Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

KDE 3.5 Fork Trinity Releases First Major Update

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the new-and-improved dept.

KDE 161

First time accepted submitter Z_God writes "Disappointed with KDE 4's performance and other shortcomings, Timothy Pearson continued KDE 3.5 development under the name Trinity. Tuesday the first major update of the Trinity Desktop Environment was released providing an alternative upgrade path for KDE users that do not feel comfortable with KDE 4. The Trinity Desktop Environment should provide a fast and familiar experience for all users expecting a traditional desktop environment. Packages are available for Debian, Ubuntu and Fedora from the Trinity project site."

cancel ×

161 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924208)

Long live KDE 3.5. I love it.

Re:Great! (1)

Stachybotris (936861) | about 2 years ago | (#37924288)

You know, if I still had my old laptop I'd give this a try. I always found KDE3.5 to be a *Very* friendly way to introduce people to Linux. It was Window-like enough that they could intuit their way around the menus. Then again, the wife's laptop doesn't quite have enough power for the KDE4 environment... Might be worth checking out. If only the site weren't already slashdotted...

Someone please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924366)

Someone please fork GNOME 2 and continue it. GNOME 3 and Unity are both unusable, while GNOME 2 rocks.

Re:Someone please... (4, Informative)

RDW (41497) | about 2 years ago | (#37924538)

Someone did:

https://github.com/Perberos/Mate-Desktop-Environment [github.com]
http://k3rnel.net/2011/06/22/bluebubble-the-fine-manual/ [k3rnel.net]

Not sure how much mileage there is in these, though. Working on upgrading the crippled 'fallback' mode of Gnome 3 to something a bit closer to the Gnome 2 Panel might be more worthwhile in the long run. Meanwhile, there's Xfce.

Re:Someone please... (1)

Patch86 (1465427) | about 2 years ago | (#37925562)

Personally, I'm an XFCE convert. The Xubuntu variant looks and feels very similar to the classic GNOME 2 Ubuntu, it's not overly flashy looking (I don't want my GUI to dazzle, I want it to stay out of my applications' way), and it's relatively hardware friendly. It's not as diligent about being slim as it used to be- but that's not necessarily a bad thing when I'm trying to use it as a full desktop environment on modern hardware.

Although I've never tried GNOME 3. Not a big fan of Unity for normal usage, although it probably suits my small-screen devices (netbooks etc.) well enough.

Re:Someone please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924562)

This has already happened - the fork runs under the name of MATE [github.com] .

Re:Great! (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 2 years ago | (#37924622)

I certainly respect and will always cherish 3.5, but the new 4.xes aren't that bad either. I'm betting that by KDE 5 and GNOME 4, the K Desktop Environment will have a fairly masterful market share once more.

Re:Great! (1)

Lord Lode (1290856) | about 2 years ago | (#37925548)

Yay, thanks Trinity team!!

Re:Great! (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#37926344)

Somehow, the Trinity link above seems to be a dead link

Trinity 3.5 (-1)

loftwyr (36717) | about 2 years ago | (#37924260)

Because some people have trouble letting go...

I'm sure it's a wonderful set (although a bit slow getting to the page) but there has been so much improvement in the toolkits. Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?

Re:Trinity 3.5 (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924324)

Why do you hate freedom? A major point of open source is so that if you're dissatisfied with the direction a vendor goes, you can fork and maintain locally. That's what's going on here. You don't have to fucking use it, jerk.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924490)

Oh yeah, well I'm going to fork Trinity to make it more like KDE 4!

Re:Trinity 3.5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925104)

Why do you hate freedom? A major point of open source is so that if you're dissatisfied with the direction a vendor goes, you can fork and maintain locally. That's what's going on here. You don't have to fucking use it, jerk.

Uhh... seems clear he doesn't use it.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924392)

Because some people have trouble letting go...

I'm sure it's a wonderful set (although a bit slow getting to the page) but there has been so much improvement in the toolkits. Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?

One can still use the behind the scenes improvements in QT while maintaining a usable GUI.
Kudos to the trinity developers. I just whish some developers would fork Gnome 2 and give the kiss of death to the Gnome 3 project.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

Arker (91948) | about 2 years ago | (#37924550)

Kudos to the trinity developers. I just whish some developers would fork Gnome 2 and give the kiss of death to the Gnome 3 project

Gnome 2 is the root of the problem, actually. Gnome 3 is just following the (flawed) decisions and judgements that lead to Gnome 2 to their logical conclusions. If you really want a useable Gnome you need to go back to Tranquilty and fork from there.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924448)

Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?

