Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE's Plasma Active Running Nicely On The Nexus 7

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by Del_ View Post
    Nexus 7 is a tablet not a desktop. So , I guess the right question is do we need widgets on tablets. Not sure really since I haven't seen the light when it comes to tablets yet. My phone has a decent screen (the GS2), so I generally prefer a laptop when I need more. In any case, on my phone I *really* enjoy and need widgets, it is a real mystery to me how anybody can go with Iphone. All my desktops (except when work forces me on Windows) run KDE these days, and I have to admit that I really don't use the widgets much, at least not outside the taskbar. There is one important exception, and that is the folder view, it really is a must if you want to have any control over shortcuts. That said, the KDE desktop comes with a whole bunch of built in plasmoids that covers most of what you need, it is just that I typically don't want to litter my desktop with it. Interestingly, Windows 8 Metro is all about littering the desktop with widgets. If I am representative, it will fail badly.
    Yes I noticed that. Seems there is a need for polish when it comes to optimal size of icons and other objects in plasma. Should not be very hard to adapt it to Nexus 7 though, QML is tailored for making that easy. I ported a Qt application over to Android to test out Necessitas. I quickly realised that desktop apps cannot simply be recompiled. For touch screens you need tailored gui's, the gui needs to be recoded from scratch with a tool kit meant for touch screens.
    Yes, "do we need widgets on tablets" is the right question.

    We also don't want KDE end up as Microsoft's new UI, the heavily critized UI aka 'Metro'. That UI brought a tablet UI to the desktop, in a world where very few desktops have a touchscreen.

    Comment


    • #12
      Looks OK but having tiny controls in the top panel is just retarded on a Touch Device. Unless you have fingers as thin as a pencil.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by sabriah View Post
        Yes, "do we need widgets on tablets" is the right question.

        We also don't want KDE end up as Microsoft's new UI, the heavily critized UI aka 'Metro'. That UI brought a tablet UI to the desktop, in a world where very few desktops have a touchscreen.
        We also don't want to limit choice and freedom by dictating things KDE needs to remove because we don't like it (even though they're only options).

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
          Great news! I like when same software is running everywhere: Linux, KDE/Qt. I don't like what Canonical is doing. If they use gtk on a desktop then they should use it on the phones as well. Or just use Qt on the desktop.
          +1
          My thought exactly.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
            Looks OK but having tiny controls in the top panel is just retarded on a Touch Device. Unless you have fingers as thin as a pencil.
            Yea, having used it, the sliding top panel is a bit of a bother. I don't know why it should be sliding to begin with, though. Why not just make the whole top area a large toggle button for the panel to appear...

            Otherwise, it's nice to see it shaping up.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
              Great news! I like when same software is running everywhere: Linux, KDE/Qt. I don't like what Canonical is doing. If they use gtk on a desktop then they should use it on the phones as well. Or just use Qt on the desktop.
              This is a good point. It's not surprising that they made this decision, however. They often make bad engineering decision such as, well, take your pick
              Gtk clearly won't work well with touch screens. It apparently is limiting enough that it forces developers to compromise on their vision. That's why I'm in favor of simply using web tech on desktops.
              **ducks head**
              Seriously, it is incredibly flexible. The big issue is having to always deal with the dom but what can we do? The web is the only truly ubiquitous platform around, and it really is flexible.
              I'm hoping FFOS come up with some clever solutions.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by varikonniemi View Post
                That UX is even laggier than my 3 year old phone running android 4.2
                Which phone? My htc much newer than that totally choke if I try to do animations over high resolution video.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                  Great news! I like when same software is running everywhere: Linux, KDE/Qt. I don't like what Canonical is doing. If they use gtk on a desktop then they should use it on the phones as well. Or just use Qt on the desktop.
                  I'm not completely sure as I don't use Ubuntu. But I think they use Qt in there own newer applications? Unity is mostly written in Nux which I think is some sort of Canonical developed clutter replacement.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Akka View Post
                    I'm not completely sure as I don't use Ubuntu. But I think they use Qt in there own newer applications? Unity is mostly written in Nux which I think is some sort of Canonical developed clutter replacement.
                    Ubuntu Software Center is python and gtk.
                    Ubuntu One client is in Qt.

                    Other then that Canonical doesn't write their own apps, just repackage other applications.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by n3wu53r View Post
                      Ubuntu Software Center is python and gtk.
                      Ubuntu One client is in Qt.

                      Other then that Canonical doesn't write their own apps, just repackage other applications.
                      Please refrain from this erroneous statement. I have seen it repeated all to often, so much so that people start believing it. It is true that Canonical is focused on end-user-experience, it is true that they are nowhere close to the level of code contribution from Red Hat, but keep in mind that they only have about 3% of Red Hat's revenue. Their focus has been on getting the desktop mature. They did a lot of polish to Gnome2, witnessed by the polish and success of 10.04. Unfortunately, their contributions had a hard time being accepted upstream, which probably is a main reason for their choice to build a new DE, Unity, a significant code base. They have also made Upstart, but that seems to be out-run by Systemd these days, nevertheless it was a significant code base contributed. They have contributed Launchpad, a large project that has gained significant popularity. As part of Launchpad, you have the version control system Bazaar and the very popular ppa's. Right now they are contributing to maturing GNU/Linux on ARM, with direct contributions to Linaro.

                      Unfortunately they have included proprietary offerings in the mix with Ubuntu One and Landscape. Personally I see that as their downfall. Red Hat has demonstrated how important it is to stay open, Novell already demonstrated the slippery slope of making deals under the table. It really is sad, Ubuntu has made invaluable contributions to linux popularity and viability of the desktop, it saddens me tremendously to see them crumble in this way, I am afraid it marks the beginning of their downfall.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X