What do we think of KDE 4.2?

[jonsem.phooey]

KDE 4.2 sort of pushed itself as an update to Kubuntu 8.10. For me, Adept seemed to have problems getting it working and I had to go into the command prompt login and use apt-get to sort it out. Soon after, more updates were pushed that seemed to get 4.2 sorted out (for me). Although I did follow advice given elsewhere in this forum and set up synaptic to handle updates instead of adept.

It almost seems like it was still in beta when originally pushed to us. Seems to be OK now, but I'm starting to wonder if it's time to look at Gnome again? I started out with Gnome and KDE kinda won me over. Right now though, I'm thinking I liked KDE 3.5 better than KDE 4.2, and I'm wondering how much Gnome has progressed since I left it behind. Then again, I didn't like Dolphin initially but, once I got used to it, I found it better than Konqueror.

Anybody tried both KDE 4.2 and the latest Gnome on Ubuntu 8.10....any thoughts?

[barbolani]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

I have GNOME with 8.10 installed in a netbook and KDE 4.1 with the latest updates on my desktop. Even with all the problems with KDE 4.1 and all the manual fiddling it took me to get it to my likings, I still prefer KDE. The netbook is going to stay with GNOME until I am convinced that the KDE resource usage is low enough to allow me to use the little machine swiftly.

[MoonRise]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

I've tried both and KDE 4.2 to me and IMO is far better. Most if not all customizable parts that were in 3.5 are now here. I've actually been nearly 100% productive on my machine since 4.1. It still all comes down to what people like and want. KDE4.2 is what I like and want, so there I stay. Hands down performs better than GNome and looks better too (for those who like eye candy). Again, IMO.

[dibl]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

It almost seems like it was still in beta when originally pushed to us.

Yes, but if you're "experienced" (aka OLD) you've seen this movie before. MS DOS 4. O/S 2 (first release). Windows 95. Windows XP, SP 1. New software is always rough around the edges.

[bartho]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

i prefer the layout of KDE 4.2 rather than previous versions. However it's unfortunate that 4.2 is still in its beta version... it takes much RAM to run,maybe because 4.2 needs akonadi? CMIIW... 4.2 also runs very slow and laggy on my 256mb laptop, while it can still handle the 4.1 GUI.
i wonder how can I uninstall the KDE4.2 and use the default intrepid KDE 4.1 ...

[jensoko]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

I like it--it seems to handle some of the backend stuff more naturally. Or unobtrusively. The desktop effects seem to run better for me, and Bluetooth is finally doing a good impression of functional, though I haven't really tested it out yet

Plasma crashed on me when I tried to add a widget to the desktop by clicking the "Add Widget" button. But I knew enough to Alt+F2 and type "Plasma" which restarted plasma. I remembered somewhere that drag-n-drop is the best way to work plasma anyway, so that problem was solved.

One problem I've been having of late (and I don't know where this came from--it wasn't in conjunction with an update, I don't think) is that in Firefox, my sound will start out fine, then periodically go out to this stuttering nightmare. Sometimes, it's because I've suspended to RAM, other times, it's because I played something in YouTube or Hulu, and then visited another tab at one of those sites that has those sound ads embedded (which I loathe and will never ever click on). I think it might be something originating in Firefox, though, because my system sounds never had a problem. I have been able to work around it by either restarting Firefox, or restarting the alsa-utils, but after the upgrade, restarting doesn't work and I have to shut down and restart the whole computer. I'm sure there's a solution out there, I just have to keep looking and start asking.

I like KDE 4.2. But I've liked KDE since 3.5, and while 3.5 was incredibly stable, 4.1 was beautiful, and really seemed to take the desktop beyond a standard forced onto users by Redmond. KDE encourages me to be more intuitive, and to use more of its resources. Splitting off from the standard "windows and shortcuts on a desktop" was a brave move. I like it.

I do still have to use KDE 4.2 for more time before I really figure out whether or not it's better than 4.1, but already, I'm seeing more stability and more functionality. Now if only I could get the main panel to move to the top instead of the bottom of the screen, I'd be totally set...

[claydoh]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

4.2 was not 'pushed' to anyone. It is now being put into backports - the "unsuppported updates" section in Adept's software sources setup, and has to be selected by the user

[Teunis]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

The good: Beautiful and stable enough.

The bad: Very slow and incomplete.

I switch once or twice per day between Hardy/3.5 and Intrepid/4.2 and find 4.2 due to it's molasses-like nature very annoying.
For curiosities sake I run on this same computer also Vista Business and it is generally faster, even at booting!

4.2 depends totally on the Plasmoid widgets (even the K-menu is one) but so far very few are ported and even less can be properly configured.

Things like the handicaped search (minimal 4 characters) in Adept are plain stupid.

