the user reference in the name is a placeholder for when they will have users.
</SARCASM>
More seriously, this was because most Gnome users who went to the conference were also developers. And, GNOME is very young (even younger than KDE:) ), so much things are work in progress, so there was more thing to say about development than about simple use.
You forget Debian. Among the big players in Linux distros, the match is well balanced: Gnome have RedHat, Debian; KDE Mandrake and Caldera. I don't know which side is SuSE. Personnally I think the future is more collaboration between GNOME andKDE teams, and this as already begin like the introduction of XDND or the work toward a common set of specification for WM between these teams.
Re:How do you pronounce it?
on
GUADEC Reports
·
· Score: 1
Oh well, I prefer to pronounce "gnome", like the name of these fantasy dwarves.
> We all know about how the camel is said to be a horse designed by committee
Actually, if I were to go to a desert, I'll find the committee specifications for the camel were good. Don't forget horses are very unstable beast, which need constant care and lots of food and water. Camel are more durable and sober.
So, if Gnome designed by a committee will be more stable and bugfree than the previous Gnome, I will maybe find an use to it. You see, I found Gnome prettier than KDE, but some nasty crash made me prefer the K to the G-shaped foot.
x86 instruction set isn't copyrighted, else Intel wouldn't have allowed AMD and Cyrix to create and distribute CPU with x86 instruction set.
Furthermore, if DeCSS is illegal in NY and California, that doesn't means it's illegal elsewhere in the world.
Then, we must not forget that arguments against DeCSS are mainly based on stupidity. I won't explain why here, it should be off-topics, but with normally brained lawyers, these arguments won't be receivable.
No more, as for KDE2 there is a OLE-like protocol (DCOP) which require X for ICE. Without X, no DCOP, so KOffice, for example, won't work. Except if Qt/embed include a remplacement for ICE (I doubt).
BeOS is better designed because J-L Gassé wasn't trying to have a system compatible with what was already existing. BeOS is not a VT100-compatible Linux with a silly keyboard handling (fucking numlock and fucking delete). Nor is it a DOS-compatible Windows. BeOS is a wholly new OS, designed for new appliances without bothering with carbon-dated technojunks. This is its strength (for the technical part) and its weakness (for the number of applications). I hope to see one day a GPL-or-whatever version of BeOS.
Also, a lot of Qt/KDE developers might release free as in beer versions of their apps for Windows
Maybe right for QApplications, but not for KApplications. I remember reading Matthias Ettrich's letter for launching the KDE project, something like "Qt is portable to Windows, but don't matter, we can use enough Unix-specific things to make a windows port of KDE impossible". Most peoples involved in the KDE project want to see more apps for unices (particularly free ones), and not more apps for Windows (particularly proprietary ones, as they're the only ones;) ).
Most Qt-hater blame Qt for making money out of people wanting to work in an universe were everyone is making money (MS OS). They compare with GTK but the comparison is unreceivable: GTK don't allow proprietary development, and don't allow cross-platform development. As long as you stick with free development for unices, you use them the same way: costless, with a look on the source. Oh yes, for the Qt 1.X branch you weren't granted the right to distibute modified version of Qt. This was mainly to enforce Troll Tech's right as developers and maintainer of this toolkit, something which is tacitly agreed on for GPL software (the creator is the owner). Can you imagine John Doe Programmer modifying three function in the Linux kernel and then saying "Hey, I've got the new official Linux kernel!" No way.
French gov have also a law proposal for *exclusive* use of free software (logiciel libre, in french). If it is accepted, no french administration could use commercial or closed source software after 2002. It seems the OSS is beginning to take over the world...
KDE2 is no more based on CORBA, but is still compatible with it. The KDE team has devised with DCOP a lighter way to obtain the same things, in order to have a faster desktop. When CORBA is needed, a tiny daemon bridge is activated that transparently make it. I think this could slow down if you use KDE essentially for non-KDE CORBA applications, in which case you should consider using Gnome. For all KApplications, things will instead be speed up.
It seems you're focusing on the beta-software you've tried. You're forgetting all the stable software you use, sometimes even without knowing it. Nearly all things in any linux distro are open source, and stable (and Debian is only open source).
