Over at Practical Tech Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols suggests that it may be time for a fork of KDE, mostly because he doesn't believe that KDE 4.1 is heading in the right direction. It's obviously an interesting and emotional topic as the comments will attest. I'll quote a small portion of one of the comments. A writer who goes by burpnrun said, "I can understand the emotional investment that Asiego has in Kde4. But the article writer is correct: the desktop should not get in the way of the mainstream user’s productive needs, and that is what KDE4 does."
First of all, the Asiego (sic) in question is Aaron Seigo, a KDE luminary if ever there was one. The article writer is Stephen J. Vaughan-Nichols, a luminary in his own right -- of the tech-journalist variety. Now, Stephen may have said a lot more about KDE 4 in earlier postings but in this article, he points to one feature of one icon in one application. Not much to go on really. However, he does, indirectly, remind us of an important aspect of Linux and the world of FOSS (free and open source software).
When we talk about Linux and open source software, we invariably bring up the whole notion (and glory and burden) of choice. You can choose to run GNOME, or KDE (3.x or 4.x) or WindowMaker, or EvilWM, or whatever turns your crank. Or to put it another way, whatever helps you get your work done in a way that works best for you. Freedom is great! It's also damned inconvenient because you have to take a stand. Both Stephen and Aaron must be commended for their willingness to take a stand. Freedom reigns and we move forward.
Like SJVN, I have run numerous distributions and desktop environments and I move from one to the other with little fuss. I am one with pretty much all of this stuff. I run GNOME from time to time, but I prefer KDE. Heck, I still log into WindowMaker from time to time and nothing beats IceWM on some of the older machines I find myself using from time to time. However, I am one of the people who find KDE 4.1 so incredibly useful and so much more tuned to the way I want to work, that these days, I find myself longing for my KDE 4.1 desktop whenever I run anything else.
KDE 4.1 is a bold move; a fresh and exciting rethinking of the desktop. And frankly, it is (in my opinion) more than time the desktop was rethought. I honestly believe that the most exciting, innovative, and promising shift in the desktop has to be KDE 4.X (complete with all the new and sometimes seemingly odd changes) and I want to follow that excitement. That's part of the reason I went through my distro crisis of faith lately (I switched back to Mandriva, by the way).
All this discussion, and yes, criticism, is also good. Evolution doesn't just move forwards. It moves sideways, tries things here and there, abandons a few, then continues its move forwards. A few years from now, when we look back at the evolution of the computer desktop, I'm sure we'll be pointing to these discussions, and KDE 4, as part of that evolutionary process. Sitting here in July 2008, it's not all perfect and rosy, but things are not only a changin', they are a improvin', too.
And yes, that is my opinion.
-- Marcel
All I want is to keep using KDE 3 Indefinitely
That's not the same thing as a fork, is it? It's not reasonable to want to stand still and move forward at the same time. Just security updates, maybe a bug fix or two, and I can wish you guys all the best. I installed KDE 4.1, and I hate it, but I can see why lots of people are going to love it. Let me keep my desktop, and I can stop freaking out all over the web, and start wishing you all the best your awesome desktop. Linux needs KDE4, but I need KDE3.
Misunderstanding
I think you dev's aren't getting what we are saying. It's not so much that we don't believe KDE is heading in the right direction, it's that you haven't *showed us* that it's heading in the right direction.
For example, you write "I am one of the people who find KDE 4.1 so incredibly useful and so much more tuned to the way I want to work, that these days, I find myself longing for my KDE 4.1 desktop whenever I run anything else."
Can you show us *exactly* how KDE is so useful to you? I tried KDE 4 for about a week (about a month ago) but all I could find was "CPU sucking eye candy."
I'm probably wrong as you claim but the only thing you hear on the web is propaganda about how it's "going to change the world"...etc.
Choices, choices ...
Oh my.
I just left GNOME when I upgraded to hardy because I was totally fed up with having to watch for Mono and other tainted stuff like a hawk.
It was quite nice to get back to KDE (I was a Suse user for years until Novell bought them).
Now it seems that there's an unalterable law of nature that every GUI application (and that's all desktops are, let's face it, functionally rich though they be) must go the way of bloat and eye candy.
So I have a lot of sympathy for sjvn's attitude, but I don't think a fork is either necessary or desirable. KDE has gone as far as it sensibly can, I think. The situation is not unlike the birth, development, growth, and death of species - nothing lasts for ever, things just thrive for a while. I suspect KDE's near its peak, though of course I'm probably wrong.
Poisonally, I shall switch to Xfce, while that remains sufficiently lightweight and simple.
If that goes to the bad, I suspect something else will turn up. If not, then using just a simple Window Manager (IceWM, anyone?) woul;d be no great hardship.
Don't you love choices?
Yes, It's time for a Fork.
I understand and respect the fact that KDE 4.x works for you and the way you use your desktop. But it does not work for me or the way I use my desktop. And although you think that "things are not only a changin', they are improvin', too." With KDE 4.x, I think they're a makin' a Vista type slide down hill. (My opinion.) I don't need CPU cycle sucking eye candy. And I can decide for myself what I need on my desktop. So, I don't think it's out of line to fork it so you can work your way and I can work mine.
Stop making absurd statements, please.
- KDE4 platform is more than just "CPU cycle sucking eye candy". Go google nepomuk, solid, phonon, plasma (as in framework, not the desktop shell) and other KDE4 technologies.
- Why are all the critics so obsessed with Vista?
- You don't save your statements by "my opinion" kind of responsibility refusal.
- If you want to decide whats on your "desktop", then great, the folderview will let you decide much more then the old way (read: multiple folders (even through KIO) on multiple containments versus one folder on one containment in the old desktop metaphor).
So please, don't make fool of yourself. Go grab 4.1, learn something about it and then post your comments. Or just use KDE3.5 and wait until your distribution prepares fine tuned KDE4.x desktop.
That is your right.
I can't believe the comments that I have read today. KDE has and always will be a good desktop due to hard work from the devs.
There is no need to start making comments about KDE 4.X as it is not even a finished product yet. Wait til it is finished before you let your mouth run amok, making absurd and unfounded comments on the direction and usability of the product.
Jim