Which style do you want?

Most of all I prefere "Lightweight Style version 2" but I also feel well with many other styles in KDE3.

If someone wants to port a third-party style to KDE 4 they are free to do so, but you cannot blame KDE developers for third-party styles not being available.

I think it is unreasonable to contribute to a project whose developers so easily throw away the others' work.

No, I don't mean the one called "classic", I mean the crystal icon set that was the default one for KDE 3.

I hate the Crystal as much as Oxygen. I like Slick, iKons, DarkGlass.

So I'm sure you submitted a bug report about this, right?

Years ago. It was broken from KDE4.0

Have you tried?

Yes.

unless you make the panel really small

Yes, I usually use small panel.

So set the desktop to folder view mode.

Already I want the icon for Storage media on the desktop.

Not if you do right click->create new->link to location

No. As I already sait it shows that location but not as it shows desktop folder.

I can't really help you

I asked for help?

What does it matter what it is as long as you can get the same functionality?

You stated that one can make KDE4 to look and feel as KDE3. The statement is not about functionality.

You asked for something that was like the rest of KDE, then reject it because it looks like the rest of KDE?

I asked for a way to make Plasma like the rest of Qt4 apps. Not with Oxygen style which I do not use.

Unfortunately, unlike plasma elevators won't detect when there is a problem,then remove whatever led to the problem, then start up again as plasma generally does.

The fact that Plasma easily recovers does not make it reliable.

enorbet wrote:
2) One had to give up skills as well as applications for questionable replacements and some seemed like the exact wrong direction. A case in point here is that it seems like the important KPackage (with it's full path list of all installed files for each specific package) was gutted and dumbed down to be a bad Synaptic clone. If one has Synaptic (or it's analog) one doesn't need KpackageKit where KPackage was a useful complement. This seemed a poor tradeoff and an indication of poor planning and an indicator of heading in a wrong direction. And why did it seem so hard then just to add a symlink to the Desktop?.

They aren't finished with KPackagekit. Kubuntu has the latest version and it has what you describe and much more. It beats Synaptic hands down.

Anixx wrote:

Which style do you want?

Most of all I prefere "Lightweight Style version 2" but I also feel well with many other styles in KDE3.

Do you have a link, I don't see this style on KDE-look.org. By the way, there are more widget styles for KDE 4 than KDE 3.

Anixx wrote:

If someone wants to port a third-party style to KDE 4 they are free to do so, but you cannot blame KDE developers for third-party styles not being available.

I think it is unreasonable to contribute to a project whose developers so easily throw away the others' work.

KDE routinely breaks backwards compatibility. It says so up-front, and has done so in the past. By that logic there wouldn't be any KDE 3 themes, either.

Anixx wrote:

No, I don't mean the one called "classic", I mean the crystal icon set that was the default one for KDE 3.

I hate the Crystal as much as Oxygen. I like Slick, iKons, DarkGlass.

The reason for the issues with KDE 3 to KDE 4 icons is so KDE could conform with the freedesktop.org icon naming standard, allowing for better interoperability with other desktop environments.

Have you tried this: kde3 to Kde4 icon theme converter?

Anixx wrote:

So I'm sure you submitted a bug report about this, right?

Years ago. It was broken from KDE4.0

Weird, I wasn't able to find it.

Anixx wrote:

Have you tried?

Yes.

Fair enough. What, exactly, is the problem?

Anixx wrote:

unless you make the panel really small

Yes, I usually use small panel.

So you refuse to make the cashew invisible, and refuse to make your panel a little tiny bit bigger, and refuse to just ignore the thing. You really are intent on not being even the slightest bit flexible about anything, aren't you? Yes, I'll admit it, KDE 4 is never going to be absolutely identical to KDE 3 in every single way. If you refuse to be even the slightest bit flexible, and demand that KDE 4 be absolutely identical to KDE 3 in every way, with no room for modification or improvement of anything, then you will never be satisfied.

Anixx wrote:

So set the desktop to folder view mode.

Already I want the icon for Storage media on the desktop.

