-
 KDE-Apps.org Applications for the KDE-Desktop 
 GTK-Apps.org Applications using the GTK Toolkit 
 GnomeFiles.org Applications for GNOME 
 MeeGo-Central.org Applications for MeeGo 
 CLI-Apps.org Command Line Applications 
 Qt-Apps.org Free Qt Applications 
 Qt-Prop.org Proprietary Qt Applications 
 Maemo-Apps.org Applications for the Maemo Plattform 
 Java-Apps.org Free Java Applications 
 eyeOS-Apps.org Free eyeOS Applications 
 Wine-Apps.org Wine Applications 
 Server-Apps.org Server Applications 
 apps.ownCloud.com ownCloud Applications 
--
-
 KDE-Look.org Artwork for the KDE-Desktop 
 GNOME-Look.org Artwork for the GNOME-Desktop 
 Xfce-Look.org Artwork for the Xfce-Desktop 
 Box-Look.org Artwork for your Windowmanager 
 E17-Stuff.org Artwork for Enlightenment 
 Beryl-Themes.org Artwork for the Beryl Windowmanager 
 Compiz-Themes.org Artwork for the Compiz Windowmanager 
 EDE-Look.org Themes for your EDE Desktop 
--
-
 Debian-Art.org Stuff for Debian 
 Gentoo-Art.org Artwork for Gentoo Linux 
 SUSE-Art.org Artwork for openSUSE 
 Ubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Ubuntu 
 Kubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Kubuntu 
 LinuxMint-Art.org Artwork for Linux Mint 
 Frugalware-Art.org Artwork for Frugalware Linux 
 Arch-Stuff.org Artwork and Stuff for Arch Linux 
 Fedora-Art.org Artwork for Fedora Linux 
 Mandriva-Art.org Artwork for Mandriva Linux 
--
-
 KDE-Files.org Files for KDE Applications 
 OpenTemplate.org Documents for OpenOffice.org
 GIMPStuff.org Files for GIMP
 InkscapeStuff.org Files for Inkscape
 ScribusStuff.org Files for Scribus
 BlenderStuff.org Textures and Objects for Blender
 VLC-Addons.org Themes and Extensions for VLC
--
-
 KDE-Help.org Support for your KDE Desktop 
 GNOME-Help.org Support for your GNOME Desktop 
 Xfce-Help.org Support for your Xfce Desktop 
--
openDesktop.orgopenDesktop.org:   Applications   Artwork   Linux Distributions   Documents    Linux42.org    OpenSkillz.com   
Xfce-Look.org - Eyecandy for your Xfce-Desktop
Xfce-Look.orgXfce-Look.org

 Apr 20 2024  
 Not logged in  
Xfce-Look.org
 Home    Add Artwork   Forum   Groups   Knowledge   Events   Jobs   Users   Register   Login-

-
- Poll . 

Amount of apps bundled with KDE?


Posted by Yaba on Apr 10 2005
YabaYaba
editor
Home
There can't be enough.22%22%22% 22%
Some specific apps are missing.20%20%20% 20%
Just right.8%8%8% 8%
Some apps should be removed.28%28%28% 28%
KDE is too much bloated.17%17%17% 17%
I don't care.5%5%5% 5%
Votes: 1128
-
.

 Definition of bloat

 
 by leinir on: Apr 11 2005  
Score 50%
leinirleinir
KDE/Amarok, KDE/Gluon
editor
Home

The shortest definition of bloat is the anti-description: It is not bloat if there are people using it.

More deeply, and cutting out a long (and very informed) description, this is how it goes according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bloat ):

Still, why bloatware?
The question remains, then, why so many bloatware are around, even though their usability and commercial viability seem lacking.
Joel Spolsky in his Strategy Letter IV: Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth, argues that while 80% of the users only use 20% of the features, each one uses different features. Thus, "lite" software editions turn out to be useless for most, as they miss that one or two special features that are present in the "bloated" version. Spolsky sums the article with a quote by Jamie Zawinski: "Convenient though it would be if it were true, Mozilla [Netscape 1.0] is not big because it's full of useless crap. Mozilla is big because your needs are big. Your needs are big because the Internet is big. There are lots of small, lean web browsers out there that, incidentally, do almost nothing useful. But being a shining jewel of perfection was not a goal when we wrote Mozilla."

