Image 01
profile-image

app3al

J T Bird , United Kingdom
PeaZip

System Software 175 comments

Score 84%
84 Likes
16 Dislikes
Oct 28 2018
Ok, you know KDE from the user point of view since 1997, about like me, but you are still confusing 'it uses' with 'it is'; sorry, but it's plainly a wrong.
A program (KDE) using a library set (Qt) withing the plethora of libraries it uses, and offering an API well beyond the scope of that library, must not be confused with the library set (widgetset) itself.
An application is a KDE application if it able to use the API offered by KDE (of wich those coming from Qt and precluded to applications compiled using a different widgetset is only a part).
Is this application able to use KDE API? It uses many important KDE specific features like opening associated files, finding paths and resolving urls, reading system variables, use Konqueror's servicemenus etc; it does not use others (Qt system dialogs).
Is it enough a KDE-app or not? Does it uses enough KDE API?
Is the glass half full (may stay) or half empty (may go)?

Sorry, I don't want to be unpolite to you and other KDE-Apps reades when I say 'since you are not a coder', but from a coder POV it seems to me half full.
Other coders may have different backgrounds, experience or likes and may think differently, like other users may have a different opinion than you.
It just seem pointless to me that at each program's update, with KDE support getting better version by version, somoeone comes up saying 'is it still there?'... hey, do the user took time to notice the glass is not empty!? - Jul 13 2007
> As I said. Qt is the *basis*
> of KDE - like it or not. (Like
> Gtk is the basis for Gnome, btw).
I said it too. But since you say you are not a coder I'll take some more time to explain: don't confuse the part for the whole.
On a given system+desktop environment you can use different widgetset: you can use Qt on Gnome, you can use GTks on KDE, you can even install libraries needed to run both of them under Win32 or OSX/Darwin desktops!
Widgetset are a set of libraries related to manipulate (mainly) graphic elements, which KDE developers uses compiling KDE.
Third parts application developers can use those libraries too; doing this will render the application's visual components (and system dialogs) coherent with a desktop environment compiled with the same library, and here you win a point, but will not do ANYTHING else, so it will not turn the application using QT in a KDE application, nor a GTK* application a Gnome application.

To integrate an application in the desktop environment, over this level the effect of the choice of the widgetset is over, stop, halt!
You want to use drag and drop? You have to code it for the given desktop environment, for the given data set you are handling, for the given objects of the application wich will use this mean to communicate with the rest of the world (a Qt or GTK or Java or anything else app open in the same KDE session!).
You want to open files and dirs with KDE-associated application like this app does? You have to deal with KDE specific calls, Qt will not help you here (nor GTK in Gnome)
You want the system be aware of the application in the right menus (like this app)? You have to follow Freedesktop standards; the same you need to create proper file association in the desktop environment, Qt will not help you here (because are part of KDE, not 'the' KDE, and its part role ends before here).
You want the application be aware of system variables (like this app)? You need to code it.
Otherwise you will have native dialogs and GUI objects (btw, I'm not a great fan of theming eyecandy, but PeaZip seem also theme aware), and stop, no integration in what you usually do with desktop (menus, d&d, file associations...).

Would a Qt app be a KDE app just because it uses the same widgetset KDE is compiled for? But it will lack a lot of things wich the widgetset libraries role simply doesn't cover, you can add it but they doesn't belong to Qt or any other widgetset...
An a non-Qt app will not be a KDE app even if it is aware of KDE session variables, KDE file association, KDE menus etc...?
IMHO, saying that something is a KDE (or Gnome) app is more complicated to say if something is a Qt (or GTK) app, just because the desktop environment (a big bunch of libraries to cover very different scopes) comes with far more things than the widgetset (a small set of libraries focused on a specific range of functions)!
And IMHO is not fair for this application saying it's porly integrated on KDE and should go away from here, apart for using GTK (wich can be replaced at compile time on Lazarus/FPK, the development tool used) and lack of d&d (but lacks on Gnome too), the KDE menus are great and the file associations in KDE works seamlessly (both from desktop and in the application) so the application is fully usable on a KDE system as is out of the box of most Linux distribution, in my experience without having to deal with missing GTK libraries installation.

