KDE Gets The Hat
minkwe writes "Tension is currently rising between the KDE and GNOME followers, following the release of the new beta to Red Hat's upcoming distribution. Neither group appears to be satisfied with the fact that Red Hat has null-ified the difference between the two desktop environments."
Here'w a bunch of screenshots from the article to show what they are talking about:
Screenshots:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20
Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
You can find Google's cache of the article HERE.
"UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things."
From the google cache:
Texstar of pclinuxonline, recently posted a bunch of screenshots from Redhat's 3rd beta release known as null. Redhat has made a huge effort via the use of similar icons and themes to make their packaging of GNOME and KDE resemble each other more closely . What do you think?
Screenshots:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20
Well, the sequence of events goes roughly like this:
As it stated in the foot notes comments, you can change BACK to the default settings with GConf. End of discussion. What they did is do away with the appearance of fragmentation between UI's while leaving the power to switch if you like/know about it, a smart move IMHO.
Stupid things kids do.
Be careful: rumor has it that Debian will start migrating to gcc 3.2 soon, so we're probably about to enter one of those periods where "unstable" really means it...
Neither of these companies violated the GPL in any way
umm... neonapster DID violate the GPL. They provided source, but did not mention anything about GPL in the binaries, at first at least. (in fact, the license for the binaries flagrantly violated GPL, restricting redistribution. etc)
Which Linux kernel developers? When was the lat time they did `this'? How is providing a consistent desktop theme bad? What did Red Hat so with their packacged kernels that was bad?
I can't believe this load of unsupported tripe gets moderated up. If the author had anythign to say I'm sure he'd have provided some supporting arguments, but he's trolling instead.
You use tabs for *compression*?
If you have a *single* mp3 on your hard drive, you're probably looking at a good 5 million characters blown right there. Text files are not the primary drain on resources any more.
Besides, if you compress your text files, gzipped or whatever, you save more than just using tabs instead of spaces.
Unless I'm missing sarcasm here...
May we never see th
I know plenty of developers who use GTK 1.x out of licensing issues, when they openly admire Qt but can't touch it.
I thought those issues were fixed about 2 years ago. Heck, even RMS is cool with the QPL, last I checked.
Well it depends what you're talking about. For an open-source developer, there's no problem with Qt. For someone who wants to write a closed-source application, Qt costs a lot of money. Then again, it's fair since Troll Tech has to make money somehow and making Qt GPL was already very nice of them...
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
This is what I do:
Generally speaking that's all anyone needs to be told about the desktop.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"