I've already explained how to do this several different ways.

Anixx wrote:

Not if you do right click->create new->link to location

No. As I already sait it shows that location but not as it shows desktop folder.

It makes no difference for me whether I tell it to point at the desktop folder or any other. I can post a screenshot if you don't believe me.

Anixx wrote:

I can't really help you

I asked for help?

So you don't actually want any of your problems solved, you just want to rant? Sorry, I assumed we were trying to have a constructive discussion here. My mistake.

Anixx wrote:You stated that one can make KDE4 to look and feel as KDE3. The statement is not about functionality.

No, what I actually said is, and I quote, "You can set it to behave very similarly to KDE 3."

Anixx wrote:

You asked for something that was like the rest of KDE, then reject it because it looks like the rest of KDE?

I asked for a way to make Plasma like the rest of Qt4 apps. Not with Oxygen style which I do not use.

It is only going to look like other Qt apps if someone makes a theme to let it do that.

Anixx wrote:

Unfortunately, unlike plasma elevators won't detect when there is a problem,then remove whatever led to the problem, then start up again as plasma generally does.

The fact that Plasma easily recovers does not make it reliable.

[/quote]
So you take one bit of my comment out of context and completely ignore the rest of my points. Lovely.

Do you have a link, I don't see this style on KDE-look.org.

It is in standard shipment of KDE3.

By the way, there are more widget styles for KDE 4 than KDE 3.

I do not bother about quantity. I never seen a single Qt4 style I can be satisfied.

Have you tried this: kde3 to Kde4 icon theme converter?

How one can convert a theme which has lesser icons to a theme which has more icons? KDE4 icon themes require more icons and/or drop some icons which were present in KDE3.

Weird, I wasn't able to find it.

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204948
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=245874
I usually do not report bugs in KDE4, because

1) I do not and do not plan to use it
2) There is so many bugs that one could write volumes of them just for fors five minutes of experiencing KDE4
3) I think the worser KDE4 is the better - more people will abandon it.

Fair enough. What, exactly, is the problem?

The problem is the panel is not shown with the same widgets as Qt4 controls. Except color.

If you refuse to be even the slightest bit flexible, and demand that KDE 4 be absolutely identical to KDE 3 in every way, with no room for modification or improvement of anything, then you will never be satisfied.

Well I am fairly well satisfied with Gnome. I am satisfied with Windows XP (never tried further versions). The problem of KDE4 is that the concept which the devs impose on the user is not simple, familiar and classical, but something unusual, exotic and perverted.

I've already explained how to do this several different ways.

You only suggested to add a plasmoid widget. It is not a storage media icon. Any other suggestions?

So you don't actually want any of your problems solved,

I do not have any problems.

you just want to rant?

I do not rant, I just do not like when people spread false statements about anything, including KDE4.

No, what I actually said is, and I quote, "You can set it to behave very similarly to KDE 3."

What you suggested here is not behavior similar to KDE3.

Anixx wrote:

Do you have a link, I don't see this style on KDE-look.org.

It is in standard shipment of KDE3.

Very well.

Anixx wrote:

By the way, there are more widget styles for KDE 4 than KDE 3.

I do not bother about quantity. I never seen a single Qt4 style I can be satisfied.

Despite the fact that many KDE 3 styles were successfully ported. You really are extremely picky.

Anixx wrote:How one can convert a theme which has lesser icons to a theme which has more icons? KDE4 icon themes require more icons and/or drop some icons which were present in KDE3.

Have you tried it? It very well may still work for normal use.

Anixx wrote:https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=204948
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=245874

So in other words you didn't submit a bug report about the option in konqueror not working. And none of those were reported "years ago", one was reported a few months ago, and one reported a little over 1 year ago.

Anixx wrote:I usually do not report bugs in KDE4, because [
1) I do not and do not plan to use it
2) There is so many bugs that one could write volumes of them just for fors five minutes of experiencing KDE4
3) I think the worser KDE4 is the better - more people will abandon it.

