No announcement yet.

Debian-Based Distribution Updated With KDE 3.5 Forked Desktop

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    1993 called

    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    I'm hoping for a Motif version. Happy new year 1993 everyone!
    1993 called and said it wants it desktop back )

    I do agree that everyone is free to do whatever he/she wants with their spare time but this really seems a waste of it.


    • #12
      Originally posted by kudlaty View Post
      Exactly. Using LXQt + KDE applications seems like a much better solution if you don't like Plasma, the code is maintained and the footprint is reasonably small.
      People try to support KDE3 not because plasma is "bloated", but because of KDE3 with the apps as a whole. IMHO I agree: The old apps were better designed and had more functionality (both official apps and unofficial ones). I mess them a lot - just not enough to make trinity as my main DE.

      Plasma/Plasma2 looks really good and has good cross platform support, but I just don't like the apps that come with it. KDE had a much larger community back in the day, it lost a lot of good stuff with breaking backwards compatibility and taking such a long time to release new versions. Hopefully plasma2 and perhaps wayland support will draw some of the old crowd back.

      PS: LXQt looks nice too. I tested Razor-qt for a few days. It worked really well I was impressed by it, but still has the same issue with KDE4 apps (now KDE5 apps). Long live Amarok 1.4 & Konqueror


      • #13
        Originally posted by Jabberwocky View Post
        Long live Amarok 1.4 & Konqueror
        Long live ncmpcpp & ranger!


        • #14
          why is kde3/qt3 UI more responsive on the same hardware than even a modern lxqt install?


          • #15
            Originally posted by carewolf View Post
            I wonder Trinity ever completed the port to Qt4...
            I don't think they ever attempted one.

            Back in the day they created some kind of wrapper API that supposedly would be implementable on top of Qt3 and Qt4 and the Qt4 backend didn't work that well.
            My guess would be that the wrapper was too close to Qt3's paradigms or behaviors to make Qt4 backend viable in the first place.

            Not that it matters nowadays, they would need to do a port to Qt5 by now.