[gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[Philip Webb]

I unmerged all the kde-base/...-4.2.1 pkgs preparatory to remerging them
with USE="kdeprefix" & it hit me: why am I wasting time on this rubbish ?

KDE 4.2.1 is not -- as someone bluntly pointed out -- a successor to 3.5 :
it's a whole new concept, not yet clear even in the minds of its developers.
So I'm faced with something I don't want & it's also full of bugs:
I don't want desktops to slide to/fro when I change them, it's nauseating;
Konsole profiles don't work, Dolphin won't start as I want,
add the wrong item to a panel & Plasma freezes with 1 CPU at 100 % .

I cb content with Fluxbox, if KDE 3.5 disappears one day,
but I do like the KDE 3.5 environment & many of its applications:
they're reliable, highly-configurable, attractive & tasteful.
There is an urgent need for a fork of KDE to improve 3.5 -> 3.6 ,
while leaving the silly candy-babies to ape Microsoft & Mac.

I've removed the rest of what I installed to support KDE 4 (except Qt 4 )
& may install Xfce 4.6 next weekend to see how far it's come
since I last used it in autumn 2004 (a poor 4.2 then).
As I've said, I'm impressed with Thunar,
which is way ahead of Dolphin & cb installed without most of Xfce 4 .

There was an article in the Linux press last week about a plain user,
who had had enough of Microsoft & tried out a Linux distro:
what she loved most was the simple practical Fluxbox desktop ...

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Philip Webb <purslow@ca.inter.net> wrote:
> I unmerged all the kde-base/...-4.2.1 pkgs preparatory to remerging them
> with USE="kdeprefix" & it hit me: why am I wasting time on this rubbish ?
>
> KDE 4.2.1 is not -- as someone bluntly pointed out -- a successor to 3.5 :
> it's a whole new concept, not yet clear even in the minds of its developers.
> So I'm faced with something I don't want & it's also full of bugs:
> I don't want desktops to slide to/fro when I change them, it's nauseating;
> Konsole profiles don't work, Dolphin won't start as I want,
> add the wrong item to a panel & Plasma freezes with 1 CPU at 100 % .
>
> I cb content with Fluxbox, if KDE 3.5 disappears one day,
> but I do like the KDE 3.5 environment & many of its applications:
> they're reliable, highly-configurable, attractive & tasteful.
> There is an urgent need for a fork of KDE to improve 3.5 -> 3.6 ,
> while leaving the silly candy-babies to ape Microsoft & Mac.
>
> I've removed the rest of what I installed to support KDE 4 (except Qt 4 )
> & may install Xfce 4.6 next weekend to see how far it's come
> since I last used it in autumn 2004 (a poor 4.2 then).
> As I've said, I'm impressed with Thunar,
> which is way ahead of Dolphin & cb installed without most of Xfce 4 .
>
> There was an article in the Linux press last week about a plain user,
> who had had enough of Microsoft & tried out a Linux distro:
> what she loved most was the simple practical Fluxbox desktop ...
>

While not a KDE user I echo your thoughts. I'm personally a bit
worried about Gentoo overlords sort of pushing this hald thing with
reasons like 'Gnome's automounting depends on it'. If I wanted
automounting that's OK, but what if I don't? Eventually someone will
remove hal as a USE flag and then what do we do?

I started in Linux about 12 years ago and the best environment for my
needs at that time (audio recording, 32 channels of live audio,
real-time kernels, Ardour, etc.) was fluxbox. Low overhead. Easily
customizable. Every time I get fed up with Gnome I go back to fluxbox.
Takes a few minutes to build, not hours like Gnome or days like KDE.
Not a great environment for my wife and kids, so they get Gnome.

I hope the future of Linux desktops doesn't look anything like
Windows. Sometimes it seems to me we're moving too far that direction
too fast.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[Michael P. Soulier]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 347 bytes --]

On 14/04/09 Philip Webb said:

> I cb content with Fluxbox, if KDE 3.5 disappears one day,

/me hugs fluxbox

Mike
-- 
Michael P. Soulier <msoulier@digitaltorque.ca>
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a
touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
--Albert Einstein

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[Michael P. Soulier]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1645 bytes --]

On 14/04/09 Mark Knecht said:

> While not a KDE user I echo your thoughts. I'm personally a bit
> worried about Gentoo overlords sort of pushing this hald thing with
> reasons like 'Gnome's automounting depends on it'. If I wanted
> automounting that's OK, but what if I don't? Eventually someone will
> remove hal as a USE flag and then what do we do?

Would they do that? Choice is the only reason I'm using Gentoo. If my choices
go away then I'll just go back to Debian.

> I started in Linux about 12 years ago and the best environment for my
> needs at that time (audio recording, 32 channels of live audio,
> real-time kernels, Ardour, etc.) was fluxbox. Low overhead. Easily
> customizable. Every time I get fed up with Gnome I go back to fluxbox.
> Takes a few minutes to build, not hours like Gnome or days like KDE.
> Not a great environment for my wife and kids, so they get Gnome.