So in other words not matter what KDE developers do, no matter how good KDE 4 gets, no matter how similar you can make it to KDE 3.5, there is no way you will ever use it under any circumstances.

It is obvious you simply dislike the concept of KDE 4 and there is absolutely nothing that anyone could ever do to satisfy you.

This is exactly the sort of attitude that gives KDE 3 fans a bad name. Rather than helping your cause, you are furthering the (incorrect) stereotype of KDE 3 fans as closed-minded, stubborn, and self-centered.

A lot of people have put a lot of effort into making KDE 4 as good as possible. To actively want to see all that effort be for nothing, want to see an entire desktop environment destroyed, is frankly quite upsetting. I wouldn't wish that on anyone no matter how much I might dislike the end result.

Further, a lot of people really like KDE 4. All indications are that KDE 4 has become really popular. For the first time in years it was ranked alongside gnome as the best desktop environment. Application developers have been busy porting their applications to KDE 4. There are now more KDE 4 widget styles then there were KDE 3 ones despite it being out for a fraction of the time. Rather than KDE 4 crashing and burning, all indications are it is growing in popularity.

Anixx wrote:The problem is the panel is not shown with the same widgets as Qt4 controls. Except color.

What specific widgets are you having a problem with?

Anixx wrote:Well I am fairly well satisfied with Gnome. I am satisfied with Windows XP (never tried further versions). The problem of KDE4 is that the concept which the devs impose on the user is not simple, familiar and classical, but something unusual, exotic and perverted.

So basically, you are saying you are against progress, everything needs to stay exactly the same? If things don't change, they stay the same. Yes, the whole point of KDE 4 is that the ways people have been doing things since Windows 95 or so is not optimal, and by making some fundamental improvements you can get a lot more out of the desktop.

If we followed your lead, we wouldn't even have a desktop. We also wouldn't have a panel or application launcher menu. Those were all radical departures from how things used to be.

I assume you are against unity and Gnome 3 as well, right?

Anixx wrote:

I've already explained how to do this several different ways.

You only suggested to add a plasmoid widget. It is not a storage media icon. Any other suggestions?

It will give you icons for your storage media. What more do you want? Oh, right, you never use widgets under any circumstances. Sorry, then I can't help you.

Anixx wrote:I do not have any problems.

You apparently have lots of problems with KDE 4. But I said this before I know you are eagerly looking forward to the destruction of KDE 4.

Anixx wrote:I do not rant, I just do not like when people spread false statements about anything, including KDE4.

You still haven't pointed out anything I have said that was false. You just put words in my mouth I never said and then called those false.

Anixx wrote:

No, what I actually said is, and I quote, "You can set it to behave very similarly to KDE 3."

What you suggested here is not behavior similar to KDE3.

Yes, it is. It is not behavior identical to KDE, but it is behavior similar. You are able to get the same end result, icon for trash, icons for your removable devices, and so on. But you refuse to do this because it has the word "widgets" in the name, then say KDE 4 can't behave similarly. It can, you just refuse to let it.

Despite the fact that many KDE 3 styles were successfully ported.

Only Phase. Also Plastic, but with changes to the worse.

So in other words not matter what KDE developers do, no matter how good KDE 4 gets, no matter how similar you can make it to KDE 3.5,

Well, it is more probable that Gnome or E17, or Xfce or anything else will become similar to KDE3 than KDE4. Especially if to take into accout that KDE4 devs explicitely and categorically refused to move in this direction.

It is obvious you simply dislike the concept of KDE 4

Yes.

This is exactly the sort of attitude that gives KDE 3 fans a bad name. Rather than helping your cause, you are furthering the (incorrect) stereotype of KDE 3 fans as closed-minded, stubborn, and self-centered.

I do not bother what KDE4 fans think about me. And I am not a fan of KDE3. KDE3 is just one environment which I can use and which is currently more satisfactory than others. If it's unavailable I can use Gnome, for example, which I did for several years before switching to KDE3.

A lot of people have put a lot of effort into making KDE 4 as good as possible.