..Dan // Leinir
http://www.leinir.dk/
Reply to this

-

 Re: Definition of bloat

 
 by MxCl on: Apr 14 2005  
Score 50%
MxClMxCl
Home

Do you really agree with this though Dan? I think 80% of people agree Mozilla was/is full of bloated crap.

amaroK is frankly, bloated, but we get away with it because the interface is lean. It's quite easy to trick the user really ;)


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Definition of bloat

 
 by trejkaz on: Apr 17 2005  
Score 50%
trejkaztrejkaz
Home

Mozilla sure is bloated crap.

The Firefox strategy is much better. Deliver the basics, and then have people write hundreds of extensions, to take care of the few people who need the extra features.


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Re: Definition of bloat

 
 by illogic-al on: Apr 18 2005  
Score 50%
illogic-alillogic-al
Home

If only a "few" people needed the extensions then they'd be worthless. the number of downloads alone of certain extensions proves this disproves this.
As it stands almost no one uses vanilla firefox, while people don't use the same extensions almost everyone uses some extension.
When people go to surf the web they are no longer content with an html renderer (which is what the default firefox is), they want a web browser.

Konversation. amaroK. K3b.
The new KKK.
Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Re: Re: Definition of bloat

 
 by catmandu on: Apr 18 2005  
Score 50%
catmanducatmandu

This was the concept that microsoft had when they developed activex and made it part of IE. Although activex was developed somewhat at different times they wanted extensions. It is these extensions (known as browser helpers) that puts IE at risk. It is where the adware/spyware apps put themselves and most people do not know how to get rid of them.


Reply to this

-

 Re: Definition of bloat

 
 by catmandu on: Apr 18 2005  
Score 50%
catmanducatmandu

Heh, we have to accept your first premis e to accept the whole argument. I won't suspend disbelief just because you make a comment that if ppl are using it then it isn't too bloated.

For me, I don't care how much is in it. I think it has a few things that are unnecessary and I think that a few things are too buggy still. Rather than have them remove items I would rather have them fix the items they have put in. Even some of the obvious things are messed up and they need to resolve those.


Reply to this

-

 Clean up a bit...

 
 by Svyatogor on: Apr 11 2005  
Score 50%
SvyatogorSvyatogor
Home

I guess some packages (especially kdemultimedia) could be cleaned up. It would be nice if they followed the approach: one task - one application.


Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Clean up a bit..

 
 by stripe4 on: Apr 14 2005  
Score 50%
stripe4stripe4
Home

You're right, multimedia apps are a mess in KDE - especially the variety of available players. He're my suggestion to improve the situation - there should be one full featured player for audio collection (amaroK) and another player that can open single audio or video file or load them in a playlist but does not utilize a multimedia database Noatun's three windows for playback controls, video output and the playlist confuse me and Kaboodle has no playlist, maybe just take the best features of each one and make a hybrid?


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Clean up a bit..

 
 by illogic-al on: Apr 18 2005  
Score 50%
illogic-alillogic-al
Home

you mean like juK?

Konversation. amaroK. K3b.
The new KKK.
Reply to this

-

 Split ebuilds

 
 by blaster999 on: Apr 11 2005  
Score 50%
blaster999blaster999
Aisys
Home

Gentoo recently started to provide KDE split ebuilds, which allow to install individual apps instead of the huge kdebase/kdemultimedia/kdenetwork/kdesomething packages. It's very handy because it allows to make a very slick KDE environment (before split ebuilds I had to install kdemultimedia just to have kmix, kaudiocreator and audiocd:/ ioslave, now I have these apps without juk and other apps/libs from kdemultimedia). Now KDE isn't bloated for me anymore, as I got rid of all kde apps that I don't use.

It is not the size of the hammer that counts. It's how you wield it.
Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Split ebuilds

 
 by DocTomoe on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
DocTomoeinactive user

I wish they'd do this to Debian ... for some strange reason I seem to absolutely *have* to install kdeedu if I want sound. Never have touched one of those education applications... Ain't this big a learner...


Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Re: Split ebuilds

 
 by Svyatogor on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
SvyatogorSvyatogor
Home

That's strange. I recently tried kde 3.3 from debian testing and got amarok running without any kdeedu's. The I removed whole of kde and installed kde 3.4 from fresh KUbuntu release - dependencies are more than sensible.


Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Re: Re: Split ebuilds

 
 by leinir on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
leinirleinir
KDE/Amarok, KDE/Gluon
editor
Home

amaroK isn't a part of kdemultimedia, it's an extra program :) (let's get used to calling them that, they'll be renamed from kdeextragear to simply kde extra for the switch to SVN, or at least that's what it looks like now :) ).

