KDE 4.0 verdicts

[spotslayer]

From the kubuntu forums. Some tips. May help some.

http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/index.p ... =3090269.0

David

[greggh]

From the kubuntu forums. Some tips. May help some.

http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/index.p ... =3090269.0

David

Thanks. From that link...

You can go back to a 'normal' kmenu if you wish. There are 2 Widgets for this called Application Launchers. The Traditional is the one you will want in this case.

So my main annoyance is solved.

[Vogateer]

Reviving an old thread, I know, but I'm trying out the latest OpenSuse KDE4 live CD again.

Things are working better, though there are still several bugs. OpenSuse refuses to eject my iPod through the graphical interface. Ejecting through the terminal worked fine though. Dolphin is a great program, from what little I've used it. I really like how they've cleaned up the cluttered toolbars of programs like Konqueror, too. I could use Konqueror as my main browser, if it ever finally works with secure connections. The whole desktop looks very nice, and I'm sure these things will get hammered out over time, but I still really question the usability decisions.

It's obviously a personal thing, but even though i'm really excited about the technological accomplishments of KDE, I still find the Gnome interface so much more intuitive. Just chaning my mouse speed in KDE4 made me feel like I was lost. If I remember right, Gnome gives you a little slider under the system -> preferences -> mouse, but in KDE4 it's under computer administration. How is mouse speed (or sound and display) a part of administration?

This may just be a part of OpenSuse, but the panel at the bottom of the screen has a little icon that looks like a desktop. I assumed it would clear the desktop, as that had been an option in the past, but there was absolutely no tooltip or any text to identify what it did. I went ahead and tried it, and it made my panel disappear. WTF? Then I had to go up to the upper right hand of the screen to select "Hide Dashboard" to get my panel back. It wasn't until I did some thinking that I figured out that I had actually been in the Dashboard feature, and that I had to click on that "Hide Dashboard" link to get back to the desktop. Thoroughly annoying in every single way. No indication of what the icon did before I clicked on it (why are there tooltips over Konqueror and Dolphin, but not over Dashboard?), no indication of what had happened when I did click on it (just a flicker of the screen, which wasn't reassuring. Why couldn't it have something pop up and say, "Welcome to the Dashboard Feature" just to give you some orientation, and explain how to get back? I thought the panel had simply crashed), and there was no reasonable indication of how to get out once I was in there (say something like, "Click Here to leave the Dashboard"). I highly question Dashboards anyway, since I've never used them on any system. Having Widgets on the desktop is nice, but having to access them through a dashboard program just never really struck me as useful.

People have already complained about the menu, and I think it's terrible. It's sad because the heirarchy of the application menu is finally laid out in a relatively sensible way now, much better than KDE3 in my opinion, but accessing them is just painful. Why is there some irrational fear of using a good amount of desktop space to let me select the application I want? If I'm in the process of selecting another application, I don't need to have desktop space set aside for anything else, I just need to find the application I want to launch and click on it, and do it quickly; if that means using up half the desktop to do it, that's fine by me.

The problem is that these these aren't simply failures in implementation, but they represent a completely different philosophy and way of thinking about how the desktop should behave. Perhaps these issues will be addressed in the future, and prove me wrong (Man, do I ever hope I'm proven wrong on this), but the more I look at it, the more I appreciate Gnome's Human Interface Guidelines. Sometimes programs designed to work with Gnome drive me crazy in that I can't change some simple setting (why can't I make a slideshow go slower in F-Spot?), but I still feel like the entire layout of Gnome is really well done, and I don't find myself fighting to try to understand how the Gnome people think, it just feels natural. It felt natural within a few minutes of sitting down with it. I find myself fighting with the KDE4 interface far too often. Perhaps it's a personality thing, but I'm really surprised at how much I don't like the desktop interface right now, even though i still love a lot of the KDE applications.

[snarkout]

if it ever finally works with secure connections

Could you expand on this? I use konqueror almost exclusively on my linux boxen and am not aware of any such failure.

[Tsuroerusu]

if it ever finally works with secure connections

Could you expand on this? I use konqueror almost exclusively on my linux boxen and am not aware of any such failure.

Yeah same here, I use it all the time with secure connections. In fact I run a secure web server myself and use Konqueror with it, and it works really great.

[Vogateer]

Sorry about that. Every time I try to log in to a site with a secure connection, such as log in to Gmail, it refuses to connect. Unfortunately I can't even remember the error I received. I should have figured something this big would have been caught for most people, but it's failed for me every time I've tried it on my computers with every version of the Kubuntu and OpenSuse live CDs. It's really strange.

As for the interface philosophy and idealogy, maybe there's a virus that infects you when you use Gnome for a long time, and you start to become a fanatic about its HIG. I used KDE for a long time, well over a year when I was running Gentoo, and didn't notice these things. Now they really stick out and drive me nuts. I think KDE has better frameworks and makes better use of resources, but I really do believe Gnome has put a lot of work into usability, and that this work really shows.