I tend to do the same. I also use older hardware, which is half the point of
using Linux to me, and Gentoo. If Gentoo starts requiring cutting-edge
hardware then it will have outlived its usefulness to me, and defeated its own
purpose, IMHO.

> I hope the future of Linux desktops doesn't look anything like
> Windows. Sometimes it seems to me we're moving too far that direction
> too fast.

Yes, the drive for adoption by Windows users is being driven by the lowest
common denominator.

Mike
-- 
Michael P. Soulier <msoulier@digitaltorque.ca>
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a
touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
--Albert Einstein

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Michael P. Soulier
<msoulier@digitaltorque.ca> wrote:
> On 14/04/09 Mark Knecht said:
>
>> While not a KDE user I echo your thoughts. I'm personally a bit
>> worried about Gentoo overlords sort of pushing this hald thing with
>> reasons like 'Gnome's automounting depends on it'. If I wanted
>> automounting that's OK, but what if I don't? Eventually someone will
>> remove hal as a USE flag and then what do we do?
>
> Would they do that? Choice is the only reason I'm using Gentoo. If my choices
> go away then I'll just go back to Debian.
>

I hope not. I know nothing and I'm probably being too negative, but
better spoken and never true than silent and forced...

>> I started in Linux about 12 years ago and the best environment for my
>> needs at that time (audio recording, 32 channels of live audio,
>> real-time kernels, Ardour, etc.) was fluxbox. Low overhead. Easily
>> customizable. Every time I get fed up with Gnome I go back to fluxbox.
>> Takes a few minutes to build, not hours like Gnome or days like KDE.
>> Not a great environment for my wife and kids, so they get Gnome.
>
> I tend to do the same. I also use older hardware, which is half the point of
> using Linux to me, and Gentoo. If Gentoo starts requiring cutting-edge
> hardware then it will have outlived its usefulness to me, and defeated its own
> purpose, IMHO.
>

Well, learn to manage your own overlays because over time portage
drops stuff that old machines need. I have two machines here that were
happy Gentoo'ers 3 years ago but today I wouldn't be able to build
them in a meaningful way from portage. Lots of things have been
dropped, not only by portage but even by ATI. Keep what you need safe.

>> I hope the future of Linux desktops doesn't look anything like
>> Windows. Sometimes it seems to me we're moving too far that direction
>> too fast.
>
> Yes, the drive for adoption by Windows users is being driven by the lowest
> common denominator.
>

Yeah, so sadly true, and there's a place for it. I'd love to see
Windows destroyed by lots and lots of new happy Linux users just like
the lot of us, but good choices must remain. This is not a case of one
size fits all.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[Jorge Morais]

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:56:20 -0700
Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> While not a KDE user I echo your thoughts. I'm personally a bit
> worried about Gentoo overlords sort of pushing this hald thing with
> reasons like 'Gnome's automounting depends on it'.
Where have you got that from? I have not heard of that. I don't use
hal either, and I have -hal in /etc/make.conf

> I started in Linux about 12 years ago and the best environment for my
> needs at that time (audio recording, 32 channels of live audio,
> real-time kernels, Ardour, etc.) was fluxbox. Low overhead. Easily
> customizable. Every time I get fed up with Gnome I go back to fluxbox.
> Takes a few minutes to build, not hours like Gnome or days like KDE.
> Not a great environment for my wife and kids, so they get Gnome.
I have used Xfce at version 4.4.2 (or 4.4.3, I don't remember) and
I think it has a lot of user-friendliness. And it is even similar
to GNOME, so GNOME users will feel at home.
I think Xubuntu is a good example of a well put together Xfce desktop.
I don't agree with every Xubuntu choice for default apps, but it is
a great start if you want to build a user-friendly, lightweight,
customizable desktop with Xfce plus the right applications.
So if you like simplicity and lightweight, but think your wife
won't like fluxbox, give Xfce a try.
Maybe even fluxbox could be configured and combined with the
right applications to be easy to use, but starting with
Xfce would probably be much easier (I say "probably" because
I have never performed either of these tasks).
On the other hand, maybe you should continue giving GNOME
to your wife simply because GNOME is much more common than Xfce and,
by knowing GNOME, she is more likely to know how to use another
GNU/Linux computer, and if she needs technical support from, say,
the ISP, the technicians are more likely to know GNOME and Xfce.

For the record, I have moved from Xfce to LXDE because I am a 
speed freak and also a simplicity freak. More on simplicity
below.
 
> I hope the future of Linux desktops doesn't look anything like
> Windows. Sometimes it seems to me we're moving too far that direction
> too fast.
I get that feeling too. When I use Ubuntu and something fails, sometimes
I feel it is hard to diagnose and fix the problem. Maybe this is
the cost of things being "automagic": when it works, great, but when
it doesn't work, you've got to be a wizard to fix it.

Car analogy:
A person with mediocre knowledge of car mechanics can understand how
a classical car works, and doesn't complain that the transmission is
manual. He can even fix simple problems.
A person with good knowledge of car mechanics can even fix more serious
problems, because the car is simple, and many of its parts can be
serviced by an interested man.

