WOW - KDE4!

marscay said:
that's a hard one, take a look in .Trash ...ok so there's no 1 click restore button like windows but this is linux :) and you're stuff is still recoverable to copy/move wherever you want.



that's why you take advantage of the functionality of compiz and use smart windows placement :)

ppl are always talking about bloat on linux, personally i find stuff like compiz not only pretty to look at and a nice tech demo to your clueless friends but extremely functional and useful day to day, there's just so many little tweaks to enhance the desktop.
Click to expand...

Indeed The trash is nothing more than a directory on the hd. Like any other. It is no more trash, than home is. The point of a special trash folder is that you can restore. What happens if you don't KNOW where the file came from? The system is supposed to know that for you.

Uh huh- but I thought the point of gnome was to offer a simple system with nice defaults. adding on compiz and replacing the wm is not a simple sytstem with nice defaults. It's a customised system.

It's been a good few months since I last tested out ubuntu/gnome I can't remember the other niggles I had right now.

Oh and compiz really is something special, the functinality and exceution is awesome. But it's not part of gnome. That is all.
 
whitecrook said:
Indeed The trash is nothing more than a directory on the hd. Like any other. It is no more trash, than home is. The point of a special trash folder is that you can restore. What happens if you don't KNOW where the file came from? The system is supposed to know that for you.
Click to expand...

yeh but it sure makes you think twice about using that rm cmd don't it :)

btw my compiz rant wasn't against you just a general rant out to whoever, those who complain about bloated desktop environments but also run linux on their 600mhz laptop ......and they'd expect Vista to run on it smoothly also?

i've found little difference on the desktop between Ubuntu/Arch/Gentoo once you have a certain level of hardware, just that obviously Ubuntu and the like are so much more seamless to get up and running for inexperienced users.
 
marscay said:
btw my compiz rant wasn't against you just a general rant out to whoever, those who complain about bloated desktop environments but also run linux on their 600mhz laptop ......and they'd expect Vista to run on it smoothly also?
Click to expand...

wtf? I run Arch with kde and compiz on my Compaq Evo n620n (Pentium M 1.4, ATI mobility 7500 and 768 MB RAM) very, very nicely. Vista would struggle severely to do anything as nice (or even close to nice) on this system.

Vista is a huge resource hog which requires a minimum of 2GB and a much heartier processor to get even close to the same results. Why would *anyone* expect to get the same results on the same hardware??

p.s. I'm sure that any other linux distro would have the same "performance", not just Arch.
 
marscay said:
yeh but it sure makes you think twice about using that rm cmd don't it :)
Click to expand...
Heh, that's true... you don't tend to get posts from Linux users asking about "undelete software" cause they've mistakenly deleted their wedding photos/dissertation/text file with all their passwords stored in it :p

marscay said:
btw my compiz rant wasn't against you just a general rant out to whoever, those who complain about bloated desktop environments but also run linux on their 600mhz laptop ......and they'd expect Vista to run on it smoothly also?
Click to expand...
I think there's 2 types of people that you've covered there. Firstly, there's the "KDE is bloated rubbish" camp are your typical sandal-wearing weirdy beardy types that use BSD and refuse to use a desktop environment at all.

Secondly, the "Vista runs more smootly" type are those that have used Windows for umpteen years and have just dabbled with Linux for five minutes. They complain about boot up times, graphics drivers, etc... without really understanding what they're talking about cause they're just comparing it with how things are in Microsoft-land. You're right that they're usually using an old laptop and not their main PC, which they use for Vista, so it's hardly a fair comparison.
 
whitecrook said:
I don't they are 'competitors' in the normal sense of the world. Alternatives, may be a better word.

XFCE, takes it's cue from the old CDE environment, as as it's based of GTK, all most if not all gnome stuff works really nicely on it, without all the gnome bloat.

KDE4 is supposed to have built in compositing negating the need for compiz et al.

Personally I have used gnome and KDE alternately since the beginning, and I kinda went gnome 1-> Kde2 -> back to gnome after 2 . all the time running a main station of win2k until about 8 months ago when i moved to winxp.


KDE really does have some fantastic integration between it's components, kioslaves, and all the rest are really sweet. Konqueror is too bloated for me, but it is a great web browser. and fast.

