Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: GNOME 3.10 Continues Pushing Ahead With Wayland

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Personally I think both KDE and gnome go to two different extremes and I'd like them to both move towards a middle ground.

    KDE's interface is still quite convoluted and janky, and its just massively overloaded with many features, many of which really aren't necessary. It is nice to have a very tweakable and customizable desktop, but its impossible to have a properly polished and not-super-buggy UI when you have a shitload of features to maintain. You run into issues where some features may interact poorly with each other, or features that are so rarely used/tested that they are broken and buggy and things like that. I really dislike KDE's plasma shell, its very customizable but very rough and "clunky", it still suffers from tons of padding and alignment issues too. There are a few things I really love about KDE, for example Kwin is by far the best compositing window manager on linux, very good performance, very customizable, and very stable (far less buggy than compiz too ). KDE is always a desktop I "want to like", but I always end up feeling its too convoluted and buggy when using it.

    Now on the gnome side, I would say they went too far, they removed some very popular and pretty objectively useful features. Interacting with the gnome developers it can often seem that they are very much "in their own little world" and don't respond very well to critisism. However in the end I do still prefer gnome, I just find its interface to be much cleaner, polished and more usable. For the most part it still gives me the features I need, and anything else I've been able to easily add via the tweak tool or extensions.

    When it comes to a balance of features and customization I actually prefer XFCE. It has a very simple and usable interface, that is sane and reasonably customizable. However I don't like how outdated XFCE is under the hood, its very slow development pace, and lack of opengl compositing (using 3rd party compositors always results in problems for me, compiz is extremely buggy and I don't like the way compton handles shadows, as far as I'm concerned proper opengl compositing is an absolute necessity, I loathe video-tearing and like the features an open gl compositing can provide, such as shadows, expose and nicer alt tab switching etc...)

    In the end what I'd prefer is something simple, light and customizable like XFCE, but built on modern gnome 3/gnome-shell like technology (and no cinnamon does not fit this bill, its interface is a total mess and its quite sluggish and buggy. From a tech standpoint elementary's pantheon comes close, but its not very customizable)
    Last edited by bwat47; 08-23-2013 at 11:15 AM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    That is how you do away with software with non-free contributor agreements. Watch and learn KDE.
    Oh, funky is back. I hadn't noticed.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northumberland, UK
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    Personally I think both KDE and gnome go to two different extremes and I'd like them to both move towards a middle ground.

    KDE's interface is still quite convoluted and janky, and its just massively overloaded with many features, many of which really aren't necessary. It is nice to have a very tweakable and customizable desktop, but its impossible to have a properly polished and not-super-buggy UI when you have a shitload of features to maintain. You run into issues where some features may interact poorly with each other, or features that are so rarely used/tested that they are broken and buggy and things like that. I really dislike KDE's plasma shell, its very customizable but very rough and "clunky", it still suffers from tons of padding and alignment issues too. There are a few things I really love about KDE, for example Kwin is by far the best compositing window manager on linux, very good performance, very customizable, and very stable (far less buggy than compiz too ). KDE is always a desktop I "want to like", but I always end up feeling its too convoluted and buggy when using it.
    I found KDE 3 to be an absolute mess and I don't think its cartoonish theme helped either. I find KDE 4 to be more refined but I find that in some instances the customisability can be overwhelming. On the positive side there seems to be a move towards simplifying some aspects with the KlyDE project. I hope they don't take it too far though!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    KDE's interface is still quite convoluted and janky, and its just massively overloaded with many features, many of which really aren't necessary.
    Then don't use them and STFU.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    Then don't use them and STFU.
    Why the hate, Awesomeness? bwat seemed to be fair-handed and hardly a troll that deserves such a response. Complain about Honton, if you must (but I'd rather you didn't), but bwat's post didn't smell trollish to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    6.) phasing out KDM and focus on a lean solution and systemd logind for wayland/XCB[for now QDDM seem the best candidate]
    I hadn't heard that KDE was tying themselves to systemd. That's a good thing, IMHO, but surprising since I'd thought they'd described themselves as very much a crossplatform environment.
    I think gnome is doing the same thing, and is also the the right choice since being able to assume systemd makes things a decent amount simpler.
    Last edited by liam; 08-23-2013 at 03:06 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    I hadn't heard that KDE was tying themselves to systemd.
    They are not although some functionality might not be available. For example there seems to be intrest in using systemd for user sessions in KDE (leading to faster and better managed user session startup). That doesn't mean system without systemd won't be supported, kdeinit will be "maintained" (it hasn't changed much at all in many years). Display managers usually aren't tied to desktop environments so even if KDM is dropped and adopted SDDM it wouldn't tie KDE into it. SDDM doesn't even depend on systemd at the moment and I'm not aware of any such plans.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    I hadn't heard that KDE was tying themselves to systemd. That's a good thing, IMHO, but surprising since I'd thought they'd described themselves as very much a crossplatform environment. I think gnome is doing the same thing, and is also the the right choice since being able to assume systemd makes things a decent amount simpler.
    I have clarified this before but it keeps cropping up. GNOME does not assume systemd at all. It uses a D-Bus API that is implemented by systemd but not limited to it. Alternative implementations are possible and already exist. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Soft...tabilityChart/

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    Then don't use them and STFU.
    Thank you for your valuable contribution to the discussion. /s

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bordeaux, France
    Posts
    321

    Default

    I don't get the KDE / Qt bashing. Yes, you give the right to digia to use your code, but the code is also under GPL, which I think is a strong enough warranty, isn't it ?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bordeaux, France
    Posts
    321

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    You can't upstream free code to Qt. Doing so requires you to sign a contributor agreement stripping away the copyleft. KDE is blind to Qt's non-free nature just as Ubuntu users are blind to Canonical's non-free nature. Expressing concerns why this is very wrong is as valid as caring about software freedom.
    ???
    http://qt-project.org/legal.html

    It says very precisely that the submitted code must be LGPL V2.1, that's not what I would call non-free...
    Also, " each person retains ownership of the code as well as related IP they create"

Posting Permissions

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