:-S
Why does the KDE 4.2 look like the Vista startbar; you can download one from lee-soft for Windows then use WINE. So why go for the Microsoft Look? We're Linux.

Besides being black (when transparency is on, otherwise it is blue), how does it look like the vista bar? What do you suggest they do about making it look less like the vista bar besides changing the color? And there are a lot of other themes you can use that completely change the appearance if you don't like the current bar. As functionality goes, there is no comparison. There is very little you can do to change the vista bar, while KDE's panel (or panels, I have about a dozen of them) is extremely flexible. You can do just about anything you want with it.

Why the people like ugly, old and **** themes? The current KDE appearance is beautiful and doesn't look like vista.

certainly, You can took KDE3 look anyway... My response is here:
showthread.php?tid=36211&pid=50671#pid50671

TheBlackCat wrote:Besides being black (when transparency is on, otherwise it is blue), how does it look like the vista bar? What do you suggest they do about making it look less like the vista bar besides changing the color? And there are a lot of other themes you can use that completely change the appearance if you don't like the current bar. As functionality goes, there is no comparison. There is very little you can do to change the vista bar, while KDE's panel (or panels, I have about a dozen of them) is extremely flexible. You can do just about anything you want with it.

:thumbs_up:True... Maybe I should just change the L&F.

I've only seen Vista a couple of times (yes, I live in a cave), but from my perspective KDE looks nothing like vista. The default panel looks just like the old KDE3 panel, except for a better gradient and optional transparency. I don't like the default electric blue, but there are other looks available.

My prediction: If KDE ever puts the titlebars on the sides of windows, uses a circular panel, and has a lime green paisley color scheme, people will still complain that it looks like Windoze...

Yeah what does Vista really offer in returned to the end user? Maybe change the colour of the border and pretty much that is it. You spend $300 for a very basic and bare any customising? Even if KDE4 attempt to copy Vista. They do it right the first time and provide much more customizing and better performance and Windoze could ever do.

The default panel looks just like the old KDE3 panel,

nooo, thank goodness that not :P

PoL666 wrote:nooo, thank goodness that not :P

Ummm, yes it does. Looking at the default panels, they are roughly 40 pixels high, K menu on the left, taskbar in the middle, clock on the right, with gradient. The biggest visual differences are the color and gradient, which are superficial. It's essentially the same look we've had since KDE 1.0. That is not a bad thing, it's a good thing! Don't throw away what works.

Of course, you can customize it to look very different. Or not use it at all. If you don't like the KDE 1.0 look, you can do something different. Unlike some other desktops (*cough* Vista and Mac *cough*), KDE give you the ability to things differently.

Currently I am using KDE 3 KDE Versions 2-3 are the best. Simple and useful. The current KDE is a mistake.

During Christmas I used my brothers Vista PC, I thought it "looked" good. Pretty icons, smooth effects. Besides there are only a million themes to choose from if you don't like the default and it a few clicks to change. There is even a 3.5 theme for the diehards. And don't forget the menu is just an application, I know of three different choices and I'm sure there are more if it really bothers you.