Because change is NOT always good.

The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop. It's supposed to take priority. I have never experienced the level of outright frustration as when the KDE Plasma Weather Widget got stuck in a constant crash-restart loop and the KDE Crash Reporter burnt up all my RAM (in addition to stealing focus constantly.) In KDE 3.5 I could've simply killed the widget process. But in KDE4, no, I can;t, because killing the widget process wipes out my launcher, my desktop icons, my taskbar - all the critical system components I need to even do so much as load a damn terminal to kill the widget. Yes, I know, Ctrl-Alt-F2, but having to deal with that in the first place is just the solution that proves there's a problem.

I now run GNOME2. I tried GNOME3, Unity, and even KDE4. And I mean for 2-3 weeks each. I couldn't stand any of them. It's not that each has their little annoyances. I mean, GNOME2 is slap full of those as well. Rather, my issue with the latest generation of WMs is simply that they're growing more and more devoid of choice. Want a launcher on the left side? Good luck! Maybe loading another separate desktop widget system? Why would you want that?! Every little thing I try to do, these new WMs tell me "I can't do that." I'm not using GNOME2 because I love the eye candy (I prefer the LOOK of GNOME3, actually.) I'm using it because every time I want to do something that's not the default, GNOME2 lets me do it. It's the "have it your way" WM. Nothing in the latest generation actually offers that level of freedom-as-in-choice.

When the taskbar and program launcher (preferably a menu) in KDE4 is its own separate process, THEN I'll try it again. Critical system components should NOT be freaking widgets! That is dumb. And I will not upgrade to "dumber and choice-less" just because it looks pretty, else I could just go get a Mac.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (2)

Noughmad (1044096) | about 2 years ago | (#37924714)

The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop. It's supposed to take priority.

And by "the desktop" you probably mean "a folder". I don't know about you, but my real wooden desktop doesn't look like a folder at all. Instead, it's filled with post-it notes, pencils, sometimes a notebook, a computer, a phone, a lamp and a Rubik cube. In short, it's filled with gadgets.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (2)

Arker (91948) | about 2 years ago | (#37924972)

It may be filled with gadgets, but it doesnt crash and burn just because a pencil tip gets broken off.

"The Desktop" is and has always been nothing but a very poor metaphor anyway. Get your damn desktop off my root window! ;)

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

byuu (1455609) | about 2 years ago | (#37925130)

One of the worst trends in computing is trying to make real-world analogies to everything. Who cares what the real top of your desk looks like? Your desk is not a personal computer, and vice versa.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924768)

WM

I think you mean DE. WMs these days are very flexible.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

Urban Garlic (447282) | about 2 years ago | (#37924928)

So you probably know this already, but for the benefit of similarly-minded but less-knowledgeable readers, there are many desktop environments for Linux -- open source breeds choice, after all.

We're mostly a KDE shop where I work, but there are users using xfce, fvwm, and xmonad here, and one who swears by gnome, but launches it from KDM, because our system has its big warning banner set up for KDM but not GDM or XDM.

So if they end-of-life gnome2 out from under you, you still have options.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

vurian (645456) | about 2 years ago | (#37924948)

No, killing the plasma-desktop process does not kill all your chance to start a terminal: krunner is a separate process, so alt-f2 will give you the minicli and you can start anything you want.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (2)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#37925480)

He acknowledged that, had you cared to read a few more sentences before jumping to reply.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

vurian (645456) | about 2 years ago | (#37926316)

No, he did not. He talked about ctrl-alt-f2, which goes to a text console, not alt-f2, which opens krunner, aka the minicli, right inside the X11 session. You'd realized that, had you cared to read both his and my post before jumping to reply. Toodle-pip.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

bmo (77928) | about 2 years ago | (#37925208)

>The desktop should not be a widget, gadget, or any other form of "app" because it's the desktop

Former OS/2 user here.

The Desktop should be an object just like any other object in the environment.

I take umbrage with your insistence that the root window is somehow special.

Also, your rant is otherwise so full of holes I will stop there since I would wind up writing a dissertation.

--
BMO - former KDE4 hater.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (5, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | about 2 years ago | (#37924452)

Why do we have to fight change every step of the way?

