Plasma alternative

[Felipe Rodrigues Maia]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Hi...

Is there some alternative for KDE 4 Desktop, instead of Plasma?

Thanks,

 

Felipe Rodrigues Maia

felipe_rmaia@...

__________________________________________________
Fale com seus amigos de graça com o novo Yahoo! Messenger
http://br.messenger.yahoo.com/
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Andrew Mason-9]

You can choose to not run plasma desktop and use XFCE / Gnome / some
other desktop shell. You can also run plasma-desktop with with
different widget sets ala the netbook interface.

Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
will work.

On 10/15/09, Felipe Rodrigues Maia <felipe_rmaia@...> wrote:

> Hi...
>
> Is there some alternative for KDE 4 Desktop, instead of Plasma?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Felipe Rodrigues Maia
> felipe_rmaia@...
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Fale com seus amigos  de graça com o novo Yahoo! Messenger
> http://br.messenger.yahoo.com/

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

Andrew Mason wrote:

> Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
> will work.

And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any other
desktop shell...

Ryan

--
Ryan Rix
Fedora KDE SIG Member, Phoenix AZ Ambassador, News KDE Beat Writer

Please refrain from mailing me directly in replies, I am subsribing
via GMane NNTP. Thank you.

http://hackersramblings.wordpress.com | http://identi.ca/phrkonaleash
XMPP: phrkonaleash@...          | MSN: phrkonaleash@...
AIM:  phrkonaleash                    | Yahoo: phrkonaleash
IRC:  PhrkOnLsh@.../#srcedit,#plugaz,#fedora-kde and
      countless other FOSS channels.


___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[dotancohen]

> Is there some alternative for KDE 4 Desktop, instead of Plasma?
>

That is a rather loaded question, what specific goal are you trying to
achieve? What problem is Plasma giving you? What feature is missing?

--
Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

On 17/10-2009 04:23 Ryan Rix <phrkonaleash@...> wrote:
> Andrew Mason wrote:
> > Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
> > will work.
>
> And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any other
> desktop shell...

+1

I started out customizing it to act and look like KDE3 but now I have a
heavily customized workplace which serves my needs. The strength and weakness
of KDE. I prefer the strength!

(and I know the developers are trying to limit the options of customization
but users demand it - it's a sharp edge to walk on)

--
Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen

  Thomas Olsen

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Anne Wilson-5]

On Saturday 17 October 2009 11:36:57 Thomas Olsen wrote:

> On 17/10-2009 04:23 Ryan Rix <phrkonaleash@...> wrote:
> > Andrew Mason wrote:
> > > Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
> > > will work.
> >
> > And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any other
> > desktop shell...
>
> +1
>
> I started out customizing it to act and look like KDE3 but now I have a
> heavily customized workplace which serves my needs. The strength and
>  weakness of KDE. I prefer the strength!
>
> (and I know the developers are trying to limit the options of customization
> but users demand it - it's a sharp edge to walk on)
>

The funny thing is that in the past the criticism was often that it had just

too many options - IOW was too configurable.  My own feeling has that KDE has
always appealed to individualists, who want maximum possibilities ;-)

Anne
--
New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Just found a cool new feature?  Add it to UserBase


___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

On 17/10-2009 14:38 Anne Wilson <cannewilson@...> wrote:

> On Saturday 17 October 2009 11:36:57 Thomas Olsen wrote:
> > On 17/10-2009 04:23 Ryan Rix <phrkonaleash@...> wrote:
> > > Andrew Mason wrote:
> > > > Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
> > > > will work.
> > >
> > > And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any
> > > other desktop shell...
> >
> > +1
> >
> > I started out customizing it to act and look like KDE3 but now I have a
> > heavily customized workplace which serves my needs. The strength and
> >  weakness of KDE. I prefer the strength!
> >
> > (and I know the developers are trying to limit the options of
> > customization but users demand it - it's a sharp edge to walk on)
>
> The funny thing is that in the past the criticism was often that it had
>  just too many options - IOW was too configurable.  My own feeling has that
>  KDE has always appealed to individualists, who want maximum possibilities
>  ;-)

My sentiment too, but I haven't really much to compare with bc I've used KDE
exclusively since about 3 months after Matthias Ettrich started the project
:-)  '96-'97?

--
Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen

  Thomas Olsen

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Felipe Rodrigues Maia]

I was looking for an official component that could provide better performance than Plasma on old hardwares.

My question has been resolved. As explained by Duncan about KDE4, there isn't an official component that provides the same funcionalities as the plasma.

Sorry if I made a nonspecific question. However, I believe that the answers relative to customization also being productive for many.

Thanks.

Felipe Rodrigues Maia
felipe_rmaia@...




________________________________
De: Dotan Cohen <dotancohen@...>
Para: kde@...
Enviadas: Sex, Outubro 16, 2009 11:38:55 PM
Assunto: Re: [kde] Plasma alternative

> Is there some alternative for KDE 4 Desktop, instead of Plasma?
>

That is a rather loaded question, what specific goal are you trying to
achieve? What problem is Plasma giving you? What feature is missing?

