The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
-- rex
On Tuesday 23 Aug 2011 Rex Dieter wrote:
The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
Not having a facebook account, I can't read that. My own opinion is that if you don't want a folderview it's simple to delete it, whereas if the desktop is empty and you do want one it's less obvious how to get one - for someone new to plasma, I mean. Of course that doesn't allow for those that want the desktop to *be* a folderview :-) but that's another story.
Anne
On Tuesday 23 Aug 2011 16:53:28 Rex Dieter wrote:
The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
Sorry don't have/use FB so I can't look at that..
IMO I think you should keep folderview on the default Desktop like previous releases and if for some reason the user does not want it it's easy to remove. A blank Desktop could cause confusion to new 4.x users.
Colin
Rex Dieter wrote:
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
It would help if you reproduced that poll's options here, since Facebook is banning us non-Facebook-users from even viewing it…
Kevin Kofler
On 08/23/2011 10:33 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
It would help if you reproduced that poll's options here, since Facebook is banning us non-Facebook-users from even viewing it…
Or perhaps see if people are more open to Google+ as I too view facebook as not somewhere I want my info to be.
I would suggest that having the memo plasmoid might be enough (at least for new people using KDE), or maybe memo & folderview?
On Tuesday 23 Aug 2011 Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
Saves me the work of deleting folderview.
I don't like folderview, after all, I have Dolphin. I like an empty desktop... no clutter.
So do I, but instant access to a mounted remote drive is wonderful. Still, that may not be the needs of most people.
Anne
On 08/24/2011 01:53 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
I vote for emptiness. Whenever I do a complete install, I spend the next week turning things off. My experience so far is that it is a lot easier to turn things on than to turn them off.
Jim
Jim Lemon wrote:
I vote for emptiness. Whenever I do a complete install, I spend the next week turning things off. My experience so far is that it is a lot easier to turn things on than to turn them off.
That's not quite true in this case. Removing a Plasma widget (plasmoid) from the desktop can be done in 1 click (click on the X which appears if you mouseover the widget). Adding it means going to the desktop toolbox (by clicking on that cashew-like icon), clicking on "Add widget" and then finding the correct widget in the list (which also implies you have to know how it's called). So removing stuff is much easier than adding it in this case.
Kevin Kofler
On 08/24/2011 09:29 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jim Lemon wrote:
I vote for emptiness. Whenever I do a complete install, I spend the next week turning things off. My experience so far is that it is a lot easier to turn things on than to turn them off.
That's not quite true in this case. Removing a Plasma widget (plasmoid) from the desktop can be done in 1 click (click on the X which appears if you mouseover the widget). Adding it means going to the desktop toolbox (by clicking on that cashew-like icon), clicking on "Add widget" and then finding the correct widget in the list (which also implies you have to know how it's called). So removing stuff is much easier than adding it in this case.
Well, I know it took me days to find out how to get rid of the cashew, and that was only one of the things that I decided I didn't need. Perhaps I'm a troglodyte in this regard, but I like to start a session clean.
Jim
Jim Lemon wrote:
Well, I know it took me days to find out how to get rid of the cashew, and that was only one of the things that I decided I didn't need.
The cashew is not a widget, it is not really up for discussion here.
(FWIW, I also use kde-plasma-ihatethecashew.)
Kevin Kofler
Rex Dieter wrote:
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
It would help if you reproduced that poll's options here, since Facebook is banning us non-Facebook-users from even viewing it…
fwiw, the options there were essentially as I posed it here 1. stick with empty desktop, no widgets (upstream default) 2. revert back to pre kde-4.7 setup, with folderview widget 3. (kevin's favorite. :) ) use folderview *layout*, full screen, aka like kde3 times.
-- rex
My personal preference would be an empty desktop. The first thing I did in previous versions was remove the folderview.
On 25 August 2011 03:25, Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
It would help if you reproduced that poll's options here, since Facebook
is
banning us non-Facebook-users from even viewing it…
fwiw, the options there were essentially as I posed it here
- stick with empty desktop, no widgets (upstream default)
- revert back to pre kde-4.7 setup, with folderview widget
- (kevin's favorite. :) ) use folderview *layout*, full screen, aka like
kde3 times.