[Tsuroerusu]

As for the interface philosophy and idealogy, maybe there's a virus that infects you when you use Gnome for a long time, and you start to become a fanatic about its HIG. I used KDE for a long time, well over a year when I was running Gentoo, and didn't notice these things. Now they really stick out and drive me nuts. I think KDE has better frameworks and makes better use of resources, but I really do believe Gnome has put a lot of work into usability, and that this work really shows.

You know a certain group of people, would argue the exact same thing about Windows Vista, that it may be worse technically than GNU/Linux, but has a better UI, with more usability research put into it. For me, non-free software is not an option, but looking at it from a purely technical point of view, for a brief moment. I prefer to use what is the most reliable, what has the better code quality (Which inevitably results in bugs being squashed more easily, and security problems solved more easily), what is better designed, what uses resources more efficiently (As my system becomes older and older, this becomes an issue) etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. and in my opinion, that happens to be KDE in terms of desktop environments, and it happens to be GNU/Linux and *BSD from an operating system perspective.

And this is not just me being a geek. My mother uses my sister's laptop to check her email and manage photos and all sorts of stuff. That laptop, being new, came with Windows Vista pre-installed. And here's what's cracking me up. The networking is flaky! Yes, Microsoft's super-duper new networking stack is buggy as shit, sometimes it can't resolve a hostname, other times connections crap out, it's amazing how shitty this is. And the thing runs like a freaking turd, it's slow a shit! Guess what, it's bugging the hell out of my 58 year old mother, who knows very little about computers, but even she notices that this new machine (Which is a beefy laptop!) is slower than the older one, and runs like crap. Priceless!
So if the people, who claim that Windows has a better UI, are right, well my mother can tell them that, that does not matter if the system does not work properly.

I'm not trying to say that GNOME is a Vista, because it definite does work, but I think usability is sometimes overstated compared to just overall technical quality. Both have to be in balance.

[Vogateer]

I can certainly understand that viewpoint. I don't think there's going to be anything in KDE 4.1 that I couldn't work around and get accustomed to, but I really wish KDE would adopt a more Gnome-like layout for their panels.

With Gnome, I have concerns about Mono being everywhere in the Desktop Environment, and I was really hoping KDE was going to show me something that would bowl me over. Maybe it will one day, but right now I see seriously awful mistakes in usability that seem almost inexcusable. Like you said, there needs to be a balance. As of now I feel the balance is against KDE due to the usability issues. The new Kicker Menu (that's the name of the new Slab-like menu, right?) and Dashboard are both so poorly executed that I seriously wonder if they're trying to work towards usability at all in these areas. That menu system is a step backwards from KDE 3, and another huge step backwards from the Gnome menu system. It's one thing if I simply find it less appealing than Gnome, but I find it to be a step in the wrong direction. My experiences with average users around here make me really agree with Ubuntu's decision to go with Gnome as the default desktop.

On the other hand, Dolphin is nice. I could use that, and if I figure out what's going on with Konqueror and the secure connections, I really like what they've done with it, as well. I generally like using the average KDE program, as well. As long as Gnome's doing what I want, I'll stick with it, but if I were forced to use KDE, I would try to make it as Gnome-like as possible. A lot of trouble to go through since Gnome's already there and working well, but with Mono bringing about patent concerns, I'm glad to know KDE is there.

[Tsuroerusu]

I can certainly understand that viewpoint. I don't think there's going to be anything in KDE 4.1 that I couldn't work around and get accustomed to, but I really wish KDE would adopt a more Gnome-like layout for their panels.

I don't get what you're talking about. Why should KDE start to copy GNOME, then they would not be KDE. And that would waste a lot of work they have done! In case you did not know, during the 4.0 development cycle of 2½ years, they spent a lot of time writing up a brand new set of shiny Human Interface Guidelines, which fit KDE's user interface philosophy. It's different from GNOME's, I'm gonna keep my mouth shut about opinion in this area, as I don't want to offend anybody in here. The process towards 4.0 was huge, they had to port all their code to Qt 4, which was a major task, then they wrote new frameworks to replace the crappy stuff, and wrote others to add stuff etc. etc. and built some new applications, decided to rewrite the desktop etc. etc. it's been an assload of work, expecting it to be done on day one is simply delusional. There's so much interface in a desktop environment that it's gonna take some time to get it all into compliance with the new HIGs. Aaron Seigo stressed that in 2006 on The Linux Action Show, I cannot believe I have to relay his message.

With Gnome, I have concerns about Mono being everywhere in the Desktop Environment, and I was really hoping KDE was going to show me something that would bowl me over.