Gnome even though it looks great and is really easy to use, nice default etc, still has some majorly RETARDED functionality. Take for instance the recycle bin (trash whatever) How do you restore a file from the bin? Oh that's right you can't.

Create 2 new folders on the desktop, open them up where do the windows appear? That's right slap bang on top of each other. Spatial mode would be awesome if they obeyed the simples laws thry should follow but they don't, it's half baked.

Nautilus is slow, clunky, and restricting.

There's so many of these things that probably 95% of people don't notice, but they really annoy me. So that's why I stay on XP just now. Last time I used ubuntu I couldn't use a gui to burn an Audio cd without using k3b (which is awesome)
perhaps it's better now.
Click to expand...

You need to get more up to date on gnome, also the file transfer/trash functionality is getting a major rewrite with hardy.
 
Rich43 said:
You need to get more up to date on gnome, also the file transfer/trash functionality is getting a major rewrite with hardy.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? These are based on Ubuntu Gutsy (7.10?) I have another scheduled ubuntu try-out coming up soon, I'll be sure to post my comments, but I seriously doubt they've fixed the issues.

Spatial File manger - i'd be surprised if this was fixed as it had major problems with the whole Spatial concept. and leaves tons of .ds_store files scattered all over the place. I'm sure I read somewhere they were gonna fix this.

The window placement bug was still there last time I checked.

Trash - well it's still not fixed. MS had this in Win95.

Gnome as a whole is laggy especially in comparison to KDE.

Mounting samba file systems still sucks.

Oh and perhaps there's some proper builds for GUI AUDIO cd burners now as well.
 
whitecrook i'd rather not have my desktop the exact copy of windows "what-ever-version" thanks. You obviously do so stick with your M$ products because Linux ain't for you. Things are different and that's what makes it great for me. :)
 
brummie said:
whitecrook i'd rather not have my desktop the exact copy of windows "what-ever-version" thanks. You obviously do so stick with your M$ products because Linux ain't for you. Things are different and that's what makes it great for me. :)
Click to expand...

Not true, and we're talking about Gnome, not Linux.
 
Ross1234 said:
when updating to the nest build of Ubuntu is a full reinstall required?
Click to expand...

No. When you go into Updates there is a button that says A new Version is Available Click here to Upgrade. Then it upgrades everything, and I think it asks to reboot if there was also a new kernel update.


Pretty straight forward.
 
whitecrook said:
No. When you go into Updates there is a button that says A new Version is Available Click here to Upgrade. Then it upgrades everything, and I think it asks to reboot if there was also a new kernel update.


Pretty straight forward.
Click to expand...

Thanks that puts my mind at rest.
 
ubuntu_updates.jpg
 
brummie said:
I'm sorry but thats what i meant. M$ have their own GUI, Linux users at least get a choice.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I can't resist - you are now saying because 'Gnome is not for me, I should stick with "M$" ' ?

That's clearly a very stupid thing to say, by your own admission Linux users get a wide choice of GUIS, so why wouldn't you suggest I use one of them instead?

(
brummie said:
You obviously do so stick with your M$ products because Linux ain't for you.
Click to expand...

)
 
brummie said:
Because by what you have posted you expected it to run the way windows does. ie the Win95 comment.
Click to expand...

LOL no. Please go back and read it again. In reference to the Broken and pointless trash can in Gnome, I commented that this is a feature that MS had way back in 1995 in order to highlight how absurd it is that Gnome still hasn't got it. There are plenty of other things as well, but a Working trash can with restore is something you'd expect all 'desktop environments' to have by now, this is 2008, not 1998.
 
The point your saying is its broken because it lacks a feature your windows has had since '95, right? And its 2008 so everyonme should conform by now?? And the pleny of other features your windows has that we Gnome users dont have??
 
I tried KDE 4, but it was a bit buggy so thought I would wait til kubuntu 8.4 and see what it is like then. I prefer KDE to gnome, yes it is bloated and slow, but for relative noobs like me, its a good way to work with linux while still getting used to the differences from MS
However 'knetworkmanager' has to be the worst pile of ***** ever....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom