Fwd: Installation Problems and Useability
eliwap at newmail.net
Sat Aug 24 08:58:31 BST 2002
> > That's OK I running Redhat 7.2 and Redhat compiled the kde libraries
> > with funny names. but the one that really got me was that
> > kdebase-3.0.3-7 required kdelibs-3.0.3-10 or higher which of course
> > does not exist. I realize that this is a Redhat problem, but...
> What but...? If you know that this is a Redhat problem then it's
> probably time for changing to another distribution.
But this reflects very badly on KDE
> > Having an installation as big as KDE and having the libraries
> > dynamically linked is a real pain in the butt and is creating a major
> > mess for you guys and for me. I think it would be a good idea to get
> > your libraries statically linked. Why?... Because it would make the
> > release of bug fixes much easier.
> And it would blow up each of the 300+ KDE application which I have
> installed from a few tens or hundreds KBytes to several MBytes. Just
> have a look at Netscape Communicators size. Now multiply ths size by
> 300. Do you really want to download several KDE programs of this size?
If the applications are worth installing and using then it really doesn't
matter how big the app is. I don't need nor do I want most of the
applications that come with KDE. Why can't I get KDE desktop without the rest
of the extras and then install the extras later if I want them. The base
Windows Manager should not be dependant on "plugins" that should be "plugged
in" if I want them without having to recompile everything. I use some KDE
apps, some gnome apps, some java apps, Star Office 5.2 because nothing on
Linux has the feature set that 5.2 has - heck I even have a vmware running
windows because of a unique consideration. Make KDE platform independant of
any of the screw ups that a distro is making. At least, provide people with a
this fail safe option.
Please don't take this the wrong way Linux has afforded me a completely legal
software base when it comes to day to day computing and KDE is the lynch pin
for me that makes Linux a very useable desktop environment. However ... one
of the things that can be said of Windoz is that when the bug fixes come from
MS one has to double click on it. It installs and it works. This is the one
thing that is really missing from Linux as a desktop environment. What the
really good KDE apps have is that once the installation is complete and the
applications are working then those apps really are well laid out and
relatively easy to use. The base useability issues are really resolved.
Whether an icon is animated or the kicker bar is transparent really doesn't
add anything to KDE's useability, though it is cool.
In my opinion its time to stop adding features to KDE when you still have bugs
to iron out. Concentrate on getting the bugs worked out. Standardize the User
Interface and find a way to get the KDE installed independant of the distros.
So that the bug fixes can be installed quickly and easily. Then complete the
feature set for KOffice. This would be the windoz killer on the Linux
desktop. And once that is done then KDE can become cooler than it already is.
I have tried several distros, including SUSE, Mandrake and Redhat. The Redhat
distros -- at least for me -- have been the easiest to install, and manage.
Up to KDE 3.0 I have had no problems running and installing KDE.
Once again... thanks for your consideration.
More information about the kde-core-devel