MX Linux Forum

No surprise here:

https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/mx-19-2-kde.html

No idea how he could complain about how hard it is to find out how to get it, with the "Download" button staring him in the face at the top...

No surprise at all. I knew from the start Dedo would pan an older release of KDE. Complaining about the font size and colors in konsole seems to me to be a very minor point. I found the fonts too small as well. Easily changed.

Opinions are like .... everyone has one.

I kinda think he answers his own question if he should stop doing reviews.
The answer is YES, they have become very opinionated, unrealistic, and uninformative.

Then again we probably should have added Plank to the default desktop and then we'd get a 90 page review of how great it was.

But its a good thing we made this version for our users and just not one person.

And why exactly do we care and promote this reviewer? I didn't like him when he liked MX...

We care because 1) he has typically provided thoughtful critique, not just criticism; 2) he has early and often reviewed MX.

Not sure how we promote him--I posted this because it is the first actual review that I have seen.

We care

I never cared what this dudemedo had to say.

he has typically provided thoughtful critique, not just criticism

In this cause: "I decided to cut this review short" doesn't sound like thoughtful critique, it's just that he doesn't like KDE version in Debian Buster. But we already know that, MX KDE is not for people running for after new shiny objects (they can use Arch or Neon or something else as he pointed out). He should not have started a review in the first place, if somebody would have asked for his opinion he could have just said "I'm not even considering running or reviewing KDE from Buster" and leave it to that. That's not really about MX, it's about him.

For me Dedoimedo reviews towards KDE is more professional way and as per a users view, His reviews on MX xfce has always appreciated, rewarding and even he nominated MX the best xfce distro of 2019.

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:08 pmMX KDE is not for people running for after new shiny objects (they can use Arch or Neor or something else as he pointed out).

Makes sense. But he'd probably say that you should have used Plasma 5.12 then, because that's a LTS release. But I suppose this is a bit difficult when you're based on Debian.

SwampRabbit wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:47 am Opinions are like .... everyone has one.

for example from the review

There are already way too many distros, distro spins and distro editions out there. Roughly 90% too many.

That is an opinion repeated over and over by him in his reviews and at the security forum he's a member of, and by others.
That's all it is - an opinion.
How tiring to have opinions stated as Absolute Truth.

tony37 wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:19 pm

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:08 pmMX KDE is not for people running for after new shiny objects (they can use Arch or Neor or something else as he pointed out).

Makes sense. But he'd probably say that you should have used Plasma 5.12 then, because that's a LTS release. But I suppose this is a bit difficult when you're based on Debian.

We of course considered that, but there are Qt library problems. From what I've heard from packagers we'd have to have KDE on different Qt library then the rest of Debian Buster applications. We don't subject our users to breakage just to have a higher version number. Also, this is a first release and more of a proof of concept (also to gauge the interest), we can make other decisions for MX-20, this was supposed to be up to par release (although delayed) with MX-19.2 Xfce.

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:29 pm We of course considered that, but there are Qt library problems. From what I've heard from packagers we'd have to have KDE on different Qt library then the rest of Debian Buster applications. We don't subject our users to breakage just to have a higher version number. Also, this is a first release and more of a proof of concept (also to gauge the interest), we can make other decisions for MX-20, this was supposed to be up to par release (although delayed) with MX-19.2 Xfce.

First release? Proof of concept? Hell, this is my daily driver for the next five years.

I think its clickbat, just using "MX" "KDE" and "Missing in action" gets him tons of hits.

Ripping on the KDE version is why I initially said its "unrealistic".
Is he going to rip on Debian Stable for it too? Gimme a break.

uncle mark wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:38 pm

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:29 pm We of course considered that, but there are Qt library problems. From what I've heard from packagers we'd have to have KDE on different Qt library then the rest of Debian Buster applications. We don't subject our users to breakage just to have a higher version number. Also, this is a first release and more of a proof of concept (also to gauge the interest), we can make other decisions for MX-20, this was supposed to be up to par release (although delayed) with MX-19.2 Xfce.

