A look at GNOME 2.14, comparison to KDE

[Anders Storsveen]

Kurt Pfeifle wrote:
> On Monday 20 February 2006 21:54, Iñaki wrote:
>   
>> El Lunes, 20 de Febrero de 2006 22:21, Aaron J. Seigo escribió:
>>     
>>>> and the "Services" tab with
>>>> Fonts and Printers information??
>>>>         
>>> people actually find this useful.
>>>       
>> Not the people I know. Konqueror is a web browser and file browser. 
>>     
>
> No, you are wrong. At least partially wrong. It's what you *think* it 
> is. And you think so (only these two roles) because you compare it with 
> other apps, which you knew before you came into touch with Konqueror.
>
> And yes, you are also right. At least partially. Konqueror indeed can
> act as a web browser (and a damn good one at that). As well as for a 
> file browser/manager.
>
> But you'll be shocked to see what Konqueror shows you if you type into
> its address bar other things. Start simply:
>
>   man:/cupsaddsmb
>
> A man page reader! O my god, bloat!
>
>   info:/ls
>
> A GNU info format browser. Even more bloat!
>
>   fish://kpfeifle@linuxprinting.org
>
> Oh, a graphical remote SSH browser! Why can't we have separate tools
> for each of these tasks??
>
>   webdavs://mediacenter.gmx.net/
>
> A remote WEBDAV file manager that is able to encrypt all traffic.
> B.L.O.A.T!
>   
now you're just being a bitch :D the problem wasn't too much
functionality, it was too much ugliness, like too much buttons. we
wouldn't want to have a button for each of those, open man page open
fish open this open that...

>   smb://workgroup/windows_xp_box/my_share
>
> Uhmm... a client for accessing Windows file shares. What is that good
> for? Out with it from Konqueror, out!
>
> And "settings:/", "applications:/", "help:/konqueror", "help:/konsole",
> and "fonts:/" to name a few more... ?
>
> In reality Konqueror is not bloated at all. Konqueror is very thin, and
> very lean. Konqueror is "only" an empty shell. An empty shell which is
> able to load other programs ("kparts") into itself and into its tabs so 
> that the user can access them from one place.
>
> And as such Konqueror is an extremely powerful tool in the hands of the
> knowledgable user. Many users just happen to know about the two profiles 
> ("web" and local files) you named (if at all).
>
> Of course, you and everyone is free to only use Konqueror for one of its 
> purposes (like web browsing), and ignore or even hide the rest. Just 
> don't ever click on the "home" icon and you will never get to see Konqui's 
> file management abilities (or weaknesses if that is your opionion). Best, 
> remove that icon from the top tool bar; and remove it for your users too, 
> if you happen to be an administrator who does not want his users "abuse"
> a web browser for file management...
>
> My defense of Konqueror does *not* mean that we and KDE couldn't 
> improve a lot in the next stage of development, and that we could not
> learn a lot from looking at other people's work -- Apple, Microsoft,
> Gnome. [They also look at ours... and honestly, in some respects we
> are *leading* the pack, not trailing behind!] 
>
> It means that we should not throw the baby out with the bath water.
> To simply elevate that one principle "let's get rid of 40% of icons,
> 70% of lines and borders, and all 'extra' widgets" into the First Holy
> Commandment will not make things better.
>
> KDE has 2 thirds of Linux desktop users behind it. 
>
> And a large percentage of those have *choosen* it by their *own* will, 
> and have not been ordered by their bosses or husbands to use it. There 
> must be a reason for this, no? -- Can you imagine that a quite 
> significant minority of KDE users are even "fans" for their desktop 
> platform? And that this is mainly because of the power and of the 
> configurability it provides to them?
>
> Taking away things like this will surely alienate the most powerful 
> allies KDE has (the "active" and outspoken part of our current userbase)
> but will not automatically winning new users in turn.
>
> I completely agree with all efforts to "polish" the UI and make it 
> more pretty, and even with removing buttons *for the default*, "first
> start" view. But do not take away my option to re-add it for my own
> personal desktop!
>
> Don't forget a few other things:
>
> * Usability, quality and "giving a professional impression" is not 
>   only tagged to the polish level for toolbars and icons. It is
>   also about things like user documentation. If you are not a coder, 
>   or a graphic designer, you may be able to help writing manuals, 
>   FAQs, articles; triage bug reports; make educational movies, adopt 
>   an application and make its "WhatsThis" help items complete; help 
>   look after the *huge* amount of content of the KDE web sites...
>
> * KDE4 will give the oportunity to go much beyond petty "icon this, 
>   toolbar that, border there" discussions. What are your ideas here?
>   Completely new ideas? Ideas that go way beyond what was done by 
>   anybody in desktop computing before? Yes, it is not easy. If we 
>   find 2 or 3 major new concepts for UI designs, we will probably be 
>   very lucky + successful. And below that Olymp, someone will still 
>   have to make pretty all the icons and toolbars and how they blend 
>   together...
>
> Cheers,
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> kde-quality mailing list
> kde-quality at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-quality
>