KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

[Snowhog]

Sorry to be 'negative' on this, but I've been watching (and reading) the many posts concerning all the problems being experienced with KDE 4.0, leaving me with the question:

WHY was KDE 4.0 released at all?

From what I've been reading from the posts, this release doesn't even meet the quality standards to even be called a Beta release. Alpha seems more apt. Developers: Hate to even say this, but not even M$ has (to my knowledge) ever released a 'major upgrade' that has as many problems as KDE 4.0 does.

I said this before, and I'll say it again: Develop to a standard and not to a time schedule. I for one, am not moving to KDE 4.0 until it achieves at least the 'working status' of KDE 3.5.8.

[Rog131]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

No, you are not 'negative. KDE 4.0 is still beta (even, if it officially called 'final').

WHY was KDE 4.0 released at all?

Because there is /1/ KDE 4 Launch Event, 18 January 2008 ?


/1/
Schedules/KDE4/4.0 Release Schedule
http://techbase.kde.org/index.php?ti...lease_Schedule


29/08/2007
Rodney Gedda wrote:
KDE 4.0: revolution or hype?
Big improvements to come in 4.1 release
http://www.computerworld.com.au/inde...2;fp;16;fpid;1

[srikar]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

Develop to a standard and not to a time schedule

I strictly agree wid Snowhog.

[marshallbanana]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

Just a thought (hopefully someone can tell me if it makes sense); could the problems be only partly in kde4 itself and also, given that the major changes are all at the level of the underlying/behind-the-scenes aspects of the desktop that it just doesn't interact well with the rest of kubuntu (that is to say the non-kde parts) that is designed to work with the old kde tech? Or am I simply displaying an ignorance of how the actual kde desktop and the rest of kubuntu interact?

In other words, is kde4 ready, but the distros simply aren't ready to work with it yet (they all seem to have rushed out kde4 versions somewhat haphazardly)?

[Fredh]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

given that the major changes are all at the level of the underlying/behind-the-scenes aspects of the desktop that it just doesn't interact well with the rest of kubuntu

I don't know, maybe to a point. But it seems the kubuntu people have done a great job.
even some of the mepis guys acknowledge that. And that is saying something.

Personally I think after 5 days of continual usage I am pleasantly surprised by the overall stability. I remember the days when kde3.0 came out.
That was one of the reasons I gave up on linux back then. This a completely different experience

[integr8e]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

From what I understand, KDE 4.0 was never meant to be a stable release, but was meant to attract new users and devs who would test the software (those who wouldn't test the "beta" versions, but are willing to test the initial release); it's better than alpha, but definitely beta.

I believe Rog131's link explains the situation best

[dibl]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

but not even M$ has (to my knowledge) ever released a 'major upgrade' that has as many problems as KDE 4.0 does.

I dunno 'bout that, Snowhog -- are you too young to remember Windows 2.0?

[Fintan]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

but not even M$ has (to my knowledge) ever released a 'major upgrade' that has as many problems as KDE 4.0 does.

Of course vista was not a major upgrade :P

Well at least kde4 has been releasing updates since the last 3 days and it is getting better all the time.

[Snowhog]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

I dunno 'bout that, Snowhog -- are you too young to remember Windows 2.0?

I remember Windoze 3.1, the 'glorified' DOS shell! I actually don't remember 2.0. There really wasn't a 2.0, was there?? :P

[integr8e]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

I actually used Window$ 3.1 up until about 7 years ago on my home PC

Back then, all I did was play some tank game I had, minesweeper, and lookup random things in Encarta '95; I believe that was about it (oh yeh, I also played Janes ATF quite a bit, which was about the only thing I could do via CLI). Now that I'm thinking about it, I would also mess around with a physics game my dad gave me where I would have to direct a beam of light to a target using variously shaped mirrors and prisms. How times change

[firephoto]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

They have to release. If they constantly wait for it to be 'better' then they'd wait forever. They made a release and now other developers have a target that isn't moving so fast (it's still moving though).

You don't just seem negative you are negative. You make it seem like this is the end of the line for KDE4 and it isn't. The foundation for the desktop that is KDE4 has been created and now the rest of the structure will be built up from it and evolve constantly into something better until it's time to create a new foundation.

I see comparisons to other desktops or other operating systems but there's nothing to compare to. KDE is KDE and it's different and it's developed different so it is what it is.

A lot of the complaints or issues that are raised can be the result of distro packaging. I've seen a fair number of issues with gutsy packages, less with hardy but still some that stand out but different and even less with local builds from svn. Once the distros get familiar with it and (hopefully) don't go into a patch fest for 'their' version of KDE4 a lot of these issues should disappear.

[eggbanjo]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

As far as i was aware this is in 'general testing' stages and its not a full release - and isnt that what all these people with faults doing? Just testing it to find the faults.
Ive had it running now for a week and apart from some cosmetic thingsits been good (for a tester). Maybe peoples expectations were set to high, as kde 3xx is so good.

IMHO that is of course

[kubicle]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

Most of the open source world follows the 'release early, release often' guideline. The problem with software developing, especially open source, is that if you don't set release timelines nothing gets done, as software is almost never 'finished', people will just keep adding new features at a faster pace than old features can be solidified.

Release deadline usually creates a 'buzz' of fixing existing issues to make them 'release-ready'.

Releasing software also is the only way to get software out for extensive testing, as developers usually can't test everything. This is the way users can give back to the project (testing software that isn't finished and is often buggy).

People that have used open source software some period of time usually avoid point-zero (x.0) releases like the plague (for serious use, testing is another thing of course ).

[dibl]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

There really wasn't a 2.0, was there?? :P

Yeah there was -- the term "abortion" comes to mind. :P Besides being a really buggy DOS shell, Apple sued M$ over infringement of their GUI features, so M$ did a hasty makeover (and a hasty legal settlement) to come up with non-infringing Windows 3.0. But 3.0 was just about as buggy as 2.0. Ver. 3.1 was the semi-cleaned-up result.

Kubicle is correct -- any Ver. x.0 software release should be assumed to be "for pioneers".

Like us!

[Rog131]

Re: KDE 4.0 - When a time schedule trumps a quality standard

If programmers have make a plane (Maybe: Making KDE 4.0 )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZq4sZz56qM