--
Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Veja quais são os assuntos do momento no Yahoo! +Buscados
http://br.maisbuscados.yahoo.com
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

Thomas Olsen posted on Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:14:36 +0200 as excerpted:

> On 17/10-2009 14:38 Anne Wilson <cannewilson@...> wrote:
>> On Saturday 17 October 2009 11:36:57 Thomas Olsen wrote:
>> >
>> > I started out customizing it to act and look like KDE3 but now I have
>> > a heavily customized workplace which serves my needs. The strength
>> > and weakness of KDE. I prefer the strength!
>> >
>> > (and I know the developers are trying to limit the options of
>> > customization but users demand it - it's a sharp edge to walk on)
>>
>> The funny thing is that in the past the criticism was often that it had
>>  just too many options - IOW was too configurable.  My own feeling has
>>  that KDE has always appealed to individualists, who want maximum
>>  possibilities ;-)
>
> My sentiment too, but I haven't really much to compare with bc I've used
> KDE exclusively since about 3 months after Matthias Ettrich started the
> project :-)  '96-'97?

One of my feeds recently featured a "Two elephants" article, the thesis
of which was that significant new functionality is one "elephant", while
existing users are another, and the problem becomes one of trying to fit
them both in the same room at the same time, without forcing the old one
out in ordered to accommodate the new one.  The author then proposed
three methods of trying to do this, including building a bigger room to
hold two elephants and trying to move them both in.  KDE was the example
here, but the danger is that the original users won't like their new home
and will refuse to make the move, which is he said the problem KDE4 had,
that it's just now beginning to overcome.

... Unfortunately it seems Google hasn't picked up the piece yet (or my
googlefoo is bad today) as I don't find it, or I'd post the link.

But this the configurability is definitely one of the elements of old kde
that the old "elephant" enjoyed, in part because unlike the biggest
alternative, gnome, kde wasn't apologetic about making things
configurable.  As a result, those that wanted to keep things simple and
have the developers choose sufficient defaults so it "just worked" tended
to gravitate toward gnome or something else, while those who seldom found
defaults that met their needs and weren't shy about changing them, and
demanding that the knobs and levers be available TO change them,
gravitated toward kde.

It's no secret, therefore, that most of the long-time kde users will NOT
be happy if they find configuration options disappearing on them, or even
if new features arrive without what they consider an appropriate level of
knobs and levers available to configure them.  Should they get mad about
it, that elephant will simply pickup and leave...

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

Felipe Rodrigues Maia posted on Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:51:21 -0700 as
excerpted:

> I was looking for an official component that could provide better
> performance than Plasma on old hardwares.
>
> My question has been resolved. As explained by Duncan about KDE4, there
> isn't an official component that provides the same funcionalities as the
> plasma.


The performance issue is a valid one, especially on older hardware.  A
good graphics card and setup is vital for most of the eye candy that
sells kde4 as better than 3 (there are other features that make it better
as well, but these are generally behind the scenes and many, such as
akonadi, won't come to full power until kde 4.5, so it's the eye candy,
and the fact that kde3 seems to be simply being dumped by they wayside,
that seems to form the reasons to switch, currently).

If one wishes, of course, it's possible to turn the eye candy off, and
then plasma and kwin especially, perform about like their older brethren
did.  However, as one turns off the eye candy, the remaining bugs in kde4
that make it less functional than kde3 in some ways, become even MORE
apparent.

Thus the frustration.  It's much the same problem Vista had.  Aero Glass
was great... for hardware on which it worked.  But the developer kept
saying it worked for existing hardware as well, which it sort of did, but
then all the features that one would switch for didn't work, and many
found it better to stay with the old version, eXPrivacy.

But one thing MS had was continuing support of that old version.  With
kde, the old version is getting dumped by the wayside, bugs being closed
as unsupported, upgrade, etc, with little official kde support.

Oh, well...  Whatever is done is done, and kde4 is at least up to
reasonable beta level functionality now.  With trends as they are, 4.4,
scheduled for February, should be release-candidate level, and 4.5,
provided the switch to akonadi etc goes smoothly tho that's yet to be
seen, should finally be up to 3.5 in functionality and quality.  But how
many folks will have switched and won't return?

But meanwhile, yes, replacing the desktop is possible, tho I do wonder
what the point would be, if keeping the rest of kde, then.  Might as well
just run some other desktop environment, and run the kde apps one likes
on it, because really, a desktop environment without the desktop...
ceases to be a desktop environment.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

On 18/10-2009 01:32 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@...> wrote:

