The windows port for KDE allows users to install and run KDE applications in Windows 2000, XP, 2003 and Vista . This tutorial will guide you step by step through installing KDE in Windows.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2006-07-16
Installing KDE and its programs on Windows just somehow seems wrong! :-) Although, if Windows users get used to using KDE and its applications, they may be more inclined to leave the Windows platform behind for Linux. Otherwise, this whole thing just makes me feel all dirty! LOL!
Member since:2005-07-06
The primary goals behind these ports are:
* to reach more developers (lots of them on Windows/Mac either because they are "stranded" or by choice)
* to make open protocols and file formats viable on platforms like Windows; take having Kontact native on all three platforms lets people choose one of half a dozen or so groupware servers and have a single production quality user interface that runs natively on all platforms with the exact same feature set. it's a perfect way to make non-Windows platforms viable on the desktop and non-Exchange groupware systems viable on the server by removing the Outlook problem entirely. repeat for things like ODF (Okular as a viewer, KOffice as another editor suite for ODF), freedom friendly music stores (via Amarok), etc..
having defined the above two goals, and reaffirming our primary commitment as being to Free software platforms, made me feel a lot less dirty about it all 
whether or not it has any leverage in the individual user market at all is an interesting discussion (personally, i doubt it will) but not much more than that =)
Member since:2006-05-09
Member since:2006-07-26
I'll take one that works with samba shares thank you.
Seriously. I heard all these great things about Amarok so I went to try it out and the thing freezes like crazy. XMMS is deprecated (in Gentoo anyway) so I have been using audacious.
Anyway, once XBMC starts working nicely on Linux (music works okay but not video), I'll use that and only that.
Member since:2006-05-09
Member since:2006-07-26
Member since:2008-07-04
Sometimes Windows is a better choice: It has better hardware support (for instance, I couldn't get Kubuntu to suspend properly on my Toshiba laptop), and some apps are win only. In those situations you can keep what's best: solid system and innovative KDE apps that you like. All without using Virtualbox of coLinux.
Member since:2008-04-23
Member since:2006-01-14
Ahhhh. I've got you beat. I can even install a different OS, which I have done. If I can get my work done, they don't care. The only thing is, I have to dual boot because I have need Windows to get my work done. The sad truth is that I'm usually in Windows because it slows me down to have to dual boot.
Member since:2008-05-27
Remember, Stallman was developing GNU on proprietary platforms at first. KDE on Windows is probably the epitome of OSS development - a huge OSS project starting a port to the most important proprietary platform. This is up there with Apache or PHP being optimized for Windows, in terms of impact/importance.
You do have to realize that some people are used to Windows, some prefer it, and some aren't able to choose their OS (predefined environment).
Member since:
2007-01-01
Member since:2006-01-04
Member since:2007-03-30
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2006-02-05
Member since:2006-11-24
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-09-21
It is a quote. I think it is a religious one , whereby Christians are told never to waste their time preaching to people who will never be converted and are too set in their ways.
The quote the op said was very apt indeed as people entrenched with windows will not move to Linux, so why should they have the ability to run such things as amarok ?
Member since:2006-03-10
Huh? For goodness' sake, why shouldn't they?
I'm pretty sure the goal of the KDE porting teams isn't to get people into using Linux; it's to get people into using KDE. I for one applaud it, just as I applauded cygwin when I first discovered it.
Look, I love Linux myself, but sod it, that's not the point here at all. The GNU tools and the KDE infrastructure are wonderful bits of useful software that I'd want to use on whatever platform I happen to find myself on. Where do you get off saying I shouldn't be allowed to, because I choose something other than Linux as my underlying OS? I notice you didn't say anything about the (planned) Mac port; I think you show your true colours there.
Member since:2005-09-21
No, KDE apps also should not run on Mac. Macs can dual boot Linux too.
Where do I get off saying you should not be able to run specific apps on certain operating systems ?
I get off at the same place Microsoft gets off saying I cannot run MSOffice on Linux, and Apple says I cannot run quicktime under Linux.
Can I download and install iTunes on my PC-BSD install ? No... (well, yes, but only with a hack)
Can I download IE7 for Linux ? No
Can I run MS Publisher on OpenSolaris ? Nah
Will Adobe let me run Photoshop on BSD ? Nope
See, that is where I am coming from. Now, if you REALLY want to use KDE apps, do so under an operating system it was designed for.
Member since:2007-03-30
Member since:
2006-08-03
Member since:2006-02-05
Member since:2007-03-26
Damn exchange that makes me use windows@work :-P
As much as I prefer Linux, Microsoft Visual Studio far exceeds kdevelop in my humble opinion.
Member since:2008-07-05
if you're using visual studio for .net development, I recommend using Monodevelop [http://www.monodevelop.com/Main_Page].
It's been a boon for me as far as easily integrating Linux into my infrastructure.
Member since:
2006-11-01
Member since:
2006-01-01
Member since:
2007-03-30
Member since:
2008-07-03
Member since:2005-12-02
"One question:
By using this KDE for windows, Is it possible to SSH to Linux system and run KDE apps? (sort of like cygwin)"
This has always been possible, without KDE for windows. All you need is a windows X server, of which those have been available for many many years.
Member since:
2007-12-25
Member since:
2008-03-25
Member since:
2006-09-18