But a modern car...
With all of its automatic transmission and everything, one does not
even need mediocre knowledge to drive it; but to understand how it
works is hard. To fix simple problems is harder. To fix serious problems,
one needs complex tools and specific knowledge that is almost beyond
the reach of the common man.

So I think that "automagic" things often tend to be harder
to understand and much harder to fix.

But so far, Ubuntu is actually *more* "automagic" than Windows
but more open, easier to understand and easier to fix (Windows
is a badly documented black box).

And a Gentoo desktop is easier to understand and fix than Ubuntu.
Specially if the user selected simple software such as Xfce or,
even simpler, LXDE.
Of course, you can theorize that at least part of this impression of
mine is caused by me being used to my simple no-hal no-nothing LXDE
Gentoo desktop and me being unfamiliar with Ubuntu.


Regards,
    Jorge

-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free. --Linus Torvalds

[gentoo-user] Re: KDE 4.2.1 : goodbye & good riddance

[7v5w7go9ub0o]

Jorge Morais wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:56:20 -0700 Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
>  wrote:
> 
>> While not a KDE user I echo your thoughts. I'm personally a bit 
>> worried about Gentoo overlords sort of pushing this hald thing with
>>  reasons like 'Gnome's automounting depends on it'.
> Where have you got that from? I have not heard of that. I don't use 
> hal either, and I have -hal in /etc/make.conf
> 
>> I started in Linux about 12 years ago and the best environment for 
>> my needs at that time (audio recording, 32 channels of live audio,
>>  real-time kernels, Ardour, etc.) was fluxbox. Low overhead. Easily
>>  customizable. Every time I get fed up with Gnome I go back to 
>> fluxbox. Takes a few minutes to build, not hours like Gnome or days
>>  like KDE. Not a great environment for my wife and kids, so they
>> get Gnome.
> I have used Xfce at version 4.4.2 (or 4.4.3, I don't remember) and I 
> think it has a lot of user-friendliness. And it is even similar to 
> GNOME, so GNOME users will feel at home. I think Xubuntu is a good 
> example of a well put together Xfce desktop. I don't agree with every
>  Xubuntu choice for default apps, but it is a great start if you want
>  to build a user-friendly, lightweight, customizable desktop with
> Xfce plus the right applications. So if you like simplicity and 
> lightweight, but think your wife won't like fluxbox, give Xfce a try.
>  Maybe even fluxbox could be configured and combined with the right 
> applications to be easy to use, but starting with Xfce would probably
>  be much easier (I say "probably" because I have never performed 
> either of these tasks). On the other hand, maybe you should continue 
> giving GNOME to your wife simply because GNOME is much more common 
> than Xfce and, by knowing GNOME, she is more likely to know how to 
> use another GNU/Linux computer, and if she needs technical support 
> from, say, the ISP, the technicians are more likely to know GNOME and
>  Xfce.
> 
> For the record, I have moved from Xfce to LXDE because I am a speed 
> freak and also a simplicity freak. More on simplicity below.
> 
>> I hope the future of Linux desktops doesn't look anything like 
>> Windows. Sometimes it seems to me we're moving too far that 
>> direction too fast.
> I get that feeling too. When I use Ubuntu and something fails, 
> sometimes I feel it is hard to diagnose and fix the problem. Maybe 
> this is the cost of things being "automagic": when it works, great, 
> but when it doesn't work, you've got to be a wizard to fix it.
> 
> Car analogy: A person with mediocre knowledge of car mechanics can 
> understand how a classical car works, and doesn't complain that the 
> transmission is manual. He can even fix simple problems. A person 
> with good knowledge of car mechanics can even fix more serious 
> problems, because the car is simple, and many of its parts can be 
> serviced by an interested man.
> 
> But a modern car... With all of its automatic transmission and 
> everything, one does not even need mediocre knowledge to drive it; 
> but to understand how it works is hard. To fix simple problems is 
> harder. To fix serious problems, one needs complex tools and specific
>  knowledge that is almost beyond the reach of the common man.
> 
> So I think that "automagic" things often tend to be harder to 
> understand and much harder to fix.
> 
> But so far, Ubuntu is actually *more* "automagic" than Windows but 
> more open, easier to understand and easier to fix (Windows is a badly
>  documented black box).
> 
> And a Gentoo desktop is easier to understand and fix than Ubuntu. 
> Specially if the user selected simple software such as Xfce or, even 
> simpler, LXDE. Of course, you can theorize that at least part of this
>  impression of mine is caused by me being used to my simple no-hal 
> no-nothing LXDE Gentoo desktop and me being unfamiliar with Ubuntu.
> 
> 
> Regards, Jorge
> 

Heh..... Your overall "attitude", as suggested by the above, rang a
sympathetic sound with me.

So, I figured that even though LXDE couldn't be faster than my beloved
fluxbox, I'd at least give it a try.

WOW!

It (seems) *significantly* faster than flux both in initial loading, and
in the operation of windowed applications. Certain window activity (e.g.
lightning "alarms" on TBird) now display as intended (something that I
couldn't get working in FB).   Only downside ...may... be the
documentation; but everything is pretty intuitive so far. It stays.

Ditto everything you said.

Thanks!!!