Because not all change is good?

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

Zancarius (414244) | about 2 years ago | (#37924588)

Because not all change is good?

KDE 4.7 is actually quite nice.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 2 years ago | (#37924680)

Good for you? Not everyone agrees, though.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (2)

SomePgmr (2021234) | about 2 years ago | (#37925422)

And that's fine. Some people hate Gnome 3, while I happen to like it. I have no objection to anyone that wants to use older stuff, or new forks of older stuff.

But as is usually the case, the shouting is largely unidirectional. "Zomg, new shit sucks, it's totally unusable, I'm never going to use this, you're all jerks if you like it, get off my lawn."

It's a grating and juvenile process. Every time something gets an overhaul, everyone screams that "new isn't better", as if that's insightful. We all know that, and they are trying to make something better. If something is genuinely broken, file a bug report. If you just don't like it, that's fine too. There's no reason we can't be civil about it.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

bky1701 (979071) | about 2 years ago | (#37924750)

Sure it is. It still is half as responsive as 3 was for me (on older hardware, even), feels clunky and unpolished, and still has not returned some of the features I used KDE 3 for. KDE 4 is a step backwards towards Windows, not a step forward, and I am certain that KDE 5 will be worse.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924526)

I'm not opposed to change, but I invariably want that change to be an improvement. I don't use KDE, but I tried using Unity. It frustrated me at every step. Every time I wanted to do something, I found it either couldn't be done, or that I had to look for nasty workarounds. After a whole hour, I gave up.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

Fri13 (963421) | about 2 years ago | (#37924842)

I love that users can actually continue using their loving software, even if corporation or community what is responsible maintaining the software is heading own direction.

I love KDE4 more than KDE 3.5 and that is because the speed and simplicity with great amount of features and now since 4.7 there is more than what 3.5 had. I have even ran 4.7 on old AMD Athlon 1800Mhz, 1 Gigabyte RAM with Nvidia GT4xxx and it just worked fine without problems. The HDD was bottleneck and when I tried SSD on it by swapping such to it with IDE adapter it just blow my mind out how fast KDE 4.7 has come from 4.0-4.2 versions.

People still don't like to give a change for newer KDE but it is their miss. They have rights to stick with KDE 3.5 if they want but I dont see a point on it so much.

I hope the Trinity 3.5 will get new ideas and features what can be added later then to 4.x or 5.x series if they are great and innovative.

Re:Trinity 3.5 (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#37926382)

Is the Trinity version# going to be 3.5, or 1.0, or something else? How do they plan to increment it? As for the name, I thought that a name like QDE (for Qt based DE) would have been more suggestive.

Looks nice. (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | about 2 years ago | (#37924282)

I might give this a try. One of the reasons I stopped using KDE was because it was painfully slow on my poor laptop.

Re:Looks nice. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924734)

What kind of a laptop is that? The only thing in my house that could not run it is an old laptop that even has trouble with Gnome2.

QT 3.x still required? (1)

IBJamon (837087) | about 2 years ago | (#37924306)

I assume QT 3.x is still required. While it's technically Free software and all that, the subsequent additional freeing (LGPL) of QT 4.x in my mind makes it a lot more relevant. If that's the case, is there hope that this team would attempt to port Trinity to QT 4 in the future? Now THAT would really turn heads, at least in my opinion. I'd use it in a heartbeat.

Re:QT 3.x still required? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924396)

Porting from 3 to 4 is not hard, it just takes time. Lots of typing. I've done it on commercial applications, without even using the 3->4 porting classes. So let's hope they concentrate on porting to Qt 4.x, I think that would make Trinity a bona-fide fork with a real future, even if no major changes are ever really introduced.

QT 4 still buggy and slow compared to QT 3? (1)

IBJamon (837087) | about 2 years ago | (#37924414)

I hate to reply to myself, but it looks like it was started but stalled due to QT 4 bugs and slowness. I found this through the slashdotted project roadmap. Is it really that much worse? Can anyone speak to this?

Re:QT 4 still buggy and slow compared to QT 3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924596)

Yes.
Qt4 IS that bad. the lead developer has put it off to fix more important problems. its slow, buggy as hell. There is no QA from nokia. it's terrible.

end of discussion :P

I don't see why Qt3 is irrelevant? it works, its fast, it's EXTREMELY stable.

