Impressions of KDE3?

Jeevz · Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2002 3:26 pm Post subject: Impressions of KDE3?

Just curious... what is everyone's impressions of KDE3? How does it compare to the earlier release? Better? Worse? Faster? Slower? Bloatware? Feature rich?

Any other misc. comments?

:?:

garbageiscool2 · n00b Joined: 18 Apr 2002 Posts: 45

i really havn't noticed any amazing new features but there are various changes to the gui that i like such as the way konq shows file info when you hold the mouse over a file, otherwise i havn't noticed any real slowdowns or speedups.

Fragadelic · n00b Joined: 18 Apr 2002 Posts: 26

Most of the changes are under the hood except for things like the transparent menus.

Other than the ksplash sigterm issue which is a known bug, it isn't bad. It is slower than minimalistic Window Managers but then again it is a Desktop Environment and does use up more resources.

All in all, I like KDE 3.0 almost as much as I liked KDE 1.1.2.

The Anti-Aliasing makes everything look so purdy!

474 · l33t Joined: 19 Apr 2002 Posts: 714

I agree. I had reservations about using KDE3 especially when I heard that one of the KDE developers had claimed that KDE3 was rushed out of the door too fast, criticising one of the team co-ordinators in the process (I'll post the link if I can find it). Nevertheless, I tried it out and have not experienced any more or any less problems than in any previous KDE release. You can look at the ChangeLog here: http://www.kde.org/announcements/changelog2_2_2to3_0.html

Performance-wise, it seems equivalent. The only niggles I have had are (a) the splash screen crashes for me if I start as non-root user - there's another posting in this forum that deals with that, and (b) KPackage crashed once (but hey, I've had that before). The next point release of 3.0 will probably bring it more into maturity, but I think a lot of pre-3.0 bugs have been fixed at least. It's difficult for me to judge its performance relative to 2.2.2, because I'm used to running it on FreeBSD which is unbelievably fast (no holy wars please!) - but I might try using Robert Love's pre-emptive kernel patch - I'm interested to see how that would affect KDE performance ...

freefall · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 13 Apr 2002 Posts: 89

KDE 3.0 is pretty good but I removed it in favor of fluxbox. I just don't need what KDE offers so I see no reason to have it installed.

I was one of the people who had problems with Konquerer. It would crash almost every time I opened a new window.

I compiled and recompiled. Recompiled some libs, like libpng. Recompiled qt and kde. Still no luck. Konq just kept crashing so I gave up.

I would have switched anyway though. I like things clean. Fluxbox/IceWM both do what I need a wm to do.

justus · n00b Joined: 16 Apr 2002 Posts: 48

Well... first off let me say that I'm a KDE fan... that said...

KDE 3.0 doesn't really offer that much more that can be seen. Most of the differences are under the hood so to say. There is a speed difference between 2.? and 3.0, this is guaranteed. I personally couldn't go back to 2.? because of that speed issue.

KDE 3.0 is also more stable and doesn't crash as much (or at all for me... well maybe once... but this is also taking what problems other people have into consideration.) In KDE 3.0 you will find better support for java, javascript, more configuration options, speed improvements, stability improvements, DHTML and HTML improvements..etc...

All in all I would have to say that KDE offers everything that I require and the programs made for KDE generally have good stability too.

Right now I can only think of two programs that I have installed that weren't written specifically for KDE (Gimp and Xine) and the rest were part of KDE or made for it.

That's my view on it all

Justin T

PS - update qt to qt3.0.3.1 and this will fix the ksplash crash and some other instability problems that some people are having.

Hmm... speaking of stability... why do people complain when something doesn't work correctly, but there is an upgrade or bug fix for it? I have always wondered about that... Hmmm....

Sleep deprivation... it does wonders to the mind...