First release? Proof of concept? Hell, this is my daily driver for the next five years.

Uncle Mark, even if the only gain was bringing you and a couple of KDE users back it was all worth it and our effort is well repaid regardless of such reviews.

Although I never left, it got me back to KDE. Never doubt that it was worth the effort. I am sure there are dedicated fans.

He's wrong about the pinning thing being a bug.

There are 2 ways of placing launchers on the panel, from what I can see. MX-KDE used the actual "place launcher on panel" method. In this method, launcher is different from the opened window, so you seemingly get 2 icons. If you use the "pin to task manager" method, then clicking on the pinned app will open it and the pinned icon disappears when the app is opened so you only get the opened window icon. So they are actually 2 different things.

Apart from that, since it was essentially just a short note about how he's not going to review an older Plasma, I'm not bothered by it. The "older" thing was expected, although like Adrian says, that's just how Debian Stable is, with regard to desktop environment versions.

Hi,

I read the review and to be honest I have the ISO file in my downloads folder but haven't installed it yet so I can't really comment specifically on the KDE version... however

I'm still very new here and have watched from afar for years, MX seems rooted in many pillar virtues (common sense, compatibility, long-term support, foresight, focus on the existing community here rather than the potential future community which may never materialize etc etc.). In our back asswards world those are not the sexy virtues that get positive press nearly often enough but day after day they get the job done 24/7... Nobody likes a bad review (I've seen my share for my own project) but so often bad reviews are about poor research preparation and unrealistic or uninformed expectations by the reviewer.. These things sting a bit, but I love the single minded focus and purpose of this project, it may not be shiny or jump out immediately but those who will peek beyond the veneer will be well rewarded!

There are already way too many distros, distro spins and distro editions out there. Roughly 90% too many.

.. be interesting to see his top 5 or 10 favorites

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:56 pm

uncle mark wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:38 pm First release? Proof of concept? Hell, this is my daily driver for the next five years.

Uncle Mark, even if the only gain was bringing you and a couple of KDE users back it was all worth it and our effort is well repaid regardless of such reviews.

You might rethink that once I get limbered up...

Guy seemed in a bad mood from the start, and perhaps has burned out on Linux.
The small font thing has always been an issue with kde. Not really surprising. It's the first thing I change.
For me MX KDE scratches a nostalgia itch, but more than that--it works great and offers a nice alternative to the regular MX release.

That's the most rubbish review ever, why did he bother even posting it? He sounds like a total n00b.
MX-KDE still has a way to go to reach the level of the Xfce version, but nothing he said there is at all pertinent.

KBD wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:32 pm ... perhaps has burned out on Linux.

I've been reading his reviews for a long long time, and he's never made any secret of the fact that he is/was using windows for his main production machine. He believes it's better for writing and games.
Tell that to the people on this forum who use MX as their production OS.
I used to find myself agreeing with a lot, but his sarcastic negativity has finally done me in.

His first few sentences tell the tale: he's become burned out on doing Linux distro reviews. He really shouldn't have even written this one, that being the case, as there was no way he'd approach MX-KDE with an open mind and his review reflects that. It seems like his major complaints about all distros is that they don't have Shiny New Stuff. He's apparently never read the Don't Break Debian page in the Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian ... f_Syndrome

I agree with his basic premise that using the Debian Stable version of KDE is always going to put you extremely far behind in terms of the latest features. Literally multiple years behind. Which means to me that the Debian Stable version of KDE really can't be the long term solution.

Where I disagree strongly with Igor (the real person behind Dedo) is I think that MX KDE is a fantastic release. Really nearly perfect in the way it showcases how the MX tools and concepts can blend so perfectly with the KDE desktop and default programs. It's as if KDE is still deeply embedded in the MX DNA from the Mepis days.

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:29 pm

tony37 wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:19 pm

Adrian wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:08 pmMX KDE is not for people running for after new shiny objects (they can use Arch or Neor or something else as he pointed out).

