[kde-linux] In KDE4, to set a different background for each of the multiple desktops

[Stan Goodman]

At 23:08:36 on Wednesday Wednesday 23 December 2009, Dale 
<rdalek1967 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Felix Miata wrote:
> > On 2009/12/23 14:45 (GMT-0500) James Loughner composed:
> >> Stan Goodman wrote:
> >>> Right you are. I will continue to examine that facility, which I
> >>> currently regard as useless FOR ME.
> >>
> >> LOL It is useless to you because you have not yet seen the light.
> >
> > As many won't, since it's hidden in an unintuitive maze.
> >
> >> After all who needs microwave ovens or cell phones??
> >
> > If you want the healthiest possible cooked food, you don't cook it in
> > a microwave oven.
> >
> > There is no cell service where I live, while where I live has
> > everything else I need. Plus, I prefer wires, so that less radiated
> > energy has an opportunity to invade my body uninvited.
> >
> > KDE3 was, and remains, to many, the 2nd best desktop environment,
> > trailing only IBM's WPS. Calling KDE4 KDE at all, at least through
> > the latest GM release, is little short of an abomination to a _lot_
> > of experienced KDE3 users.
> >
> > It's hard to believe the amount of mailing list traffic just this one
> > single subject has generated across the panoply of KDE4 incarnations
> > in the popular distros including it in place of KDE3.
>
> While I like some of KDE 4, if I could just stick with KDE 3, I would
> do just that.  KDE 3 works for me and I am already used to using it as
> well.  KDE 4 doesn't, at least not yet.
>
> I think KDE 4 should have been something different too.  KDE 3 should
> have been maintained longer EVEN IF KDE 4 was going to replace KDE 3.
> People on the Gentoo lists mentioned the same thing.  It's not a drop
> in replacement or a upgrade.  It's a whole new thing.  It's not a "new"
> thing like M$ claims theirs to be either.  Their new thing sucks with a
> new shine on the front.  lol
>
> I sincerely hope KDE does a better job with KDE 5.  I have read where
> several people have switched away form KDE because of the way this was
> done.  KDE 3 was dropped before KDE 4 was even off to a good stable
> start.  At least that is my opinion anyway.  For me, KDE 4 is still not
> ready.
>
> Dale

The excuse is that KDE doesn't have the resources to both maintain KDE3 
and develop KDE4. That's a copout. Normal people, faced with such an 
artificial dilemma, would conclude that the development has to be 
sacrificed, or continued on a back burner, to avoid the inevitable result 
of pulling the rug out from under users, with no real replacement 
available.

The reason a different decision was made is that the development team, in 
a terminal case of hubris, took the attitude that they work for nothing, 
and therefore are in a position to enjoy their hobby with no thought of 
what people want. Their attitude is wrong because they have, by dint of 
having produced an excellent desktop (KDE3) achieved a dominant position 
in the Linux desktop market, and then betrayed their users who, it turns 
out, DO have an alternative.

And no, forcing "The Future" on people who are content with dealing with 
the present and letting The Future arrive at its own pace is not what 
anybody anticipated or will tolerate, even for cool stuff.

And it isn't as if KDE3 would not have profited from some work. If they 
felt underemployed, they might have, as others have suggested, taken a 
good look at the OS/2 Workplace.

-- 
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel