Well, go ahead and write it, find a developer that will write it for you or pay someone to do it

by the way, i couldn't find such a handy sidebar entry in konqueror3 on my computer, it invokes clicking on system, then media and then on the storage device shown in the main view of konqueror.

Why do you all complain about Konqueror, when the original topic was about how much Dolphin sucks? Does it mean that it wasn't a bad decision to make Dolphin the default file manager after all?

And no, there's no guarantee Konqueror4 would be much better if Dolphin wasn't developed - actually, it could even be worse (Konqueror uses some parts from Dolphin).

@aapgorilla:
I wouldn't mind a Places sidebar in Konqueror, but as said before, someone has to do it.

i think they came to the conclusion both dolphin and konqueror in kde4 suck, and they want kde3 back

Yeah, well I think you're all missing the point. Look at this thread.

What do we all want from Open Source? Sustainable systems that work for the community as a whole. Not just a small elite part of it. So "write it yourself" comments are a decade out of date.

If you want to help the future of Linux/KDE and Open Source, then listen and learn from the user base. Don't get your hackles up and get all defensive.

It's time OpenSource matured and took responsibility for it's place in the Software community. The debacle of KDE4.0 shows to me, at least, that it's got a long way to go before it can be trusted in the corporate environment.

Changing a users workspace and workflow so drastically needs a massive amount of justification and (dare I say it) risk assessment. I have seen nothing on these KDE forums and developer blogs which justifies this.

Unfortunately this doesn't leave many alternatives ...

Me, I've changed over to XFCE as a temporary measure and waiting to evaluate what next; Windows. OSX ... any other suggestions?

rwsinter wrote:What do we all want from Open Source? Sustainable systems that work for the community as a whole.

indeed, but with community i hope that you mean that we all as part of the community are willing to activly help the software to evolve and stay maintainable, in stead of leeching from it and complaining to the few people that are putting all their free time and sometimes even money in it to provide it to you.

So "write it yourself" comments are a decade out of date.

Not really.
I work with opensource for over a decade, and i experienced that the old saying: if you got an itch, you can scratch it yourself or find/pay someone to scratch it for you.
If opensource in 2010 means that you can command others to write or maintain features that you in particular want, without giving anything in return, than the whole principle of opensource movements is gone.

If you want to help the future of Linux/KDE and Open Source, then listen and learn from the user base.

Aren't we both that user base?
Also, my experience with kde is that the people that form the developer base of kde do listen to the users of their software and change it accordingly.
But that doesn't mean that every feature will get implemented or that every existing feature will be maintainable for eternity.
Like i said, opensource is always short on people willing to get involved. People you call the userbase can only do one thing to help: get involved in any way you can.

The debacle of KDE4.0 shows to me, at least, that it's got a long way to go before it can be trusted in the corporate environment.

I don't see why, as the kde community clearly warned that kde 4.0 was merely a developer release and that people should stick with kde 3 in stead.
kde also continued to release updates to kde 3.5 on par with releases of kde4.
until december, some third party projects, like digikam and kmymoney still released kde3 versions of their software.

Talking about drastic changes to the workspace: microsoft did the same with windows 95, windows xp and windows vista, and got away with it, apple did the same with os x.

So i have no idea which system is safe enough for you against any drastical changes....

indeed, but with community i hope that you mean that we all as part of the community are willing to activly help the software to evolve and stay maintainable, in stead of leeching from it and complaining to the few people that are putting all their free time and sometimes even money in it to provide it to you.

That's why we're here, trying to make things better for everbody...

But, again (Riinse) you're missing the point. KDE forms the basis of a work platform. One that, I presume, the KDE team want to be the biggest and best in the OS community, on the most Linux desktops etc... So forget KDE4.0 being a dev release, forget the problems with Plasma freezing etc, the fundamental change has been to WORKFLOW and for many professionals this has got worse.

Other systems that you have mentioned improved the workflow. One of the major budgets on W95 was analyzing how people use the desktop and how to make the interface slicker and faster to use. Look at the outcry when Vista came out. Microsoft failed to give maximum priority to workflow. OSX worked so well, not just coz it looks so cool, but it's so easy and intuitive to use. The buttons are in just the right place, the menus are easy to navigate - it just works.

This thread was about file management. It seems that a number of people who have tried to use the default file manager (Dolphin) for their daily professional use, find it a retrograde step.

Hiding functionality (or even removing it) is not the answer. Designing the interface better is ...

the fundamental change has been to WORKFLOW and for many professionals this has got worse.

how is that different with the examples i gave?
For example, moving from windows 3 to windows 95 is considered a major improvement.
Still, i know people who hated it. People who hated the new explorer and continued to use winfile for file management, because explorer didn't do the job the way they wanted to.

Look at office 2007 and its ribbon interface. People got completely lost in the interface, weren't even able to perform basic tasks like opening a file without help.

Major changes to the workflow, no matter if they were neccesary or not, will cause people to change the way they operated their computer, and not everyone will like that.

But that is just how it is.

During kde3, konqueror was far more critisized for its complexity, clutter and unintuitive interface than dolphin is now.

So apperently the workflow did improve by this change.

Major changes to the workflow, no matter if they were neccesary or not, will cause people to change the way they operated their computer, and not everyone will like that.

Yes, but until Dolphin you had the choice. With konqueror you can tailor the profiles to suit your needs. Give it a basic interface at the start and a pre-defined "Advanced" users profile as a starter for more advanced users to tailor.

Why remove the functionality that people use everyday? I have seen quotes "...for ftp use an ftp manager like filezilla ..." but I just don't understand the mind set of dumbing down what was a VERY good product. Revise the interface, give it a new look, but don't remove functionality.

Remember a file manager should manage files wherever they are; local drive, hot-plug device, ftp etc ... whether it be detail lists, icons, photo thumb viewer, zip archives - these are all jobs for an advanced file manager... in fact what about more functionality - local to remote syncing and more .....

So bring back the old Konqueror - let's take a vote!

So bring back the old Konqueror - let's take a vote!

One problem with that - the thousands of happy Dolphin users won't be reading a thread like this, so you can guarantee that they won't vote.

and the old konqueror is still there, installed by default.

Remember a file manager should manage files wherever they are; local drive, hot-plug device, ftp etc ... whether it be detail lists, icons, photo thumb viewer, zip archives - these are all jobs for an advanced file manager... in fact what about more functionality - local to remote syncing and more .....

all working fine with kde4....

I don't mean to resurrect and old thread but this one is close to my last couple of days of struggle. This thread has turned into a flame war. I can see both sides of the argument to some degree, but think that the 'write it yourself' comments are juvenile and self defeating for KDE if it wishes to be seen as a professional, usable and user friendly environment.
I am now using Konq as my default, why? The juvenile argument would be because it is my choice, but in the spirit of enlightenment I will explain. It is not just a 'because Dolphin is a pile of doodoo' answer, but specifically, the other day I started Dolphin SU to navigate to and edit CUPS config, and found that I couldn't, no matter what I tried Dolphin Su would not open text files, regardless of the editor I tried to use. Sorry, but I would have thought that the ability to navigate to a file and open it as root is a pretty fundamental thing, why else does Dolphin SU exist? If it cannot do the basics, then all the bells and whistles in the world are not going to help. I didn't like Dolphin when it first came out, but I have persevered for over 12 months with it but in the end have just given up and gone back to Konq.
I agree with the sentiments of the thread title, I feel, as a user, that Dolphin has very much short changed us and is nothing more than an ego driven whim. And don't even think about using the 'it is a work in progress' argument. We're up to a 4.4 release and a very basic function of a central programme is broken.

here ... here

and it goes for many other struggles in KDE4 too, Amarok (where did that nice interface go?), digiKam (still can't work over a network) and poor old quanta (who still hasn't caught up yet)!

Are there any other reasons to use KDE?

Drop Dolphin ... resurrect KDE3!!!

PS: having had a good rant a few months ago, backed out and re-installed most of the KDE4 libraries by hand (this may be a Suse package issue), added many of my own actions, I've nearly got to like Dolphin, but it's still the poor relative to what Konqueror used to be, which is still my default file manager.

Oh, and by the way, when you plug in a digital (c)Kamera, KDE assumes/insists that you HAVE to use digiKam to connect to it - what about choice! This is worse than MS!

rwsinter wrote:Oh, and by the way, when you plug in a digital (c)Kamera, KDE assumes/insists that you HAVE to use digiKam to connect to it - what about choice! This is worse than MS!

Please check your facts before ranting. You can change and add actions using the input actions KCM in system settings.

Yeah, that's exacly what you think of when you want to change the behaviour for this particular device now. How many clicks to go there and back?

rwsinter wrote:Amarok (where did that nice interface go?)

its gone.

, digiKam (still can't work over a network)

works fine with my nfs-shares

and poor old quanta (who still hasn't caught up yet)!

you can donate to the project in an attempt to speed up development.
software doesn't grow on trees by itself..

Drop Dolphin ... resurrect KDE3!!!

kde3 is still out there..

Oh, and by the way, when you plug in a digital (c)Kamera, KDE assumes/insists that you HAVE to use digiKam to connect to it - what about choice!

Choice is determined by the applications on your system. They should propagate their capabilities in opening your digital camera.
If they don't, you can add them yourself.
If you find an option missing, please report that to the developers of the application in question.

by the way, if i plugin a camera, i get a list of applications, including digikam and dolphin (and some other, which i can't remember)

This is worse than MS!

of course it is..