-- rex
kde mailing list kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
On Wednesday 24 Aug 2011 Jim Dean wrote:
My personal preference would be an empty desktop. The first thing I did in previous versions was remove the folderview.
It concerns me a little that all who advocate the empty desktop are experienced users. My thought is for those coming new to KDE.
Anne
Rex Dieter wrote:
The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
-- rex
If we're voting, I have a different request. Make cwd be $user/home. It seems to be $user/home/Documents. For example, if I start emacs from kde panel (which uses 'emacs %f'), it starts with cwd being Documents. I don't even know how to change it.
On 08/25/2011 09:03 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
-- rex
If we're voting, I have a different request. Make cwd be $user/home. It seems to be $user/home/Documents. For example, if I start emacs from kde panel (which uses 'emacs %f'), it starts with cwd being Documents. I don't even know how to change it.
Yes! I'm still trying to work out how to get the default search path to be /home/$user. The problem for many of us, new or experienced, is that trying to guess what the user wants never works. It's bad enough if one just has to remove the things that aren't wanted. Maybe instead of forcing everyone to have the same defaults like MS, a sort of FAQ of how to change the search path, add a file manager, etc. "Setting up your desktop".
Jim
On 08/25/2011 06:03 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
If we're voting, I have a different request. Make cwd be $user/home. It seems to be $user/home/Documents. For example, if I start emacs from kde panel (which uses 'emacs %f'), it starts with cwd being Documents. I don't even know how to change it.
Start a new thread please! :)
anyway, this is a known issue/bug, and there's an upstream bug open on it already. and part of a big-picture issue of incorporating use of xdg-user-dirs more...
-- rex
On 08/23/2011 10:53 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
The kde-sig is seeking feedback on f16's plasma-desktop (and potentially other containments) default layout.
In particular, prior to kde-4.7.x, the default was basically an empty desktop with a sole folderview widget. Now in kde47, the default is even emptier, without even folderview.
So, we were close to deciding simply putting a folderview back as default, but I thought we could brainstorm for even better ideas. What do you all think?
To ensure this feedback is most useful, if rationale were provided too... and "because this is what *I* do", doesn't count, sorry. :)
-- Rex
Rex Dieter wrote:
To ensure this feedback is most useful, if rationale were provided too... and "because this is what *I* do", doesn't count, sorry. :)
My preference: an empty desktop
Rationale: folderview is redundant, as users ought to be familiar with file managers (namely dolphin or similar)
Rationale: Users can build up their systems from an empty slate, as desired, rather than being forced to deconstruct one before constructing their own
Rationale: cluttered desktops are ugly and counter to the kde4 paradigm of order, place and function
Anne Wilson wrote:
It concerns me a little that all who advocate the empty desktop are experienced users. My thought is for those coming new to KDE.
Does windows have a 'folder view' on it's desktop? I've never seen one. In fact, their windows explorer, the file manager, is so hard to find, under layers of menu categories. I don't think they really want you to use it, but how do they expect one to locate files? No need to answer that question: it's rhetorical.
On Thursday 25 Aug 2011 Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
It concerns me a little that all who advocate the empty desktop are experienced users. My thought is for those coming new to KDE.
Does windows have a 'folder view' on it's desktop? I've never seen one. In fact, their windows explorer, the file manager, is so hard to find, under layers of menu categories. I don't think they really want you to use it, but how do they expect one to locate files? No need to answer that question: it's rhetorical.
FWIW, I know people who can't find files at all once they are no longer in a Recent Files list :-)
Anne
On Thursday 25 Aug 2011 Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
To ensure this feedback is most useful, if rationale were provided too... and "because this is what I do", doesn't count, sorry. :)
My preference: an empty desktop
My preference is for a folderview. Rationale:
A single click closes it if you don't like it
It's easy to shrink it to take only a small area.