> Thomas Olsen posted on Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:14:36 +0200 as excerpted:
> > On 17/10-2009 14:38 Anne Wilson <cannewilson@...> wrote:
> >> On Saturday 17 October 2009 11:36:57 Thomas Olsen wrote:
> >> > I started out customizing it to act and look like KDE3 but now I have
> >> > a heavily customized workplace which serves my needs. The strength
> >> > and weakness of KDE. I prefer the strength!
> >> >
> >> > (and I know the developers are trying to limit the options of
> >> > customization but users demand it - it's a sharp edge to walk on)
> >>
> >> The funny thing is that in the past the criticism was often that it had
> >>  just too many options - IOW was too configurable.  My own feeling has
> >>  that KDE has always appealed to individualists, who want maximum
> >>  possibilities ;-)
> >
> > My sentiment too, but I haven't really much to compare with bc I've used
> > KDE exclusively since about 3 months after Matthias Ettrich started the
> > project :-)  '96-'97?
>
> One of my feeds recently featured a "Two elephants" article, the thesis
> of which was that significant new functionality is one "elephant", while
> existing users are another, and the problem becomes one of trying to fit
> them both in the same room at the same time, without forcing the old one
> out in ordered to accommodate the new one.  The author then proposed
> three methods of trying to do this, including building a bigger room to
> hold two elephants and trying to move them both in.  KDE was the example
> here, but the danger is that the original users won't like their new home
> and will refuse to make the move, which is he said the problem KDE4 had,
> that it's just now beginning to overcome.
>
> ... Unfortunately it seems Google hasn't picked up the piece yet (or my
> googlefoo is bad today) as I don't find it, or I'd post the link.
>
> But this the configurability is definitely one of the elements of old kde
> that the old "elephant" enjoyed, in part because unlike the biggest
> alternative, gnome, kde wasn't apologetic about making things
> configurable.  As a result, those that wanted to keep things simple and
> have the developers choose sufficient defaults so it "just worked" tended
> to gravitate toward gnome or something else, while those who seldom found
> defaults that met their needs and weren't shy about changing them, and
> demanding that the knobs and levers be available TO change them,
> gravitated toward kde.
>
> It's no secret, therefore, that most of the long-time kde users will NOT
> be happy if they find configuration options disappearing on them, or even
> if new features arrive without what they consider an appropriate level of
> knobs and levers available to configure them.  Should they get mad about
> it, that elephant will simply pickup and leave...

It's a nice analogy but I'm scared to be caught in the never ending discussion
of pro/con configurability (think my spelling is wrong). I guess I'm an old
elephant but I respect the decisions of the developers. They give me a lot of
space for customizing and scripting and when I'm not satisfied with it I can go
the C++ way :-)
And sometimes I'm just lazy and want it to work out-of-the-box so an
ambivalent elephant is probably the best description :-D
 

--
Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen

  Thomas Olsen

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[James Tyrer]

Ryan Rix wrote:
> Andrew Mason wrote:
>
>> Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
>> will work.
>
> And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any other
> desktop shell...
>
Well, it is, in theory at least, customizable but I have to say that
because things can only be set by dragging the mouse that it isn't easy.
  The problem is that when you extensively customize it, the instability
starts to be a real problem.  Don't take this wrong, I like the Plasma
DeskTop, or would like it if it weren't for the instability.  Then there
is the matter of taste: I would like to have a Plasma theme that matched
the application and window manager themes that I am using.

--
James Tyrer

Linux (mostly) From Scratch
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Anne Wilson-5]

On Sunday 18 October 2009 05:43:37 James Tyrer wrote:

> Ryan Rix wrote:
> > Andrew Mason wrote:
> >> Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop shells
> >> will work.
> >
> > And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any other
> > desktop shell...
>
> Well, it is, in theory at least, customizable but I have to say that
> because things can only be set by dragging the mouse that it isn't easy.
>   The problem is that when you extensively customize it, the instability
> starts to be a real problem.  Don't take this wrong, I like the Plasma
> DeskTop, or would like it if it weren't for the instability.  Then there
> is the matter of taste: I would like to have a Plasma theme that matched
> the application and window manager themes that I am using.
>

While instability was a problem in earlier versions, by 4.3 I see practically

none.  I suspect that some problems are caused by interactions between
applications and/or customisations.  This inevitably makes it hard to track
problems down, so filing bug reports with maximum supporting information is
the only way to stand a chance of solving a problem such as this.

Anne
--
New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Just found a cool new feature?  Add it to UserBase


___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

Anne Wilson posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:19:57 +0100 as excerpted:

> On Sunday 18 October 2009 05:43:37 James Tyrer wrote:
>> Ryan Rix wrote:
>> > Andrew Mason wrote:
>> >> Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the desktop
>> >> shells will work.
>> >
>> > And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than any
>> > other desktop shell...
>>
>> Well, it is, in theory at least, customizable but I have to say that
>> because things can only be set by dragging the mouse that it isn't
>> easy.
>>   The problem is that when you extensively customize it, the
>>   instability
>> starts to be a real problem.  Don't take this wrong, I like the Plasma
>> DeskTop, or would like it if it weren't for the instability.  Then
>> there is the matter of taste: I would like to have a Plasma theme that
>> matched the application and window manager themes that I am using.
>>
> While instability was a problem in earlier versions, by 4.3 I see
> practically none.  I suspect that some problems are caused by
> interactions between applications and/or customisations.  This
> inevitably makes it hard to track problems down, so filing bug reports
> with maximum supporting information is the only way to stand a chance of
> solving a problem such as this.

I'm actually of the same opinion as Anne on this one. =:^)  The 4.3.x
series has been stable enough...

For me it's just that not everything works... yet.  There's bugs filed
and they know it doesn't work.  And it'll be fixed, eventually, but it
(well, some of it) just doesn't work yet.

