>> So why is it called KDE? Why not another new name?
>> That would be more fair.
>>
>If you have a specific question will try to help you. Please don't waste our
>time with this FUD.
Hi, Anne:
Yes, I have several specific questions:
1. I would like to set my panel size to 46 points. In this panel I would like to set my clock as follows: time is shown as HH:MM:SS in boldface Sans Serif (ie Arial on my system) 17 points. Below this I would like the date to be shown as YYYY-MM-DD in normal Sans Serif 12 points size. How can I do this?
2. I would like removable media icons (such as USB flash disk, CD-ROM, DVD, digital camera) to be placed onto the desktop when plugged in. I would like to be able to mount and unmount them manually, and remove them safely (ie eject, safely remove options in KDE3.5).
3. I would like in certain cases to hide the panel manually. Autohide is not what I want.
4. I would like to set panel transparency, background image. I could not find out how. I would like to use classical appearance, where I can see the borders of the tasks and widgets on the panel. How?
5. I don't want to see those large bubbles when I move the mouse over a widget. How can I disable them? I would like to see normal, thin tooltips.
6. I would like to see borders between system tray, taskbar, and other widgets. (In KDE3 they were called apllet handles.)
7. I could not find out how to set theme/lookout so that it would look like my openSUSE KDE3.5 theme.
These are the things I think of right now.
As for your remark about FUD: my message is not FUD. Everything I wrote in it is based on my personal experience. I have a system with a 2.4 GHz CPU and ~700 MB of RAM. I guess many people has computers with weaker resources. KDE3 runs pretty smooth on this computer. KDE4 is noticeably slower.
Once linux was famous for its minimal resource requirements. Nowadays, partially because of desktop managers like KDE4, linux systems became resource eating monsters. Not everyone can afford or want to use 4-6 GHz CPU and GBs of RAM.
And you even has not tried to answer my question. I try to explain my opinion from another point of view:
What makes KDE4 more similar to old KDE than to GNOME, XFCE, LXDE etc?
I guess nothing. My experience is so far: the difference between KDE4 and KDE3 is bigger than that between KDE3 and eg. GNOME. On the base of KDE3 knowledge it is easier to use even GNOME, XFCE, LXDE, whatever, than KDE4. It is something like to give a new airplane to an airplane pilot to fly, but the new airplane is actually a helicopter. And when the pilot claims about it, the constructor tells him "this is an airplane, though it looks different, behaves different, has different wheels, different control units, but this IS an airplane".
And I would not care about it if I weren't a long time KDE3 user. I chose KDE3 since I found it superior to other desktop environments. And I will keep using it as long as I can, since KDE4 is not a replacement of it, it is not superior to other desktop environments anymore. Many of the things that are important for me are missing from KDE4. But the problem is that KDE3 is being replaced by it in large distros and one day I won't be able to install KDE3 anymore. By that day I would like to have something that as good as, or even better than KDE3. That is the reason I am writing this.
Istvan
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