..Dan // Leinir
http://www.leinir.dk/
Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Split ebuilds

 
 by secretmethod70 on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
secretmethod70secretmethod 70

Interesting, I have not heard anything about this. I use Gentoo...could you point me to where I can learn how to do this please? Thanks :)


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Split ebuilds

 
 by blaster999 on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
blaster999blaster999
Aisys
Home

Here it is: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/kde-split-ebuilds.xml

It's said that split ebuilds take longer to compile, but the benefit is that you can select what to install. In fact, it takes much less time with a sensible set of packages (not everyone uses all of 300+ programs that come with kde). And if long compile times bother you, set the "kdeenablefinal" USE flag.

It is not the size of the hammer that counts. It's how you wield it.
Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Re: Split ebuilds

 
 by trejkaz on: Apr 17 2005  
Score 50%
trejkaztrejkaz
Home

Sure, they'll take much longer to compile... if you compile everything you don't need. But if you did that, you wouldn't need to use the split ebuilds. :-)


Reply to this

-

 more choice

 
 by janet on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
janetjanet
Home

I also would appreciate the option to just install single apps - the libs, the base and then just applications instead of bundles. There are many applications I don't use/need, e.g. i don't see why I should install noatun or kaboodle. But on the other hand I miss handy applications like e.g. ksteak, kuake, kickpim, knemo and - er - kpicframer ;) And I don't need any of the kdetoys - but kteatimer. And so on. So the amount of apps is o.k. for me but not the handling and the allover selection. But better more apps than less :)


Reply to this

-
.

 Re: more choice

 
 by secretmethod70 on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
secretmethod70secretmethod 70

Janet speaks the truth. I would LOOOOOOVE single app install options!


Reply to this

-

 Re: more choice

 
 by blaster999 on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
blaster999blaster999
Aisys
Home

Bug your distro maintainers and developers. Gentoo has done split ebuilds, but they weren't the first to do so. In fact, I remeber that in mandrake 9.1 one could install kmix, kate and other programs separately. It depends on the distribution.

It is not the size of the hammer that counts. It's how you wield it.
Reply to this

-
.

 Noatun

 
 by neokin on: Apr 12 2005  
Score 50%
neokinneokin

I think Noatun should be removed from kde for many reasons, ie:
1. It assioates it's self to every type of media every time it runs, ie: when I try to play an AVI file Noatun tries to run it and crashes, then I remove Noatun from the mime/type for AVI then I try to open a MP3 Noatun Crashes, this time taking Artsd with it and I have to restart my sound server and doublecheck the assioations for instances of Noatun.
2. It's buggy, If it's supposed to be a media player then why does it crash when ever it tries to play anything but .wav files? (I have had this problems over several compiles and sevral diffrent machines and versions of KDE.)
3.It's hardly maintained, I never see any commits on the CVS changelogs, the website hasn't had anything posted since Oct. 22, 2004.
4.Kde already has many choices for media players. (Amarok, Juk, an d Kaboodle.)


Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Noatun

 
 by Svyatogor on: Apr 14 2005  
Score 50%
SvyatogorSvyatogor
Home

Yep, you'r totally right. Actually noatun has been one of the worst apps in whole of KDE. Probably when it was intoroduced the idea was exciting, but I guess noatun was never stable enough to be such an important part of KDE.


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Noatun

 
 by smileaf on: Apr 15 2005  
Score 50%
smileafsmileaf
Home

I'm almost the opposite. I use to only use noatun and hated how kaboodle was defaulted to open for every type of media.
Kaboodle never did(and still doesn't) play alot of the stuff I have where as noatun does.
Now I use neither and prefer old kaffeine or mplayer.

this comment has been leafed...
Reply to this

Add commentAdd commentall pollsSuggest new pollBack



-
Xfce-Look.org
-
NEWS
-
Linux42.org
-
Popular Groups
-
Newest Groups
-
FORUM
-
People
-

Copyright 2004-2016 Xfce-Look.org Team  Legal Notice
All rights reserved. Xfce-Look.org is not liable for any content or goods on this site.
You can find our FAQ here.
All contributors are responsible for the lawfulness of their uploads.
Please send us a notice if you spot an ABUSE of the website.
Information about advertising in Xfce-Look.org.
Developers can use our public webservice interface. More information here: public api
For further information or comments on this site, please send us a message
Xfce is a trademark of the Xfce Project
Content RSS   
Events RSS