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 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
