3 ms·

I think I remember looking at the project page a while ago and thinking, huh! What is the relevance of this project? While it is always great to see Linux DE's/

I think I remember looking at the project page a while ago and thinking, huh! What is the relevance of this project? While it is always great to see Linux DE's/projects living on, this is just another project which sadly fragments the Linux desktop ecosystem even further. I agree, we need more Linux apps (Before electron apps take over the entire Linux DE), not distro's or DE's (checkout https://makealinux.app/ https://makealinux.app/). And if you are still adamant on creating a new DE, make it interoperable between other DE's. Remember https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/ https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/ ? Also, things have changed: - KDE 5 plasma is lighter than GNOME. - GNOME became a project with zero regards to the community. But is breaking less since the last few releases. - You have so many "traditional DE's". XFCE, Mate, Solus DE, Cinnamon, Deepin DE. I agree with someone who have said that none of the new GUI have made him/her/they productive. My progression for productivity through DE's has been GNOME for 10ish years, KDE 5 for 1.5, Another 1.5 years in XFCE and now I use i3wm. Looks like you focus more on functionality as you become a mature user and less on the bells and whistles. - Moved from GNOME after using from 3.0 till 3.22 because of crashing. It is better now. - Moved from KDE because every update on my rolling release distro was a panic attack due to the bizzilion dependencies each software depends on. Not to mention it could be a security disaster. just install Okular or Korganizer to see what I am talking about. Krita has been the only exception I have noticed. - Window managing has been the bottleneck in XFCE, it is the best for a rolling release distribution. So now I use i3wm. I only see a gradual transition to Swaywm now since Xorg is breathing it's last few, so I will have to move from i3wm. So I ask again, what is the point of Trinity? What is it bringing? We need to start seeing Linux as the future since big corporates are moving to Linux more. I would like to see Trinity resources going to KDE which is so much better now. But hey, that is just me.

badsectoracula 6y ago
> What is the relevance of this project? People who like KDE 3 being able to use KDE 3 with fixes and stuff. > this is just another project which sadly fragments the Linux desktop ecosystem even further This doesn't really fragment the desktop since any desktop application that works under X11 will work on it. Of course if said application makes assumptions about what is underneath then it might face trouble if said assumptions are not met, but that is really a problem with the application (and in practice usually workaround-able).
- unsungNovelty 6y ago
  > People who like KDE 3 being able to use KDE 3 with fixes and stuff. Fair enough. >This doesn't really fragment the desktop since any desktop application that works under X11 will work on it. Of course if said application makes assumptions about what is underneath then it might face trouble if said assumptions are not met, but that is really a problem with the application (and in practice usually workaround-able). I meant fragmentation of unnecessary DE/Distro's which keeps reinventing the wheel instead of working with another project doing the same thing but very well. In the case of Trinity DE, I agree there was a need initially when the KDE moved on leaving a huge number of users dry, but this should've been a temporary project. Or maybe evolve like the MATE project has (which still could've been avoided if they collaborated with XFCE instead of creating the MATE spinoff). This doesn't seems to be the case here. But yeah, I haven't test driven this RC of Trinity DE yet and my last test drive or Trinity DE was an year old, maybe things are better. Still not sure if this benefits Linux as a whole but I guess that is not my call.
  - badsectoracula 6y ago
    > I meant fragmentation of unnecessary DE/Distro's which keeps reinventing the wheel instead of working with another project doing the same thing but very well. I'm willing to bet that the people who want/use/develop this do not believe that there is another project doing the same thing - even if it might not appear like that to everyone (i mean, you read comments about people wondering why there are so many distributions and why not everyone works on a single one to make it the best :-P). > In the case of Trinity DE, I agree there was a need initially when the KDE moved on leaving a huge number of users dry, but this should've been a temporary project. Why temporary? The developers and users of TDE may prefer the way KDE3 does things or Qt3 or whatever that wouldn't work with anything that came after. MATE is an interesting case - IMO MATE should have forked Gtk+ 2 instead of switching to Gtk+ 3 because Gtk+ 3 has a different "feel" to it that -again, IMO- is much worse (and feels a bit sluggier) than Gtk+ 2. This would also help the ton of other projects that at the time were still stuck in Gtk+ 2 and would waste a lot of time down the road to converting their code to Gtk+ 3 while also preserving Gtk+ 2 as a stable API for GUI applications that was still in widespread availability. Of course it is too late now.

badsectoracula 6y ago

> What is the relevance of this project? People who like KDE 3 being able to use KDE 3 with fixes and stuff. > this is just another project which sadly fragments the Linux desktop ecosystem even further This doesn't really fragment the desktop since any desktop application that works under X11 will work on it. Of course if said application makes assumptions about what is underneath then it might face trouble if said assumptions are not met, but that is really a problem with the application (and in practice usually workaround-able).

unsungNovelty 6y ago
> People who like KDE 3 being able to use KDE 3 with fixes and stuff. Fair enough. >This doesn't really fragment the desktop since any desktop application that works under X11 will work on it. Of course if said application makes assumptions about what is underneath then it might face trouble if said assumptions are not met, but that is really a problem with the application (and in practice usually workaround-able). I meant fragmentation of unnecessary DE/Distro's which keeps reinventing the wheel instead of working with another project doing the same thing but very well. In the case of Trinity DE, I agree there was a need initially when the KDE moved on leaving a huge number of users dry, but this should've been a temporary project. Or maybe evolve like the MATE project has (which still could've been avoided if they collaborated with XFCE instead of creating the MATE spinoff). This doesn't seems to be the case here. But yeah, I haven't test driven this RC of Trinity DE yet and my last test drive or Trinity DE was an year old, maybe things are better. Still not sure if this benefits Linux as a whole but I guess that is not my call.
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  > I meant fragmentation of unnecessary DE/Distro's which keeps reinventing the wheel instead of working with another project doing the same thing but very well. I'm willing to bet that the people who want/use/develop this do not believe that there is another project doing the same thing - even if it might not appear like that to everyone (i mean, you read comments about people wondering why there are so many distributions and why not everyone works on a single one to make it the best :-P). > In the case of Trinity DE, I agree there was a need initially when the KDE moved on leaving a huge number of users dry, but this should've been a temporary project. Why temporary? The developers and users of TDE may prefer the way KDE3 does things or Qt3 or whatever that wouldn't work with anything that came after. MATE is an interesting case - IMO MATE should have forked Gtk+ 2 instead of switching to Gtk+ 3 because Gtk+ 3 has a different "feel" to it that -again, IMO- is much worse (and feels a bit sluggier) than Gtk+ 2. This would also help the ton of other projects that at the time were still stuck in Gtk+ 2 and would waste a lot of time down the road to converting their code to Gtk+ 3 while also preserving Gtk+ 2 as a stable API for GUI applications that was still in widespread availability. Of course it is too late now.