Probably good for themselves. To me their effort only brought end of support and the fact that many programs are currently not developed for KDE. That's why KDE4 is not neutral, but negative.

To actively want to see all that effort be for nothing, want to see an entire desktop environment destroyed

Did you ask the KDE4 devs why they sought to destroy KDE in favor of their newly-written Plasma Desktop?

I wish anybody could develop what they wanted, including any experiments and perversions, and if the KDE4 devs did not hijack the name and brand of KDE for their built-on-a-knee experimental DE, I would of course wish them success in making their DE better.

Further, a lot of people really like KDE 4. All indications are that KDE 4 has become really popular.

It became popular because it used KDe name to attract developers and users. And also because of active efforts to suppress KDE development and usage.

What specific widgets are you having a problem with?

I use the term "widget" in generic meaning, not in KDE4 one. KDE4 panel cannot be configured to have the same style as controls in other Qt4 applications. That's it.

So basically, you are saying you are against progress

Is vandalism a kind of progress?

everything needs to stay exactly the same?

No. Everything needs to be better, not worser.

KDE 4 is that the ways people have been doing things since Windows 95 or so is not optimal, and by making some fundamental improvements you can get a lot more out of the desktop.

Ok, if they think their way is better, they free to use it. I personally do not want to revert to the level of Win 3.1.

You apparently have lots of problems with KDE 4.

I do not use it, how can I have problems with it? Do I have problems with Mac if I don't use it?

You are able to get the same end result, icon for trash, icons for your removable devices, and so on.

No they are not desktop icons. They are plasmoids.

But you refuse to do this because it has the word "widgets" in the name, then say KDE 4 can't behave similarly.

Widgets do not behave similar to desktop icons. Anyway you should agree that Gnome and Windows behaves more similar to KDE3 than KDE4.

Hmmm, can't we just give up and agree that there will be no resolution here? I thought this might die off after page 3.....

Anixx wrote:

Despite the fact that many KDE 3 styles were successfully ported.

Only Phase. Also Plastic, but with changes to the worse.

And other third-party ones.

Anixx wrote:

So in other words not matter what KDE developers do, no matter how good KDE 4 gets, no matter how similar you can make it to KDE 3.5,

Well, it is more probable that Gnome or E17, or Xfce or anything else will become similar to KDE3 than KDE4. Especially if to take into accout that KDE4 devs explicitely and categorically refused to move in this direction.

Gnome, are you kidding? You apparently have not paid any attention to what Gnome devs have been doing for Gnome 3.

And there is nothing stopping anyone from releasing a third-party desktop containment and panel containment that are absolutely identical to their KDE 3 counterparts. The only reason that this hasn't happened is a lack of interest.

Anixx wrote:

This is exactly the sort of attitude that gives KDE 3 fans a bad name. Rather than helping your cause, you are furthering the (incorrect) stereotype of KDE 3 fans as closed-minded, stubborn, and self-centered.

I do not bother what KDE4 fans think about me. And I am not a fan of KDE3. KDE3 is just one environment which I can use and which is currently more satisfactory than others. If it's unavailable I can use Gnome, for example, which I did for several years before switching to KDE3.

As long as Gnome doesn't change, which it will soon in ways far more radical and far less flexible than the changes in KDE 4.

Anixx wrote:

A lot of people have put a lot of effort into making KDE 4 as good as possible.

Probably good for themselves. To me their effort only brought end of support and the fact that many programs are currently not developed for KDE. That's why KDE4 is not neutral, but negative.

KDE 3 support was going to end, just as KDE 2 support ended and KDE 1 support ended. That is how KDE works, how it has always worked. You are acting like the changes in KDE 4 are somehow a radical departure from how KDE has worked in the past.

Anixx wrote:

To actively want to see all that effort be for nothing, want to see an entire desktop environment destroyed

Did you ask the KDE4 devs why they sought to destroy KDE in favor of their newly-written Plasma Desktop?