The 4.2 Knetworkmanager is the first that handles my various Wifi cards correctly so I did not have to install wicd like still is the case with 3.5.
I don't know whether it's the Kernel version or KDE but 8.10/4.2 is the first distro that recognises my USB VOIP phone.

All together this is the least mature (K)Ubuntu distro I have seen since I started off with the 4.10 Warty Wardhog.

27 Feb. 2009, With the many updates of the last week the whole system is behaving much better, still not a speed demon but clear improvements, especially things like some widgets that are now somewhat configurable.

[MoonRise]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

I don't personally see where it's incomplete. I agree with Dibl's observation. I have been dealing with Vista to get it to function properly in our network for 2 days! So I have a real one to one comparison if one so chooses. I still prefer Kubuntu with KDE 4.2, took 8 hours to integrate into our network. It is more complete than Vista. I had to "search" for a "free" tool to even do "basic" tweaks. Didn't for KDE4.2. Vista also takes up WAY to much memory and this system is at the 3GB limit. Runs KDE4.2 smoother than Vista. This is a real analysis of this system. KDE 4.2 won, as always.

[Marlin]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

All right. Just kick me now, but I can't help myself.

"It is more complete than Vista. I had to "search" for a "free" tool to even do "basic" tweaks. Didn't for KDE4.2. Vista also takes up WAY to much memory and this system is at the 3GB limit. Runs KDE4.2 smoother than Vista. This is a real analysis of this system."

I thought the question was "What do you think of KDE 4.2". The text above seems to be "What do you think of Vista". Alright, I'll go to my corner now

[MoonRise]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

The point goes back to completeness and Dibl's observation that most released to the public in some degree is incomplete and has issues. The point of using Vista is because many, maybe not this thread, want to compare KDE4 to Vista. My observation is is that they are different and KDE4 hold its own in Function and Form. What do I think of KDE4.2? I Love It!

[jonsem.phooey]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

It almost seems like it was still in beta when originally pushed to us.

Yes, but if you're "experienced" (aka OLD) you've seen this movie before. MS DOS 4. O/S 2 (first release). Windows 95. Windows XP, SP 1. New software is always rough around the edges.

Ahh yes, I have fond memories of OS/2 and OS/2 Warp, sorry to see how IBM completely mis-managed what I thought was a very impressive OS at the time.

I'm starting to get KDE 4.2 figured out...I actually do consulting work on this machine so it's important that it's running well. In fact, the thing that really drove me to KDE in the first place was that it seemed better suited to the type of work I do. As far as applications however, it's a mix between what typically comes with KDE and with Gnome (which is a real plus with Ubunbu/Kubuntu since it all comes from the same repositories)

Krita is good for simple graphics, use Gimp for more complex stuff.

Don't really use KOffice, prefer OpenOffice and Openproj

Kontact seems to be improved (previous version seemed to be slowing down, was running Thunderbird for a while).

Kopete still won't speak MySpace, so I'm running Pidgin. Would try Kopete if it did support MySpace.

I'm used to Dolphin now, and I like it. Miss the "open as root" option, but running an embedded command prompt essentially gives me the same thing

Kate is still good, has replaced Emacs in my "holy trinity of home-grown computational analysis"...I.e. Octave, GnuPlot, and Kate (formally Emacs).

I do miss being able to specify the task bar color or make it semi-transparent, but that's pretty minor


And last but not least, Synaptic has replaced Adept for my package management (although nothing will replace apt-get).


As I said before, didn't care for having a beta version of KDE automatically loaded to my machine, but it worked out in the end. Most likely, I just have my repositories set too agressive.

[MoonRise]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

Ahh yes, I have fond memories of OS/2 and OS/2 Warp

I never did get a chance to use those or experience those. It would be interesting if those were pulled out of Moth Balls.



@ Dibl -

(aka OLD)

Hey! What u mean Old!

[ssri]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

It almost seems like it was still in beta when originally pushed to us.

I do miss being able to specify the task bar color or make it semi-transparent, but that's pretty minor


And last but not least, Synaptic has replaced Adept for my package management (although nothing will replace apt-get).

For transparent or semi-transparent themes, right click on the desktop and go to appearance settings and select new theme. Also, you should have desktop compositing turned on. From there, you will get a whole host of semi-transparent and transparent themes. To mix and match transparencies and colors, alt-f2 "desktop theme details," where you can select individual components from different themes. My current desktop theme is mix between naked, barely naked and oxyglass themes.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php...&postcount=970

As for package managers, nothing beats apt-get. I wish adept did not have such an incomplete feel to it (yeah, yeah I know it is still beta). I gave kpackagekit a whirl and came away unimpressed.

[jonsem.phooey]

Re: What do we think of KDE 4.2?

Don't know if I should enable compositing until I update my ancient nVidia card (or nVidia updates their legacy driver)