I disagree with "most of it is barely beta quality". It's just that we're more loikely to notice whan something don't work that when it works.
Slashdot Mirror
<SARCASM>
the user reference in the name is a placeholder for when they will have users.
</SARCASM>
More seriously, this was because most Gnome users who went to the conference were also developers. And, GNOME is very young (even younger than KDE :) ), so much things are work in progress, so there was more thing to say about development than about simple use.
You forget Debian. Among the big players in Linux distros, the match is well balanced: Gnome have RedHat, Debian; KDE Mandrake and Caldera. I don't know which side is SuSE. Personnally I think the future is more collaboration between GNOME andKDE teams, and this as already begin like the introduction of XDND or the work toward a common set of specification for WM between these teams.
Oh well, I prefer to pronounce "gnome", like the name of these fantasy dwarves.
Actually, if I were to go to a desert, I'll find the committee specifications for the camel were good. Don't forget horses are very unstable beast, which need constant care and lots of food and water. Camel are more durable and sober.
So, if Gnome designed by a committee will be more stable and bugfree than the previous Gnome, I will maybe find an use to it. You see, I found Gnome prettier than KDE, but some nasty crash made me prefer the K to the G-shaped foot.
Furthermore, if DeCSS is illegal in NY and California, that doesn't means it's illegal elsewhere in the world.
Then, we must not forget that arguments against DeCSS are mainly based on stupidity. I won't explain why here, it should be off-topics, but with normally brained lawyers, these arguments won't be receivable.
No more, as for KDE2 there is a OLE-like protocol (DCOP) which require X for ICE. Without X, no DCOP, so KOffice, for example, won't work. Except if Qt/embed include a remplacement for ICE (I doubt).
BeOS is better designed because J-L Gassé wasn't trying to have a system compatible with what was already existing. BeOS is not a VT100-compatible Linux with a silly keyboard handling (fucking numlock and fucking delete). Nor is it a DOS-compatible Windows. BeOS is a wholly new OS, designed for new appliances without bothering with carbon-dated technojunks. This is its strength (for the technical part) and its weakness (for the number of applications). I hope to see one day a GPL-or-whatever version of BeOS.
Maybe right for QApplications, but not for KApplications. I remember reading Matthias Ettrich's letter for launching the KDE project, something like "Qt is portable to Windows, but don't matter, we can use enough Unix-specific things to make a windows port of KDE impossible". Most peoples involved in the KDE project want to see more apps for unices (particularly free ones), and not more apps for Windows (particularly proprietary ones, as they're the only ones ;) ).
Most Qt-hater blame Qt for making money out of people wanting to work in an universe were everyone is making money (MS OS). They compare with GTK but the comparison is unreceivable: GTK don't allow proprietary development, and don't allow cross-platform development. As long as you stick with free development for unices, you use them the same way: costless, with a look on the source. Oh yes, for the Qt 1.X branch you weren't granted the right to distibute modified version of Qt. This was mainly to enforce Troll Tech's right as developers and maintainer of this toolkit, something which is tacitly agreed on for GPL software (the creator is the owner). Can you imagine John Doe Programmer modifying three function in the Linux kernel and then saying "Hey, I've got the new official Linux kernel!" No way.
French gov have also a law proposal for *exclusive* use of free software (logiciel libre, in french). If it is accepted, no french administration could use commercial or closed source software after 2002. It seems the OSS is beginning to take over the world...
KDE2 is no more based on CORBA, but is still compatible with it. The KDE team has devised with DCOP a lighter way to obtain the same things, in order to have a faster desktop. When CORBA is needed, a tiny daemon bridge is activated that transparently make it. I think this could slow down if you use KDE essentially for non-KDE CORBA applications, in which case you should consider using Gnome. For all KApplications, things will instead be speed up.
I disagree with "most of it is barely beta quality". It's just that we're more loikely to notice whan something don't work that when it works.
Personnaly, I don't worry too much about licenses. I spent my times looking for news on slashdot and other sites instead of coding.
This comment is totally useless!