Re:QT 4 still buggy and slow compared to QT 3? (2)

BlueLightning (442320) | about 2 years ago | (#37925272)

Totally unsubstantiated claims. And FYI, porting something from Qt3 to Qt4 is not just a matter of switching libraries; painting among other things has to be done in a different way. This is one of the reasons why Plasma was written from scratch instead of porting Kicker in the first place.

Re:QT 4 still buggy and slow compared to QT 3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37926232)

So instead of just rewriting the paint routines everything had to be rewritten from scratch? lolwut?

Re:QT 4 still buggy and slow compared to QT 3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924618)

I only use Qt 4 personally, but I've never encountered show-stopping bugs with it.

There was a bug in Phonon that caused me to switch to GStreamer for a while, but they fixed it some time ago.

Can't really say anything about slowness as I haven't had the time to learn Qt 3 or GTK+ as a comparison. (Something is screwed up with GTK's scrolling, though, it seems to lag a lot on my system if I scroll too much... Like in a web browser. Compare uzbl and Arora to see what I mean, uzbl seems to stop responding under heavy scrolling whereas Arora is unaffected. Firefox used to have this, they may have worked around it.)

Re:QT 3.x still required? (1)

TheCycoONE (913189) | about 2 years ago | (#37924430)

They are porting everything to use an abstraction layer (I believe called TQ), which they in turn hope to port to QT 4, but it's a long process.

Re:QT 3.x still required? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925292)

Oh good idea. Qt is an abstraction, or an abstraction, of an abstraction. Let's add another abstraction on top. Sorry... what was that about "bloated".

Re:QT 3.x still required? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925488)

Yo dawg! We abstracted your abstraction layer of an abstraction layer so now you can abstract your abstracted abstraction, yo!

TFYFY.

Re:QT 3.x still required? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924792)

They say that as of this release, they are the new official maintainers of Qt3.
However, I believe they intend to move to Qt4 eventually.

Too bad there's no easy way... (1)

ToiletBomber (2269914) | about 2 years ago | (#37924402)

...to get even earlier versions :P For some reason that I can only attribute to nostalgia, I've always wanted to use KDE 1 and KDE 2.

Re:Too bad there's no easy way... (1)

santosh.k83 (2442182) | about 2 years ago | (#37924870)

Me too. Loved the GNOME desktop that came with Linux Mandrake sometime around 2001 or 02. Those were the days. Desktops were lean, clean and got out of your way. These days logging into either of the big two (KDE, GNOME) desktops is like walking into a fair; lots of noise and eye-candy, making you gawp and try to find your way around...

Re:Too bad there's no easy way... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#37925582)

I've not used gnome 3, but KDE 4 hardly feels that way. I get around just as well (if not better) than I did in 3.x

Re:Too bad there's no easy way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37926100)

I was a big fan of KDE1. It was very minimal but it was rock solid and extremely snappy. If you were a console person, it was great. At the time, I was running from my home account on a large LAN. I would set it up for those that asked. The network default was CDE. Needless to say, a well-configured KDE1 blew CDE out of the water. I had many takers. (Ooooooo how I loathed Sun's desktop's attempts.)

KDE2 was something of a slow starter and I never really liked it much. The early releases were extremely sluggish. This was slowly improving but then 3.0 come out. When I think of KDE2, I think of bouncing mouse animations that seem to actually bog down the CPU a bit to do. KDE 3 was not very much different from 2 but it run much better.

Continue GNOME 2? (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#37924408)

Great news about KDE3.5.

Now could we get a continuation of Gnome2?

We could call it Old Gnome Users of America [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Continue GNOME 2? (1)

Chonnawonga (1025364) | about 2 years ago | (#37924636)

It's happening. Check out the Mate project. Linux Mint is considering using it in future releases.

Re:Continue GNOME 2? (2)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#37924760)

Thanks for sharing. Here's the link for it I found:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/MATE [archlinux.org]

I like polish and a good-looking desktop, but functionality comes first, and I basically just want to be able to work, not wonder what the flavor of the week desktop is now.

good name (2)

kimvette (919543) | about 2 years ago | (#37924454)

Trinity is a good name for it, because the server got nuked!

Re:good name (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37926292)

Yeah, but I'd've liked "Keanu Reeves" more!

gone in 3 posts? (4, Funny)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 2 years ago | (#37924494)

Nepomuk must be indexing the files on his server right now.

