Message: previous - next
Month: August 2018

Re: Re: [trinity-users] Desktops Icewm and TDE

From: Kate Draven <borglabs4@...>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:16:49 -0400
> On 08/14/2018 03:01 PM, andre_debian@... wrote:
> > Somebody told me on tnis list, that TDE was based on Icewm.
> > (if I understood correctly).
> Chuckling.... (you didn't)
>   That would be the same as saying KDE was based on IceWm. IceWm as well =
> as
> Blackbox (and its forks, Fluxbox, Openbox, etc.. -- the boxtops) were ori=
> ginal
> code. Neither were Qt3 based. TDE was a continuation of KDE3 based on Qt3=
> .
> Information and history on all are available online (Wikipedia is a good =
> start).
>   While both IceWm and Blackbox (and its progeny) are very, very good win=
> dow
> managers, they are not "Desktop Environments". That is a critical distinc=
> tion.
>   KDE and Gnome were considered desktop environments as they included a n=
> ice
> set of integrated desktop applications (terminals, editors, calculators, =
> color
> choosers, file managers, etc..) with a common look and feel provided by t=
> he
> toolkits they use (Qt3 in the case of KDE3 and Gtk+2 in the case of Gnome=
> 2, etc..)
>   TDE continued the mature KDE3 build on Qt3, that basically
> "left-for-dead" when it went chasing this pipe-dream of Qt4 widgets makin=
> g the
> world a better place to live. (much as Gtk+3 did with Gtk+2/glade when it=
>  ran
> off with GtkBuildable and css styling of objects)
>   TDE, in an inspired bit of forethought, was written with a somewhat too=
> lkit
> agnostic tqtinterface layer to prevent being limited to Qt3 only. However=
> ,
> since KDE4 has become synonymous with "How to totally botch a desktop", t=
> he
> impetus on toolkit flexibility has lost a bit of necessity. Qt3 was a rob=
> ust
> and well written toolkit and there nothing it lacks inherently and what
> security and maintenance is needed is provided in-house.
>   So in short, TDE was a continuation of KDE 3.5.10 which was left for de=
> ad by
> and relegated to desktop history. Now has abandoned KDE4 =
> and
> "left-it-for-dead" (though it that case, I doubt you will see anyone run =
> in to
> try and save it....)
>   Those intimately familiar with desktops, recognized what had been achie=
> ved
> with KDE3 was special, in terms of flexibility and efficiency and the hum=
> an
> factors taken into the desktop design that minimize the keystrokes or
> mouse-clicks required to do a task, and how that philosophy shared by the=
>  team
> created not only the desktop interface itself, but was also evident in ea=
> ch of
> the applications developed as a part of the project. KDE3 was the result =
> of
> that ground-up process, the desktop and all of the application that made =
> up
> the environment benefiting from that process in terms of usability and ef=
> ficiency.
>   It is something that can never be captured in a "Let's move to a new to=
> olkit
> and port all the applications over" effort. Every time that has been
> attempted, it invariably results is a "just get it ported and working... =
> and
> let's get a release out" mentality that cannot, and will never, achieve t=
> he
> same efficiency or usability that a ground-up design did. Thus KDE4 could=
> n't
> and Plasma never will match the elegance, the integration or the usabilty=
>  of
> the KDE3 desktop environment.
>   TDE continues the best of KDE3 -- that's why you are here.
> --=20
> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said prof.
Umm, may I have me soapbox back now?

Seriously, well said.