16

Why not to create a single system plasmoid? Even like a mini version of system settings with mostly often used ones also with shortcuts to appropriates system settings tab (everything cabt fit in mini version )

It could be (optional) replacement for battery monitor, Network manager, System monitors, Peripheral devices (save space in panel) also could bring many important features closer to user.

The overall behavior should be combination of Kickoff and Battery monitor: A tabbed settings pages.

Basic tabs could be:

• Display - Allows to adjust brightness, select displays: Twin-view, clone, single screen (very handy when doing presentations)
• Power - A bit improved battery monitor (energy profile, ALL leave options etc)
• Networking - Network manager
• System - Updates, Important info about system, Audio control, time zone, compoziting etc.
• Other - In system try we have many icons we not really often or almost newer use like HPlip. Some of them could be moved to Other tab.
  
  By now i should have 2 levels of hide in system try:
  Mostly hidden (would be moved to Other tab) - HPlip, System update (I do updates manually), Kwallet etc.
  Sometimes hidden (as it is now) - Volume controll, klipper, skype etc
  Always visible - Amarok, kontact etc

The list itself should be improved, but the idea I hope is clear
What do you think?

I like the concept, there are too many useful plasmoid around my panel / desktop (I use wicd for not having another plasmoid!) Perhaps a plasmoid that contains plasmoids (in elegant way to be discussed) is the right thing? Only one condition: the access point should be an icon on the panel or on the desktop, no dashboard or similar!

I like the idea but am unsure about your implementation. I think the idea might be very close to a "purified" systray anyway (in which only system tasks are displayed. I notice the systray now has options to control what kinds of icons are displayed, and it is possible to have multiple systrays, each with a different purpose. But on my 4.3 beta this feature seems to have no effect )

I'd like your plasmoid, for example, to be able to show separate icons for each active system task (printing, charging, connecting to network etc) and I'd like to be able to access settings and status information by directly clicking on the corresponding icon. But this is almost exactly what the systray should be for (IMHO).

The problem has been that most KDE developers (?) seem to be moving towards plasmoids for most of these system tasks and we are left with the problem of grouping them and displaying them into something that looks and behaves a little like a systray. And in the mean time we can't throw out the old systray because too many useful things use it; some such as kmail, amarok and others use it inappropriately to provide access to the application when the main window is closed (really useful but not the same as accessing system task info).

It is very frustrating. There are conflicting models of interaction going on and it makes it hard to actually achieve the unified and consistent behaviour that draws many of us to KDE. I've read the article but I still can't understand the reason for the movement away from the systray (especially now its had a lot of fixes).

There is many ideas about systray, taskbar, quicklouch, plasmoids. But is there a clean and clear document defining what should do what. If not, then we should create one first. Such questions like should this belong to here or there must even don't exist.