Wow, the number of misconceptions you can squeeze into one sentence is staggering. First, plasma and KDE are not the same thing. There is a lot more to KDE than just plasma. Second, KDE 3 support had to end, Qt 3 was no longer being maintained. This required rewriting many things, including the desktop. KDE developers chose to rewrite it in a more flexible and more planned manner, but a rewrite was going to happen one way or another.

Anixx wrote:I wish anybody could develop what they wanted, including any experiments and perversions, and if the KDE4 devs did not hijack the name and brand of KDE for their built-on-a-knee experimental DE, I would of course wish them success in making their DE better.

Wait, so the KDE developers hijacked the brand? That doesn't make any sense. The KDE developers are the ones who control the brand. They can't hijack it, it is theirs to begin within. Or do you think you should be the one who gets to decide how the brand is used?

Anixx wrote:

Further, a lot of people really like KDE 4. All indications are that KDE 4 has become really popular.

It became popular because it used KDe name to attract developers and users. And also because of active efforts to suppress KDE development and usage.

Of course, since you don't like it is absolutely impossible that anyone else could possibly like it. Obviously, no one could ever have a different opinion than you.

Anixx wrote:

What specific widgets are you having a problem with?

I use the term "widget" in generic meaning, not in KDE4 one. KDE4 panel cannot be configured to have the same style as controls in other Qt4 applications. That's it.

I know what you mean, the question is which particular widget is causing problems.

Anixx wrote:

So basically, you are saying you are against progress

Is vandalism a kind of progress?

I'm done with this conversation. You obviously have no interest in a reasonable, constructive discussion. You just want to flame the KDE developers and throw out insults and baseless accusations. This is not going to go anywhere.

Gnome, are you kidding? You apparently have not paid any attention to what Gnome devs have been doing for Gnome 3.

Well, yes, but Gnome 2 is already closer to KDE3.

And there is nothing stopping anyone from releasing a third-party desktop containment and panel containment that are absolutely identical to their KDE 3 counterparts. The only reason that this hasn't happened is a lack of interest

Kicker was already ported to Qt4. The KDE4 alpha came with kicker. But later it was scrapped. There is also Trinity project, which successfully built KDE3 with Qt4 (it can be built either for Qt3 or Qt4). But this will not find its way in KDE4. I still remember an early KDE4 press-release where they stated clearly that there will be no kicker in any case and at any cost.

As long as Gnome doesn't change, which it will soon in ways far more radical and far less flexible than the changes in KDE 4.

Yes, they borrowed the idea from KDE4. But they keep gnome-panel in Gnome 3. Bad practice is infectious. That's why KDE4 is bad in square: it is spreading bad practices and decisions like plague. In modern world projects borrow not only good but also bad ideas from competitors just "not to be behind".

You are acting like the changes in KDE 4 are somehow a radical departure from how KDE has worked in the past.

KDE3 was a new version of KDE2, KDE2 was a new version of KDE1. KDE4 is not a new version of KDE3. The only common thing between them is the name.

Wait, so the KDE developers hijacked the brand? That doesn't make any sense. The KDE developers are the ones who control the brand.

KDE in its major part was not developed by those people, but they scrapped it. They should be called KDE destroyers, not KDE developers.

Of course, since you don't like it is absolutely impossible that anyone else could possibly like it.

Well. It's possible. So what? If they advertised their new desktop under a new name, say "Plasma" or "PDE", it won't become so popular.

I know what you mean, the question is which particular widget is causing problems.

There is somply no correspondence between panel outlook and the Qt style. Anything looks different: buttons, menus. I know only that there is a Plasma style that uses the same colors as Qt. Otherwise all different.

You just want to flame the KDE developers and throw out insults and baseless accusations. This is not going to go anywhere.

It is you who throwed accusations of being "against progress" against those who do not like your favorite defective and buggy desktop environment.
There is no progress in KDE4 at all. It is total degradation to the level far behind KDE1.

Anixx wrote:

Gnome, are you kidding? You apparently have not paid any attention to what Gnome devs have been doing for Gnome 3.

Well, yes, but Gnome 2 is already closer to KDE3.

