[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: KDE and Gnome
From:       David Johnson <david () usermode ! org>
Date:       2003-08-26 1:44:36
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 25 August 2003 03:16 pm, Taj Morton wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
> Yes, I know you are tired of everyone complaining about how KDE and
> Gnome don't work together very well. However, I have come to plea for
> that very thing.
> If Linux is *ever* to get to the desktop, KDE and Gnome apps *must*
> be able to work with each other.

That's funny, KDE and GNOME are both running on my desktop at work and 
at home. Perhaps we have different definitions of the term "get to the 
desktop."

The hardest part of using a Unix like operating system (I use FreeBSD) 
is the system administration stuff. Once you get beyond that, the 
desktops are just fine. Funny thing is though, when you're on the 
corporate desktop, you already have people doing system administration 
for the user. KDE and GNOME *ARE* ready right now for the desktop. The 
underlying OS might not be ready yet for your grandma, but desktop on 
top is.

> The answer to several other things is _standards_. For example, we
> need a desktop standard. We should just have one ~/Desktop folder
> which holds items on the desktop. That way, you could eaisly swap
> between Gnome and KDE without loosing your desktop. True, links
> contain different information, but they are basically the same. They
> include the name in any number of languages, the icon, the location,
> etc etc . This also needs to be standardized.

The standards are already there. The problem is that we don't have a 
monopoly like Microsoft does, so we don't have any large knobby clubs 
to coerce compliance. If you find an application that doesn't use the 
drag-n-drop standard (as an example), then file a bug for that 
application. That's all you can do.

> There are some things that KWord is missing that Abiword has, and
> vise-versa.
> ...
> Also, interfaces need to be standardized. When you start an app in
> the Windows world, you *expect* the interface to look the same.

But how is this any different than under Windows? There's stuff in 
Microsoft Media Player that aren't in WinAmp, and vice versa. Ditto for 
WinAmp versus Quicktime, or Media Player versus Realplayer. And as for 
the interface none of the above look alike. Heck, my MFC based apps 
don't even look like my .NET based apps!

But I don't hear people bitching about how Windows will never get to the 
desktop until Bill Gates starts applying that big knobby club some 
more. 

> I have installed Linux
> for a couple of people and the one thing that they say that they
> don't like is how apps look different. This *must* change.

Really? In my experience I've found that people just don't care, with 
one exception. That one exception is when they're changing a theme or 
something, and have to change it twice. And then they still can't 
retheme OpenOffice or get Mozilla to match Geramik. It's a pain for 
those people, but that's the price one has to pay for not living under 
a dictatorship.

But otherwise people just don't care. I don't hear people bitching that 
Quicktime doesn't look like PowerDVD, and I don't hear it about AbiWord 
not looking like KWord.

> Now, I'm not into some kill KDE or kill Gnome. Nor do I like
> Bluecurve. It was terrible (IMHO, anyway). I would just like to see
> the KDE and Gnome team working together, rather than duplicating each
> others work.

The best thing I like about Open Source is the duplication of work. It's 
proof that's there is freedom here. It's proof that we don't have a 
dictator. It means that if I don't like GNU Emacs I can use XEmacs. I 
can use AbiWord if I don't like KWord. Heck, it even means I can use 
Keramik or Alloy if I loathe Bluecurve!

-- 
David Johnson
___________________
http://www.usermode.org

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]