Projects/KDE on Windows/FAQ - Revision history

Ttguy: /* ... FOSS applications as a reason for KDE for windows - really? */

2012-06-10T00:12:07Z

‎... FOSS applications as a reason for KDE for windows - really?

Ttguy: add references/ tag

2012-06-10T00:00:29Z

add references/ tag

Ttguy: /* ... tell me who except über geeks need KDE on Windows? - define FOSS */

2012-06-09T23:59:25Z

‎... tell me who except über geeks need KDE on Windows? - define FOSS

Tfry: Hint on potentially acceptable "reforms" of the compiler decision

2010-11-08T09:14:05Z

Hint on potentially acceptable "reforms" of the compiler decision

Tfry: Start add FAQ for the compiler issue (a bit more to come)

2010-11-08T08:26:00Z

Start add FAQ for the compiler issue (a bit more to come)

Vdboor: windows 7 is no longer upcoming

2010-03-02T16:51:44Z

windows 7 is no longer upcoming

Tampakrap: Minor grammar fix

2009-12-01T00:41:00Z

Minor grammar fix

Tampakrap: Extremely minor change

2009-11-30T23:58:40Z

Extremely minor change

Tampakrap: Fixed grammar

2009-11-30T21:18:23Z

Fixed grammar

Tampakrap: fixed small grammar error

2009-07-24T10:15:32Z

fixed small grammar error

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 . Most businesses won't suddenly switch. Clear step-by-step migration paths (Windows + Office + Explorer -> Windows + OpenOffice + Konqueror -> Linux + OpenOffice + Konqueror) make it easier for the IT deciders to enter this process. (Something along the lines of "If the users do not like Konqueror, they can still use Explorer.") Yes, I know that Konqueror is not a good example, as many Windows users have just learned Firefox and will most probably not look into learning yet another browser.
-. Having FOSS<ref>''F''ree ''O''pen ''S''ource ''S''oftware</ref> applications available on the Windows platform is crucial for attracting users. Not many people go into the store and buy a SuSE box, but many people get single FOSS apps like OOo or Firefox because they read about it in some magazine, or some friend recommended it to them.
+. Having FOSS<ref>''F''ree ''O''pen ''S''ource ''S''oftware</ref> applications available on the Windows platform is crucial for attracting users. Not many people go into the store and buy a SuSE box, but many people get single FOSS apps like OpenOffice or Firefox<ref>Both of these run on Windows without having to install a whole underliying framework like KDE. So reason 3 is not really valid. I guess if individual FOSS apps exist that are useful and they rely on KDE then this is a good reason to develop KDE for windows. But it would be far better for apps to be developed so they were not dependant on KDE. Who wants the whole KDE if all they really want is one application?</ref> because they read about it in some magazine, or some friend recommended it to them.
 ==== [http://dot.kde.org/2009/06/08/kde-windows-continues KDE on windows attracts developer] ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:00, 10 June 2012
Line 73:		Line 73:

	Of course that does not mean ''everything'' has to stay the way it is for all times. For instance, it has been suggested to make it possible to create releases for the different compilers on independent schedules, and possibly even in independent installers ([http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-windows&m=128897091402019&w=2] [http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-windows&m=128904725308842&w=2]). Even for those, you'd need to spend some work to convince us going this way is worth the trouble (and be prepared to actually do the work to implement them, too). But at least discussing such reforms may not be entirely fruitless.		Of course that does not mean ''everything'' has to stay the way it is for all times. For instance, it has been suggested to make it possible to create releases for the different compilers on independent schedules, and possibly even in independent installers ([http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-windows&m=128897091402019&w=2] [http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-windows&m=128904725308842&w=2]). Even for those, you'd need to spend some work to convince us going this way is worth the trouble (and be prepared to actually do the work to implement them, too). But at least discussing such reforms may not be entirely fruitless.
		+
		+	<references/>

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 . Most businesses won't suddenly switch. Clear step-by-step migration paths (Windows + Office + Explorer -> Windows + OpenOffice + Konqueror -> Linux + OpenOffice + Konqueror) make it easier for the IT deciders to enter this process. (Something along the lines of "If the users do not like Konqueror, they can still use Explorer.") Yes, I know that Konqueror is not a good example, as many Windows users have just learned Firefox and will most probably not look into learning yet another browser.
-. Having FOSS applications available on the Windows platform is crucial for attracting users. Not many people go into the store and buy a SuSE box, but many people get single FOSS apps like OOo or Firefox because they read about it in some magazine, or some friend recommended it to them.
+. Having FOSS<ref>''F''ree ''O''pen ''S''ource ''S''oftware</ref> applications available on the Windows platform is crucial for attracting users. Not many people go into the store and buy a SuSE box, but many people get single FOSS apps like OOo or Firefox because they read about it in some magazine, or some friend recommended it to them.
 ==== [http://dot.kde.org/2009/06/08/kde-windows-continues KDE on windows attracts developer] ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:14, 8 November 2010
Line 68:		Line 68:
	==== Ok, so having multiple compilers is a good thing for developers, but do we really need to include multiple compilers in the installer for end users? ====		==== Ok, so having multiple compilers is a good thing for developers, but do we really need to include multiple compilers in the installer for end users? ====
	Keep in mind that some features / applications can only be compiled with either MSVC or GCC (see above). Also, application developers, too, may be interested in using the installer to install ready-made packages, and they should be able to build their software with the compiler of their choice (see above).		Keep in mind that some features / applications can only be compiled with either MSVC or GCC (see above). Also, application developers, too, may be interested in using the installer to install ready-made packages, and they should be able to build their software with the compiler of their choice (see above).
		+
		+	==== I still don't agree on the compiler issue. Is this your final word? ====
		+	Well, never say never. But again, this ''has'' been discussed, before, we do intend to stick to our decision for the foreseeable future, and any discussion about it is very, very likely to be a complete waste of time, for you and for us.
		+
		+	Of course that does not mean ''everything'' has to stay the way it is for all times. For instance, it has been suggested to make it possible to create releases for the different compilers on independent schedules, and possibly even in independent installers ([http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-windows&m=128897091402019&w=2] [http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-windows&m=128904725308842&w=2]). Even for those, you'd need to spend some work to convince us going this way is worth the trouble (and be prepared to actually do the work to implement them, too). But at least discussing such reforms may not be entirely fruitless.

