People forget why they initially implemented the CSM system. Initially, CCP was so isolated (geographically and otherwise) from their playerbase that they didn't even care when one of their developers helped his Alliance get access to the richest region of the game (Delve) and gave them exclusive rights to blueprints that gave them monopoly rights to some of the most powerful ships in the game. After they got called out on it, and it looked like their subscriber numbers might drop, they brought in the CSM system to help hold them accountable.
It's worked. They're a lot more in tune with what players want than ever, and while the stuff from the new patch seems to be utter failure, the core game is solid. People are actually debating ideas with the knowledge that someone is going to pass them along.
The system isn't perfect - the community representative for faction warfare is intentionally filtering out player suggestions so she can help her own Alliance - but it's created a stronger game. The skill queue system means that my friends and I can log in when it suits us, log off to do other things, and not have to babysit the game every time a game finishes. That's directly due to the CSM system.
In other words, the KDE team destroyed a perfectly functioning desktop environment to build a better Weatherbug.
This is a perfect summary of may reaction to KDE4. Mod parent up.
KDE4's panel is one of those things that you figure out and then say "WhereTF was the tutorial for this?" That is, after you figure out that you have to manually add it because it's not there by default. You can right-click where it doesn't have any programs or on the edge, and there's a rectangle you can click+hold and drag to change size I think.
I call this the Microsoft Excel Charting experience: where you have to guess where and how (left-click, right-click,click-and-drag) to click to set various parameters. It's frankly exhausting, more like a crappy game of skill than configuration.
KDE3, conversely, gives me a tree view, and somewhere within that tree are all the settings I need. I may take a bit of time looking through the tree to find what want, but no magical clicking is required, and I don't have to guess what an option does: it's clearly labeled.
KDE4 is a massive step backwards; Gnome, which I've always detested because it's not configurable, is preferable to KDE4. I'm really at a loss as to what the KDE4 team was thinking.
KDE 4.1 looks like Gnome, only worse. The default font sizes are HUGE, and the default antialiasing is horrible. The launcher button on the kicker panel, instead of just showing applications, shows a tabbed panel that starts on the "favorites" tab; to actually launch an app, I have to chose the application tab, then get a list in a HUGE font, when menu, instead of cascading, are replaced by sub-panels, and the replacement is made slower by stupid animation.
The kicker panel itself is way too large, probably 50 pixels high.
The desktop isn't a normal desktop, instead there's some pseudo-transparent lozenge in which desktop items are grouped.
When I open "System Settings", I get some multi-applet container like MS-Windows or Gnome, not the tree-view I saw in KDE 3.5. I can't even find most things I want to change (like Window Decorations) or even a menu with an about which would tell me what app I'm running.
Did I screw up the install somehow? Am I still running Gnome (no, can't be, every app starts with "K").
What the hell??? If I wanted Gnome or Vista, I'd run that crap. Why can't KDE be KDE?
Help!
I liked KDE because it was clean and functional. KDE 4.1 is a travesty.
Ok, read this bullshit marketing drivel from KDE, it reads like an MBA's sales pitch:
However Plasma is more than just this familiar collection of utilities, it is a common framework for creating integrated interfaces. It is flexible enough to provide interfaces for mobile devices, media centres and desktop computers; to support the traditional desktop metaphor as well as well as designs that haven't yet been imagined.
Christ, man, I just want to launch an app, and occasionally glance down at the laucher to see how much battery life I have. I don't want a "framework" that can do everything.
But, says KDE:
Plasma takes a different approach, engaging the user by creating a dynamic and highly customizable environment.
I don't want to be engaged, I just want to launch an app. I'll probably maximize that app, so the desktop won't even be getting a look.
But, says KDE, you can get rid of the gee-whiz gee-gaws:
With Plasma, you can let your desktop (and accompanying support elements) act like it always did. You can have a task bar, a background image, shortcuts, etc. If you want to, however, you can use tools provided by Plasma to take your experience further, letting your desktop take shape based on what you want and need.
Oh, ok, that's cool. So can I get rid of the "cashew" control on the desktop?
Although putting an option to disable the cashew for desktops sounds reasonable, from a coding point of view it would introduce unnecessary complexity and would break the design. What has been suggested is, since the destkop itself (a containment) is handled by plugins, to write a plugin that would draw the desktop without the cashew itself. Currently some work ("blank desktop" plugin) is already present in KDE SVN. With containment type switching expected by KDE 4.2, it is not unreasonable to see alternative desktop types developed by then.
So let me get this straight: Plasma's a revolutionary framework that can do things "that haven't yet been imagined." But it also supports the traditional desktop.
But getting rid on a "cashew" on the desktop is too hard to code, but if you write a trivial plugin that redraws the entire desktop (which isn't so trivial, as it's a yet unready work in progress, and won't even be possible until the next release of KDE) you can get around this unwanted "feature".
Come on, guys, your super framework requires a plugin to be written just to present a blank desktop? And plugins won't work until 4.2? And a boolean "don't show" would break the design? You guys got seduced into major mission creep.
This isn't a desktop environment, it's the dev's toy. Which is great, but don't claim it's ready for end users.
The world population is increasing exponentially.
The rate of growth has been slowing for decades. It's not only sub-exponential, it's been sub-linear for 20 years - the world's population was growing at 83M/yr in the 80s, and will end this decade with an average growth of less than 80M/yr, despite a larger population.
the most likely scenario is that we will simply continue growing our consumption until we run out of the resources
Why do you believe that's the most likely outcome? Entire nations have behaved in exactly the opposite manner as you suggest they would; for example, Germany's energy consumption hasn't changed in 20 years, despite a strong economy and substantial population growth. Now that the population of the country is shrinking, its overall energy consumption will most likely also fall.
It is an enormous and fallacious oversimplification to suggest that humans are the same as yeast, for both theoretical reasons (we're able to reason about our situation) and evidential ones (e.g., Germany).
You're right. Your one paragraph assessment is far more detailed and comprehensive than a national auto company's research and publications.
His one paragraph is certainly far more detailed and comprehensive than the zero paragraphs we've seen to back up the original claim.
All of the numbers in the grandparent post are sourced from fairly authoritative sites, and the math he does on them is simple, so anyone can check his results rather than simply believing his conclusions. If you think he's wrong, then how about you say where he's wrong, and provide evidence for that claim, rather than simply waving your hands about some alleged analysis that may or may not even say what it was claimed to?
Evidence beats assertion. If someone doesn't back up their claims, why should we believe them?
Quark! Quark! Beware the quantum duck!
