A few words about the Quality of KDE 4.2

[Thierry de Coulon]

Mepis 8 includes KDE 3.5.9 or 3.5.10, I'm not sure. Warren made the right 
choice. I don't blame KDE developpers for taking time to get 4.x stable, and 
I have lived through the early KDE stages (started with 0.4), but I think 
_may_ mistakes were made:

- the advantages of the new KDE were and are not clearly explained (I for one 
don't see them).
- KDE 4 as a Beta class software could only disappoint KDE 3 users.
- why are distribution forcing KDE as the main (if not only) desktop when it's 
not ripe?

What can I say to people who tell me that "Linux" is not ready for mainstream 
use if what they experiences was KDE 4.2 ? We should have had KDE 3.5.x as 
the "stable" branch until4.x has reached comparable stability.

I don't like Gnome so much, but for the time being, any distribution that 
goes "KDE 4.x only" will be blacklisted for me. I do hope 4.x some day is 
usable like 3.5.x is.

Thierry

On Monday 16 March 2009, Rick Miles wrote:
> > Even though I'm really sad about the stability of KDE these days. For
> > explaining why, i want to describe a common use case for me an many many
> > other users.
(...)
> > Please don't get me wrong. I love KDE4. I'm with it since the 4.0 betas.
> > It's a damned cool peace of software and has sooo much potential.  And I
> > really love to use it because of the very much genial things it offers.
> > Kudos to all developers for that.
(...)
> That being said I also believe that distribution packagers should take some
> responsibility for what they package for their users, especially if their
> users have purchased their initial install disks and then upgrade to newer
> software from a officially sanctioned repository expecting it to run as it
> was intended/expected.

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.