On Sat, 2008-10-04 at 21:14 +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
It is obvious that KDE4 is meant to be used with a different mindset (no icons on the desktop, desktop is not a folder, everything you can see is a window or a widget, etc...), but the question is actually *why* is it different and *how* is one supposed to think in order to make optimum usage of it. I believe some users are trying to forcibly configure it to behave like KDE3, and are frustrated by the process and the results. The "why" question is obvious somehow...
Note, I did some reading on the sugested websites that explain this in some sense, but I still fail to see the actual benefit of this paradigm shift. So I'd be grateful if someone explained this in a nutshell, and I believe this is what OP also wants. I also like it and use it on a daily basis, but somehow feel that I am missing the idea of how it is intended to be used.
You said it better than I did.
I don't "get" KDE4. The big thing I missed from KDE3 was a desktop with real folders on it that I could drag and drop to my heart's content. KDE has "folder view" that one can use to display a folder and one can put the icon for a folder on the desktop, but I don't see how that is better than what we had with KDE3.
All I see so far is that KDE4 is different. I don't get how it is better.
The management and control of the desktop area is what I don't understand. Its like we added a layer of complexity (ie using folder view and having to use an icon on the desktop to represent the folder) and I am not following why its better. I don't see anything we couldn't have done in KDE3 if we would have added widgets to it.
Why did they not allow the user to have a traditional desktop that displayed the entire contents of the Desktop folder ?
Thanks