And there is nothing stopping anyone from releasing a third-party desktop containment and panel containment that are absolutely identical to their KDE 3 counterparts. The only reason that this hasn't happened is a lack of interest

Kicker was already ported to Qt4. The KDE4 alpha came with kicker. But later it was scrapped. There is also Trinity project, which successfully built KDE3 with Qt4 (it can be built either for Qt3 or Qt4). But this will not find its way in KDE4. I still remember an early KDE4 press-release where they stated clearly that there will be no kicker in any case and at any cost.

As long as Gnome doesn't change, which it will soon in ways far more radical and far less flexible than the changes in KDE 4.

Yes, they borrowed the idea from KDE4. But they keep gnome-panel in Gnome 3. Bad practice is infectious. That's why KDE4 is bad in square: it is spreading bad practices and decisions like plague. In modern world projects borrow not only good but also bad ideas from competitors just "not to be behind".

You are acting like the changes in KDE 4 are somehow a radical departure from how KDE has worked in the past.

KDE3 was a new version of KDE2, KDE2 was a new version of KDE1. KDE4 is not a new version of KDE3. The only common thing between them is the name.

Wait, so the KDE developers hijacked the brand? That doesn't make any sense. The KDE developers are the ones who control the brand.

KDE in its major part was not developed by those people, but they scrapped it. They should be called KDE destroyers, not KDE developers.

Of course, since you don't like it is absolutely impossible that anyone else could possibly like it.

Well. It's possible. So what? If they advertised their new desktop under a new name, say "Plasma" or "PDE", it won't become so popular.

I know what you mean, the question is which particular widget is causing problems.

There is somply no correspondence between panel outlook and the Qt style. Anything looks different: buttons, menus. I know only that there is a Plasma style that uses the same colors as Qt. Otherwise all different.

You just want to flame the KDE developers and throw out insults and baseless accusations. This is not going to go anywhere.

It is you who throwed accusations of being "against progress" against those who do not like your favorite defective and buggy desktop environment.
There is no progress in KDE4 at all. It is total degradation to the level far behind KDE1.

This is almost complete troll nonsense, but as one who hated KDE4 before I came to like it, I can empathize somewhat, and I do want to respond to the idea that KDE4 is not a continuation of KDE3.

I've said this before. In my view, it's unfortunate that KDE4 chose "Desktop" as the default activity, instead of "Folder View". It's not reasonable to expect users to understand how easy it is to run KDE4 in a way that is much more like than unlike KDE3, not without much misunderstanding and griping along the way Anyone who wants a no-hassle look at the classic KDE Desktop that hides in KDE4 should try the KDE versions of the live CDs for Aptosid, PCLinuxOS, or Simply Mepis.

In the past , what has always distinguished KDE for me, and made it indispensable, is the way that Konqueror enabled customizable Desktop launchers (AKA links to applications, links to locations) to be placed anywhere within the filesystem. Through Konqueror, any directory could be used as the equivalent of a Desktop GUI, and therefore one could have any number of specialized GUIs devoted to discrete tasks or subjects. Last time I checked, Nautilus couldn't do that. In Gnome, you can only launch an application from the directory named "Desktop" (unless the application is being used to open a file).

To my way of thinking, this flexibility is what makes KDE. It's why I'm always using KDE, even if I'm using Fluxbox or Awesome or FVWM Crystal. The inclusion of KDE's amazing file managers (now there are two of them!) completely opens up and transforms whatever window manager I happen to be using.

And KDE4 directly builds on this strength, by passing on this ability from the window manager to the desktop. Now any folder can be not just the equivalent of a Desktop GUI, but a real honest-to goodness Desktop GUI, laid out flat on the screen with your wallpaper. The ability to make a Desktop of any folder, whether using the "folder view" widget or the "folder view" activity, is far more revolutionary and important than those damned widgets. It's a complete opening up of the ways in which the Desktop can be used. For the first time we can have several customizable desktops devoted to several different tasks, and not just one fragmented interface for all things. Unfortunately, the usual default settings emphasize the widgets, and that can cause people to miss what I see as the big picture.