Slashdot Mirror
BBC on Gnome & Interview Miguel
Evil Greeb writes "The BBC have written a fairly pro-Linux article, citing Gnome as "the operating system which could loosen Microsoft's stranglehold on the market". I thought it was a desktop environment myself, but that's not the issue: Linux promotion is! The page includes an audio snippet of Miguel de Icaza on Gnome. " Excellent-now if my Gnome-session would just run properly.
'"I don't think KDE has a future at this point, it's not completely free yet and it's bound to a single programming language in Unix. Gnome from the very beginning has been accessible through any language. We are providing the GUI for all the languages and programmers can choose the language they like the most," says Miguel'
Has he been horribly misquoted, or did he _really_ mean this?? Since when has Gnome been accessible through Fortran? Each system is authored in one core language (C or C++) with bindings at various levels for other languages (Perl, Python, etc). Geez.. Maybe more of the Gnome API is available to more languages, but that hardly makes the above comment accurate.
There are two big pieces to a desktop environment, that distinguish it from a window manager.
It has a set of UI guidelines that conformant programs follow as closely as possible.
For example, on Win95, hitting Alt-F4 will kill just about any Windows applictation, and every menu bar has to have a File option -- these are the sorts of things that Windows applications are (theoretically) required to follow.
It has a set of guidlines for exposing component interfaces that conformant programs follow as closely as possible.
The advantage of having a component architecture is that it makes it *much* easier to script programs (because the scripting language bindings become simple to implement), and because it makes it easier for programmers to allow different programs to interact. For example, a programmer writing a word-processor could let users put charts into a document whose appearance is dynamically calculated from the spreadsheet, without knowing how the spreadsheet is implemented -- all he needs are the component interfaces. Think of it as Unix pipes on steroids and growth hormones, and you'll have some idea of why component models are so cool.
Also, a DE usually contains a set of libraries and applications to make adhering to the first two much easier.
For example, KDE uses the QT widget library to expose a set of UI elements to make it easier for programs to look and behave like KDE apps. Gnome uses GTK. Likewise, KOM/OpenParts (for KDE) and Baboon (for GNOME) are the component APIs that programs have to honor to be well-behaved KDE or GNOME apps.
That's all there is to it, really. A window manager doesn't do these two things; all it does is manage the decorations on the windows. (Well, there's ICCCM, but it is at once hideously overengineered and utterly inadequate for specifying UI behaviors....)
However, note that the big interoperability problem between GNOME and KDE isn't the UI; Unix users have been dealing with wildly different-looking GUI programs for years.
Instead, the problem is that the component specs are different, which means it will be a lot harder to write programs that mix components from the two environments. For example, it will be unneccesarily messy to (say) write a script that uses KIllustrator to draw a chart from data in a Gnumeric spreadsheet unless the KDE and GNOME teams figure out a clean way of bridging their two component models.
Fortunately, both of these are free software, so if they don't want, someone else will be able to. (It would have *legendary* hack value, if that someone is reading and needs encouragement. :)
>"I don't think KDE has a future at this point,
/., the GNOME/KDE flamewars finally cool off and then Miguel has to go and say stupid something like this! :(
>it's not completely free yet and it's bound to a
>single programming language in Unix. Gnome from
>the very beginning has been accessible through >any language. We are providing the GUI for
>all the languages and programmers can choose
>the language they like the most," says Miguel.
At least on
KDE and GNOME are both very nice( I use pieces
from both ) and there is no need for either team
to make inflammatory statements like this. Let
the kiddies fight this psuedo-debate out in the
middle school lunch room. GNOME rocks! KDE rocks!
But having a choice rocks even more!
If that's his opinion, my opinion is that he is about as immature as they come, which is his right, and that immature people of his age are sadly too common.
Then again, that's something I have suspected for quite a while.
And everyone, please remember this the next time someone says "KDE people" go around bashing GNOME.
KDE and Gnome are not window managers (though KDE does come with one).
Both of these are, at heart, suites of applications and libraries. The applications are there to make the user experience easier; examples are the file managers and the panels of each. The libraries are there for two purposes: to provide a consistent look and feel, and to help applications written for a given desktop environment to interact with one another, thereby providing a more seamless experience.
My choice: Gnome, with KDE's libs also installed.
There's some info here:- announce-list/1999-April/0028.shtml
m e-mailer-list/
http://www.gnome.org/mailing-lists/archives/gnome
Here's the mailing list archive:
http://www.gnome.org/mailing-lists/archives/gno
I suppose he is going to promote Gnome over KDE, but his comments are a little inflammatory. I use Gnome nad Linux at home, and KDE and FreeBSD at work, and have to admit that KDE is far more stable at the moment than Gnome. I prefer GTK+ to Qt, but that's simply because I prefer C to C++. So before the flame war starts, lets remember that KDE and Gnome promote healthy competition on the Linux desktop - something the Windows world sadly lacks.