Bring back CmdrTaco (0)

gentryx (759438) | about 2 years ago | (#37924534)

...and stop posting irrelevant stories like this on the front page. KDE 4.0 was horrible, yes, but it's not like KDE 4 development was halted. The latest release is 4.7 and it's much more stable and feature rich than 3.5 ever was.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (2)

Zancarius (414244) | about 2 years ago | (#37924672)

...and stop posting irrelevant stories like this on the front page. KDE 4.0 was horrible, yes, but it's not like KDE 4 development was halted. The latest release is 4.7 and it's much more stable and feature rich than 3.5 ever was.

The problem is that Slashdot, like most other communities, tends to hold onto widely accepted opinions even if they aren't currently true (or correct). Like you, I agree: Early KDE 4 releases weren't up to par, but 4.7 is very, very well done. But, because there's this preconceived notion that anything KDE 4 is terrible, the myth is perpetuated ad infinitum.

Of course, there's also the group that wants to run it on 6+ year old hardware, even though there's 1) plenty of light weight projects that will work on old hardware and 2) other OSes like Windows 7 likely won't work well on very old hardware either.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 2 years ago | (#37924856)

Or, you know, people have different tastes and opinions from you? No, can't be. It has to be just myths and FUD, right?

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925380)

Yeah, some people are of the opinion that development stopped at KDE 4.0 and no progress has been made since. They formed an opinion 3 years ago and they'll be damned if they're going to be reasonable now. Incorrect use of the term 'FUD' qualifies as FUD, right?

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 2 years ago | (#37925502)

So what? Why do you care? Is your life that pathetic that you really get so worked up that someone doesn't like the same thing as you?

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925670)

Worked up? Are you smoking something?

Oh yeah, it is very well done (2)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#37925006)

So please explain WHY in godsname KDE insists on copying a movie file from a samba share before playing it in a capable player? That is just plain annoying on small files but when you are talking about 20gb files it is just plain silly. This kind of thing is so fucking basic and since the same player can just play from the share with other desktops it is a complete and utter failure on the KDE team to prioritize on basic functionality over bling.

KDE dropped the ball. Polishing a turned over several releases so it shines a bit more still means you got a turd.

You are talking like a stockholm beating, believing your captor is becoming your friend because the beatings have gotten slightly less regular.

Using Samba as your file server... (0, Troll)

gentryx (759438) | about 2 years ago | (#37925128)

...disqualifies you as a technical reviewer. Sorry. KDE isn't bad just because you can't get it to work with your Windows compatibility network setup.

Re:Using Samba as your file server... (1)

tibit (1762298) | about 2 years ago | (#37925314)

There is nothing fundamentally wrong about using a samba share, sorry. That problem with KDE 4 persists no matter what sort of a share you're using: if it's not visible in the filesystem, there is usually no streaming. It sucks.

Re:Using Samba as your file server... (0)

gentryx (759438) | about 2 years ago | (#37925462)

Exactly my point: use the file system! Otherwise, you're still free to stream via other means. I use KDE, but stream using xine, which may very well stream from smb shares.

That said, I don't claim KDE was flawless. Clearly a system that copies a 20GB file just to play it once is rubbish in that matter, I'll grant you that.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (5, Informative)

impaledsunset (1337701) | about 2 years ago | (#37925158)

KDE 4.7 is up to par with what?

- Printing is not "up to par". KDE 3.5 used to have a printing system that anyone could envy, in KDE 4.x printing barely works (bug 180051)
- PIM is not "up to par". KDE 3.5 used to have a sync feature, a bit clumsy, but it worked. The sync feature in KDE 4.x is only available in SVN and barely works. And don't get me started with syncing with my phone...

And I could cite you the bug database all day, giving you an example of bugs that make features really uncomfortable to use. I am subscribed to at least a dozen bugs, all that affect my productivity, while in KDE 3.5 I had little or no issues.
- I have issues with network shares.
- I have issues with instant messaging (granted, some of them existed with 3.5, but the fixes were commited right before the KDE 4 fiasco started)
- I have issues with the text editors
- I have issues with using KDE over SSH
- I have issues with performance (maybe I should upgrade my ancient quad-core PC with 8 GB RAM)

Most of these are not fixed in 4.7, which is not available for all distros yet, so even if they were, it doesn't matter. You know, KDE 3.5 was stable, mature and polished. KDE used to be a pain in the ass, but with 3.5 all the issues slowly disappeared. It was already available everywhere, in all distros. KDE 4.7 just got out, and it's filled with issues I cursed KDE 3.3 or 3.4 for. Compared to KDE 3.5, KDE 4.7 is still crap. And slow.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37926362)

I have lost count of the number of times I have filed bug reports on the printing issue. In my opinion KDE 4 is still very much beta software and cannot be used in a professional office environment whilst these issues remain unaddressed. Shiny widgets are great but surely not at the expense of basic functionality.

