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

List:       kde-look
Subject:    Re: Reply
From:       Paul Fredlein <P.Fredlein () uq ! net ! au>
Date:       2001-02-14 23:57:02
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Rick,

It's the KDE Desktop (and GNOME's) which I dislike. They both look like a
poor man's version of Windows with the desktop full of icons, a fat dumb
task-bar and a "start" button.

I refer to KDE and GNOME together as far as I, as an end user, is concerned
there is NO DIFFERENCE in the user experience. I don't care if perhaps KDE's
SDK's and API's are more advanced than GNOMEs, I don't see the difference on
the desktop.

Compare this with BlackBox which has only a small bar at the bottom of the
screen but it actually conveys more information about what workspace is
current and the apps running within it than does KDE or GNOME and it does it
in a smaller space, less clutter and is simply ELEGANT. Clicking the
appropriate mouse button on the desktop lets you choose workspace and/or
applications. You DON'T NEED A START BITTON.

You can actually launch all of KDE's and GNOME's applications from BlackBox
without launching their respective desktops.

Of course all windows whether they be MacOS, Win, BeOS or KDE must contain
essential controls such as scroll bars, close, maximise & minimise boxes etc
so as far as programming is concerned there's not really much difference
between all the OSes except that a function to initialise a window may have
a different name and perhaps one or two argument passed to that function may
differ but it's all essentially the same stuff. So the argument about it
being easier for a programmer new to KDE to feel at home because it looks
like Windows is crap.

Also, the argument that it's easier for a Linux newbie to feel at home
because KDE look like windows is also crap - give linux users credit for
some intelligence, don't treat them like dummies. Most are probably looking
for an alternative to Windows so let's give them something that WOWs them.

Have a good look at BeOS, it's also clean, uncluttered and some imagination
went into producing the look and feel. It's a little strange at first but
you gradually get to know and like it. Like the MacOS it's the little things
(that are usually hard to convey to non-users) that make it elegant.

So, it's not the GUI (although there needs to be some work done on that)
it's the LACK OF IMAGINATION AND THE UNRIVALLED MEDIOCRITY of the KDE &
GNOME Desktop that I find unsatisfactory.

I strongly believe that to succeed you don't copy you innovate, of course
the risks are greater but the rewards are more satisfying. As far as KDE &
GNOME - there is no innovation.

Briefly: KDE and GNOME equals MEDIOCRITY it does NOT equal innovation.

Regards,

Paul


> From: Rick Sivernell <res005ru@gte.net>
> Organization: D & R Consulting
> Reply-To: res005ru@gte.net
> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:30:12 -0600
> To: Paul Fredlein <P.Fredlein@uq.net.au>
> Subject: Reply
> 
> Paul
> 
> A quick question?  Please explain to me what it is that you do not like
> about the KDE.  What do BlackBox & AfterStep have that kde does not.
> I like kde as it does make life easier, I do not really like MS as the code
> is so very buggy. I do like a GUI.
> 
> Not every one does, and everyone's opion counts at least with me.
> 
> Have a good day, hope to hear from you.
> 
> Rick Sivernell
> D & R Consulting
> Dallas, Texas 75287
> res005ru@gte.net
> 

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