KDE 4 Beta 1

[Derek Broughton]

Magyari, Balázs wrote:

> I guess the real problem is that the quality of Beta software isn't
> very standardized. I also think many final software isn't really final
> either. But I have used some Google Beta software without any issues
> (in Windows), however there are some Beta software which should still
> be called an Alpha (according to me)... So, what does Beta in the case
> of KDE means? :-) Sorry for that quite "newbie" question...

You're absolutely right - which is why I mentioned Wine.  While wine is
considered "Alpha", that's because it doesn't always run all Windows
software, let alone run it well.  Yet for the software it does run, I'd
have to say it's pretty darn good!  Google is also a good example - half
the world was on GMail before they officially released it!

Still, while I'll recommend Wine for specific apps that I know work, I'm not
going to recommend that new Linux users jump right in and use it - it's
likely to frustrate them enough to want to quit Linux.

That's pretty much the way I feel about KDE4.  I remember the KDE2 to KDE3
upgrade.  I jumped in before it was official, and for the most part
considered it well worthwhile.  I may try KDE4 really soon now :-) 
However, it's practically guaranteed that some things will break & some
will be ugly.  Since KDE (or Gnome for those poor souls who don't know
better) is the face of Ubuntu Linux, I really believe that encouraging new
users to try out KDE4 will just lead to them returning to Windows.

As for what "Beta" means, it's generally whatever level of software
preparedness the developers are willing to expose to the general public
(and so, I would argue Wine should be at least considered "Beta").  In the
case of KDE it means it's undergone a LOT of testing, and all the really
obvious errors are fixed.  Now they need lots of us to bang on it for weeks
to find the more obscure ones.
-- 
derek