Bring back 1920x1200 (2)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about 2 years ago | (#37925254)

Of course, there's also the group that wants to run it on 6+ year old hardware

This is posted from a laptop which is 8 years old, buddy. It runs Lubuntu 10.04 LTS, and rocks with it (LXDE). It was starting to suck a bit with Ubuntu 10.04 (Gnome 2) and with PCLinuxOS 2009 (KDE 3.something), but LXDE purged the bloat and revived the hardware.

other OSes like Windows 7 likely won't work well on very old hardware either.

In what way is that relevant? The laptop of which I spoke came with original XP (pre SP1), which ran OK on it, but sucked in so many ways (starting with the applications). I can't imagine running Win7 on it; probably more like staggering or slithering than running, actually.

So why don't I get a new laptop? Easy: this one has a nice 17" 1920x1200 display. All the new models (even from the same vendor) have nothing better than a shortscreen 1920x1080, if they even have that. The extra 120 vertical pixels are valuable.

Re:Bring back 1920x1200 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925484)

This is posted from a laptop which is 8 years old, buddy.

That doesn't actually earn you any bragging rights. It's an 8 year old laptop...that's so...dull, uninteresting, and mundane.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (2)

lpp (115405) | about 2 years ago | (#37924690)

I suppose it's silly of me to comment on this, but really, what is wrong with posting this? Okay, so 4.7 is available. Why does that invalidate someone else's effort to fork the 3.x branch? I think you're getting hung up on version-itis, the idea that a larger version number is inherently better, or in a less confrontational manner of putting it, that the changes in a higher version number inherently represent progress. Major version number changes are not necessarily better. Instead, think of it is significantly different. Yes, the point is to improve the system, but sometimes people disagree with the direction a project is taken on a subsequent major revision. Frankly, when people bitch about it, they are often told "if you dislike it so much, stick with the old version, it still works." Well, this guy took it to heart and is continuing development. As it happens, I think that's pretty freaking awesome.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

gentryx (759438) | about 2 years ago | (#37924902)

1. I've been using both, KDE 3 and 4 for years. I didn't make the switch because of "versionitis", but because 3.5 wasn't satisfying in various aspects (e.g. the broken menu editor, broken USB auto mounting, poor calendar storage format choices... I could continue this list endlessly).

2. What I'm questioning is not if "Trinity" is a good from a technical perspective, but the relevance of the project itself. People are free to do in their basements whatever they please, but not everything is worth being posted on such a high volume/high profile forum. This is a prime example. The work is irrelevant since the reason why it was started (KDE 4.0 did suck, after all) doesn't exist any longer (KDE 4.7 rocks). You'll never get enough manpower to keep up with KDE mainline. Thus, Trinity will trail behind, with the gap growing constantly. Just look other, larger projects: even Gnome is struggling to keep up the pace. The story just got posted because it triggered the right ./ buzzwords: Linux desktop and KDE 3.5 vs. 4.x.

3. Anyone who's used both, QT3 and QT4 will agree with me that QT4 was a huge step forward. E.g. the widget rendering infrastructure alone is now so much more elegant that it would be a reason to make the switch.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

sqldr (838964) | about 2 years ago | (#37925020)

what always annoyed me is the FUD that anything using 3D hardware is going to be slower. Maybe on a 2nd generation intel laptop model gfx chip, but you'd struggle to buy one. $5 can get you a basic GMA card well capable of it, and once you've offloaded your GFX to something which is -designed- to do that specific job, it's the opposite - it absolutely flies.

As for the "bloat" - people should try running top (or hitting ctrl-esc, since it's KDE). As the above says, QT4 is better than QT3, especially when it comes to memory footprint...

