Seems kinda inconsistent. I'm seeing thin lines, thicc lines, flat, 3d, colored and monochrome all together
The icons don't all speak the same language, true. Some are way more elaborate and detailed than others, which just makes them look off.
Maybe the library could be a single book instead of an entire bookshelf, for example?
There's another icon called "folder-book"
Ah, didn't see that one at first. Even that icon is still too different from the others though, using thinner lines and no fill. Hm
Jesus, it's so inconsistent. I suppose that may be beneficial when looking at all of your folders at a bird's eye view but my knee jerk reaction isn't the most positive.
filled areas and outlined, simple and chaotic... :-)
That looks… really inconsistent
IIRC they refined the Breeze icons over a LONG period of time to get them to the current state - I'm sure the same will be true here.
These are definitely an improvement over the current icons but while some of the design rules are evident, i think a bit of refining is in order.
The games and download folders both need a complete redesign as the ignore the design rules that the other folders use, and why are the symbols on each folder white except for the Mac folder?
They are... certainly icons. I can't get any more excited than that I'm afraid
Finally designers are realizing it's not 2013 anymore and nobody liked the Win8 designed-in-powerpoint style.
Respectfully, I love how powerful KDE is but my god they can't make things visually consistent to save their lives!
From inconsistent icons, to different KDE apps using wildly different design languages, to padding being inconsistent all throughout the DE and their apps, to fonts and their sizes kinda being all over the place
But at least a custom theme is trivial to install and solves most of it
Interesting. Even though I definitely have some mild form of OCD, I do not have single issue with Breeze defaults look.
This feels like a step back from what we currently have.
Ooh, it really reminds me of newaita reborn which is one of my favorite icon themes. I'm glad they're making it a little less minimal
I've seen better designs. But I've also seen worse designs. This is pretty meh.
And I was gonna try out KDE anyway.
I don't mind this.
Looks good to me
I actually quite like the current breeze style with the sharper edges, it sets it apart from other designs.
Now KDE needs to implement a consistent design language for its apps, clean up its settings, and have better defaults. Not asking KDE to copy Gnome, just that it needs a lot more work to be palletable to someone using it for the first time.
TODO since KDE 3...
My opinion, if possible, just use the Papirus icons by default. It does such a great job of being consistent while giving apps their own look.
I liked old look more. Would prefer to add even more preinstalled icons instead.
Great criticism overall. Yes, it'll be improved.
Kinda hard to tell with the symbols due to the white on light blue
Why is everything a folder? What does a debian or android folder do?
Yes, everything will be a folder in plasma 6, including applications, don't worry, you I'll love the new Firefox folder. Its the natural progression of things, don't try to stop it.
It's deb, not Debian, so I'd assume it's the icon for .deb files (which are browsable archives).
It folds Debian to prevent Debian prions
Debían no idea... But I guess android could be android studio folders or similar stuff?
I'm not the most knowledgeable on this subject, but I'm curious to learn more.
Why do various toolkits have major releases that seem to reset the features of the last one?
GTK 3 seems like GTK 2 but slower to me, and before the transition was even complete GTK 4 showed up, which just seems like GTK 3 but a bit different. Qt 5 works really well and is efficient on resources, so why are we switching to Qt 6? It seems like reinventing the desktop over and over again.
I understand updates for the kernel for compatibility, small to medium updates to all software for bug fixes and new features, and major updates to toolkits when there are big problems with the current release (X vs Wayland for example). Or if the current release was unreliable and bloated, which I heard was what happened with Qt 4 and why they switched to 5. But I also heard Qt 3 was really stable and lightweight, so why did they switch away from it?
Usually there's big new features that accomodate more modern hardware better. As an example, Qt6 revamps support for Wayland, HDR, and scaling. Even these things on their own don't seem like much, but if you go back to KDE 5 in 10 years time you'll definitely feel like something is plain/dated (or completely not working if you're on new hardware)
Gtk 3->4 made a lot of internal changes, and at least some were related to making wayland work. Wayland "worked" in gtk3, however it was very much an afterthought, and half the toolkit was useless under wayland. Other changes are usually required for changes related to rendering, gtk4 had vulcan rendering which may require some breaking changes. Another thing is just general breaking changes that are good, sometimes you realise some decision was bad, and a new major release is just a way to make these.
From the end users perspective nothing much changes, it maybe looks a bit different, but not much besides that. But a vulcan renderer and being fully wayland compatible are major improvements that also improve the user experience, even if you don't notice directly.
This is soooo good
Loving the new style. Still a bit of rough edges to polish and can't wait to see them in practice after the finall release in February next year.
Looks awesome
Still garbage. Why is it so hard for the KDE guys to actually design something simple that makes sense? Starting with proportions and spacing between elements that they seem to be unaware of?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