Deech · Posted: Tue Apr 23, 2002 8:28 am Post subject: Re: Yes, it seems OK ...

paulisdead · Guru Joined: 10 Apr 2002 Posts: 510 Location: Seattle, WA

I kind of felt let down with KDE 3.0. I can't notice any speed difference between KDE 3 and 2.2.2, and they both ran just as well for me. I personally thought going from 2.2.1 to 2.2.2 was a bigger upgrade than going to 3.0, since I really had problems with 2.2.1 and 2.2.0. It seems more like KDE 2.2.3 than a full version change. I do like KDE 3 though, and those few features they added like konqueror playing files when you hold the mouse over them, and that you can center the kicker if it doesn't extend all the way across the screen, are nice, but I was really expecting a lot more from it. Also my favorite 2.2.2 theme (Teax, for transparent menus, kicker, and taskbar) hasn't been ported to KDE 3 yet, so I'm stuck with the Liquid theme that only has transparent menus.

freefall · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 13 Apr 2002 Posts: 89

squanto · Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2002 1:18 am Post subject:

It is less resource intense. Upon starting kde3 for me, only about 130megs of ram used up, vs. kde 2 taking up as much as 250megs, so for that alone, it is slightly better.
Konq is ok, not too much new, but works fine for me. I use galeon for web browsing, seems more compatible than Konq.
I have tried icewm, but never fluxbox, what exactly does fluxbox give me in addition to icewm. I like ice, casuse it is small and fast and does everything i need, but like the whole "desktop environment" deal more.

-Andrew

zerogeny · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 85

it tries to be too much like windows.
it bundles too many useless programs into it, to mention just one of the gripes.

but im a minimalist when i comes to X and fluxbox with a nice background and transparent terms seems much nicer than any kde theme.
_________________
Searched the web for zerogeny.
Results 1 - 1 of 1. Search took 0.05 seconds

freefall · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 13 Apr 2002 Posts: 89

phaze3k · n00b Joined: 24 Apr 2002 Posts: 36

I'm running KDE3 now, was previously running Debian with KDE2.2, in both cases with Robert love's preempt patch and the lock-breaking patch. Performance of KDE3 is certainly better, but this could be due to Gentoo...
Konqueror 3.0.0 is v. nice indeed, and IMO the 'clincher' in the KDE vs. any-other-desktop argument..

(Yes, I know you can run Konqueror without KDE, but startup is faster if you do, and everything looks nicer when its more uniform..

)

dice · Guru Joined: 21 Apr 2002 Posts: 577

The only reason I installed KDE3 was to get Konqueror. Later today when I get in to work I'm going to try out Konqueror-embedded though, it sure would be nice if I could have Konqueror without KDE... it's just plain silly running Konqueror from blackbox

jonemi · Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2002 6:45 pm Post subject:

I was going to run Fluxbox over KDE because of speed, but then that anti-aliasing...

Jeevz · Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2002 7:24 pm Post subject:

c_kuzmanic · Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:38 am Post subject:

I'm running KDE 3.0 with the pre-emptive kernel patch and so far I'm very pleased with it. Since I use my Gentoo Desktop on a daily basis for several hours often under very heavy load (e.g. during a typical session I'll be compiling lots of apps, watch movies with mplayer, browse the internet with mozilla, keep track of my accounts using gnucash, and usually one or more instances of kylix will be running - all of that simultanoeusly)

In the three weeks that I've used KDE 3.0 I've had : 0 Lockups, 0 Crashes, 0 Problems with any apps that use KDE 3.0 .

I did have a problem upgrading to the latest version of libpng, but that's not KDE related.

--go figure:)

clee · n00b Joined: 24 Apr 2002 Posts: 14 Location: AZ

Well, I'm biased, since I'm a KDE developer, but I would just like to say that KDE 3.0 is the best (released) KDE yet.

And damn, but this site looks smooth under Konqueror. Fast as hell, too. Life is good.

-clee

jonemi · Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:50 am Post subject: Umm, yes

Jeevz · Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2002 1:43 pm Post subject: Re: Umm, yes

Daemon · n00b Joined: 18 Apr 2002 Posts: 65

mine is fast .. nice .. and most of all .. usefull.

jonemi · Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2002 4:18 pm Post subject:

Zu` · l33t Joined: 26 May 2002 Posts: 716 Location: BE