If you organise your files at all it's likely that you have one or more directories that you use very frequently and the folderview can give quick access to that area.
The "peek into" facility means it's possible to directly open a single file without traversing several directories in a file manager.
File managers are great - but that's a different issue.
Anne
Anne Wilson wrote:
I know people who can't find files at all once they are no longer in a Recent Files list :-)
That's what the windows paradigm does to computer users. Files are placed into virtual directories like 'my this' and 'my that', so people haven't got a clue where they really are located on their hard drives (and how can they be expected to back anything up when they can't even find it?). When you ask them, they say it's in itunes or it's in the media player, as if the file were inside the program somewhere ;-)
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 18:25, Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
It would help if you reproduced that poll's options here, since Facebook is banning us non-Facebook-users from even viewing it…
fwiw, the options there were essentially as I posed it here
- stick with empty desktop, no widgets (upstream default)
This is actually what i have all the time. The first thing i do when i install Fedora is remove any widgets on the desktop.
- revert back to pre kde-4.7 setup, with folderview widget
I think this is the best option though. It's very easy to remove (one click) for people who don't want the folderview but it's the least surprising to new users (both to kde 4.7 and from "the other side").
- (kevin's favorite. :) ) use folderview *layout*, full screen, aka like kde3 times.
Using the folderview layout doesn't seem to work all that well with adding other widgets and although i found the option to change the layout fairly quickly it is not entirely obvious to new users that they need to change that setting just to make widgets work smoothly. That might cause quite a bit of confusion since plasma widgets are advertised as quite a major feature of kde.
As for the whole facebook vs google+ discussion i don't think either are a particularly great idea. I hate facebook and it's invisible to anybody without an account. Google+ seems a lot better on both counts but sadly since it is still invitation only many people still can't use it properly (myself included).
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:02 PM, John5342 john5342@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 18:25, Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
See also, http://www.facebook.com/questions/10150276652411513/?qa_ref=qd
It would help if you reproduced that poll's options here, since Facebook
is
banning us non-Facebook-users from even viewing it…
fwiw, the options there were essentially as I posed it here
- stick with empty desktop, no widgets (upstream default)
This is actually what i have all the time. The first thing i do when i install Fedora is remove any widgets on the desktop.
- revert back to pre kde-4.7 setup, with folderview widget
I think this is the best option though. It's very easy to remove (one click) for people who don't want the folderview but it's the least surprising to new users (both to kde 4.7 and from "the other side").
- (kevin's favorite. :) ) use folderview *layout*, full screen, aka
like kde3 times.
Using the folderview layout doesn't seem to work all that well with adding other widgets and although i found the option to change the layout fairly quickly it is not entirely obvious to new users that they need to change that setting just to make widgets work smoothly. That might cause quite a bit of confusion since plasma widgets are advertised as quite a major feature of kde.
As for the whole facebook vs google+ discussion i don't think either are a particularly great idea. I hate facebook and it's invisible to anybody without an account. Google+ seems a lot better on both counts but sadly since it is still invitation only many people still can't use it properly (myself included).
-- There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't... _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Hi, not sure if this discussion is mainly just for the KDE SIG or not but as a KDE user I like folder view and think that for people coming from a Windows or even GNOME 2 desktop would feel more comfortable with that as the default.
As far as the Facebook or Google+ poll goes how about a poll on the Fedora Forum? Then at the very least you would get feedback from current or perspective Fedora KDE users.
Also thank you very much to the contributors of the KDE SIG. I have recently become a Fedora user and KDE user and appreciate the work you all do.
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Does windows have a 'folder view' on it's desktop? I've never seen one.
Window$' folder view IS the desktop. Its desktop shows the content of the virtual folder "Desktop" which is actually just an alias for some physical folder deep in the directory structure (somewhere under Documents and Settings in current releases).
Kevin Kofler
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Rationale: folderview is redundant, as users ought to be familiar with file managers (namely dolphin or similar)
Most users don't even know what a file manager is (or in some cases even what a file is, other than "that thing on my desktop", for that matter; those are those folks who put files on their desktop rather than links).
