1

By all means, do not go GNOME 3 with KDE 5.
GNU/Linux users are already horribly fragmented between radically changing software and desktop environments.
I started using GNU/Linux in 2007 because it was a superior alternative to Windows. And it was when Skype, Flash, AIR and many others were ported to Linux. I could finally break the chains and run free. Free as in freedom, and free as in faster without chains stuck to my legs, even if it meant having select few packages that didn't allow so, it was solely for interacting with the non-free part of the world.
In 2011 I noticed that development shifted from making a usable desktop to a pre-alpha desktop that will, in best case scenario, just glitter. Besides that it would be nowhere near being productive (or resource-conservative for that matter).
It is a strike of luck that Valve decided to grace GNU/Linux with Steam in late 2012 (or 2013 if you didn't get in the beta). It is truly a strike of luck, because with fragmentation like never before, it's hard to provide a uniform user experience and stability in proprietary software.
KDE had this problem with version 4.0, when the change was radical and challenged all that users have learned so far with KDE 3. It took about until 4.9 before KDE was usable and its rampant memory grubbing had the final nail put in its coffin. Now, KDE is a graphically appealing desktop that is productive and it is very light in terms of memory use. This is great and this is the track that I believe, KDE should stick to, rather than try and re-invent the wheel, like it has been done with GNOME and like it is being done with Wayland and Mir. It's not easy for other developers to adapt their software to every whimsically changed API and framework. Even when the framework is just for humans to interact with the computer, which would be KDE in such case.

It's not even good for new users. In late 2010 I thought that GNU/Linux has become so convenient and usable, that new users will simply flock in and stay. That was cut short by the radical and enforced changes that followed the spring of next year. A lot of people that I know, and switched on their own complained that all that they've learned in a short time was trashed and replaced with something that was enforced as a default and not even properly tested for user experience. That gave them the idea that this is normal in GNU/Linux, that user experience is subject to radical changes every 6 months. I heard countless times comments like "how could you use this" and "why do you put up with this insolence".

So please, I implore KDE developers and the rational parts of your brains, do not make a radical change with KDE 5 in the department of external interfaces, that is, the ones users use, rather than software does to talk to other software. What's under the hood of KDE 5 should change if it can for the better, but please, do not thrash user experience. Learn from your mistakes and that of others.

Happy new year and happy hacking
concerned happy user

I disagree.

To all of the above.

The reason why people didn't "flock to linux" wasn't because KDE or Gnome wasn't "Windows XP". I changed to Linux perhaps a tad later than you and was welcomed by a better interface than the one I'd used in Windows. Perhaps this wasn't so for all but I would never claim that "the reason people didn't flock to Linux after X-point-in-time was because of LXDE, Xfce and KDE being to resemblant to Windows at vanilla-level" - that would be to take my personal opinion and create a false correlation.

I doubt for example that you wrote all this in a terminal. Why make people who learned how to use DOS relearn everything? Wouldn't it be easier if we just scrapped everything and kept it at that? No. The point isn't to recreate and stay still - in the same way technological breakthroughs aren't created by always remaining at the same point, visual and user interface design isn't either. The point is to make it easier for the user without constricting her.
I assume you and I have both checked out screenshots of what people have done with their KDE and Gnome installations - all the varying ways people have edited the way they interact with their computer. Or the way many distros have edited the DE to better fit their vision of how users would prefer to interact with their computers. There simply isn't a case of forcing the user to relearn anything. Rather the opposite for improvement without closing the door for conservative users who like things to remain as they where.

Personally I don't want to go back to Windows XP style interface but wth.

I hate the expression "don't reinvent the wheel" - what does that even mean? "Please stop improving things"? "Don't look for better sollutions"? I simply don't know. What I do know is that none of us strap these things to our cars.


Well at least I don't - I'm sure there is a petition somewhere demanding that Goodyear "stop this vulcanized crazyness and go back to the more tested and true kind of wheel".

Now please note that I don't think any change should be forced on any user. There are room for improvements but closing the door on conservative users would be foolish but as long as that is available then fearing change is just ... well its just "fearing change" I don't know how to rephrase it. Sure the switch to KDE 4 was a huge thing that brought with it issues and yes, I am sure the devs have learned from it. But one of the things I personally hope they took with them was "for every loud crow there is ten silent swallows", for every angry objection there are ten satisfied users.

And I for one would personally prefer this:


to this:



Or for that matter, this:



______________________________________________________________
As an aside I have assumed you're talking about Plasma 2 and not KDE 5