| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Trinity Desktop Environment 3.5.13.1 released! |
| By Thom Holwerda, submitted by OSGuy on 2012-10-15 23:22:32 |
| "The Trinity Desktop Environment (TDE) development team is pleased to announce the immediate availability of version 3.5.13.1 of the Trinity Desktop Environment. The Trinity Desktop Environment is a complete software desktop environment designed for Unix-like operating systems, intended for computer users preferring a traditional desktop model, and is free/libre software." Not the first time we mention TDE, but it's basically the continuation of KDE 3.x. There's a market for this. |
|
| RE[5]: Why? |
| By Hiev on 2012-10-16 15:38:04 |
|
I didn't know activities could be disabled, I know you can get rid of plasma menu with a third party tool, If there is a way excuse my ignorance. Nepomuk can be dissabled, sure, but you are limited to not use the applications that depend on it, cause as soon you start one you will have conflits or Nepomuk will be started automaticly, and since the use of Nepomuk is a trend in KDE applications it makes it more difficult to get rid of it. Edited 2012-10-16 15:41 UTC |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE[6]: Why? |
| By diegoviola on 2012-10-16 15:49:57 |
|
> I didn't know activities could be disabled, I know you can get rid of plasma menu with a third party tool, If there is a way excuse my ignorance. Nepomuk can be dissabled, sure, but you are limited to not use the applications that depend on it, cause as soon you start one you will have conflits or Nepomuk will be started automaticly, and since the use of Nepomuk is a trend in KDE applications it makes it more difficult to get rid of it. Yeah those things can be annoying, I wish there was a way to remove those components completely. I don't disable activities completely, I'm not aware also if there's a way to do that, but if someone know please let me know. What I do is, I disable Nepomuk and then I remove the activity icon in the taskbar, then after that I ignore activities completely, but it's still there. I also have a minimal install of KDE, that is, I install kdebase which provides the plasma shell, konqueror, dolphin, then after that I install amarok, phonon-vlc, etc. Edited 2012-10-16 15:55 UTC |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: Why? |
| By UltraZelda64 on 2012-10-16 16:30:27 |
|
Because then you still have the additional overhead of CPU usage as well as much higher memory usage... KDE4 is still going to be KDE4, no matter how you have your desktop and icons set to behave. You can much more comfortably run KDE3 on hardware with a less powerful processor and much less memory, and if you have more resources to spare, the desktop will breeze by while leaving much more memory for what really matters: your programs. All of this leads to a much better experience, with the desktop staying out of the way. The main system I'm using has only 1GB memory and 64-bit AMD Athlon 3800+ dual-core processor from around 2006, so I'm not sure how well it behaves on more modern processors, but in my experience with what I have access to, KDE4--while tolerable--often irritates me with its performance. Sad, because KDE3 was pretty much the same minus all the additional eye candy, and made working on the computer quite pleasant. openSUSE 12.2 managed to persuade me to give KDE4 another try (which I really do like, it's just too... bloated), and I will most likely be switching to another desktop soon... probably back to either Xfce or Openbox. Currently considering which distros have the best implementations of each while having an underlying foundation that I don't mind using. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Why? |
| By UltraZelda64 on 2012-10-16 16:42:24 |
| I agree... in fact, I recall garbage like Nepomuk and Akonadi being the primary things that pissed me off and tarnished my view of KDE4's stability since the early days. And I still occasionally see them crash, giving me bad memories of the original KDE 4.0.x, 4.1.x, and even 4.2.x (hint: everything about those series of releases sucked, though 4.2 sucked noticeably less--they were horrible; just the thought of them is a bad one). And even worse, neither service seems to be worth a damn or useful at all; we got by for years without them. And pretty much every other desktop to this day gets by without them and their crashes. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[3]: Why? |
| By latreides on 2012-10-16 18:07:46 |
|
If only you could actually disable those. Even in 4.8 when I turn those off, every so often (often enough to annoy) I get a stack of 4 "error" messages saying that it failed because it was disabled. Choosing a folder view for the desktop is fine unless you like double click to open behavior, and then its just jarring when the icons press and depress with each click. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Trinity vs. MATE |
| By aliquis on 2012-10-17 04:55:02 |
|
Maybe it's a good product. Personally I just start Razor-Qt with openbox as window-manager if I want a light-weight QT desktop. For a all bells and whistles one with massive integration and blo^wsmart functionality for banging everything together I assume KDE 4 do the better work as long as you can throw enough RAM into it. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[2]: Support for Debian Testing |
| By ilovebeer on 2012-10-17 04:58:29 |
|
> I don't think that's a reasonable assumption. A lot of people use Stable plus backports (I do) A lot skip testing and jump right to Sid. I believe (I may be wrong) that Sid users out number Testing users, as most of the time the software in Sid is newer. What do you mean most of the time. Software moves from sid to testing, not testing to sid. I communicate with a lot of debian users and the trend I've noticed is most people using testing, then stable, then sid. Of course there's no real way to know what the usage statistics are for certain but that's what I observe. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[5]: ... |
| By aliquis on 2012-10-17 05:00:31 |
|
Also your typical KDE application use KDE functionality and as such I suppose a new version of one may not work with an older KDE environment. Then you could argue that you can use Qt applications instead but yeah, then why run KDE in the first place? Maybe it's similar in the Gnome camp? I kinda have the feeling there's more "GTK" applications and that they may or may not be that tightly integrated into Gnome and even if they used some things which has been developed for Gnome 3 it may be more separated from the complete project? But I don't really know. I don't use Gnome. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[3]: Why? |
| By dmantione on 2012-10-17 21:59:06 |
|
> I also set folderview as my desktop layout and enable the classic menu style. I couldn't be happier with it. Isn't it the world upside down that you have to disable them to make your desktop usable? |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[4]: Why? |
| By ilovebeer on 2012-10-17 23:41:13 |
|
> > I also set folderview as my desktop layout and enable the classic menu style. I couldn't be happier with it. Isn't it the world upside down that you have to disable them to make your desktop usable? Pathetic would be my choice of wording there. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |