No idea what you're talking about. I tried googling it but found nothing.

I was referring to PIM applications. If you could read, you'd knew that.

Kontact 4.10 is great: http://www.muktware.com/5567/future-and-kde-pim – 4.8 however was only the second release with the new foundation. It contained bugs related to mail filtering. These bugs are all fixed in 4.9.x or 4.10.x, as far as I'm aware.

Evolution 3.6 also bought nice improvements.

As for non-PIM productivity applications: GNOME Boxes 3.4 is a mere tech preview. 3.8 is the current and much better release. GNOME Web is now based on WebKit2 which is a great improvement security-wise.
As I previously wrote: QtWebKit 2.3 has also been released with many important bug fixes but Debian 7.0 sticks blindly to QtWebKit 2.2. EVERY Qt-based application that uses WebKit to render some content has grave security risks with 2.2.

As if you would fix any bugs...

GNOME 3.4, KDE SC 4.8, and Xfce 4.8 are End Of Life and don't receive any bugfixes at all any longer and all those releases fixed more bugs than they introduced regressions. Dot-0 releases are the ones with regressions and these are gone by dot-1.

Claiming that the fixed bugs are not important is simply denying reality. Especially in KDE land where 4.7 introduced the new generation KMail and 4.8 is only the second release with it. 4.9 and 4.10 fixed loads and loads of bugs in that area and PIM is not some unimportant game or so -- it's crucial for productivity.

QtWebKit is not a single browser, it's the HTML rendering used by almost all KDE applications (excl. the few that still use KHTML).
And I don't see any reason in refusing to ship an important bugfix release that does not need any cherrypicked backporting. It simply proves that Debian is not as secure as masternerdguy claimed.
Considering that QtWebKit 2.2 is the version Debian users are stuck now for the next two years without any update in sight, Debian can be considered extremely dangerous.

No. Wheezy’s QtWebKit is stuck at version 2.2. QtWebKit 2.3.1 is out since a while featuring many important bugfixes of which none were backported: http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/qtwebkit/2.2.1-5

That's not what masternerdguy wrote.

And when you look at openSUSE, your whole argument falls apart: openSUSE is also relatively conservative but still manages to bring recent GNOME, KDE SC, and Xfce releases to its users. That's because the openSUSE maintainers decide on a case by case basis (eg. they waited a while to adopt systemd or Plymouth) instead of blindly picking only old software.

That generalized claim is wrong. Three prominent examples:

The KDE Workspaces/Apps releases 4.8.4 are less stable than 4.10.2. The 4.8.x releases as well as 4.9.x reached End Of Life quite some time ago and don't receive any bugfix any longer. 4.10.2 contains many bugfixes upstream doesn't bother backporting to older releases (at least not 4.8.x which is two versions behind).

Same with GNOME. I could understand if the package maintainers decided to use 3.6 instead of 3.8 because 3.6 still includes the Fallback Mode but 3.4 is old and unmaintained.

Xfce 4.10 is already a year old and 4.12 should be around the corner. 4.8 just unmaintained and lacks many crucial bugfixes from 4.10.

Not being cutting edge means not blindly jumping towards the latest dot-0 release. It means sticking to software with long term support (eg. Mozilla's ESR versions which regularly receive bugfixes).
However skipping releases that contain many bugfixes just for the sake of shipping >1 year old software has nothing to do with providing stability or security. On the contrary.

Bruce Schneier accurately predicts the random.
http://www.schneierfacts.com/facts/485

Bruce Schneier doesn't need to hide data with steganography - data hides from Bruce Schneier
Bruce Schneier knows who the Anonymous Coward is
Bruce Schneier can recite pi. Backwards.
Bruce Schneier can securely wipe any hard drive by shaking it like an etch-a-sketch.
Bruce Schneier knows Chuck Norris' private key.
Bruce Schneier can write a recursive program that proves the Riemann Hypothesis. In Malbolge.
Bruce Schneier can read captchas.
Hashes collide because they're swerving to avoid Bruce Schneier.
Bruce Schneier is the root of all certificates.
Bruce Schneier intercepts all your internal monologues by a man-in-the-middle attack.

http://www.schneierfacts.com/

So you mean that AMD FOSS drivers are better than NVidia's proprietary ones as well?

I agree that the Phoronix benchmarks are mostly stupid but the site also covers lots of stories other publications don't. Michael reads through git commit logs, has subscriptions to mailing lists of exotic Linux-related projects, etc. and he reports what he finds.

Filtering out the benchmark stories is still easier than to subscribe to all those mailing lists and search for useful info.

I take Phoronix over OSNews any day...

Every NVidia owner who uses Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. for at least one session.
Most distributions don't bundle proprietary drivers.

They don't work on drivers for legacy hardware. AFAIK most work on the R300 Mesa driver is done by Red Hat.

Due financial troubles, AMD had to fire many people, incl the majority of its Linux developers. Maybe that's why the docs are incomplete...

The Mesa wiki claims full power management support for almost all AMD GPUs. Can't verify that, though, as I'm currently on NVidia.

Really? So the 310.x and newer NVidia drivers don't actually crash when trying to initialize OpenGL on my GeForce 9200?

"Purity" means that the drivers work out of the box under all Linux distributions. The proprietary drivers must be re-installed every time a kernel upgrade is done which, depending on the Linux distribution, can be quite often.

Syntax highlighting for a huge amount of languages is inherited from Kate/KWrite.
For everything beyond that KDevelop uses plugins. These are available:
https://projects.kde.org/projects/extragear/kdevelop/plugins
https://projects.kde.org/projects/playground/devtools/plugins/