On Sunday 23 November 2003 23:15, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> i'm moving this to what i think most consider to be a more appropriate list
> for this discussion?
>
> On Sunday 23 November 2003 07:04, Matthias Ettrich wrote:
> > > so you're saying that using non-KDE apps in KDE isn't as good as using
> > > KDE apps in KDE? holy stating the obvious, bat man!
> >
> > The discussion is about the Business Desktop. The main choice here is the
> > applications. Applications first, desktop second. If an enterprise
> > standarizes on OOo, Mozilla and Evolution, there is little benefit of
> > using KDE. In fact - as several people pointed out on this list - , there
> > are real disadvantages over XD2.
>
> to be perfectly honest, if a company uses OOo, Mozilla and Evolution there
> is very little benefit in using Linux as a desktop as it becomes quite
> apparent that in such a configuration Windows XP and MacOS X are both
> lighter and more coherent environments.

Since I got quoted pretty much out of context, please let me clearify my 
position. The sentence quoted was basically a summary of a discussion within 
e.V. members, not necessarily my personal opinion. KDE offers an extensive 
amount of integration for its own applications, but this integration - which 
is KDE's greatest strength - comes at a price, or better: with a startup-time 
penalty. The other disadvantage for the enterprise we discussed is completely 
non-technical: the theory goes that we are - and are seen as - an open free 
software project, whereas XD2 is perceived as a commercial desktop (read: 
commercially backed up and controlled) based on free software.

Matthias