My take: it's a cross platform and (as well) cross desktop application, which becomes aware of the desktop environment in use and switch using proper menus, file associations and desktop specific methods to perform in a native way most of the operation you will expect from an archiver in a Gnome, KDE or Win32 environment, so IMHO it should be considered a 'citizen' in Gnome apps as in KDE apps and Win32 apps. - Jul 13 2007
> But it's not, so let's forget
> about that part, shall we?
No, since people saing this just forget (or refuses even to google a little to understand) what does widgetset means.
They see a different system dialog and start complaining 'it's not well integrated', 'it's not a KDE app'... well, poeple confusing 'KDE' (the desktop environment) and 'Qt' (ONE of the widgetset I can use under KDE, the one used to writing KDE, but certainly, luckyly, NOT the only widgetset KDE and Linux allows me to use) are like people confusing 'Linux' (the kernel) and 'GNU/Linux) (the system), or 'M$ Windows' and 'computer'.
And moreover: widgetset ans integration are only loosely related, you can compile an application targeting Qt, but don't expect it magically appears in context menu, becomes self aware of system variables, of how parsing parameters passed from console, other apps, or the desktop.

> My point was that it's confusing
> - you might as well rename kde-apps
> to "Apps" and let it contain Windows
> applications as well - since you can
> run Internet Explorer under Wine...
Your POV is confusing too, since the point of complaining is Qt you would be right to complain if someone publish this app on Qt-apps!

You are not a coder, so I can assume you are in good faith not knowing it, but did you realized Qt (the widgetset) is only a target for the copliation, not a magic pwder that make an application aware of all what a desktop environment may offer?
That is (hard) work of coding: to read system varaibles (this app does), to use desktop menus (this app does), to accept parameters from desktop (windoze drag&drop like, this apps don't does, but also many other apps here).

> including hard cash to developers.
That really makes you honor, but don't exeem you of trying to understanding computing topoics you are posting about... there is the Windows world for pay&complain computing ;)

I apologize again to KDE-apps.org readers for this pointless flame, but as I said I'm quite stuffed to have to surf so many pointless posts to get a menaingful info on an application I'm going to test, this on the long run is really hampering my user experience on this site. - Jul 12 2007
And so, what's the point in whimper in this manner about an application is fully functional and well integrated under KDE?
Because of you don't like the widgetset in use, which make show up GTK dialogs?
Well, if it's due to this... a decent Linux user must know about program's compilation, so stop trolling about this application and start doing something useful for KDE: port it to Qt widgetset, as it is supported by the RAD where the GUI of this application is developed on.
Or (sorry, I don't mean to be rude, this critic is not only to you but to some people here systematically complaining in that way without even attempting to do something useful), if you cannot do something useful for KDE then please stop acting as the KDE-paladin guy!
Seriously, to an user searching info on an application, comments on Kde-apps.org are about unreadable due to pointless comments of this kind (and, I repent... because of flame response that brings up, like mine...)! - Jul 12 2007
Nice improvements you did in 1.4 user interface, I like it more! - Mar 12 2007
I tested the app in the weekend and now it's the default archiver on my machine(s). - Feb 12 2007
It's nice to see innovative applications like this one; it brings a bunch of useful features lacking to mainstream similar applications and it's generally (more than) very simple to set up and use.
Keep up the good work! - Feb 12 2007
twofish

Security 7 comments

by renci
Score 67%
67 Likes
33 Dislikes
Oct 18 2008
Do you think it would make tangible difference using Qt for deploying this specific application?
And, yes, don't forget we are talking of open source software.
If you feel it would be better if ported to Qt, no one here is going stop you.
And code is far more useful to KDE users than complaints. - May 21 2007
Useful little encryption application, thank you for uploading! - Feb 08 2007
Remove special characters

Dolphin Service Menus 13 comments

Score 67%
67 Likes
33 Dislikes
May 09 2007
Nice idea you had! - May 21 2007
Tripod

Graphics & Photography 13 comments

by seb
Score 76%
76 Likes
24 Dislikes
Feb 01 2007
I agree with BorgQueen, I like thinking Linux users are smart enough to tell the difference! BTW, the program is nice! - May 21 2007
Kate

Text Editors 43 comments

Score 83%
83 Likes
17 Dislikes
Jul 20 2006
IMHO Kate is simply the overall best general/mixed purpose editor available today. - Feb 19 2007
par2repair

Dolphin Service Menus 2 comments

Score 58%
58 Likes
42 Dislikes
Jan 31 2007
It's a quite simple script but works just ok and does well what it is expected to do, seamlessly, I voted it up. - Feb 09 2007
thin liquid film

Video Converter 11 comments

by Matti
Score 77%
77 Likes
23 Dislikes
Feb 23 2007
A good and good-looking little application, very nice! - Feb 09 2007