Re: KDE Usability survey
On Wednesday 12 March 2003 19:00, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Frank Van Damme <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Filled it in with all pleasure, and, since you're asking my opinion
> > anyway, the useability of kde has little to do with menu structures of
> > user-friendlyness, at which it is way ahead of all the others. It has
> > more to do with kde's major disease: obesity. I don't know if this has to
> > do with c++, gcc, qt or kde, but there's room for improvement there. To
> > the majority of students I know, Kde has not become a viable alternative
> > to their revamped dos shell because of it. You know it would be REALLY
> > impressive if I could demonstrate kde on a p100 with just 32 megs ram!
> > Everyone would just JUMP on Debian ;-)
> Then show them a light window manager, like wmaker or blackbox (and
> friends). Having KDE be usable on extremely low-end hardware just isn't
> a design goal of KDE.
I get your meaning, and this is often answered in "window manager jihads", but
actually isn't my point.
First, any desktop user will want to use kde apps. I mean that as a compliment
:-) . So you'll inevitable load and use qt and kde libraries.
Second, It may not be the design goal to run on the lowest end stuff (like a
system built out of Linux, Dietlibc, TinyX and twm or something :-) ), but I
hope it isn't the goal of the kde project to become as big as Windows Xp or
something (exageration for the sake of demonstration).
Third, (<nitpicking>) the machine I named is low-end by todays standards, but
by no means "extremely" low-end. It would be like a space shuttle ride for
the majority of the worlds population.
So I find the most important thing that KDE can focus on, snappyness and
system requirements. And stability off course.
Frank Van Damme