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (4, Insightful)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#37925048)

This story is extremely relevant to the Slashdot community. No doubt that KDE 4.7 is well-refined. However, KDE 4 and KDE 3 differ significantly in both how they are developed and how they are used. To have the KDE 3.5 forked into an actively-developed fork will not downplay KDE 4's significance nor its own active development. This just gives us users a choice between two considerably different desktop environments. People who like KDE 4 will stay with it, and people who don't like KDE 4 abandoned it a long time ago, so there's no harm done by keeping its predecessor alive under a different name.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

firewrought (36952) | about 2 years ago | (#37925876)

To have the KDE 3.5 forked into an actively-developed fork will not downplay KDE 4's significance nor its own active development. This just gives us users a choice between two considerably different desktop environments.

When you fork, you gain a choice and lose synergies. If Trinity gains steam, how much development effort will it pull away from KDE 4? How much energy will it take from application developers trying to target both platforms? Will Debian divert other packaging efforts to support this new desktop? And how much extra confusion or frustration will this add for Linux users? Choices you don't care about are, in fact, drawbacks [economist.com] .

I'm not arguing for or against the Trinity effort. Forks can bring value to the community, especially when solving a legal dispute, circumventing a stagnant core team, trying out something really innovative, or targeting a specialized set of interests. But fragmentation has a cost, and it's not as simple as saying more choices are always better.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

vurian (645456) | about 2 years ago | (#37926384)

Nothing is taken away from KDE. The trinity people are different people, and they are welcome to do what they want to do: they even do it right inside the KDE svn infrastructure. Their itch, they scratch, it's totally fine. And when I asked them to rename their fork of Krita (because Krita 2.4 is so much better that we all want to forget Krita 1.6), they did, no complaints. Great people, good cooperation. They only need to start showing up at aKademy or Desktop Summits.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | about 2 years ago | (#37925114)

Yeah, Taco would fix it. Sure. Crappy stories are *new* on slashdot. Heck, if he's gone for another month, I wouldn't be surprised if duplicate stories started popping up now that he's departed. Maybe even a story with a typo in it.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

Waffle Iron (339739) | about 2 years ago | (#37925262)

...and stop posting irrelevant stories like this on the front page. KDE 4.0 was horrible, yes, but it's not like KDE 4 development was halted. The latest release is 4.7 and it's much more stable and feature rich than 3.5 ever was.

There's no question that KDE4 is now plenty stable. However, there must be plenty of people like me who: Can't stand the unintuitive way the UI of plasma applets and controls work; and/or strongly disagree with KDE's current "semantic desktop" goals.

After a couple of years of use, I really haven't found anything in KDE4 that's a compelling improvement over KDE3 other than that KDE4 is still actively maintained. What's worse for me, KDE4 has introduced many UI "features" that I find to be very annoying. (Maybe if I was a fan of eye candy, I'd have a different opinion. But I'm not.) If this project fixes the unmaintained code issue, I might go back to KDE3.

Re:Bring back CmdrTaco (1)

szo (7842) | about 2 years ago | (#37926166)

well...
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=277010 [kde.org]
(granted, after mere 3 month and a huge flamewar, we got a status update!)

and Mate? (2)

KiloByte (825081) | about 2 years ago | (#37924554)

That's KDE, and what's with Gnome? Gnome3 consists nearly solely of regressions, there's barely any functionality left. The primary mode, "gnome-shell" is beyond words, acting as everyone has fat fingers on a 3'' touchscreen, combining worst ideas of iPhone and Windows Phone ("you can't run a program more than once", etc). The secondary mode, "gnome-fallback" is a bad joke too -- no usable panel, no desktop, no messing with the menu (try right clicking... try dragging...). Individual programs are no better: for example, someone had the brilliant idea of taking away the tray mode from RhythmBox. Oh, and network-manager (AKA "no network more complex than single DHCP") is a hard dependency.

There is a fork attempt called "Mate" but it doesn't look that promising yet. I wonder whether it's a matter of time, or if it's time to migrate to XFCE or something. As Linus and ESR said, XFCE feels like a big step back.

Re:and Mate? (0)

sqldr (838964) | about 2 years ago | (#37925078)

Gnome3 consists nearly solely of regressions

your opinion. not sure what you mean by running a program more than once - try the middle button. gnome 2 didn't have a usable panel. It had a taskbar cluttered with tasks. The taskbar was a bad overly clicky idea from day one. No desktop? You mean icons on it? I usually fill my screen with windows. Why would I want icons -underneath- my windows? You have to drag them out of the way first.

