Reviews of KDE

1. 
   Artem Tashkinov

   Reviewing 4.3.3 (Nov 5, 2009)

   DudeBoyz should banned from commenting on any open source software.
   
   KDE _requires_ hardware acceleration for many GUI operations that's why it will never run fast in a VM (unless VM authors implement the required GPU features).
   __________________________________________
   Reviewing 4.2 RC1 (Jan 17, 2009)
   Getting better and better, unfortunately feature-wise it's still not on par with KDE 3.5.10. If you need the same configurability as KDE 3.5.10, you will probably have to wait till KDE 4.3.
   
   As for KDE 4.2 RC1: it has become faster and more responsive, features are being steadily added, all in all it's getter much better. KDE developers themselves call this release the first real 4.0 release.
2. 
   DudeBoyz

   Reviewing 4.3.0 (Aug 16, 2009)

   They have taken an ever bigger step backwards with this release. This GUI is incredibly bloated and non-responsive, especially in a Virtual Machine.
   
   Functionally it seems to focus more on fluff than on utility. All flash and very little sizzle, as it were.
   
   Man, this is an incredible let-down. I'm still not going to go with Gnome, but KDE is becoming a bitter pill to swallow.
3. 
   garretthylltun

   Reviewing 4.3 RC3 (Jul 23, 2009)

   KDE 4.x, The Wannabe Vista of the Linux Desktops!
   
   In fact, KDE 3.x had the right idea, it was usable, it was clean, it was polished, it had some glitz to it and you knew how to use it.
   
   KDE 4.x on the other hand has taken a most foul turn in development and has become not so user friendly at all and focused all on glitz and none on usability. Add to the pain of this uber awesome interface(though sweet looking, but not so sweet to use) is the fact that it requires enormous amounts of resources. I have a 1.8 ghz box with 2 gb of ram, and I could barely use KDE 4.x at all. Granted my PC isn't the latest PC of the month, it's about 2 years old, but still, systems should still run on a 1.8 ghz box with 2 gb of ram without making you want to scream.
   
   The new start menu is strenuous as you have to click through sections and click back out of sections. The desktop itself is pure gadget setup, even the icons for your desktop are a gadget.
   
   Gnome and XFCE on the other hand may not be oh so full of glitz and wonders, but they are clean, smooth and don't require a top of the line $7,000 USD AlienWare box to run on.
   
   Now if you really want glitz that doesn't suck your PC's blood dry and want usability, then check out Enlightenment DR17. They did what I think KDE 4.x was trying to do. It's glitz, it's easy on resources, it's *usable*.
   
   I give KDE 3.x 5 stars, but KDE 4.x gets 1 star. I really think KDE has taken a seriously wrong turn in it's development. One that it may not be able to return from.
4. 
   viveksj

   Reviewing 4.3 RC3 (Jul 22, 2009)

   Keep getting better. The best KDE distro i have seen is Pardus 2009. Excellent job, keep it up.
5. 
   mflip

   Reviewing 4.3 RC (Jul 1, 2009)

   This is nothing more than a cheap rip-off of Mac OS X and KDE 4.x doesn't even work properly most of the time. The latest stable version of Gnome is specifically designed for power users while being easy enough to use for less tech savvy people. Too bad KDE 4.x can't be this good. I give KDE two stars because it looks nice. At least the developers got something right.

Discuss KDE

No comments yet