KDE-3.1 Alpha Screenshots

[airhead]

Freshly baked

http://static.kdenews.org/mirrors/qwertz/kde31alpha/

Don't they look lovely? Konq looks awesome with tabbed browsing

[Ashcrow]

I might have to give KDE 3.1 one a try when it's past alpha! It looks like it is starting to catch up with GNOME!

[quote author=Ashcrow link=board=13;threadid=4133;start=0#41020 date=1026432670]
It looks like it is starting to catch up with GNOME!
[/quote]

ur kidding right?
KDE has been ahead of gnome ever since KDE 2.2 came out, and since then KDE has only increased their lead.

[quote author=Ashcrow link=board=13;threadid=4133;start=0#41020 date=1026432670]
I might have to give KDE 3.1 one a try when it's past alpha! It looks like it is starting to catch up with GNOME!
[/quote]

Would you care to explain why you mistakenly think that ?

[Schotty]

FWIW, I must agree with Ash -- GNOME has been more favorable than KDE for a while. I just have 2 things that KDE does better (per se) than GNOME

1) Automount desktop icon handling
2) Browser that is 'included'. Galeon is good, but crashes a bit more than Konqueror in 3.0. Konq from 2.2.2 was pretty bad (at least for me it was). But this is a moot point anyhow, since I prefer Mozilla or Netscape 6.

As soon as I get broadband again at my parents place (yeah, I am there for a few more months, till I get my car repaired too.....) I can post my GNOME 1.4 Shots I got laying around and some new 2.0 shots. They are very easily configured eye candy. 2.0 has had such a code cleanup, that it runs a shit-ton better than 1.4 did.

[Ashcrow]

Gnome is more modular and it really allows you to have fun with your set up while KDE has more of a large-packaged feel (like konq comming in a package with a bunch of other stuff not by itself.). It's not a hit on KDE, I like it, but Gnome just has a prittier and modular look/feel (as of 1.4/2.0)

I don't really see how Gnome is more modular than KDE... I however see how poorly Gnome2 is designed - you have to have a degree in engineering to configure it...

[Ashcrow]

[quote author=Lovechild link=board=13;threadid=4133;start=0#41189 date=1026592826]
I however see how poorly Gnome2 is designed - you have to have a degree in engineering to configure it...
[/quote]

I can't stick up for Gnome2 seing that I don't run it (yet) but if it is anything like the other Gnome releases since 1.0 (1.0, 1.2, 1.4) it should be as hard as picking your window manager, deciding what apps you want as defaults, and then making it as pretty as you want: all of that can be done in gnome control center.

[stryder144]

Nice...very nice. Is it stable? I am looking to put KDE 3 on my computer so that I can show my father-in-law how awesome Linux is. I am going to recompile my kernel for better speed and then compile kde with some speed tweaks. Is 3.1a faster than 3.0.2?

[quote author=stryder144 link=board=13;threadid=4133;start=0#41228 date=1026621319]
Nice...very nice. Is it stable? I am looking to put KDE 3 on my computer so that I can show my father-in-law how awesome Linux is. I am going to recompile my kernel for better speed and then compile kde with some speed tweaks. Is 3.1a faster than 3.0.2?
[/quote]

surprisingly enough i find it to be more stable than KDE 3.0.2 and certain apps are definitely faster (it's starts up faster and now has tabs as well). Konqueror now starts up in 2 seconds on my PIII 450 (mozilla still needs 5 seconds).

i had only one real issue with kde 3.1 alpha 1 which is that the kded process started eating up my CPU cycles once in a while so i had to kill it and restart it, but since i changed my window decoration from keramik to glow i haven't had that problem yet so far. So as of now, i will be running whatever the latest kde 3.1 version is because it simply ROX