Chris Wareham
I am very upset by what I've just read. If Miguel genuinely made those derogatory comments about KDE then he needs to be replaced as the mouth piece for the GNOME project until he learns that the position of spokesperson carries responsibility.
His comments about KDE are factually incorrect, immature and go great damage to the work people have put in to build peace between the two camps.
When I get home tonight I will be writing to the BBC with a rebutal of Miguels comments.
Macka
Miguel,
:-)
I don't know what part of cooperation is really so hard for you to grasp. I am for the most part at a loss for words to describe how disappointed I am in you. But who knows, perhaps your spewage has actual factual basis. So in the spirit of healthy competition, I'd like to see you and *only* you post a reply, and back up your statements. Put your money where your mouth is, and not your foot this time. Tell me, why does KDE have no future? Is the KDE userbase declining? Is egcs going to drop C++ support? Is someone paying RedHat? Do tell, this is the information age after all. Comming by such information shouldn't be hard.
P.S. I'm not interested in hearing what half of the population infected with Linux thinks. Really I'm not; and just because I'm curious, doesn't mean that I think Miguel is any less of a complete fucking moron. Ohh hey, I spoke my mind! Do I have *your* admiration now too? I'm unifying me, myself and I against Gnome; that's gotta count for something.
The revolution will be mocked
> The bit about Gnome being an OS caused a few twinges...
Most of the public will be familiar with W'95 and the Mac, and will have swallowed the M$ claim that W'95 doesn't run atop DOS, so they won't have much basis for distinguishing a UI from an OS. (How many times have I had someone using a VT240 run down the hall and say "My computer is broken"!)
To the uninitiated, KDE and GNOME probably appear as two different OSes. Little enough harm done.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Why wouldn't Gnome be described as an OS???
Microsoft have been able to make people believe that windows9x was an OS too.
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
I know that Gnome is not an OS. I know KDE is not an OS, I know the X Window System is not an OS, but am a little confused about what GNOME and KDE are.
They are desktop environments. OK, does that mean they are Windows Managers (like FVWM)? Or are they something else?
I haven't yet gotten into the GUI side yet, I'm still delighting at being back at the command-prompt after suffering Bindows 95 for so long (and yes,I know the prompt is accessible under 95)
~ Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity ~
(Man, I think the Gnome web pages are the best looking ones on the net.) Im looking forward to this. I see what KDE is doing and can't help but think Windows on Linux. Web Browser in the Filemanager and an integrated Office suit. Im just looking forward to a viable free office suit for gnome desktop.
--
--
wow. this gets more amazing everyday. Here you have what the linux users call themselves a 'community'. well, hate to break the news people, but if this is a community, then it's a pretty distorted one. A community is where people sharing a common interest (supposedly) and fighting for the same cause, all band together and fight as one. But this is not the case in the so called 'linux community' you all so cherish. you have all the little groupies split into different sections bad-mouthing the others, and yet you hope to succeed. sorry, but if you to acheive a goal, you have to all band together and help one another and be one loud voice.
yah, you have the freedom to choose between GNOME or KDE, or windowmaker, or fvwm, or whatever you wish to use. But how does 'linux' wish to acheive 'world domination' when they can't even get along within their own little group. Hell, you can't even decide between a name to call the 'OS' you are fighting for!
I'm almost ashamed to say I ever ran linux, or is it GNU/Linux?
I would like to add what Mr. Torvalds once said. This might let some people cool down.
> Author: Linus Torvalds
> Email: torvalds@transmeta.com
> Date: 1998/11/22
> Forums: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.x
>
> Peter A. Koren wrote:
>>
>> If I read the GNOME folks correctly, KDE essentially locks
>> you in to C++, while GNOME is architected to easily allow
>> other languages to be used for development under GNOME/GTK.
>> Is this really true? If so, the case favoring GNOME over KDE
>> would be compelling.
>
> I don't see why language is an issue at all.
>
> The kernel is coded in C, and I don't export any scheme or perl bindings
> for it. You have to code in C (or in assembly if you really really feel
> like it and want to punish yourself for some bad deed you have done) in
> order to write kernel code.
>
> Having one primary language has advantages: less confusion, and less
> overhead to maintain language-level abstractions.
>
> Haviung one primary langauge has it's disadvantages too: you have to use
> that language.
>
> I'm not saying that C++ is the only language to use, I'm just saying
> that you have to balance the advantages against the disadvantages. It
> all depends on what you want to do - saying that the language issue is
> "compelling" just doesn't make sense at all. It could be compelling in
> either way, and as such the compulsion isn't very real, is it?
[demands lean programing in both projects]
> Being too generic (in languages or features or design) often has its own
> set of serious downsides. Never _ever_ forget that.
>
> Linus