KDE is finally getting a native virtual machine manager called “Karton”

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Reception of Karton and motivation

  • Many welcome Karton as a KDE-native alternative to virt-manager, especially for users already committed to Plasma and Qt applications.
  • Some feel virt-manager is powerful but clunky, dated, and poorly maintained (e.g., HiDPI issues, lack of undo, awkward XML editing).
  • GNOME Boxes is described as simpler but too limited and buggy; several people see a gap between “virt-manager complexity” and “Boxes minimalism” that Karton might fill.
  • A few question whether “another GUI for KVM/QEMU” is needed, suggesting Cockpit or existing tools are enough, but others argue a traditional desktop UI (like VirtualBox/VMware) is better for non-experts.

UI technology and naming

  • Mixed reactions to Kirigami/Qt Quick: some criticize perceived jank, inconsistencies, and preference for Qt Widgets; others argue it’s necessary for integration with modern Plasma and can be made to look good.
  • Several comments attribute Plasma’s “janky” feel to QML rendering and even joke about commercial Qt licenses.
  • The name “Karton” triggers linguistic digressions (German/Dutch/Spanish for “cardboard”), plus jokes about KDE’s “K-” naming tradition and VirtualBox/“boxes” associations.

Desired features and integration

  • Users want better graphics support (e.g., Vulkan via libvirt), GPU passthrough, and robust audio.
  • A recurring wish: running guest apps as if they were native windows (like Parallels “Coherence mode” or RDP’s single-app mode). People note partial analogues via X11 forwarding, WSL2, RDP, and VirtualBox workflows, but no clean, mainstream Linux solution.
  • Some highlight SPICE/libvirt frontends as buggy and poorly maintained, particularly around audio and HiDPI.

KDE vs GNOME, design, and stability

  • Long debate about KDE vs GNOME:
    • KDE praised for features, performance, and flexibility; critics say what it needs most is fewer bugs.
    • Several argue Plasma 5/6 are now very solid and that reputations from the KDE 4 transition are outdated.
    • GNOME is often described as pretty but overly minimal, opinionated, and reliant on fragile extensions. Some still prefer GNOME 3’s UX or tablet support.
  • Aesthetic opinions diverge: some find KDE dated and “programmer-designed” (squares, padding, complex menus); others see KDE as the only “modern-looking” option and consider whitespace-heavy styles (GNOME/Windows) superficial.

Scope of KDE and ecosystem concerns

  • Some argue KDE should focus on the DE/window management, not more apps like a VM manager, fearing developer effort is spread too thin.
  • Others counter that building a broad application suite has always been part of KDE’s mission, and Karton (a small student project) likely won’t meaningfully drain resources.
  • Theming and icon integration spark a side debate: one side claims cross-app theming routinely breaks apps; the other insists proper use of theme variables should make theming safe and is part of user freedom.