Makes sense. But he'd probably say that you should have used Plasma 5.12 then, because that's a LTS release. But I suppose this is a bit difficult when you're based on Debian.

We of course considered that, but there are Qt library problems. From what I've heard from packagers we'd have to have KDE on different Qt library then the rest of Debian Buster applications. We don't subject our users to breakage just to have a higher version number.

I actually didn't talk about using a higher version, but a lower (LTS) version. That would have gotten complaints too of course. But it's just something to think about: how important is it to use an LTS Plasma version? It would of course be ideal if Debian used the LTS versions for its Stable releases (as Kubuntu does). But I'm probably just dreaming there.

I don't know how Debian maintainers decide which version is included in a particular stable release.

According to this: https://wiki.debian.org/KDE#KDE.27s_software_in_Debian

Debian stretch had plasma 5.8.6, and buster has 5.14. 5.12 is in between the 2 Debian releases.

Debian Unstable currently has plasma 5.17, even though 5.18 LTS has been out for some time. Who knows if Debian Bullseye (now Testing) will get 5.18 eventually.

Depending on the timing of various releases of Qt versus Debian, it might be easier or harder to backport Plasma LTS to MX's current release. Plasma 5.18 was not possible for MX19/Buster.

Not sure if 5.12 could be built on Buster base but I agree with you that going with 5.12 LTS might have led to even more complaints from various MX users, since it would probably have even less finish and fewer features.

For instance, the blur desktop effect only came out in 5.13. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ho ... -kde-5-13/

If a user is into Plasma for eye candy, going with 5.12 means you miss out on all the pretty Kvantum themes utilising blur (and blur effect in konsole).

Maybe it's a superficial reason, but it's part of the fun of Plasma, IMO.

asqwerth wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:00 amDebian Unstable currently has plasma 5.17, even though 5.18 LTS has been out for some time. Who knows if Debian Bullseye (now Testing) will get 5.18 eventually.

From what I can gather, they are stuck with 5.17.x for Debian Bullseye, which won't be due until early next year, by then which KDE 5.20 or 5.21 would have been released. It beggars belief that they aren't considering the 5.18 LTS release, given the sheer amount of time between now and Debian Bullseye.

asqwerth wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:00 amDepending on the timing of various releases of Qt versus Debian, it might be easier or harder to backport Plasma LTS to MX's current release. Plasma 5.18 was not possible for MX19/Buster.

The 5.18 LTS release depends on the same library versions as 5.19 (give or take some), so this is highly unlikely to happen.

asqwerth wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:00 amNot sure if 5.12 could be built on Buster base but I agree with you that going with 5.12 LTS might have led to even more complaints from various MX users, since it would probably have even less finish and fewer features.

For instance, the blur desktop effect only came out in 5.13. https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ho ... -kde-5-13/

If a user is into Plasma for eye candy, going with 5.12 means you miss out on all the pretty Kvantum themes utilising blur (and blur effect in konsole).

The other problem is that 5.12 LTS is not really supported anymore. There have been no new 5.12.x releases since September 2019, so it's not even worth considering IMO.

AK-47 wrote: Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:11 am The other problem is that 5.12 LTS is not really supported anymore. There have been no new 5.12.x releases since September 2019, so it's not even worth considering IMO.

LTS apparently means two years of support, which isn't that much. Then Dedo's comments make even less sense.

One thing which is fine in 5.14 but not in recent releases are the icons in 'Recent Documents'. It makes 'Recent Documents' pretty useless if I can't see if something is a folder or a text file.

Speaking only for myself, from the start of this project my realistic aims and views for MX19-KDE were:

1. Plasma 5.14 was good enough to work with (I'd installed KDE-Standard on top of a MX19 VM and also one of my real metal installs to test for some time).
2. MX can't give users the latest Plasma, but it can give users a stable and efficient Plasma workhorse that comes with the MX DNA (tools, tweaks).

Norbert Preining said the Debian KDE devs are finally working with him on trying to incorporate his 5.19 packages into unstable, which should then work their way into testing. So, by the time the next version of Debian is released, if all goes well then they should be using some version of KDE that's at 5.19 or beyond.

