On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 07:58 -0700, Kai Ponte wrote:
Instead of working to fix the issue, he went ahead and focused scarce resources on another competing product. This has created a schism of sorts in the Linux world and has been pointed to me several times by people wanting to upgrade from Windows as a reason why they won’t or why [snip]
You make a number of valid points. The same could be said for a host of applications in the opensource world. I would, for example, love to see the recources put into rewriting sendmail, rather be spent in develping postfix. But see that becomes a matter of preference. I think for all the bad that gnome was (it has improved a lot), it served one important purpose. Had it not been for gnome, KDE would not have been anywhere near as good as it is today.
GNOME is – I’m sure – a fine desktop. I won’t use it because I feel it is blurry and puts a strain on my eyes when I look at it. KDE is also a fine desktop, which IMO is sharper and easier to read. I can't say I have that problem. In fact, I like Gnome as it is now, a lot. Was it not for that braindead file manager, I probably would have been using it over KDE.
I also believe the Qt licensing is a valid business model which deserves support and not ridicule. Agreed. I have stated before on this list and others my displeasure with people who can never stop complaining about things note being completely free/open. Like the nVidia and ATI drivers. We know they can't opensource the drivers, but still we keep on bitching and moaning about it.
Hans