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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
The folder "Notes" and the folder "Library" literally could be anything. There's no way you show that to any user and they guess the name correct.
And this is the problem I have with all of the icons used in menu's throughout KDE. I don't know what the hell they are supposed to be! Even more so as the eyesight gets worse with age.