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:26, 8 November 2010
Line 52:		Line 52:

	[[Projects/KDE_on_Windows\| back to KDE on Windows]]		[[Projects/KDE_on_Windows\| back to KDE on Windows]]
		+
		+
		+	== Development ==
		+
		+	=== Multiple compiler support ===
		+
		+	==== Why do you support so many compilers? Is that really what the project needs, at this time? ====
		+
		+	You are not the first to bring up this suggestion, and the decision to support multiple compilers has not been entirely uncontroversial. However, we have reached a decision on topic (on the [http://dot.kde.org/2007/09/18/windows-developers-meet-berlin 2007 Developers meet in Berlin], if you want to know), and we do intend to stick with it for the foreseeable future. Here are some of the primary reasons:
		+	# Having multiple compilers going through the code helps catch issues, as different compilers produce different warnings about problems.
		+	# Unfortunately, C++-libraries compiled with MSVC cannot be linked against with GCC, and vice versa, so the two cannot be mixed. We want to give developers the chance to compile their applications with the compiler of their choice. But that means compiling everything (well, mostly everything) with both compilers.
		+	# Some features / applications cannot be compiled or do not work when compiled with MSVC, some others don't work with GCC. This is a relatively small share of the software we offer, but still, dropping either compiler would mean dropping the respective features. Supporting both compilers still does not allow to have all these features in ''one'' KDE installation, but at least it will allow users to use these features at all.
		+	# So perhaps having support for multiple compilers is not all that important ''to you''. But keep in mind that the majority of KDE on Windows developers are volunteers. We are glad, if our project is useful to you, but our priority is to work on the things that ''we'' care about. And yes, support for multiple compilers is a thing that some of the primary developers do care about.
		+
		+	==== Ok, so having multiple compilers is a good thing for developers, but do we really need to include multiple compilers in the installer for end users? ====
		+	Keep in mind that some features / applications can only be compiled with either MSVC or GCC (see above). Also, application developers, too, may be interested in using the installer to install ready-made packages, and they should be able to build their software with the compiler of their choice (see above).

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ==== What versions of windows does KDE windows work on? ====
-KDE4 is known to run on various versions of Windows XP and Vista, as well as the upcoming Windows 7.
+KDE4 is known to run on various versions of Windows XP and Vista, as well as Windows 7.
 ==== Does KDE windows use additional resources or does it replace any windows resources with its own? ====

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 == Reasons for KDE on Windows ==
-==== [http://dot.kde.org/2009/06/08/kde-windows-continues ... tell me who except über geeks needs KDE on Windows]? ====
+==== [http://dot.kde.org/2009/06/08/kde-windows-continues ... tell me who except über geeks need KDE on Windows]? ====
 We need KDE on Windows for three reasons:

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == Technical ==
-==== How to replace windows explorer as shell ? ====
+==== How to replace windows explorer as shell? ====
 Download and run autorun from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb963902.aspx - enter the tab 'Logon' and replace the value of HKCU\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\Shell with the plasma-desktop path - but - be aware that explorer provides almost everything in the system settings area and other stuff.

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 KDE4 is known to run on various versions of Windows XP and Vista, as well as the upcoming Windows 7.
-==== Does KDE windows use additional resources or does it replace any windows resources with it's own? ====
+==== Does KDE windows use additional resources or does it replace any windows resources with its own? ====
 ==== Is it easy to uninstall if I don't want it on my system? ====
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 ==== [http://dot.kde.org/2009/06/08/kde-windows-continues Morty wrote - Not the desktop] ====
-... The power of KDE are it's library and the applications made with it, and those are also interresting for the Windows platform.
+... The power of KDE are its library and the applications made with it, and those are also interresting for the Windows platform.
 And for KDE as a whole, any developers brought in and bugs fixed by the Windows port are a net win for KDE.

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 We need KDE on Windows for three reasons:
-. Most businesses can't just switch to Linux. I've heard more than enough stories of workers being stucked with Windows as they're of course not allowed or able (because of special apps) to convert their boxes to Linux. KDE might provide them with a comfortable working environment to which they are used.
+. Most businesses can't just switch to Linux. I've heard more than enough stories of workers being stuck with Windows as they're of course not allowed or able (because of special apps) to convert their boxes to Linux. KDE might provide them with a comfortable working environment to which they are used.
 . Most businesses won't suddenly switch. Clear step-by-step migration paths (Windows + Office + Explorer -> Windows + OpenOffice + Konqueror -> Linux + OpenOffice + Konqueror) make it easier for the IT deciders to enter this process. (Something along the lines of "If the users do not like Konqueror, they can still use Explorer.") Yes, I know that Konqueror is not a good example, as many Windows users have just learned Firefox and will most probably not look into learning yet another browser.