I agree with you about rhythmbox.. sort of. It needs to be a top-bar menu. They got rid of it and didn't replace it with anything else. Then again, it's still rather beta on gnome3 at present.

I believe that the network woes got mostly fixed in 3.2.

If I wanted to go back to a cluttered taskbar, not being able to find windows, and manually creating extra desktops rather than them just appearing for me when I need them, I would use gnome2.

Re:and Mate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925954)

YOUR opinion. And a very incorrect one.

Gnome 3 is missing so many features of Gnome 3 it's not funny. I simply don't have enough time to list the mountain of lost functionality. If really liked dock over taskbars, there are plenty of docks for Gnome/Linux. Try AWM. Other than the workspace manager most of the functionality of GNome 3 was already present in Gnome 2 + a couple of apps like AWN, Gnome-Do and Compiz. So The transition of Gnome 2 to 3 has been mostly about "simplification" aka throwing away features and preference options.

Re:and Mate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925090)

"acting as everyone has fat fingers on a 3'' touchscreen" - You've obviously never tried to grab a gnome 3 window border.

Re:and Mate? (1)

tenchikaibyaku (1847212) | about 2 years ago | (#37925482)

You'll be happy to know that this has been improved in gnome 3.2.

Re:and Mate? (2)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | about 2 years ago | (#37925654)

The primary mode, "gnome-shell" is beyond words, acting as everyone has fat fingers on a 3'' touchscreen

WHEN will Gnome finally design a UI to accommodate my tiny tiny fingers? We are stuck waiting for Frodo to fork Gnome and give us GnomeHobbit.

Re:and Mate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925888)

Obviously you haven't checked out gnome 3 key bindings:
    ctrl + left mouse button: start new instance
    alt + hold left mouse: move stuff around
    alt + suspend = shutdown!

It's not like gnome 2 panel was really working that well, but you're right about the 'fat fingers on a 3" touchscreen' feeling.

What's worse is crashes, take a look at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell [launchpad.net]

incorrect summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924556)

This is Trinty's third release since the project started, not its first.

Play on words (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 2 years ago | (#37924658)

Is "Trinity" a deliberate allusion to "Unity"?

Re:Play on words (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924688)

Trinity has been around since 2008.

end of discussion

Re:Play on words (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925212)

No. Its an allusion to 3. As in KDE 3.5.

Re:Play on words (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about 2 years ago | (#37925304)

Is "Trinity" a deliberate allusion to "Unity"?

No. Unity is merely one third of Trinity.
Its name is one of the few honest aspects of Unity.

Waste of time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37924878)

KDE4 is miles ahead of KDE3. Yes it had issues at launch, but that was years ago. I guess the beauty of free software is people can cling to things if they choose. Doesn't mean I can't choose to think it's retarded.

So is this the release schedule? Updates every 5 years? Go for it...

Re:Waste of time... (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#37925392)

I agree with your right to choose to think it's "retarded".
I disagree with your claim that it is a waste of time.

Don't you love OSS? (1)

metageek (466836) | about 2 years ago | (#37925012)

This is one of the best things about OSS. Anyone can fork and when there is a strong need, the fork will happen.

I'm spoilt for choice

I pitty the slaves of a their Master's view of computing (yes, fanboys, I mean you)

Re:Don't you love OSS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925420)

These 2 hairy nerds can't maintain millions of lines of code credibly though.

Does anyone here use this? (1)

pecosdave (536896) | about 2 years ago | (#37925310)

Do any of you happen to know if KAudio Creator still works in Trinity? I've yet to find a CD ripper that actually works anywhere near as well as KAudio Creator for ripping tons of disk at a time, I open an instance for each drive and it works beautifully. All the rest of the rippers I've used are buggy as hell or more complicated than I want to deal with for the size of collection I have to rip (what's with K3B skipping the first track? It's been a known bug for a long time). I might throw Trinity on the system just for that if it's still around.

ooooooh . . . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37925366)

i'd LOVE to fork Trinity!

*ducks*

Damn! (2)

halivar (535827) | about 2 years ago | (#37925446)

After my release-day copy of KDE 3.5 just finished compiling, too! Of all the luck...

Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37926236)

I can't wait to try it! Thanks for the great work Trinity team!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>