Rationale: Users can build up their systems from an empty slate, as desired, rather than being forced to deconstruct one before constructing their own
It's just one click to remove the widget if unwanted, adding it if wanted is actually harder.
Rationale: cluttered desktops are ugly and counter to the kde4 paradigm of order, place and function
Desktops showing the contents of the Desktop folder have been the standard paradigm in computing since 1995, and are what users are used to.
Kevin Kofler
2011/8/24 Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu:
fwiw, the options there were essentially as I posed it here
- stick with empty desktop, no widgets (upstream default)
- revert back to pre kde-4.7 setup, with folderview widget
- (kevin's favorite. :) ) use folderview *layout*, full screen, aka like kde3 times.
I prefer the 1st one. May be the 3rd is less confusing for those MS Windows users who are trying KDE for the first time.
On Thursday 25 Aug 2011 Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
I know people who can't find files at all once they are no longer in a Recent Files list :-)
That's what the windows paradigm does to computer users. Files are placed into virtual directories like 'my this' and 'my that', so people haven't got a clue where they really are located on their hard drives (and how can they be expected to back anything up when they can't even find it?). When you ask them, they say it's in itunes or it's in the media player, as if the file were inside the program somewhere ;-)
No-one denies that, but this is real life. If you want to help and educate people you don't do it by giving them something so blank that they haven't a clue where to start.
Anne
On Friday 26 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Does windows have a 'folder view' on it's desktop? I've never seen one.
Window$' folder view IS the desktop. Its desktop shows the content of the virtual folder "Desktop" which is actually just an alias for some physical folder deep in the directory structure (somewhere under Documents and Settings in current releases).
And surprise, surprise, that is exactly what you got with the oft-mourned KDE 3.x.
Anne
On Friday 26 Aug 2011 18:24:21 Anne Wilson wrote:
On Thursday 25 Aug 2011 Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
I know people who can't find files at all once they are no longer in a Recent Files list :-)
That's what the windows paradigm does to computer users. Files are placed into virtual directories like 'my this' and 'my that', so people haven't got a clue where they really are located on their hard drives (and how can they be expected to back anything up when they can't even find it?). When you ask them, they say it's in itunes or it's in the media player, as if the file were inside the program somewhere ;-)
No-one denies that, but this is real life. If you want to help and educate people you don't do it by giving them something so blank that they haven't a clue where to start.
FWIW I agree 100% with Anne, all those on here suggesting a blank Desktop is best are the experienced 4.x users not new user's.
In the end a blank Desktop will lead to a lot of confusion and questions which then leads to unnecessary work/questions for those involved with KDE.
Colin
Is a blank folderview much different to a blank desktop? It is just a box sitting on the desktop.
If it contained something useful or helpful that might be different.
On 27 August 2011 03:54, Colin J Thomson colin@g6avk.demon.co.uk wrote:
On Friday 26 Aug 2011 18:24:21 Anne Wilson wrote:
On Thursday 25 Aug 2011 Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
I know people who can't find files at all once they are no longer in
a
Recent Files list :-)
That's what the windows paradigm does to computer users. Files are placed into virtual directories like 'my this' and 'my that', so people haven't got a clue where they really are located on their hard drives (and how can they be expected to back anything up when they can't even find it?). When you ask them, they say it's in itunes or it's in the media player, as if the file were inside the program somewhere ;-)
No-one denies that, but this is real life. If you want to help and
educate
people you don't do it by giving them something so blank that they
haven't
a clue where to start.
FWIW I agree 100% with Anne, all those on here suggesting a blank Desktop is best are the experienced 4.x users not new user's.
In the end a blank Desktop will lead to a lot of confusion and questions which then leads to unnecessary work/questions for those involved with KDE.
Colin
Fedora 15 (Lovelock) Registered Linux user number #342953
kde mailing list kde@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
On Friday 26 Aug 2011 Jim Dean wrote:
Is a blank folderview much different to a blank desktop? It is just a box sitting on the desktop.
