1 |
On Friday 01 January 2016 11:33:32 lee wrote: |
2 |
> Peter Humphrey <peter@××××××××××××.uk> writes: |
3 |
> > I won't list all my objections here, but I have attached two screen |
4 |
> > shots of KMail: one in the standard qt4 KDE environment and the other |
5 |
> > in qt5. You can see how much less compact the qt5 version is, even |
6 |
> > after I've fiddled at some length with fonts and qt tweaks, including |
7 |
> > installing the noto fonts which you see here. And the qt5 screen shot |
8 |
> > is half as big again as the qt4. |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > My question to the panel is: is this just a temporary stage of |
11 |
> > development, or are we going to have to live with it down the years? |
12 |
> |
13 |
> What you have there is, overall, like 85% (unnecessary) GUI and 15% the |
14 |
> content you're trying to see. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> You don't need to live with that. You could use fvwm or i3 and gnus or |
17 |
> mutt or seamonkey, for example. |
18 |
|
19 |
I've tried other DEs and I still prefer KDE. And KMail is the best MUA I've |
20 |
found for POP3, which I intend to stick with. |
21 |
|
22 |
-- |
23 |
Rgds |
24 |
Peter |