. The problem with Gimp is the multiple windows with some of them being utility windows and that situation not being handled very well by KWin. If you minimize Gimp and then click on it's panel button to bring it back up it only brings back the image window. You have to press Ctrl+B to bring back the Tools window. Likewise if you change to a maximized window of another program in the same workspace, clicking the Gimp button to give it focus causes the same problem. This is cumbersome.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by devius View Post
                    This is true and I didn't mentioned it in my post because I was only pointing out the factors for why it doesn't work for me. KWin without compositing is very very good and fast that's a fact, but the extra features offered by compositing are very handy to my workflow. Compiz does make KDE run very smoothly on my HD4200 as well.
                    This sounds strange as I could run KDE 4.0 and 4.1 on an Pentium 3 w. ATI Radeon 9200SE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_...n_9000.2F9200; "There was also a cheaper version, the 9200SE, which only had a 64-bit memory bus." ).

                    Originally posted by devius View Post
                    It needs a lot of cleaning up! I would really like to be able to use KDE, but as it is I can't. The fact that as time went by I needed to use more and more gnome apps because the KDE equivalents were either too slow, buggy, incomplete or non-existent made me transition to gnome in full. Still, I use some KDE apps like the amazing Digikam and KMyMoney. Also, I use Gimp a lot and it works properly in Gnome, although the fault can be attributed in equal measures to both Kwin and Gimp in that case.
                    One thing which amazes me is that one of the plugins for GIMP is a Qt/KDE based plugin!

                    QuiteInSane (http://packages.debian.org/en/sid/gimp2.0-quiteinsane): "A Qt based SANE plugin for GIMP 2.0. This Qt based SANE plugin runs through the GIMP image manipulation program and provide the ability to scan directly from it."

                    It works excellent with the latest GIMP of Debian Sid!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                      This sounds strange as I could run KDE 4.0 and 4.1 on an Pentium 3 w. ATI Radeon 9200SE
                      That doesn't surprise me since KDE ran (almost) as fluently on my Atom N270 with crappy GMA950 as it did on a much faster Athlon II X4 2.8GHz with Radeon HD4200. Maybe it has something to do with OpenGL extensions being used. The 9200 is a OpenGL 1.5 card IIRC as the HD4200 is OpenGL 3.3, so they may be using some extensions of the newer version that cause the slowness.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                        Still, I am at a loss why Gnome 2.x/3.0 and Unity still are the main favorites for most distros.
                        Gnome 2.x is the default because most people value a clean and simple interface over fancy compsititing effects. You may have noticed that hardly anyone seems to like Gnome 3.x or Unity with their clunky and slow replacements for simple menu interfaces.

                        The 'start menu' alone in KDE is enough to put me off using it in place of Gnome 2.x.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by movieman View Post
                          Gnome 2.x is the default because most people value a clean and simple interface over fancy compsititing effects. You may have noticed that hardly anyone seems to like Gnome 3.x or Unity with their clunky and slow replacements for simple menu interfaces.

                          The 'start menu' alone in KDE is enough to put me off using it in place of Gnome 2.x.
                          http://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=67&t=94534

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                            Still, I am at a loss why Gnome 2.x/3.0 and Unity still are the main favorites for most distros.
                            There are countless distributions. How can you actually tell that “most” distributions choose GNOME and Unity? And why do you write about it as if Unity and GNOME are the same thing? Except some GNOME foundation libraries used by Unity, they have nothing in common.

                            KDE is one of the most active FOSS communities. It wouldn't be if KDE made lots of things wrong.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                              Yes, I'm a KDE fan, even before the numbers were out here on Phoronix - http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...anagers1&num=1

                              Still, I am at a loss why Gnome 2.x/3.0 and Unity still are the main favorites for most distros.

                              I guess the political side of it should have died a decade ago when Qt went GPL and later went LGPL.

                              What are the motives for retaining Gnome, seriously? Yes, seriously, as I don't understand that.

                              From what I have understood KDE can do anything Gnome can do and KDE does things Gnome cannot do (e.g. the scalability of a vector graphics desktop and a lean one at that). Even if I'm a general ignoramus I am still open to counterarguments.

                              Please educate me.
                              I loathe KDE, nothing political, Just every machine I've tried it on it has been dog slow, and the UI is a convoluted, unpolished, buggy mess IMO. Gnome has every right to exist and many simply prefer it to KDE.

                              And with gnome 3, gnome continues to go in a very separate direction from KDE. I much prefer gnome-shell's simple, slick, and polished approach to kde4.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X