Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: KDE 4.4 Release Candidate 1 Released

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    Sorry, can't resist.

    Edit: damn, I meant swamp not forest. Bah!
    Last edited by BlackStar; 01-09-2010 at 07:09 AM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    I too find some of the default KDE apps to be annoying and cluttered in comparison to many Gnome apps, but things have certainly improved. I'm anxious to play with Amarok again to find how easy it is to get it to what I want in a music player: small with play/pause/next/etc buttons, volume bar, and a playlist, that's it. Amarok used to be so much prettier IMO, the gray is really boring and mono-colored, but oh well. Of course, the gray part is due to the theme, but I preferred the blue and gray/white/etc theme from the previous Amarok.

    Will definitely be interesting to see how Gnome 3 and KDE 4.5/6/7/x compete, and even though I like customizing some things which KDE often really allows you to do, I'm hooked on Gnome's simplicity and sane settings by default objective like, well, Arnold on steroids? =P But will continue to try out KDE every now and then.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Sorry, can't resist.

    Edit: damn, I meant swamp not forest. Bah!
    This what you writes makes you a troll or not. However, trolls and gnomes are very common and what's funny gnomes are often the trolls same time.

    Adriano's Amarok looks fantastic in comparison to the 4.3 default.
    This card was your answer to my previous question? Can you explain what's the default Amarok in KDE 4.3?*

    Is it really too much to ask for sensible defaults so that (a) the application fits the rest of the desktop and (b) it is actually usable out of the box without tweaks? (Usable usually entails not wanting to stab your eyes out due to braindead design decisions.)
    This means more then some fantasy card. I prefer Amarok's new look, but it doesn't mean it was braindead designed before and unusable out of the box. So trollish.

    * you can draw some another card if trolls prefer this way to communicate.
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-09-2010 at 08:27 AM.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Not too mention he catches all such little things in KDE but not in Gnome (and I could name a few little things like that myself) ...

    Back on topic I tried beta2 of SC 4.4 and it was bad, plenty of crashes and problems, reminded me of 4.0 days. I had to revert to 4.3. I wonder if it was just the fault of kubuntu packages or is this kde betas/rc really less stable then in 4.2 series (where I used beta version with almost no problems )
    Anyway that experience means I'll wait for stable before I'll try it again.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    I find it curious that you think one should comment on Gnome's deficiencies in a KDE thread. There are many things that irk me in Gnome, too, but this is not the place to discuss them.

    As I plainly said, I nitpick. I want things to work and look as good as they can without me having to go in and modify them any more than necessary. If you don't agree with this, that's fine: say why and let it go.

    @kraftman: There's absolutely no need to get all defensive ("get a better theme" or "you can change the defaults, you know" or "gnome sucks worse anyway") or offensive ("go tell the gnome developers first"). Seriously, stop doing that, it's not conductive to discussion.

    The card was a jab at your attitude.

    I've already explained what I don't like in amarok's default look: it's the huge, overlapping icons. They simply don't make any sense from a design or usability perspective (if they did, why isn't this design used anywhere else in KDE?) I do believe that this decision was braindead in a "look, we are different!" kind of way and that Adriano's layout looks way more professional.
    Last edited by BlackStar; 01-09-2010 at 10:44 AM. Reason: spelling

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    I find it curious that you think one should comment on Gnome's deficiencies in a KDE thread. There are many things that irk me in Gnome, too, but this is not the place to discuss them.

    I didn't say that and I didn't name those little things myself... Just that I have not seen you name them anywhere else

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by val-gaav View Post
    I didn't say that and I didn't name those little things myself... Just that I have not seen you name them anywhere else
    That's because I tend to name my complaints in places where it can actually make a difference, namely in bug reports and feature requests. However, I've commented and nitpicked on many Gnome-related discussions on phoronix, too. My post history is public if you wish to seacrh.

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    That's because I tend to name my complaints in places where it can actually make a difference, namely in bug reports and feature requests. However, I've commented and nitpicked on many Gnome-related discussions on phoronix, too. My post history is public if you wish to seacrh.
    Why aren't you doing the same when comes to KDE? You commented a lot about Gnome, but rather like its fanboy.

    There's absolutely no need to get all defensive ("get a better theme" or "you can change the defaults, you know" or "gnome sucks worse anyway") or offensive ("go tell the gnome developers first"). Seriously, stop doing that, it's not conductive to discussion.
    I just wondered how it's possible big icons made Amarok useless? Then I started to wonder how it's possible some other players are useful while they're less configurable then Amarok and their design isn't better, but rather much worse? I should expect you'll start talking some bull now. I asked you at least two times for something, but you said nothing.

    The card was a jab at your attitude.
    I don't think so. It matches perfectly your attitude - it's enough to change some words there.

    I've already explained what I don't like in amarok's default look: it's the huge, overlapping icons. They simply don't make any sense from a design or usability perspective (if they did, why isn't this design used anywhere else in KDE?) I do believe that this decision was braindead in a "look, we are different!" kind of way and that Adriano's layout looks way more professional.
    It's easier to click large icon and there's no similar player to Amarok in KDE, so maybe such icons fit only there. It doesn't change a fact your attitude was very trollish. Your a Gnome fanboy, so I'm not surprised :>
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-09-2010 at 02:05 PM.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    I said the Amarok's default design (as seen in openSUSE 11.2 / KDE 4.3) is braindead and ugly, not that the application is unusable. Your response was that Amarok looks ok to you (fair enough), is configurable (nice, but irrelevant) and that other, Gnome-related players are even worse (irrelevant *and* flamebait).

    May I ask you something? Why did you think I was referring to Gnome when I said I expect applications to look nice and be usable out of the box? (I was not referring to Gnome, for the record, so your consequent anti-Gnome rant was both unwarranted and trollish - if not completely unexpected).

  10. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    I said the Amarok's default design (as seen in openSUSE 11.2 / KDE 4.3) is braindead and ugly, not that the application is unusable.
    We've got a progress here, nice. However, you said: "Is it really too much to ask for sensible defaults so that: b) it is actually usable out of the box without tweaks?" (flamebait), so I assumed it's unusable out of the box without tweaks. It's obvious, isn't it?

    Your response was that [...] is configurable (nice, but irrelevant)
    I was answering to this: "Also congrats to whomever got amarok to fix their damned pause/play buttons." I find it obvious to say it's very easy to change its default look, so it will look different - nicer in your opinion. It was just a tip from my side to inform you how to make it look like on Adriano screenshot. I can only imagine what were you thinking.

    and that other, Gnome-related players are even worse (irrelevant *and* flamebait).
    Keep playing. I was wondering why do you complain about Amarok while you didn't complain about Gnome players in previous threads. It makes you a fanboy or a troll in my opinion, because you being a Gnome user usually complain only about KDE apps.

    May I ask you something? Why did you think I was referring to Gnome when I said I expect applications to look nice and be usable out of the box? (I was not referring to Gnome, for the record, so your consequent anti-Gnome rant was both unwarranted and trollish - if not completely unexpected).
    It's simple. Basing on my experience I found you're a Gnome fanboy, so I assumed you were referring to Gnome.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •