Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

KDE 4 to Support Apple Dashboard Widgets 373

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the apple-setting-accidental-standards dept.
Ryan writes to tell us Applexnet is reporting that Zack Rusin, a lead developer of KDE, has confirmed that KDE 4 will be able to run and display Dashboard widgets similar to Mac OS X 10.4. From the article: "Basically, this means that a layer (similar in some ways to layers in Adobe Photoshop) in the KDE desktop could function the same way that Dashboard does in Mac OS X. Widgets themselves are not inherently difficult to write nor properly interpret, since they are usually just HTML and Javascript (although Cocoa code can be included, the developer's skills permitting). Furthermore, since Konqueror and Safari share very nearly the same rendering engine, KHTML and WebKit, this too will simplify the process."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

KDE 4 to Support Apple Dashboard Widgets

Comments Filter:
  • by hahafaha (844574) * <lgrinberg@gmail.com> on Monday January 02, 2006 @01:57PM (#14379409)
    Apple already took a lot from UNIX. It pretty much *is* UNIX. Perhaps it will lend something to KDE.

    Most UNIX-people use Apple because it still is UNIX but with a better GUI. Perhaps KDE will convince Apple to make the GUI Free Software.

    Or maybe Apple will just sue the socks off of the KDE project.
  • by molnarcs (675885) <molnarcs@NOspAm.gmail.com> on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:07PM (#14379467) Homepage Journal
    You have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about... Slow down KDE even more? What version did you use last time? 2.2? With every release since 3.0 KDE is getting better and better perfomance on old hardware. I'm happily using it on a 700Mhz duron with 256Mb SDRAM (not my main machine though). Please don't spread FUD about KDE if you haven't used it for years...

    On the other hand, if KDE is slow for you (on hw with speck >= to my duron conf.), than you screwed up your config (or your distro screwed up kde). KDE permorms admirably well these days...

  • by hahafaha (844574) * <lgrinberg@gmail.com> on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:08PM (#14379471)
    I know of plenty of people like that. You might have misinterpreted what I said. I did not mean that most people that like UNIX, use Apple because of its GUI. I said that most people that use UNIX and use Apple, do so because of the GUI.

    Why do you think the UI is awful?
  • by melonman (608440) on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:16PM (#14379529) Journal

    You forgot to add "and if you don't like it you should write your own Window Manager, that's the power of open source". That's my favourite knee-jerk dismissal of constructive criticism.

    If the KDE community is happy for their user base to be restricted to those willing to hand tune and compile KDE, fine. But if we're going to stick with the "Linux Desktop takes over the world" mantra beloved by many here, the way KDE runs out of the box does matter.

    I've been using KDE for several years. It's hard to say if it has slowed down or speeded up, as I keep upgrading my hardware. But this laptop I'm typing on ran XP and Office just fine in 256Mb of RAM, but needed twice that to run KDE and OpenOffice comfortably.

    Now maybe that's down to KDE, or Open Office, or the Redhat Network icon for all I care, the point is that overall system performance does matter, especially when it is worse than that of Windows, and berating the users for noticing the bloat is not a great growth strategy IMHO.

  • by Bralkein (685733) on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:21PM (#14379557)
    Well things in the style of the OSX dashboard widgets can be useful too. In this interview [ox.ac.uk], Zack Rusin (the guy mentioned in the summary for this article) talks briefly about OSX-style eye-candy in KDE4, and he says that they want their interface to be useful as well as good-looking. If you still don't want the useful magic eye-candy thingies because you think they're too heavy on resources or annoying or whatever, then you'd probably be better off not using KDE anyway. You could just use XFCE or Fluxbox or something like that instead. You'd still be able to run apps from KDE or GNOME or whatever, but the DE would be more minimal.
  • by oneiron (716313) on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:24PM (#14379577)
    I have to admit, I am completely new to KDE/Linux. However, I just installed kubuntu on a HP omnibook p3 600 w/ 256mb RAM. It runs beautifully and flawlessly with zero post-installation configuration. I dare say the notebook is a good deal snappier than when WinXP was installed on it. I'm very happy with it, and I plan to run it in the future...whenever possible.
  • by ShatteredDream (636520) on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:31PM (#14379622) Homepage
    I hate to break it to you, but Java beat them by a wide margin a long time ago. Java has been able to do the write once, run anywhere since around JDK 1.2. Yes, you still need to do testing on platforms you plan to officially support, but the big difference is that Sun has made incredible strides in making Java that reliable on all officially supported platforms.

    Now, as a Java developer I see nothing wrong with this and even see a good place for Java in the development of widgets. It's an easy language to pick up and you have the applets concept which was the first attempt to create something similar to widgets. All things considered, Java is an asset, not a competitor, for widgets.
  • RAM-hogging pleasure (Score:3, Interesting)

    by kitzilla (266382) <paperfrogNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:39PM (#14379664) Homepage Journal
    So now KDE users can enjoy the same RAM-hogging pleasure afforded us OS X users by an array of useless, bloated widgets. Now THAT is progress! ;-)
  • Re:Memory Usage (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Arctic Fox (105204) on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:43PM (#14379692) Homepage Journal
    Of course.

    But 150+ Mb for a weather widget? The Mac widgets were pigs. Though, I don't think it was the individual widget's fault. I think Dashboard was funky.

    Like I said, I've since turned of Dashboard and am using the Yahoo Widgets, with far less trouble.

  • by aztracker1 (702135) on Monday January 02, 2006 @02:56PM (#14379765) Homepage
    Considering that *most* computer sales are laptops, it may well be a good thing to F/OSS their OS... you would get *real* support for branded hardware, and OSS community support for other hardware... Honestly, it's the *only* way I would trust apple to have an OS for non-apple hardware is an OpenSource license, considering what happened the last time they allowed 3rd party vendor licensing.

    I really like OSX 10.4, and would really like more support, the intel move will help this a little. Open-Sourcing the OS could help a *LOT*, maybe restrict the license to use without redistribution, or something... Which would allow for download/install, but limit competing vendors.
  • Re:Am I the only one (Score:1, Interesting)

    by FaramirTook (853006) on Monday January 02, 2006 @03:16PM (#14379883)
    You're not "binding" the browser in. You're using KHTML to render HTML/CSS/JavaScript-based widgets in a seperate layer. You don't need to use it or enable it. One could use Gecko to accomplish the same feat, but it being KDE and Apple using KHTML in thier WebKit, which drives Dashboard, the KDE devs used the KHTML rendering engine. Konquerer has no part here, if I understand correctly.
  • Re:Am I the only one (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tawhaki (750181) on Monday January 02, 2006 @03:38PM (#14380021)
    It is actually quite difficult to use KDE without KHTML being installed. Lots of things depend on it. I believe you wouldn't even be able to load KDE without KHTML.
  • Superkaramba (Score:2, Interesting)

    by biscon (942763) on Monday January 02, 2006 @03:45PM (#14380058)
    As only mentioned by one poster earlier. Isn't superkaramba an older implementation of the same idea? im curious since everyone seems to give apple credit for the concept.
  • Re:Am I the only one (Score:2, Interesting)

    by monkaru (927718) on Monday January 02, 2006 @03:45PM (#14380059)
    Konquerer will have everything to do with unless the abstraction layer is running off the X server, much like Windows ActiveX components, which wouldn't make any sense. KHTML has to be rendered by a browser because that's how the scripts will be parsed. The desktop is just a Konquerer shell anyway. It's going to make Konquerer even more like Windows Explorer, which it is a lot already, with the browser making calls to the hardware abstraction layer. I see the makings of a security hole you could drive a small band of Mongols through.
  • Re:Superkaramba (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 10Ghz (453478) on Monday January 02, 2006 @04:08PM (#14380172)
    SuperKaramba, Kicker and the Desktop are going to be merged in to one coherent whole in KDE4 called Plasma. These widgets and related technologies will be part of Plasma. So, in KDE3.x, we use SuperKaramba to handle widgets like these. In KDE4, it will be handled by Plasma.
  • by AlgorithMan (937244) on Monday January 02, 2006 @08:51PM (#14381479) Homepage
    Yes sure, lets all waste cpu time on running scripted programs in our OS, they are not horrible enough on websites... script languages are so great because every moron can use them... do you realize that the fastest "programs" written in SCRIPT languages need about TWENTY TIMES the ammount of cpu time that a COMPILED C++ Program would need? Is it so important to us, that every idiot can write "programs" for us? do we need them so badly that we have to throw our CPUs performance out of the window for them? just my two cents I love my c++ compiler =) AlgoMan
  • by lasindi (770329) on Tuesday January 03, 2006 @01:45AM (#14382477) Homepage
    script languages are so great because every moron can use them... do you realize that the fastest "programs" written in SCRIPT languages need about TWENTY TIMES the ammount of cpu time that a COMPILED C++ Program would need? Is it so important to us, that every idiot can write "programs" for us?

    To a large extent I agree with you, and C++ is also my preferred language. However, there are good reasons for making languages easier (so that "every moron can use them"). The fact is, no programmer is perfect; and if it's easier for a very imperfect programmer (moron) to use a language, it's (usually) also easier for a good (but still imperfect) programmer. Easier languages mean fewer mistakes by programmers, no matter how good they are; fewer mistakes mean fewer bugs.

    I like C++ as a good compromise between being able to do low-level stuff (like pointers and memory management) when you have to, and still being able to hide all that low-level code inside classes and benefiting from the features of OOP. However, sometimes ease-of-coding (and the greater reliability of your programs that comes with it) is worth more than the performance, and C++ may not be the best language for the job.

    I have discovered a truly wonderful signature, but this margin is too narrow to hold it

    Seems like you got your sig from the same place I got mine. ;)

From Sharp minds come... pointed heads. -- Bryan Sparrowhawk

Working...