Therefore I should update my earlier post - sticking with the Debian Stable version of KDE might give packages that are fairly recent if the Debian KDE team makes a lot of progress between now and next summer.

What the author told about kde version on mx,
I have read some where that Debian don't include the lts version of Plasma due to some reason may be copyright things or something else.
Debian release its kde one below or above LTS version of kde.

But I may say the latest kde on Kubuntu or Manjaro though looks fine and Useful features includes, but some bugs remain which is very less on Debian and so MX kde spin.

Debian uses KDE Plasma 5.14. I was also surprised the Debian team picked up a non-LTS version of Plasma. Using Plasma 5.12 LTS would make more sense. I think having a very outdated version of KDE Plasma (along with some other major KDE software) is one of the main disadvantages of Debian.

It might also be relevant that the bug-fixes would be consistent with the goal of stability of Debian stable - so a more recent version often means better stability (or at least it could mean that).
So many kde users think So, despite love for Debian or MX and Plasma 5, have to conclude Debian 10 KDE or MX kde is not the best option on the market.

The main reason MX KDE gets some mix reactions is that other distros provide better Plasma 5 experience.

Technically, it would be possible to upload a newer version of KDE Plasma to the Debian 10 backports; currently that would be 5.17.5 since that’s what’s in testing. Given the number of packages involved, at least if you want to provide the full KDE package set, that would represent a considerable amount of work.

But may be in next kde of Mx we may consider using Debian stable with Plasma from Debian’s back-ports (Like neon which based on Ubuntu LTS but Plasma LTS updated)?????

Auro, I revamped my initial post.

....Debian uses KDE Plasma 5.14. I was also surprised the Debian team picked up a non-LTS version of Plasma. Using Plasma 5.12 LTS would make more sense....

I think the posts in this thread show that using 5.12 would not make more sense.

...So many kde users think So, despite love for Debian or MX and Plasma 5, have to conclude Debian 10 KDE or MX kde is not the best option on the market.

It is certainly not the newest, and for those who want the latest functions and options that plasma can offer, it will not be the best.

But there will be users for whom version 5.14 works fine and are happy to use it combined with the MX Tools. Remember, it's members of this community that were requesting for a KDE version.

....
Technically, it would be possible to upload a newer version of KDE Plasma to the Debian 10 backports; currently that would be 5.17.5 since that’s what’s in testing. Given the number of packages involved, at least if you want to provide the full KDE package set, that would represent a considerable amount of work.

But may be in next kde of Mx we may consider using Debian stable with Plasma from Debian’s back-ports (Like neon which based on Ubuntu LTS but Plasma LTS updated)?????

Debian backports are run by Debian, not MX,

Debian Testing is the repo for the eventual Debian 11. Just because ver 5.17 is in testing repo, it does not mean back porting is automatically possible to make it compatible with Debian 10.

I believe the team did explore trying to rebuild 5.17 for MX-KDE and ran into difficulties. It's not so easy.

Currently Backports does not contain any newer version of the plasma desktop. We'll see.

In fact, debian-backports has never backported any version of KDE, and other desktops very, very rarely. The only one I know of was a backport of Mate for stretch repos.

Stevo wrote: Tue Sep 15, 2020 1:48 am In fact, debian-backports has never backported any version of KDE, and other desktops very, very rarely. The only one I know of was a backport of Mate for stretch repos.

I remember that with MATE. After that update from backports in Stretch my OS was broken :( There is a reason Debian is cautious about Backports.

As a relative new MX KDE user I'm super happy with the system but now I'm comfortable with it I've started wanting to tweak things and having installed and using 5.8 Kernel for my very new AMD CPU I've also started looking at updating KDE to the latest version and found this thread and just wondering if there's a way I can volunteer to test Plasma 5.17.5 from Debian’s back-ports as mentioned above?

There is NO newer plasma version in Debian backports, as stated in the posts just above yours.