Hey, he called me old! :)<br><br>I did notice one thing, but it is probably more of a problem with it running in a VM. I tried to turn on the "effects", and when I clicked apply, it crashed KDE. Well, crash isn't quite right, it darkened it. To a black screen. It wasn't a BSOD (black screen of death), but it did freak me out. Of course, hitting Ctrl-Alt-Backspace took care of that, then I just had to move the .kde folder out of the way and I was back to normal.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:28 PM, David Champion <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dchampion@visionary.com">dchampion@visionary.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Really the main "downside" I've seen to KDE 4.x is the "no icons on the
desktop" thing, which you can turn off somewhere. It really hasn't
bothered me that much - you can just drop a desktop folder widget on
your desktop and have icons there if that's what you want.<br>
<br>
I've read a couple of review where the author was just vehemently
against KDE 4.x... not sure what their beef is, some people just don't
like change. Most distros will allow you to choose to run KDE 3.x if
you'd like (or Gnome, or whatever). I think if a couple of old timers
like Tim and I can handle it, then most users should be OK with it.
Maybe we should wait and see what Bryan, Morris and Ralph have to say
on KDE 4. ;)<br>
<br>
-dc<br>
<br>
Tim Wilson wrote:
<blockquote type="cite"><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">I just upgraded my KUbuntu on my VM at work. Pretty
sleek. It uses KDE 4.1. It's going to take some getting used to, but
I think I'll like it. If not, I'm sure I can customize it to be like
good ol' KDE3.<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Chris
Louden <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chris@chrislouden.com" target="_blank">chris@chrislouden.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 8:06 AM, David Champion
<<a href="mailto:dchampion@visionary.com" target="_blank">dchampion@visionary.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> Anyone running the latest Ubuntu release from yesterday? I haven't
grabbed<br>
> it yet but probably will give it a look this weekend to try it
out... even<br>
> though I'll stick with Mandriva 2009 for my main systems.<br>
<br>
</div>
I have been running 8.10 64bit since Alpha 6 and on through the BETA<br>
releases. Running it on a Lenovo T61 which is my primary PC. I<br>
downloaded the .ISOs last night of the formal release and will be<br>
doing a clean install of the 32 bit this weekend. I prefer the 64 so<br>
that I fully use the hardware to its abilities but there are issues<br>
with several plug-ins like Flash where it is not always stable. I<br>
haven't used a 32bit distro in over 2 years so i like to see how<br>
stable it can be. If Its worth it I'll keep it otherwise I will do a<br>
clean install of the 64bit from the final release in a few weeks.<br>
<br>
I'm a bit biased as I prefer Debian based to anything .rpm based.<br>
However I am really happy with it.<br>
<div><br>
><br>
> I ran across this blog entry a couple of days ago while googling
for<br>
> something else. I would take what he says with a big grain of
salt... and I<br>
> understand how someone who's trying to sell a Linux distro might
be a little<br>
> frustrated with Ubuntu. In related news, Shuttleworth announced
that he<br>
> thinks Ubuntu will become profitable in 2 or 3 years, and that
he's willing<br>
> to keep supporting it with his own money until then.<br>
><br>
<br>
</div>
I really appreciate what he is doing. I think the Ubuntu community at<br>
large does as well.<br>
<div>
<div><br>
> <a href="http://www.happyassassin.net/2008/10/28/why-i-dont-like-canonical/" target="_blank">http://www.happyassassin.net/2008/10/28/why-i-dont-like-canonical/</a><br>
><br>
> My personal take on it is that monoculture isn't good, and while
Ubuntu<br>
> isn't there yet, they have certainly become what RedHat was a few
years ago<br>
> - just about the de-facto standard version of Linux, at least for
desktop<br>
> Linux. I think the author of the blog entry above isn't completely
fair - I<br>
> understand that Ubuntu does contribute some back to the community,
and they<br>
> have done a huge amount of Linux advocacy.<br>
><br>
> I don't like Ubuntu because it used Gnome by default, but that's
pretty easy<br>
> to fix by putting a "K" in front of it and downloading Kubuntu. I
see on<br>
> Distrowatch.com that Kubuntu, Mythbuntu, UbuntuStudio, and others
are<br>
> available too.<br>
><br>
> -dc<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Cialug mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Cialug@cialug.org" target="_blank">Cialug@cialug.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug" target="_blank">http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Cialug mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cialug@cialug.org" target="_blank">Cialug@cialug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug" target="_blank">http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Tim <br>
</div></div><pre><hr size="4" width="90%"><div class="Ih2E3d">
_______________________________________________
Cialug mailing list
<a href="mailto:Cialug@cialug.org" target="_blank">Cialug@cialug.org</a>
<a href="http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug" target="_blank">http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug</a>
</div></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Cialug mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cialug@cialug.org">Cialug@cialug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug" target="_blank">http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Tim <br>