Red Hat Explains Stance on KDE/Gnome Desktop Changes

An anonymous reader writes "A lot of people are angry over the changes RedHat has done to KDE and Gnome in their latest beta, code-named Null. They have basically "nullified" all the default themes and settings with which each desktop attempts to posture for more users. Instead, there is now a beautiful unified look. To explain RedHat's stance, Owen Taylor writes this piece here. I hope that RedHat successfully forces both Gnome and KDE to become compatible with one another which would result in the creation of a single desktop. This would be the greatest gift to the Linux world."

Comments

Why do we need "one unified" desktop?

[ishpeck]

I, for one, like the different options we have in terms of desktop environments. I don't want either KDE or GNOME to go away.

I think the different desktop environments are important the way it's important to have variation in the gene pool.

We can only attain perfection through variety.

Here are some screenshots

[dg123]

ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/cont rib/texstar/screenshots/

Re:screens pls!

[frenchtouch]

You can find some right here: Red Hat 'Null' Beta screens.

Two points missed--

[Speare]

There are two points Owen didn't strike home with a sledgehammer, so I'll say them:

First, those users who already know they PREFER the "old look" of KDE or GNOME can configure their new Red Hat Linux 8.0/Null++ to regain that old look. The Red Hat "Bluecurve" work is almost entirely artwork and menu organization, both of which can be re-themed or re-edited by any user who wants to. This change is to remove a bewildering either-or choice that paralyzes many newcomers.

Second, Owen didn't mention that a huge area that BOTH desktops need to strive to improve is accessibility. It's vitally important for Linux to make inroads into the highly regulated Government sector. GNOME2 is laying groundwork for major gains in accessibility, thanks to partnering research by folks at Sun and other places. KDE needs to work hard on being accessible too. Features like Sticky Keys are just a start. Supporting limited-vision users and other areas is a must. Both desktops should do what they can, so that the best approaches can be adopted as standards.

Story is bogus

[0x0d0a]

The anonymous submitter wrote "RedHat successfully forces both GNOME and KDE to become compatible with one another which would result in the creation of a single desktop."

Where did he manage to get this idea caught in his head? Merging the desktops? RH is just trying to make the two interoperate as best they can in their own release from a UI standpoint.

If RH don't like this then why don't they just drop the one(s) they don't want people to use?

You still *can* pick KDE/GNOME/whatever. RH chose a *theme* that makes them look alike. A *theme*! God, where did everyone lose sight of that? Ximian chooses a different theme than the GNOME default as well...are *they* evil, sadistic bastards too?

I still can't figure out why this is news. It wasn't back when the story was first posted, and nobody cared except for about four people on the KDE forums (mostly the ever-vocal Mosfet).

My guess is that publicizing this is a UnitedLinux initiative to make RH look bad, since I can't figure out a single other person who has anything else to gain by blowing this as out of proportion as it's gotten. Who *cares* about RH's default theme? Change your theme! Use WindowMaker if you want! This has no impact whatsoever on you!

Re:I'm with RedHat on this one

[rosewood]

I started using Ximian the day it came out, and I enjoyed it. Then, I realized it ate a lot of my menus that RedHat or I had installed and didnt play very nice in letting me re-add them. Sadly, Ximian really locks down the menus to just a few programs, which can be a real pain in the ass when you still know of only 1 way to do things.

Why KDE people might not like this

[ChrisWong]

My speculation on why, from the perspective of KDE, this sort of thing is upsetting:

• KDE credits removed from "about" boxes. The article admits that they do not (yet) have a policy to give KDE or Gnome due credit.
  
• Code fork. The article mentions code modifications. This means it will be hard to get comparable updates when new versions of KDE appear. Given Red Hat's abysmal record with providing new KDE RPMs, users will be stuck with an obsolete version of KDE.
  
• Gnome favoritism. The article admits that Red Hat does a better job with Gnome than KDE, yet will not let KDE be itself.
  
• Application hiding. Menus dinkered to favor non-KDE apps.
  

Re:Choice and Red Hat

[Arandir]

That's why Debian tries to funnel all bugreports through its bug tracking system.

But with Redhat, they did not change the bug report dialog to forward bugs to Redhat until AFTER some KDE developers complained. It's okay to fork the code, just don't expect the original developer to support your changes.

Should GCC complain because Apple and NetBSD and Debian all apply different patches to the compiler to get to work right for them?

Debian and NetBSD send their patches on to to GCC developers. I suspect that Apple does as well, but if they don't then it's up to Apple to support their version. Redhat did NOT send their patches to KDE, but until KDE called them on it, expected KDE to support the Redhat version.