But stable... yes.  OTOH, that might be because I'm not running OpenGL,
and Composite, while slow on my old Radeon 9200 at the size of desktop
I'm running, /is/ quite stable.  Of course I won't touch proprietary
drivers and would tend to blame them for instability if people are
running them, even if it might not be them, simply because they're a
black-box and nobody can verify it, and if the manufacturers don't like
it there's one thing they can do to fix it, open the drivers, but the
older r200 series Radeons, while slow, do seem to be rock stable with EXA
and composite, at least.  Intel's the only other semi-modern graphics
chipset with open drivers, and their drivers are just coming off the low-
point in stability as everything gets put back together again after they
took stuff apart and fixed it.  I understand some of their hardware works
well, other of it not so well, and the vast majority of it, works well
*IF* you have the correct combination of X, driver, and settings (and X
and driver may require going back two years to get a stable setup), but
not so well otherwise.  And of course their newest Polsbo or whatever it
is mobile chipset is another story entirely, apparently they bought the
graphics for it and neglected to negotiate to open the specs, so that's
100% closed, at this point, even worse than Nvidia, which has at least
the basic functionality in the nv open driver.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

Thomas Olsen posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:56:33 +0200 as excerpted:

> It's a nice analogy but I'm scared to be caught in the never ending
> discussion of pro/con configurability (think my spelling is wrong). I
> guess I'm an old elephant but I respect the decisions of the developers.
> They give me a lot of space for customizing and scripting and when I'm
> not satisfied with it I can go the C++ way :-) And sometimes I'm just
> lazy and want it to work out-of-the-box so an ambivalent elephant is
> probably the best description :-D

FWIW, I think they are staying reasonably configurable, or at least I
haven't seen that changing /too/ much.  It's just a big rewrite is all,
and not everything's functional yet.  And... there are some choices on
dependencies and the like that I flat don't agree with... but that's a
rather different level of configurability than the user GUI stuff we're
talking about here.

The only major disagreement I have with them on the GUI configurability
at this point, is the way the plasma panel configuration works... and I
suspect that it'll get either a second config interface or some serious
changes over time... basically like they already are coming around to on
the workspace configuration thing -- the zoom interface and having some
options only available when zoomed out... just got roundly panned by
nearly everyone -- and they are fixing it, 4.3 is slightly better, and
4.4 is supposed to be dramatically better, in that regard, as it's not
going to require zooming out for configuration purposes at all,
everything's going to be available thru the normal config GUI.  I expect
they'll eventually change the panel sizing and etc interface as well,
because it's equally unwieldy as it is. IMO, the only reason it hasn't
been changed yet is because there were enough other severely out of whack
things for the reviewers to complain about, that the panel config
interface didn't even really make it on the list.  But with 4.4, that's
probably going to be one of the only seriously terrible bits left, so I
expect more of them to pan it, and when enough of them do, something else
will be developed to replace it.  (That's assuming there's not already
changes in the pipeline that I've not seen mention of on KDE-Planet, etc.)

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[James Tyrer]

Duncan wrote:

> Anne Wilson posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:19:57 +0100 as excerpted:
>
>> On Sunday 18 October 2009 05:43:37 James Tyrer wrote:
>>> Ryan Rix wrote:
>>>> Andrew Mason wrote:
>>>>> Plasma it's self is pretty easily replaced, any of the
>>>>> desktop shells will work.
>>>> And it's VERY easily customisable to fit your tastes more than
>>>> any other desktop shell...
>>> Well, it is, in theory at least, customizable but I have to say
>>> that because things can only be set by dragging the mouse that it
>>> isn't easy. The problem is that when you extensively customize
>>> it, the instability starts to be a real problem.  Don't take this
>>> wrong, I like the Plasma DeskTop, or would like it if it weren't
>>> for the instability.  Then there is the matter of taste: I would
>>> like to have a Plasma theme that matched the application and
>>> window manager themes that I am using.
>>>
>> While instability was a problem in earlier versions, by 4.3 I see
>> practically none.  I suspect that some problems are caused by
>> interactions between applications and/or customisations.  This
>> inevitably makes it hard to track problems down, so filing bug
>> reports with maximum supporting information is the only way to
>> stand a chance of solving a problem such as this.
>
> I'm actually of the same opinion as Anne on this one. =:^)  The 4.3.x
>  series has been stable enough...
>
> For me it's just that not everything works... yet.  There's bugs
> filed and they know it doesn't work.  And it'll be fixed, eventually,
> but it (well, some of it) just doesn't work yet.
>

Yes, that is also a problem.  The TaskManager doesn't work properly in a
vertical panel.  There are issues with the caching for the DeskTop which
now look like may have been, at least partially fixed in 4.3.2.  I can't
put anything but KDE-4 application icons on the Panel.

> But stable... yes.  OTOH, that might be because I'm not running
> OpenGL, and Composite, while slow on my old Radeon 9200 at the size
> of desktop I'm running, /is/ quite stable.

You should be able to run OpenGL on the Radeon 9200.  That is the newest
card that does 3D acceleration with the Xorg/XF86 drivers.  However, you
do need to select EXA for fast response.  Unfortunately, that will cause
problems with some KDE-3 applications.

> Of course I won't touch proprietary drivers and would tend to blame
> them for instability ... .

I am using the Xorg "radeon" driver but that isn't the stability problem
that I am having.

The main current issue is that Plasma still forgets configurations.  My
specific problem is that the Trash widget forgets its size and location
on start up.  I have two FolderView widgets on my DeskTop.  The one for
the DeskTop was having problems last week but now seems to work OK.
However, the other one must be moved and resized every time that I start
my KDE-4 session.