If it contained something useful or helpful that might be different.
Huh? How do you manage to get a blank folderview? By default it points to /home/you. You'd have to actually change the point to an empty directory to see a blank one - we are talking about what people see by default.
Anne
Anne Wilson wrote:
Huh? How do you manage to get a blank folderview? By default it points to /home/you.
No. By default, it points to /home/`whoami`/Desktop, which is empty by default. (There used to be some default entries in the good old RHL days, but these days, there aren't any, except for the live image, which has liveinst there by default.) We could probably ship some default entries in some kde-sig-default-desktop package (though I'm not sure about where to install them too: I guess /etc/skel/Desktop, but xdg-user-dirs also translates the directory names, plus I don't know if /etc/skel isn't supposed to be reserved for the local admin, it's empty in current Fedora), but it'd affect all desktops if installed.
Kevin Kofler
On Saturday 27 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Huh? How do you manage to get a blank folderview? By default it points to /home/you.
No. By default, it points to /home/`whoami`/Desktop, which is empty by default. (There used to be some default entries in the good old RHL days, but these days, there aren't any, except for the live image, which has liveinst there by default.) We could probably ship some default entries in some kde-sig-default-desktop package (though I'm not sure about where to install them too: I guess /etc/skel/Desktop, but xdg-user-dirs also translates the directory names, plus I don't know if /etc/skel isn't supposed to be reserved for the local admin, it's empty in current Fedora), but it'd affect all desktops if installed.
Apologies, then. Since the first thing I do is reset the folderview to a remote directory I never really see the default.
IIRC the old desktop used to have links to ~/ and Trash - I guess having those on the desktop by default would work well for many people.
Anne
2011/8/28 Anne Wilson cannewilson@googlemail.com:
IIRC the old desktop used to have links to ~/ and Trash - I guess having those on the desktop by default would work well for many people.
That's what you get by default if you set desktop as folderview on a fresh install box.
On Monday 29 Aug 2011 Maximiliano Alvisto De León wrote:
2011/8/28 Anne Wilson cannewilson@googlemail.com:
IIRC the old desktop used to have links to ~/ and Trash - I guess having those on the desktop by default would work well for many people.
That's what you get by default if you set desktop as folderview on a fresh install box.
Now I'm really confused so I made a new folderview to see what really happens in Fedora 14. It opens at ~/. Now my home has a lot of entries as it has been used for a long time, but I would have thought that Documents and Desktop at least, with possible Music and Pictures (those don't sound like names I would have used) showing. Trash of course doesn't show there, as it is in a subdirectory. Is it really true that the default folderview doesn't show any entries at all?
Anne
Anne Wilson wrote:
Now I'm really confused so I made a new folderview to see what really happens in Fedora 14. It opens at ~/.
The folder view widget itself defaults to ~, but the default layout script in 4.6 was explicitly setting the folder of the folder view created by default to ~/Desktop.
Kevin Kofler
On Tuesday 30 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Now I'm really confused so I made a new folderview to see what really happens in Fedora 14. It opens at ~/.
The folder view widget itself defaults to ~, but the default layout script in 4.6 was explicitly setting the folder of the folder view created by default to ~/Desktop.
Even more confused, then :-) because I'm running 4.6.5, and it opened at ~. Maybe it's something in my personal settings. <Sigh> It's so difficult to make sensible comment when so many things affect the situation.
Anne
Anne Wilson ha scritto:
On Tuesday 30 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Now I'm really confused so I made a new folderview to see what really happens in Fedora 14. It opens at ~/.
The folder view widget itself defaults to ~, but the default layout script in 4.6 was explicitly setting the folder of the folder view created by default to ~/Desktop.
Even more confused, then :-) because I'm running 4.6.5, and it opened at ~. Maybe it's something in my personal settings. <Sigh> It's so difficult to make sensible comment when so many things affect the situation.
Slightly OT, but not too much. Maybe it's been discussed before and I missed it.
