I'm very happy with the hard work Ana puts in to KDE4 on Lenny.

I take back what I said about Kubuntu. It started slowing down, locking up, and crashing so often that I gave up and looked for something else. I decided to give Arch a shot after looking over The Arch Way and deciding that its tenets might be more to my liking.

WOW. Holy ****. Seriously, Arch KDEmod is the most amazing distro I've ever had the pleasure of using. It took me a few hours to get everything set up, but the Beginner's Guide makes it really easy and I've learned a lot already. Pacman is a snap to use and Shaman is even better than Synaptic. I've got plenty of bleeding-edge toys to play with in the repos and I'm flying along. The best part is that I'm still getting my feet with with Arch and the best is yet to come...

Does it really matter what distro you run KDE on? You can always compile KDE from source on your distro of choice. Selecting a distribution based on the DE/WM is a bit stupid IMO.

In my opinion Mandriva 2009.0 is the best KDE4 distro out there. I just "feels" much better than, for instance, Kubuntu.

How is the best for me?
I am using one differant computers several distro's.
My personal Ranking for KDE4

openSUSE 11.0 / 11.1 (with the community repo's) = 5 Stars
Archlinux = 4.5 Stars
PC-BSD 7.0.1 = 3 Stars
Fedora9 = 4 Stars
Mandriva 2009 = 4 Stars
Kubuntu 8.10 = 5 Stars

Problem for me is that i like bleeding edge but easy to use and then you will be stuck with kubuntu because the fast cycle they use. Tried different distro's but always coming back to kubuntu even when i hate some decisions they make some times. But testing mepis 8 and backports to see if that can replace kubuntu.

Hi!

1cewolf wrote:WOW. Holy ****. Seriously, Arch KDEmod is the most amazing distro I've ever had the pleasure of using.

Why is Arch KDEmod so much better than Arch KDE???

mrmaikel wrote:Hi!

1cewolf wrote:WOW. Holy ****. Seriously, Arch KDEmod is the most amazing distro I've ever had the pleasure of using.

Why is Arch KDEmod so much better than Arch KDE???

It's a personal preference, really. I like KDEmod mostly because the packages are modular so I can easily pick and choose exactly what I want on my system. Something like that may be trivial to some people, but it's very important to me. I hate unnecessary bloat with a passion.

Other than that, the KDEmod guys backport some good stuff that the vanilla KDE packages don't get. Shaman is included by default. I also like where the KDEmod guys are going with the Chakra project.

I didn't hear about the chakra project. Sounds interesting. Thanx for that hint.

Greez w.

Is it true, that kdemod4 is faster than kde4 in Arch?

Treid mepis 8 beta but i don't like it, trying arch atm and installed it with a livecd http://arch-live.blogspot.com/ and it was for me a easy install its a good alternative till chakra is there. I have add kde 4.2 svn repo and running it and i love it. http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=44507 it is a bit more work sometimes to get things working the way i want but it is fast compared to kubuntu our other distro's. And it is good to learn some new things.

I like Arch because it's small, basic and a rolling release. It's like Slackware but with a package manager. But unfortunately it is very bleeding edge. I tried Debian, but it seemed like a distro designed by paranoid bureaucrats who hate documenting. For a while I was on Kubuntu, but it was too bloated and modded for my tastes. So I'm back with Arch on my laptop.

On my desktop I'm running FreeBSD. God doesn't need an operating system, but if he did he would be using FreeBSD! Unfortunately my laptop requires some proprietary drivers which are only available for Windows and Linux.

Both Arch and FreeBSD provide "plain vanilla" KDE. Which is the best KDE. I don't mind a bit of branding with wallpapers and splashscreens, and I don't mind bug fixes. But when distros start modding their KDEs, it's just not the same.

+1 for FreeBSD.

Unfortunately, the FreeBSD ports tree is in a slush state for the upcoming 6.4 and 7.1 releases, so we are still stuck using KDE 4.1.1. (That is, unless you update from the area51 repo.)

Hello community! My first post here (even if I'm a kde user since 2000)
Recently, the "to backport or not to backport, that is the question" dilemma started a heated discussion on the Aaron Seigo's blog. I think this (difficult to answer) question is central when we talk about "the best kde distro ever".
I'm a long time suse/opensuse user (even if I'm now with fedora . I agree that they put a lot of "love" in their kde versions, but I'm wondering if their "love" is not going too far this time. I've tested both, the opensuse 11.1 beta 4 and fedora 10 "preview", and the number of backports opensuse introduced is impressive. But this time I'm not so sure it is for good.
In the case of opensuse the backport policy is in contradiction with their (good) policy of "only bug-fixes after release": opensuse 11.1 will have kde 4.1.3 + backports until the end of its life.
I know you can use the factory repository to obtain the latest and coolest kde, BUT, if you look at the opensuse's forum you will see all the trouble that people with opensuse 11 had (and have) using the factory builds!
Factory is for testing development releases, not for a production environment. Full stop.
So this is my question: it is worthy the risk? I'm starting to doubt it.
On the other hand, fedora's kde is less polished than opensuse's, it have less backports, but it will be upgraded to kde 4.2 more or less one and a half months after the kde 4.2 release, so the backport thing is even less heavy in fedora and the kde experience will be nearer to the vanilla kde.
BUT, the fedora policy of introducing new features on the distro lifetime leads to a less stable system.
So... I'm on crisis... I'm not sure which one will be my next system :undecided:

OpenSUSE here, Kubuntu is nothing compared to it. But I'm currently using the Gnome version until the KDE fix the common crashes