--
James Tyrer

Linux (mostly) From Scratch
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

James Tyrer posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:11:53 -0700 as excerpted:

>> But stable... yes.  OTOH, that might be because I'm not running OpenGL,
>> and Composite, while slow on my old Radeon 9200 at the size of desktop
>> I'm running, /is/ quite stable.
>
> You should be able to run OpenGL on the Radeon 9200.  That is the newest
> card that does 3D acceleration with the Xorg/XF86 drivers.  However, you
> do need to select EXA for fast response.  Unfortunately, that will cause
> problems with some KDE-3 applications.

OpenGL does indeed work on the Radeon 9200, *BUT* that little clause "at
the size of desktop I'm running" unfortunately also applies as well.

My desktop is two (24" LCD) 1920x1200 monitors, stacked for 1920x2400.  
Pretty roomy... tho what I /really/ wanted was dual 30" 2560x1600... but
couldn't afford the $1000 plus /each/ they were going to cost, so I
settled.

The problem with OpenGL is that on the Radeon 9200, or any Radeon r2xx
chip for that matter, OpenGL is limited to 2048x2048.  One would /think/
that it might be possible to doe the same pixels (4.2 MegaPixels) in at
least double 4x3 resolution 1600x2400 (3.9 MPx, 1920x2400 would be 4.6+
MPx so over the 4.2 of 2048x2048), which is what I was running
previously, but that didn't work either, it's 2048 in either direction.

Obviously 2400 > 2048, so OpenGL only works in the top 2048 px, not the
bottom 352 px.  While that works for something like glxgears or something
run full-screen on the top monitor, kwin (and whatever else handles kde4
OpenGL effects) won't run in OpenGL mode with detection on, and while I
can force it to, it doesn't work right, and is very crashy besides.

So basically, I have a choice between running lower than native
resolution to get it under 2048 total vertical px and getting OpenGL,
running native resolution but with an overlap of some 352 px to be
displayed on both monitors again getting it under 2048 total vertical
pixels, or running at full resolution, but giving up OpenGL effects until
I upgrade cards.  I chose the latter.

As for the 9200 being the newest card with 3D/OpenGL using the native/
freedomware xorg (and Linux kernel drm) drivers, that's no longer the
case.  They've stabilized OpenGL support up thru the Radeon r5xx chip
series now -- that's thru the Radeon x1950 cards (apparently minus the
x1200 and x1250, which are rs600 chip cards, along with the x2100).  The
r600 and r700 (and the newest r800) based cards, basically anything
hdxxxx plus the three x-prefix exceptions mentioned above, has OpenGL
support to some degree in the latest native freedomware xorg ati/radeon
driver I think, but it's still under heavy development, with git tree
recommended in that case, and isn't stable.

Which is why I'm looking at upgrading to an x1950 ATM.  The cards are
still quite expensive especially in their AGP form (exceptionally
expensive for their age, $150 street), but they handle at LEAST
3072x3072 px (the figure I saw, but I'm not sure where the next cutoff
is) OpenGL and maybe higher. (I'd love to get something capable of 3200
vertical, so I could at some point upgrade to those nice 30" 2560x1600
monitors, but I expect that'd take an hd* r600+, likely and r700+ or r800
+, and of course those don't have stable native xorg/kernel freedomware
drivers yet.)

>> Of course I won't touch proprietary drivers and would tend to blame
>> them for instability ... .
>
> I am using the Xorg "radeon" driver but that isn't the stability problem
> that I am having.
>
> The main current issue is that Plasma still forgets configurations.  My
> specific problem is that the Trash widget forgets its size and location
> on start up.  I have two FolderView widgets on my DeskTop.  The one for
> the DeskTop was having problems last week but now seems to work OK.
> However, the other one must be moved and resized every time that I start
> my KDE-4 session.

Maybe that's why I'm not experiencing issues.  I've never liked having a
"trash bin" aka "recycle bin" to have to empty.  If I delete a file, I
want the space recovered then and there; I don't want the file going into
some semi-deleted purgatory somewhere.  (Yes, I know that a file still
exists on the disk, just the name is removed, and that even a shred may
leave artifacts on journaling or log based filesystems, due to the way
they work.  That's not the issue.  I just want it deleted so the
filesystem isn't worrying about it, which is what a real delete does that
a "fake delete" aka "trash", does.)  If I'm not sure I want the file
deleted, I don't normally remove it.  I'll rename it, usually adding the
date and .remove as extensions, or some such, and next time I see it,
I'll check the date and see if I think it has been long enough to safely
remove yet.  If I do delete it, I want it deleted, again, not in some
trash-based-purgatory somewhere.

So I have no trash shortcut on my desktop, and have kde set to use 0 size
for it.  Additionally, I have it set to show the delete option (and hide
the move to trash where possible), and reset the delete key as the delete
function shortcut.  I *DO* leave the confirmation on, for both trash, so
if I somehow accidentally invoke it I get a chance to cancel and to do a
proper delete, and for delete, in case I /do/ accidentally invoke it, but
that's all the protection I need, and all I want.  Any more gets in the
way.

