On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 03:04, Atri Bhattacharya wrote:
Yes, IMO, the differences should be in the interface, not the behaviour or features.
The difference in the user interface is problem too :)
Both GTk and Qt libs provide similar tools, so if someone feels that there is a need for 2 code bases, they should at least follow same rules for user interface design. I don't care what decoration is used, I also don't care is it "Yes" first and "No" second, I want same buttons, questions, reports, on the same places of the screen. Then anybody can explain system related
It is not just in look that the GNOME and KDE DE's differ.
question without silly question "GNOME or KDE?".
Asking a user if he is using GNOME or KDE is not silly. There are different channels on the IRC for openSUSE-gnome and openSUSE-kde. People who use one of these DE's have to reach out to the appropriate IRC channel and for that they have to know whether they use GNOME or KDE. Based on which channel he is in, he gets help accordingly. The only people who face a problem with this are those who use both desktops. The "Help" in both the interfaces are also good and useful I think.
Otherwise we can create 20 Ubuntu style distros and live each in its own corner, watching openSUSE sinking in inability to do the simplest tasks.
I don't understand what this means.
Well... at least I'm not alone in this opinion. I've been raising this for issue for a LONG time. I don't care what decorations there are on the common tools, but having completely different workflows between the GTK and QT software installers is wrong. I've said this over and over in the mailing lists. I've even been accused of trolling for saying this (which I'm not), I've been accused of belittling the efforts of those making the GTK interface (which I wasn't)..... and I've mostly given up on this issue because I got tired of talking to a wall. The people who think there should be a different _workflow_ in the GTK vs QT interfaces just don't seem to see the point. They don't have to do telephone user support. They don't have to struggle with newbie users trying to learn Linux. They don't have to spend more of their own time to learn both interfaces themselves so they can do the support. Now when I do installs I switch them ALL to QT... not because I think QT is better, but because I need a single tool interface to support. I don't think the QT interface is the best and has to be used everywhere. I don't think the GTK interface is the best either. I think they both have strong points... but with 100% independent development we get two weak choices instead of one good strong one. I can't emphasize enough how bad this is. :-( I don't know how to get the point across either. I also take issue with the fact that the GTK interface development is not being done under the openSUSE umbrella so to speak.. all communication is out in a Google Group. How many people here are aware of that? Yes I know there is an excuse why it's in the Google Group, but to be honest.. it's a pretty weak excuse. If the GTK YaST is an official supported project within openSUSE, then its communication should be part of openSUSE, not out in a Google Group. C. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org