The discussion about folderview brings me to a more general question about 4.x features. In old 3.x times, the Desktop was just a folderview showing the ~/Desktop folder contents. Whatever you wanted to be shown in your Desktop could be either added to it by a context menu, or simply put into the ~/Desktop folder. The only real difference between what was shown on Desktop and what could be seen with a file manager was that on Desktop everything was translated. It was rather simple and straightforward, providing all the functionalities required. An empty Desktop folder would lead to a clean empty Desktop, a Desktop folder populated with links to folders and applications would lead to a Desktop providing quick access to user's most needed features.
I fail to grasp the rationale behind creating Plasma and Plasmoids, which to a simple minded like me appear to be nothing but a clumsy implementation of what was already available, and then including the folderview we're discussing, to mimic previous features which in old good times were already there, and much simpler to create and to maintain.
Could someone give me a clue of why Plasma, Plasmoids and such should be considered a step forward, and not a step back, as it appears to me? Is there something more than parroting Mac Desktop, which is the poorest point of Mac implementation trading off functionality in favor of pleasant look?
What are, by an user point of view, the extra features we've gained? What do I fail to grasp?
Anne Wilson wrote:
On Tuesday 30 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Now I'm really confused so I made a new folderview to see what really happens in Fedora 14. It opens at ~/.
The folder view widget itself defaults to ~, but the default layout script in 4.6 was explicitly setting the folder of the folder view created by default to ~/Desktop.
Even more confused, then :-) because I'm running 4.6.5, and it opened at ~.
That's expected. As I said, the folder view widget itself defaults to ~, so if you create a new folder view, that's what it's going to open at!
But if you create a new user or remove/rename your plasma-desktop-appletsrc, you will end up with a desktop containing a folder view pointing to ~/Desktop, not ~.
Kevin Kofler
Giuliano Colla wrote:
I fail to grasp the rationale behind creating Plasma and Plasmoids, which to a simple minded like me appear to be nothing but a clumsy implementation of what was already available, and then including the folderview we're discussing, to mimic previous features which in old good times were already there, and much simpler to create and to maintain.
Could someone give me a clue of why Plasma, Plasmoids and such should be considered a step forward, and not a step back, as it appears to me? Is there something more than parroting Mac Desktop, which is the poorest point of Mac implementation trading off functionality in favor of pleasant look?
What are, by an user point of view, the extra features we've gained? What do I fail to grasp?
A folder view entry can only show an icon and a name, and open the associated program if you click on it. A plasmoid can interact with you directly on the desktop, e.g. it can show you today's and the next few days' weather or the latest xkcd comic strip, it can play video and music etc. And in many cases, the same plasmoid can be put on the desktop (as a desktop widget) or on a panel (as a mini-widget or a popup widget, depending on the form factor of the widget), as you prefer. So this is much more flexible than the plain old folder view desktop. (BTW, the Plasma folder view containment can actually also host plasmoids, so if you use that, you get both KDE 3 compatibility and KDE Plasma 4 features.)
Kevin Kofler
On Tuesday 30 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
On Tuesday 30 Aug 2011 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Now I'm really confused so I made a new folderview to see what really happens in Fedora 14. It opens at ~/.
The folder view widget itself defaults to ~, but the default layout script in 4.6 was explicitly setting the folder of the folder view created by default to ~/Desktop.
Even more confused, then :-) because I'm running 4.6.5, and it opened at ~.
That's expected. As I said, the folder view widget itself defaults to ~, so if you create a new folder view, that's what it's going to open at!
But if you create a new user or remove/rename your plasma-desktop-appletsrc, you will end up with a desktop containing a folder view pointing to ~/Desktop, not ~.
Ah - now I understand. Thanks for the explanation.
Anne
-
Anne Wilson -
Colin J Thomson -
Daniel E. Moctezuma -
Ed Greshko -
Genes MailLists -
Giuliano Colla -
Jim Dean -
Jim Lemon -
John5342 -
Kevin Kofler -
Maximiliano Alvisto De León -
Michael Dinon -
Neal Becker -
Peter G. -
Rex Dieter