So obviously I'm not going to have problems with the desktop trash
shortcut.  I think I last tried a folderview desktop plasmoid back on
4.3.0, and yes, it did still have issues then, but I decided folderview
wasn't quite what I wanted anyway, so I don't have any of those on the
desktop either.  Instead, I use a small fly-out panel in the bottom left
corner with a few button-type plasmoids on it, including kickoff which I
don't use much, a "classic" menu with bookmarks and systemsettings, the
device-notifier, and a quick-access plasmoid (from kde-look), which is
sort of like a folderview in the panel (flyout menu), except that subdirs
act as submenus instead of opening the system file-manager.  That quick-
access launcher points to a directory with a bunch of symlinks to all the
various frequently accessed dirs on the system, so often I don't have to
actually open the filemanager for file access, at all.  That does what I
need for directory access, so no folderview necessary.

FWIW, the three plasmoids I do have on the desktop are comic-strip, yawp
(yet another weather plasmoid), and a big analog clock (which with the
professional plasma theme from kde-look, has a nice surreal effect,
almost like a Dali painting... my time referral is generally to the
digital readout time sensor on one of my yasp-scripted plasmoids I have
on the big system monitor panel stretching across the top of the top
monitor.  I'm going to try to get a good screenshot taken and linked
somewhere, but haven't yet.)  I've not noticed them moving around any.

But obviously some plasmoids still have issues, as someone else was
complaining a week or so ago, about losing their plasmoid config, as well.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[James Tyrer]

Duncan wrote:

> James Tyrer posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:11:53 -0700 as excerpted:
>
>>> But stable... yes.  OTOH, that might be because I'm not running OpenGL,
>>> and Composite, while slow on my old Radeon 9200 at the size of desktop
>>> I'm running, /is/ quite stable.
>> You should be able to run OpenGL on the Radeon 9200.  That is the newest
>> card that does 3D acceleration with the Xorg/XF86 drivers.  However, you
>> do need to select EXA for fast response.  Unfortunately, that will cause
>> problems with some KDE-3 applications.
>
> OpenGL does indeed work on the Radeon 9200, *BUT* that little clause "at
> the size of desktop I'm running" unfortunately also applies as well.
>
> My desktop is two (24" LCD) 1920x1200 monitors, stacked for 1920x2400.  
> Pretty roomy... tho what I /really/ wanted was dual 30" 2560x1600... but
> couldn't afford the $1000 plus /each/ they were going to cost, so I
> settled.
>
> The problem with OpenGL is that on the Radeon 9200, or any Radeon r2xx
> chip for that matter, OpenGL is limited to 2048x2048.  One would /think/
> that it might be possible to doe the same pixels (4.2 MegaPixels) in at
> least double 4x3 resolution 1600x2400 (3.9 MPx, 1920x2400 would be 4.6+
> MPx so over the 4.2 of 2048x2048), which is what I was running
> previously, but that didn't work either, it's 2048 in either direction.
>

That is very strange.  Do you know if it is the hardware or the driver
that causes this?

> Obviously 2400 > 2048, so OpenGL only works in the top 2048 px, not the
> bottom 352 px.  While that works for something like glxgears or something
> run full-screen on the top monitor, kwin (and whatever else handles kde4
> OpenGL effects) won't run in OpenGL mode with detection on, and while I
> can force it to, it doesn't work right, and is very crashy besides.
>
> So basically, I have a choice between running lower than native
> resolution to get it under 2048 total vertical px and getting OpenGL,
> running native resolution but with an overlap of some 352 px to be
> displayed on both monitors again getting it under 2048 total vertical
> pixels, or running at full resolution, but giving up OpenGL effects until
> I upgrade cards.  I chose the latter.
>
> As for the 9200 being the newest card with 3D/OpenGL using the native/
> freedomware xorg (and Linux kernel drm) drivers, that's no longer the
> case.  They've stabilized OpenGL support up thru the Radeon r5xx chip
> series now --

It would be nice if Xorg would update their man page.  I made a
disclaimer somewhere else to the effect that I suspected that it was
outdated.  Do you have a URL for current information.

> that's thru the Radeon x1950 cards (apparently minus the
> x1200 and x1250, which are rs600 chip cards, along with the x2100).  The
> r600 and r700 (and the newest r800) based cards, basically anything
> hdxxxx plus the three x-prefix exceptions mentioned above, has OpenGL
> support to some degree in the latest native freedomware xorg ati/radeon
> driver I think, but it's still under heavy development, with git tree
> recommended in that case, and isn't stable.
>
> Which is why I'm looking at upgrading to an x1950 ATM.  The cards are
> still quite expensive especially in their AGP form (exceptionally
> expensive for their age, $150 street), but they handle at LEAST
> 3072x3072 px (the figure I saw, but I'm not sure where the next cutoff
> is) OpenGL and maybe higher. (I'd love to get something capable of 3200
> vertical, so I could at some point upgrade to those nice 30" 2560x1600
> monitors, but I expect that'd take an hd* r600+, likely and r700+ or r800
> +, and of course those don't have stable native xorg/kernel freedomware
> drivers yet.)
>

I find that X1650PRO AGP cards are much more available.  Perhaps this is
because it appears that AMD is no longer producing the X1950 series
while their site still lists the X1650 series.

http://products.amd.com/en-us/GraphicCardDetail.aspx?id=89&f1=&f2=ATI+Radeon™&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=0&f12=&f13=&f14=&f15=&f16=&f17=&f18=0&

Therefore, I was considering buying an X1650PRO AGP card.  I don't know
exactly what the difference between an R580 and an RV560 chip is.  From
info I could find, it appears that the R580 has the same vertex unit as
the RV560 but  the R580 has two of the shader/texture units in the
RV560.  Probably a die with a shader/texture unit that doesn't work.

