i like KDE 3.5 also the KDE 4.x Series ..
why dont we make kde like the old KDE 3.5 ?
also is there new distro w/ KDE 3.5 in x86_64 architecture ?

64 bit KDE 3.5 here: http://apt.pearsoncomputing.net/cdimages/index_desktop.html

What specific features from KDE 3.5 are you missing?

jemadux wrote:i like KDE 3.5 also the KDE 4.x Series ..
why dont we make kde like the old KDE 3.5 ?
also is there new distro w/ KDE 3.5 in x86_64 architecture ?

You can install KDE3.5 on OpenSUSE from KDE3 repository: http://en.opensuse.org/KDE3

It includes both 32-bit and x86_64 architectures.

Besides this as I know KDE3 is available in Alt Linux (in Alt Linux it is part of the official repository), Pardus and in community repos for Mandriva, Ubuntu and Arch Linux. aLinux http://alinux.tv/ is a distro which uses KDE3 as their primary desktop, although I am not sure whether they provide packages for 64-bit architecture.

I recommend OpenSUSE because its KDE3 repository includes much more packages than the other variants, not only the packages included in KDE3 proper but also a lot of third-party extensions.

To install OpenSUSE with KDE3 quickly, you can try this live CD: http://susestudio.com/download/94f02b17 ... -0.0.1.iso

also is there new distro w/ KDE 3.5 in x86_64 architecture ?

I missed that you already use OpenSUSE. It is pity that people who use OpenSUSE are unaware about KDE3 repository. Probably KDE3 repo in OpenSUSE needs more promotion.

TheBlackCat wrote:What specific features from KDE 3.5 are you missing?

i dont used before kde 3.5 but i think is good idea to used this project ...
i used one live cd in knoppix when i tryed linux for first time and i like it this enviroment much more that now

jemadux wrote:i dont used before kde 3.5 but i think is good idea to used this project ...
i used one live cd in knoppix when i tryed linux for first time and i like it this enviroment much more that now

Which specific features or aspects from KDE 3.5 do you prefer? Developers can only implement the features users want if they know what those features are.

They aren't going to simply convert KDE 4 to behave identically to KDE 3 in every aspect, since a lot of people prefer KDE 4. But if they know what specific aspects of KDE 3 are desired, they may be able to implement them, or third-party developers could provide add-ons that implement them.

Which specific features or aspects from KDE 3.5 do you prefer? Developers can only implement the features users want if they know what those features are.

I think people should not be misled. There is no line of developers who just wait for people to express what they are missing to implement it. The bug- and wish- reports collect dust for years in bugzilla and nobody wished even to comment.

In the first place the devs should not remove existing features, rather than reimplement them, but the will of the KDE4 core devs was already expressed: they are not going to keep those features of KDE3 regardless of how they asked for.

That said I think it is unethical to bombard people with such misleading advertising making impression that some of their wishes could be implemented.

The person asked how to install KDE3, not how no make KDE4 like KDE3.

I think you can find more converts on a Gnome forum, did not you try ask Gnome users what do they miss in KDE4 so to switch to it?

Anixx wrote:I think people should not be misled. There is no line of developers who just wait for people to express what they are missing to implement it. The bug- and wish- reports collect dust for years in bugzilla and nobody wished even to comment.

I have had a bunch of my wishes implemented.

Anixx wrote:In the first place the devs should not remove existing features, rather than reimplement them, but the will of the KDE4 core devs was already expressed: they are not going to keep those features of KDE3 regardless of how they asked for.

Depends on the feature in question. Some will not be implemented (like fake transparency), others are just waiting for someone with enough time on their hands (like panel hiding buttons, which is almost finished).

But even those features that will not be implemented in the main version can be implemented by third-party groups. For instance, nothing is stopping someone from creating a clone of the KDE 3.5 panel or desktop and releasing it as an add-on. Nobody has taken the time to do this, but if someone was really that desperate it is certainly doable. There is nothing inherent in KDE 4 that prevents KDE 3 features from being implemented in most (if not all) cases, it is just that no one has bothered to do it.

Anixx wrote:That said I think it is unethical to bombard people with such misleading advertising making impression that some of their wishes could be implemented.

The one who is being misleading here is you. A great many wishes are implemented. As I said, I have had a bunch of mine implemented.

Anixx wrote:The person asked how to install KDE3, not how no make KDE4 like KDE3.

Read the original post again. The person most certain did ask developers to make KDE 4 like KDE 3.

Anixx wrote:I think you can find more converts on a Gnome forum, did not you try ask Gnome users what do they miss in KDE4 so to switch to it?

If a Gnome user came to these forums and asked that we make KDE like gnome, I would certainly ask which specific features he or she wants. This is not even a hypothetical scenario, that very thing has happened here on several occasions, and that is exactly what I asked. I am not going to a gnome forum because I have my hands full here already.