First of all, things take time! Unlike a certain north-western American company, KDE does not have 5 billion dollars to throw into development, what they have, is smart people! Ever heard the term "Don't rush a genius" ? Could not be more true in this case, Microsoft have shown what happens when you rush things! Props to Microsoft for that, did us all a big favor.

Maybe it will one day, but right now I see seriously awful mistakes in usability that seem almost inexcusable. Like you said, there needs to be a balance. As of now I feel the balance is against KDE due to the usability issues.

Again, if you read what the KDE developers have been saying for over a year, 4.0 is a foundational release, it lays a foundation for YEARS of future work on refining things, extracting the functionality the new frameworks provide etc. etc.
KDE 3.0 came out in what, 2002? Or something like that, here like six years later, it's polished and very well translated and rock solid. And 3.0 wasn't even that much of a revolutionary release compared to 4.0, so naturally it's gonna seem more "finished".

The new Kicker Menu (that's the name of the new Slab-like menu, right?)

* Sigh *
Slab is the name of Novell's custom GNOME "start menu". KDE's menu is called Kickoff.

and Dashboard

If you're referring to the desktop, it's called Plasma. Dashboard is Apple's retarded knock-off of that Konfabulator thing.

are both so poorly executed that I seriously wonder if they're trying to work towards usability at all in these areas.

Again, again, please try listening to what developers are saying. Plasma is a complete REWRITE, yes, that's right, it's a REWRITE, from the ground of the entire desktop interface metaphor. What's that mean? The pieces in KDE 3.5, that KDE have spent years on are not used at all in 4.0. Why you ask? Because the code, in this case (Source: Aaron Seigo, maintainer of Kicker), was terrible for the panel at least, and did not suit their new goals at all as it was never written for the things they want to do.
The amount of feature of kdesktop, kicker, superkaramba and other things have taken years to write, bugfix and integrate etc. etc. they have started over for Plasma, to eventually end up with something better. So there's just inevitably gonna be regressions.

That menu system is a step backwards from KDE 3, and another huge step backwards from the Gnome menu system.

That's your opinion, which I respect, but I have used the KDE 3 version of Kickoff in openSUSE (Before I stopped using that distribution), and I really liked it. I think it makes a lot of sense, and it worked really well for me. The original one was written by Novell, and they actually did do usability studies for it, in case you did not know. Their results are available right here (Scroll a bit down the page): http://en.opensuse.org/Kickoff
I personally cannot stand GNOME's menu system, there's simply too little functionality there for me. I can give you just as many arguments as you can give me, it's an endless circle, so it's not even worth bothering with.

It's one thing if I simply find it less appealing than Gnome, but I find it to be a step in the wrong direction.

Like I said earlier, the reason you are seeing regressions is because of the complete rewrite of the desktop interface (KDE in general has not been rewritten). It will take time for them to reach feature parity with KDE 3.5 which has been under development for a very very long time. I mean it has 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 behind it. That's years and years of bugfixing etc. etc. it's no small task.

It seems to me that you in general had waaaaaaaay too high hopes for KDE 4.0.

[Vogateer]

I don't get what you're talking about. Why should KDE start to copy GNOME, then they would not be KDE. And that would waste a lot of work they have done! In case you did not know, during the 4.0 development cycle of 2½ years, they spent a lot of time writing up a brand new set of shiny Human Interface Guidelines, which fit KDE's user interface philosophy. It's different from GNOME's, I'm gonna keep my mouth shut about opinion in this area, as I don't want to offend anybody in here. The process towards 4.0 was huge, they had to port all their code to Qt 4, which was a major task, then they wrote new frameworks to replace the crappy stuff, and wrote others to add stuff etc. etc. and built some new applications, decided to rewrite the desktop etc. etc. it's been an assload of work, expecting it to be done on day one is simply delusional. There's so much interface in a desktop environment that it's gonna take some time to get it all into compliance with the new HIGs. Aaron Seigo stressed that in 2006 on The Linux Action Show, I cannot believe I have to relay his message.

You don't have to relay Aaron Seigo's message. I've already heard it. Many times. And then again. And again after that.

I don't think KDE should be a carbon copy, but I do think Gnome has better usability standards, which KDE devs could possibly learn from. In that department, I'm just looking for them to learn from what works in other areas. Dolphin looks a lot like Nautilus and the OS X Finder, after all, they've taken some good ideas from those. I think Gnome's separation of "Applications, Places, and System" makes sense. Maybe something else would make just as much sense as that sort of separation, only in a more KDE way. What doesn't make sense, like I said earlier, is putting mouse settings under "Computer Administration." Someone put that there intentionally, and it makes absolutely no sense to me.