Especially if the only difference is the chip, this seems like a mistake
  to discontinue the X1950 series.

--
James Tyrer

Linux (mostly) From Scratch
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

James Tyrer posted on Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:29:30 -0700 as excerpted:

> Duncan wrote:
>> James Tyrer posted on Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:11:53 -0700 as excerpted:
>>
>>> You should be able to run OpenGL on the Radeon 9200.  That is the
>>> newest card that does 3D acceleration with the Xorg/XF86 drivers.
>>> However, you do need to select EXA for fast response.  Unfortunately,
>>> that will cause problems with some KDE-3 applications.

>> My desktop is two (24" LCD) 1920x1200 monitors, stacked for 1920x2400.
>>
>> The problem with OpenGL is that on the Radeon 9200, or any Radeon r2xx
>> chip for that matter, OpenGL is limited to 2048x2048.

> That is very strange.  Do you know if it is the hardware or the driver
> that causes this?

AFAIK it's a hardware limitation, but it would be possible for the
drivers to work around it, almost certainly at the cost of some
efficiency and speed, if the xorg radeon driver maintainer decided he
needed to.  If I remember correctly, the limitation wasn't there some
years ago, early xfree86-4 era.  But I believe they weren't using the
hardware to its best potential back then, doing some of the 3D/OpenGL in
software.  When they realized more functions could be hardware
accelerated, they switched to that, but acquired the 2048x2048
accelerated OpenGL limitation in the process.

And the r200 series is old enough now that not so many use it any more,
and of those that are, many either use only a single monitor less than
2048 in either direction (or two 1024s, maybe 1024x768 or on flatpanel,
1024x600).  And of the ones using more than that, few care about OpenGL
or they'd be likely to have upgraded the video when they upgraded their
monitors.

So it's a bit of a corner case for someone running a card that old to be
running that high a resolution AND caring about OpenGL.

>> As for the 9200 being the newest card with 3D/OpenGL using the native/
>> freedomware xorg (and Linux kernel drm) drivers, that's no longer the
>> case.  They've stabilized OpenGL support up thru the Radeon r5xx chip
>> series now --
>
> It would be nice if Xorg would update their man page.  I made a
> disclaimer somewhere else to the effect that I suspected that it was
> outdated.  Do you have a URL for current information.

What xf86-video-ati aka radeon driver are you running, and are you sure
you have a synced manpage?  I'm running 6.12.4, Gentoo so compiled
locally from xorg sources, with an updated manpage (the bottom line says
X Version 11, xf86-video-ati 6.12.4, RADEON(4), so it's the same as the
package version).

Select/pasted from that manpage, last line of the description section:

3D acceleration (not supported on R/RV6xx and R/RV/RS7xx)

Of course under supported hardware it then lists all the supported
hardware, chip and corresponding card models, r100 up thru the rv770, so
between the two, it's obvious up thru the r5xx is now 3D accelerated.

>
>> that's thru the Radeon x1950 cards

>> Which is why I'm looking at upgrading to an x1950 ATM.  The cards are
>> still quite expensive especially in their AGP form (exceptionally
>> expensive for their age, $150 street), but they handle at LEAST
>> 3072x3072 px (the figure I saw, but I'm not sure where the next cutoff
>> is) OpenGL and maybe higher. (I'd love to get something capable of 3200
>> vertical, so I could at some point upgrade to those nice 30" 2560x1600
>> monitors, but I expect that'd take an hd* r600+, likely and r700+ or
>> r800 +, and of course those don't have stable native xorg/kernel
>> freedomware drivers yet.)
>>
> I find that X1650PRO AGP cards are much more available.  Perhaps this is
> because it appears that AMD is no longer producing the X1950 series
> while their site still lists the X1650 series.
>
> http://products.amd.com/en-us/GraphicCardDetail.aspx?id=89&f1=&f2=ATI+Radeon™&f3=&f4=&f5=&f6=&f7=&f8=&f9=&f10=&f11=0&f12=&f13=&f14=&f15=&f16=&f17=&f18=0&
>
> Therefore, I was considering buying an X1650PRO AGP card.  I don't know
> exactly what the difference between an R580 and an RV560 chip is.  From
> info I could find, it appears that the R580 has the same vertex unit as
> the RV560 but  the R580 has two of the shader/texture units in the
> RV560.  Probably a die with a shader/texture unit that doesn't work.
>
> Especially if the only difference is the chip, this seems like a mistake
>   to discontinue the X1950 series.

The "v" versions are cut-down versions of the main chip.  The r580 was
the top of the line for some time, apparently, so would have been in
their $400+ cards of the time.  The rv560 is not only a lower numbered
chip (560 vs 580), but it's the "v" cut-down version of it, and is a much
lower performing card.

I'm guessing they aren't actually producing them any more, but still have
some of the lower value chips because of the more massive production runs
they had.  Of course, some of the chips may be r580s that didn't pass
muster as well...  It's also quite likely that yield was low enough on
the full quality r580s that when the newer models came out and the market
price on the r580s dropped, they were no longer economical to produce and
market, while the lower end rv560s were economical to produce for quite
some time longer and even if they're no longer making them they still
have them in stock from that.