Why all the negativity? I am trying to be productive here. I know you don't want to see anything happen that could make KDE 4 better, and that is your decision, but you shouldn't try to interfere with people who do want to make KDE 4 better.

nothing is stopping someone from creating a clone of the KDE 3.5 panel or desktop and releasing it as an add-on.

This is what the Trinity team is doing. The problem is it won't be KDE4. The basic desktop components are not just "add-on", it is another desktop.

There is nothing inherent in KDE 4 that prevents KDE 3 features from being implemented in most (if not all) cases, it is just that no one has bothered to do it.

Conversely, they bothered to remove these features, to remove and break Konqueror, to remove Kicker, desktop and so on. Note that all this stuff was already ported to Qt4 and was included in alpha releases of KDE4. Then there was that historic press-release where the devs explained that there is no way for these features to be kept.

Anixx wrote:nothing is stopping someone from creating a clone of the KDE 3.5 panel or desktop and releasing it as an add-on.

This is what the Trinity team is doing. The problem is it won't be KDE4. The basic desktop components are not just "add-on", it is another desktop.[/quote]
For KDE 3, that is true. One of the big advantages of plasma is that basic desktop componets are add-ons. In fact there is already 2 3rd-party panels and one third-party desktop (or there was, until one of the panels and the desktop were incorporated as alternatives).

There is nothing special about the default desktop or panel. My system has 3 different types of panels and 6 different types of desktops.

Anixx wrote:Conversely, they bothered to remove these features, to remove and break Konqueror,

Konqueror wasn't removed. It is still there.

Anixx wrote:to remove Kicker, desktop and so on. Note that all this stuff was already ported to Qt4 and was included in alpha releases of KDE4. Then there was that historic press-release where the devs explained that there is no way for these features to be kept.

The whole point of converting kicker was so that its features could then be moved over to plasma, which is exactly what happened. So by that logic it wasn't removed at all, its parts were just moved elsewhere. So to the extent that the features were ported to Qt 4, they are still around, just with a different name.

Konqueror wasn't removed. It is still there.

But uses Dolphin's kpart to manage files.

The whole point of converting kicker was so that its features could then be moved over to plasma, which is exactly what happened. So by that logic it wasn't removed at all, its parts were just moved elsewhere.

No. The panel was completely rewritten.

So to the extent that the features were ported to Qt 4, they are still around, just with a different name.

KDE4 has less in common with KDE3 than any other desktop (Gnome, E17, LXDE, Windows, whatsoever).

Anixx wrote:

Konqueror wasn't removed. It is still there.

But uses Dolphin's kpart to manage files.

So what? Is there any particular UI changes that you have a problem with? Besides the issue with the spacial file manager option in konqueror, which you apparently never bothered to file a bug report about.

Anixx wrote:

The whole point of converting kicker was so that its features could then be moved over to plasma, which is exactly what happened. So by that logic it wasn't removed at all, its parts were just moved elsewhere.

No. The panel was completely rewritten.

Yes, exactly, it had to be completely rewritten for Qt 4. The panel that you are talking about is an early result of that rewrite. The rewrite was then split up and the pieces moved to various parts of plasma.

So what? Is there any particular UI changes that you have a problem with?

Do you know what is written in the Dolphin description in our KDE3 repository? "Dolphin is not intended to be a competitor to Konqueror". Pushing Dolphin in place of Konqueror was a great fraud. A narrow-purpose file manager which was never even intended to be a competitor to Konqueror was pushed to replace the universal file manager. It is like you receive a guest who asks for nothing more than overnight stay, but then declares himself to be the host and evicts you into the winter night.

The panel that you are talking about is an early result of that rewrite.

No I am talking about kicker. http://www.kde.org/announcements/visual_guide_images-4.0-alpha1/desktop.png

Anixx wrote:

So what? Is there any particular UI changes that you have a problem with?

Do you know what is written in the Dolphin description in our KDE3 repository? "Dolphin is not intended to be a competitor to Konqueror". Pushing Dolphin in place of Konqueror was a great fraud. A narrow-purpose file manager which was never even intended to be a competitor to Konqueror was pushed to replace the universal file manager.

Yes, the Dolphin application was never intended to be a replacement for the Konqueror application. Dolphin was intended to be a file manager, while konqueror was intended to be just about everything at once.

The Dolphin kpart, however, was intended to be a replacement for the konqueror file manager kpart. You were complaining about how the kpart behaves in konqueror. So what are the specific problems with how the kpart behaves in konqueror?

Anixx wrote:

The panel that you are talking about is an early result of that rewrite.

No I am talking about kicker. http://www.kde.org/announcements/visual_guide_images-4.0-alpha1/desktop.png

They are the same thing. Kicker was ported to Qt 4, and that port was then broken up and placed in various parts of plasma. The kicker Qt 4 port still exists as parts of plasma. The whole point of porting kicker was so they could then migrate the parts they got working to plasma. This is all explained in great detail right here.