I'm not just being captious with these critiques, what I'm getting at is that I simply don't understand the KDE 4 philosophy on these matters, and I did a quick Google search for the new KDE HIG before I wrote these posts, and couldn't find anything but the older HIG from KDE 3, and maybe the KDE 4 HIG can explain some of these things. What I'm getting at is that I simply don't understand what they're trying to do, and that some things, like the Dashboard implementation (Okay, this was called "Dashboard" when I had to "hide" it using that plasma menu, so I'm just using the terminology they used), are egregious mistakes. I know what Plasma is, and as a technology, it makes sense, and it was something I was excited about in KDE 4. I still am. Great idea.

I'm not saying the progress they've made is anything short of astonishing. It is. The Nepomuk framework sounds amazing, and a lot of things have already improved. All I want is to understand what they're thinking, and that's what's frustrating. I'm trying to figure out what they're attempting to accomplish, and I can't come up with a good explanation.

* Sigh *
Slab is the name of Novell's custom GNOME "start menu". KDE's menu is called Kickoff.

No need for sighing. Kicker, Kickoff, it's no wonder people might confuse those names, particularly with all the K* names flying around the whole environment. Nevertheless I really don't care for it, I don't see the improvements it's supposed to offer over other menus, and I'm not the only one, as someone in the thread previously asked how to ditch it. Once again, I didn't understand what they're trying to accomplish with it, and I'm not sure it bodes well that the explanation for it isn't more obvious.

Looking at the usability study you linked to, it appears they had some strange goals, like eliminating mouse clicks for the sake of eliminating mouse clicks. The point of eliminating mouse clicks is to gain speed, but using the "hover" feature to eliminate a mouse click in the way they've done isn't intuitive. I hate it when I'm trying to navigate a menu using Kickoff, and accidentally hover over one of those menus and end up in a whole other menu. I greatly prefer using the "hover" feature to see what items are in a submenu, myself.

That explanation was helpful, though. At least I gained some understanding about what they're trying to do.

It seems to me that you in general had waaaaaaaay too high hopes for KDE 4.0.

I don't think my expectations were too high. I wasn't expecting a revelation, and there is a lot of promise there. I've heard you and Aaron Seigo go on for quite some time about how this is a .0 release, and I agree with the "release early, release often" idealogy. What I don't like is when I can't even figure out their ideology behind things, or when some features like the "Dashboard" (once again, someone else's choice of name, as it was in the menu, not my own) don't have so much as a tooltip to help you out. I really don't understand why they wouldn't at least put a tooltip naming the feature or describing what it does.

I'm not just out to criticize KDE, and I still have high hopes for it, but what I'm trying to figure out is whether these are simply rough patches where the implementation isn't complete, or if things like "Kickoff" are a representation of their philosophy going forward, which may not jive with my own personal preferences.

[Tsuroerusu]

I've heard you and Aaron Seigo go on for quite some time about how this is a .0 release, and I agree with the "release early, release often" idealogy. What I don't like is when I can't even figure out their ideology behind things,

Fair enough, but then let me ask you, why not just email Aaron Seigo, and ask him about these things? I once sent him an email and got a good reply in three hours. His email address is: aseigo at kde dot org

Like I said I once sent him an email (This was about a year ago regarding GPLv3), and he was very nice to reply back very quickly. These developers are not that far away, in terms of us being able to talk to them.

[Vogateer]

Not a bad idea. Though I feel that if I'm going to do it right, I'll need to put some work into it.

First things first, I need to find out if that's just an OpenSuse thing, or if it's in the Kubuntu Live CD, too. I've tried installing KDE 4 on my Gutsy machine, but when I try to start a session it locks up before I even get to the desktop. Luckily I can SSH into the box and reboot, but as for now I'm relying on Live CDs to test it out.

I finally found what I think is going to be the KDE 4 HIG here:
http://wiki.openusability.org/guideline ... /Main_Page

Obviously the KDE HIG not complete, and still needs a lot of work. Nonetheless, I feel like I should read what's there so I'll know what direction they're trying to head before I offer any criticisms. Perhaps it will help me avoid bringing an overly Gnome-centric view on things. But even if we have very different ideas about how to do things, simply bringing up concerns to someone who's from the KDE project should allow them to solve it in a way that works best for KDE.

So, what is the focus of the KDE devs right now? I wonder if this is the sort of feedback they're looking for, or maybe they're still hammering out the more technical issues. Well, I need to cook dinner now, but I'll work on this.

[davijordan]

i installed kde4 as an additional desktop. Kde looks like some was trying to emulate the mac in appearance. -1,000,000 points. The new slab? The menu requires too many clicks to get to an app and it did not find all my apps. I agree with the earlier comment that you should be able to hover over the menus. Even on the kde that suse used that was like the slab you could set the menus to the traditional style. I wish they had kept that feature in there for four.. It might be there, but is was not in plain sight. Apps seemed spiffier to load. it only crashed once while I was logging out.

[jwp1]

It looked real nice with the Knoppix 5.3 no major work.
You have to spend major time for a final choice still using KDE 3.5.3 as my work box