As for the x1650pro, I did consider it and may still get one, but I
wanted dual dvi out, if possible, with both outputs handling dual-link.  
I couldn't find dual dual-link in the x1650pro cards, at least not that
AND AGP (not PCI-E, which my board is too old to have), only at the
x1950pro level.

I believe the x1650pro DOES have dual-link DVI and VGA out (one each),
and possibly dual single-link DVIs, and I may well settle for that, but
at least in the AGP version, I never saw dual dual-link DVI.  If you know
different, I'd appreciate a link. =:^)  (The one you linked is single
DVI, single VGA out, I checked.)

Using the link you provided as a starting point, take a look at this:

http://ati.amd.com/products/RadeonX1950/specs.html

Under Avivo Video and Display Platform, Flexible display support, it
lists:

Dual integrated dual-link DVI transmitters

Note the "dual ... dual-link".

On the comparable 1650 page, here:

http://ati.amd.com/products/RadeonX1650/specs.html

All I see (under features) is Dual-link DVI (not dual dual-link), and
under the parallel Avivo... Flex display... DVI 1.0 compliant.

Browsing around a bit further, it appears the x1800, and presumably the
x1900, as well as the x1950, have the same "Dual integrated dual-link DVI
transmitters", while the x1650 and below appear to have only one, plus a
VGA out.  The x1300 specifies "Dual integrated DVI transmitters (one dual-
link + one single-link)".  But I don't see anything of that specificity
on the x1600 or x1650.

FWIW, browsing around, it appears the whole r5xx series, from the x1300
thru the x1950, have, under Advanced Image Quality Features, "High
resolution texture support (up to 4k x 4k)", which would appear to double
the 2048x2048 of the 9200 I'm running, and well cover possible dual
2560x1600 stacked, tho it would NOT cover them in side-by-side mode.  So
apparently, the r2xx series is 2048x2048, the r5xx series is 4096x4096,
and one or both of the r3xx/r4xx series are 3072x3072.

And while I was there, I checked the r6xx/r7xx hd series, which currently
require unreleased xorg git drivers for best OpenGL/3D as they're still
in heavy development:

It appears the r6xx chips all do 8k square texture support, thus at that
level or above, dual 2560 width should have full OpenGL/3D accel,
regardless, and it's no longer an issue needing consideration.  The bus
interface is native PCI-E 16X, tho I've seen claims of AGP bridge-chipped
versions as well, but never actually seen any myself, tho I've not been
looking at the r6xx chip level as much.  IMO, it's likely the r580 x1950
is going to be the best possible Radeon for an AGP board, altho even
there it's a native PCI-E-16 with a bridge-chip (the x1650 is the
reverse, native AGP-8x, available with a PCI-E bridge chip).

The hd2400 (rv610) specifies dual-link DVI on primary, single-link DVI on
secondary, so it appears to compare to the x1650.

The hd2600 (rv630) appears to be the lowest end r6xx series model with
dual dual-link DVI.

The first full "r" version of the r6xx series is the r600 hd2900, again
dual dual-link DVI.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

[Duncan-2]

Duncan posted on Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:36:57 +0000 as excerpted:

> It appears the r6xx chips all do 8k square texture support, thus at that
> level or above, dual 2560 width should have full OpenGL/3D accel,
> regardless, and it's no longer an issue needing consideration.  The bus
> interface is native PCI-E 16X, tho I've seen claims of AGP
> bridge-chipped versions as well, but never actually seen any myself, tho
> I've not been looking at the r6xx chip level as much.

Hmm... Newegg carries nearly 20 hdxxxx cards with AGP 4/8x bridge-chips,
hd....: 2600 (rv610/630), 3450 (rv620/635), 3650 (?), 3850 (rv670), 4650
(rv730), 4670 (rv770), all new, and an open-box 3450.

So I seem to be wrong about not having AGP versions of the hd-series
models.  Prices appear to run about $90-110, mostly, but as low as $50
and as high as $191, plus shipping of course.

They have two x1650s listed as well, no x1950s, but an old 9250 128 meg
for $33. =:^]

So if I wait a few more months until the r6xx/7xx chips have at least
semi-stable 3D in the xorg drivers... it looks like I'll have lots of
choices!

According to the ati.amd.com site, the hd3400 is dual-link/single-link.
The hd3600 is dual dual-link, as is the hd3800.  The whole hd3xxx series
appear to be 8k square texture mapping.

The hd4650 and 4670 are both under the mainstream hd4600 page.  It says
only the primary is dual-link.  8k square texture mapping.

So of those listed on newegg, the hd3650 and hd3850 as well as the hd2600
would fit requirements.  Given that the prices seem to run about the same
and the xorg/kernel drivers are going to be the same, probably an hd3850
model looks about the best, *IF* one's willing to wait for driver
stability or run the git versions and cope with whatever issues...

FWIW, just checked a few other places as well, and nowhere I checked seem
to come close to newegg on agp based radeon hdxxxx choice and price.  
Despite their general popularity, I've never bought from newegg, as they
just never seemed to have what I wanted at the price I wanted -- always
just a bit higher, but maybe this is the time.  They seem to specialize
in ATI and AGP, at least compared to other places. =:^)

--
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.