KDE 4 to Support Apple Dashboard Widgets 373
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."
A possible merge in store, perhaps? (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:Lets slow down KDE Even more! (Score:3, Interesting)
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...
Re:Pulling numbers right out your arse? (Score:2, Interesting)
Why do you think the UI is awful?
Re:Lets slow down KDE Even more! (Score:1, Interesting)
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.
Re:I just don't see the point (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Lets slow down KDE Even more! (Score:3, Interesting)
Who knew that open source would be beaten (Score:4, Interesting)
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)
Re:Memory Usage (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Re:A possible merge in store, perhaps? (Score:3, Interesting)
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)
Re:Am I the only one (Score:2, Interesting)
Superkaramba (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Am I the only one (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Superkaramba (Score:5, Interesting)
widgets? who needs such crap? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:widgets? who needs such crap? (Score:3, Interesting)
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.