Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE Amarok Music Player Receives Revived Port To Qt5 / KF5

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

  • Nth_man
    replied
    Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

    Besides, it's not like this sort of things didn't happen with other DE's.

    GNOME: Gnote, gThumb, GDM, etc.
    Enlightenment: Elive, Entrance, ePhoto, etc.
    LXDE: LXAppearance, LXDM, etc.

    Just to name a few examples.
    Yes, it followed the older tradition of X programs having an x in front of their name, like xterm, xcalc, xbiff, xedit, xlogo, etc.

    Apple started doing the same with the prefix ā€œiā€.

    As it's probably remembered: It's not "Word", it's "MS Word" (or "Microsoft Word", if somebody wants to write more); it's not "Access", it's "MS Access"; it's not "Office", it's "MS Office"; etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post

    This is the correct answer. On Windows old applications run because they bundle their dependencies, on Linux old applications don't run because they don't, and are relying upon a unified set of libraries managed by a package manager. However this is the problem that flatpak (and its alternatives) sets out to solve.
    Actually, it depends on how you look at it. If your app is a GTK app (or maybe Qt app), then yes, it solves the problem. But there are more toolkits out there. If your app was written in FOX or (for the diehards) Motif, then your app still runs. In fact, I'm currently running the newest version of Xfe File Manager against an old FOX toolkit version (I'm several released behind) and it still works fine despite my distro being a rolling release (Solus).

    Leave a comment:


  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    20 years, yes. On Linux, there's applications that don't run on it from 5 years ago.

    Although this is understandable. People forget that Microsoft has so much money, it's not even funny. They can support their old APIs almost indefinitely. Gtk and Qt are not developed by multi-billion mega corps. You can't expect them to have the resources to support old Gtk and Qt versions to this day.
    Qt 3 is still supported by the Trinity team. Qt 3 was first released in 2001, so that's more than 20 years old and still supported (although by external developers from the Trinity team rather than the Qt team, but it's still better than unsupported).

    Leave a comment:


  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by Charlie68 View Post

    You're not very informed, Kde's policy has changed and now K has been banned!
    Besides, it's not like this sort of things didn't happen with other DE's.

    GNOME: Gnote, gThumb, GDM, etc.
    Enlightenment: Elive, Entrance, ePhoto, etc.
    LXDE: LXAppearance, LXDM, etc.

    Just to name a few examples.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by polarathene View Post
    There is also applications on Windows that don't work on prior versions iirc? Like XP to Vista transition, had a bunch of apps that did not play well I think?
    Even between Windows 7 and Windows 10 there are plenty of applications that either don't work or require some tinkering.

    Leave a comment:


  • polarathene
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    20 years, yes. On Linux, there's applications that don't run on it from 5 years ago.

    Although this is understandable. People forget that Microsoft has so much money, it's not even funny. They can support their old APIs almost indefinitely. Gtk and Qt are not developed by multi-billion mega corps. You can't expect them to have the resources to support old Gtk and Qt versions to this day.
    Depends what you call an application I guess. I mean there is nano, not quite 20 years old but close: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_nano

    I'm sure there are plenty like that which are old enough and still work perfectly fine? As mentioned, static linked builds should be fine shouldn't? Not all applications require Qt or GTK for their UI either.

    There is also applications on Windows that don't work on prior versions iirc? Like XP to Vista transition, had a bunch of apps that did not play well I think?

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by Vasant1234 View Post
    Unfortunately the Linux desktop is a developers nightmare with constant API/ABI breakage. And being "mostly" compatible is not good enough. If it was that simple all the QT4 application should have been running on QT5 when they got released.
    FYI, it would still run fine if it was bundling its own KDE4/Qt4 libraries.

    Guess what 99% of Windows applications do? They bring the kitchen sink with them for the sake of not depending on things that might be changed and break them later.

    Leave a comment:


  • Luke_Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by carewolf View Post

    They run for me. You just need the old libraries, or use static linking. Note on Windows there are few or any shared libraries except the system ones, so every game and application ship their own copies. A Qt-using Windows application always has its own Qt DLL, or is statically linked. If you did the same with Linux, they would also be immune to system updates.
    This is the correct answer. On Windows old applications run because they bundle their dependencies, on Linux old applications don't run because they don't, and are relying upon a unified set of libraries managed by a package manager. However this is the problem that flatpak (and its alternatives) sets out to solve.

    Leave a comment:


  • carewolf
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    20 years, yes. On Linux, there's applications that don't run on it from 5 years ago.

    Although this is understandable. People forget that Microsoft has so much money, it's not even funny. They can support their old APIs almost indefinitely. Gtk and Qt are not developed by multi-billion mega corps. You can't expect them to have the resources to support old Gtk and Qt versions to this day.
    They run for me. You just need the old libraries, or use static linking. Note on Windows there are few or any shared libraries except the system ones, so every game and application ship their own copies. A Qt-using Windows application always has its own Qt DLL, or is statically linked. If you did the same with Linux, they would also be immune to system updates.

    Leave a comment:


  • carewolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Vasant1234 View Post
    The stupidity of breaking API/ABI every few years is mind boggling. It is no wonder that the total number of applications available over the past 10 years for the Linux desktop has not increased. And with this constant churn it is very unlikely that commercial developers will ever port their applications to the Linux desktop. In other words Linux desktop will remain largely irrelevant to mainstream users.
    By every few years, you mean every 8 years?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X