81–90 of 150 posts
Why "finally"? To me, KDE's job should be to organize and render windows, application launcher icons, and the like If I want a virtual machine, I'll use a virtual machine for that All this "KDE suite" stuff and what not is unnecesarry - some of these are good pieces of software that I like to use, but there's no reason they need any integration with a desktop environment (arguably a few basics like a file manager, VT…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using Cachy after testing some distros. I tried Nobara but it was too limited. Before this I've used Debian based distros (ubuntu, debian), Redhat/RPM (Redhat, Mandrake, OpenSuSe) and even Gentoo. So far I really like Cachy. It's been great for the bit of gaming I do. I had a bit of audio grief, but installing a different kernel seemed to have fixed the issue. Overall I'm pretty damn happy with it. It was much easier…
I also really like the BTRFS file system which I didn't know about until installing Cachy. I like the idea of being able to go to a snapshot before I messed something up or a system update did. I figure if I ever need anything Windows related, I will just load windows in a VM. Gaming wise, mostly the only games you can't play on Linux are Windows games with root kit level anti-cheats. Not sure if that is a downside..…
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PCI_passthrough_via_OVMF#Wi...
Why "finally"? To me, KDE's job should be to organize and render windows, application launcher icons, and the like If I want a virtual machine, I'll use a virtual machine for that All this "KDE suite" stuff and what not is unnecesarry - some of these are good pieces of software that I like to use, but there's no reason they need any integration with a desktop environment (arguably a few basics like a file manager, VT…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
KDE 3 to KDE 4 transition really was painful, it pushed me away as well, but it also happened over 15 years ago. I gave it a shot a few years back, and it was great, much better than modern-day Gnome in my opinion.
Thanks for stating this. It puzzles me how people can still hold a grudge against the transition to KDE4 that happened back in early 2008. It took a while but even KDE4 got pretty good. KDE6 is great and if you follow Nate Graham's blog, you can see the improvements that go into it every week. https://blogs.kde.org/authors/nategraham/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I cane back to plasma after about year of gnome. It made me realize how much I dislike gnome. There are just so many issues. Inhad to solve them with extensions, but then it broke on updates. I couldn't get it to have English as language but ISO units. I had to install an extra app to control startup applications. Fractional scaling and several displays was wonky, made screen recording impossible. My 60fps display ha…
It's really sad what happened with Gnome3. Gnome2 was a good functional desktop, sure it was copying the 2000s with windows 98/2000 style, but it worked. Hell, even OpenStep is more functional than Gnome3 as a daily computer interface. Gnome3 targeted a weird mix of incompatible devices, like a windows 8 interface, and kinda failed as a design given the devices it optimized for never took over the market. There's not…
I'm not sure about that. Convertible laptops are quite popular as a product category, and GNOME 3 works great on those. Besides, MATE and Xfce are still around if you prefer a traditional desktop interface.
Why "finally"? To me, KDE's job should be to organize and render windows, application launcher icons, and the like If I want a virtual machine, I'll use a virtual machine for that All this "KDE suite" stuff and what not is unnecesarry - some of these are good pieces of software that I like to use, but there's no reason they need any integration with a desktop environment (arguably a few basics like a file manager, VT…
I believe you are confusing Plasma, which is KDE's desktop environment, and the KDE Project, which also hosts a lot of applications that can be used with or without Plasma, many of which are multiplatforms. Even on Windows one can use a lot of KDE apps without using their desktop environment, Plasma. It's also totally possible to use Plasma without any of the KDE apps, not even the file manager (Dolphin), the VTE (Konsole), or the simple text editor (Kwrite).
Historically, the desktop environment was KDE (Kool Desktop Environment), but it's been quite a long time since the DE is one among many software that the KDE project works on.
That said, I 100% agree with you on icons, and never used an icon theme :).
I use Arch and love KDE Plasma. It even has a blue light filter. Am never going back to Windows. KDE runs faster, looks nicer, does not have forced adware and telemetry. Great daily driver.
I cane back to plasma after about year of gnome. It made me realize how much I dislike gnome. There are just so many issues. Inhad to solve them with extensions, but then it broke on updates. I couldn't get it to have English as language but ISO units. I had to install an extra app to control startup applications. Fractional scaling and several displays was wonky, made screen recording impossible. My 60fps display ha…
Such an underrated set of distros.
Why "finally"? To me, KDE's job should be to organize and render windows, application launcher icons, and the like If I want a virtual machine, I'll use a virtual machine for that All this "KDE suite" stuff and what not is unnecesarry - some of these are good pieces of software that I like to use, but there's no reason they need any integration with a desktop environment (arguably a few basics like a file manager, VT…
I use Arch and love KDE Plasma. It even has a blue light filter. Am never going back to Windows. KDE runs faster, looks nicer, does not have forced adware and telemetry. Great daily driver.
I tried KDE 1.0 two decades ago. Although it looked like a copy of windows ideas in some points, it already seemed better even at the time.
What KDE needs isn't new features but less bugs.
That's something I think as well. I've tried 4 times through the years, and KDE always felt less stable and solid than Gnome. I guess it's the configurability of KDE that makes it that way. I like the concept, but I guess maintaining it is no easy task, and people is more motivated to add things than fix them.
A trivial example: keeping a working weather widget on my taskbar for an update cycle without breaking it was too much to ask for Gnome. I put up with this kind of thing for YEARS before switching to Plasma. Widgets for your taskbar and stable plug-in APIs should be table stakes for a desktop environment, especially if its whole philosophy is one that the core product should be minimal and most functionality should be in plugins.
You know what KDE has? Features. You know what it doesn't have a lot of? Bugs. Maybe you've tried it four times over the years but after a short trial three years ago I've been using exclusively Plasma.
It's way better than Gnome at this point, and I say this as a Gnome 2.x user. I laughed at KDE 4 back in the day.
But I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread who is bitching about Plasma has not used it in recent times. It's an absolutely fantastic, solid, polished, featureful desktop. To say otherwise is just to display your ignorance, frankly.