Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GNOME GUI

Infoworld reports on Redhat's choice of GNOME 175

Posted by sengan from the no-linux-coverage-like-this-last-year-this-time dept.
Andy Tai writes "This InfoWorld story reports on RedHat's choice of GNOME as the desktop for the next version of its Redhat Linux. While the story is nothing new, this is a sign that GNOME has captured "mainstream" attention." The IDC analyst quoted does not seem to realize that GNOME is optional.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Infoworld reports on Redhat's choice of GNOME More

Infoworld reports on Redhat's choice of GNOME

Comments Filter:

  • KDE/GNOME (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    First, I am not an Anonymous Coward, I'm just on someone else's machine and my password doesn't leap to mind.

    The KDE/GNOME war is probably the largest fracture in the Linux community. First of all, this article apparently was written on the glossed over and somewhat misunderstood information of one contact. Why accuse RedHat of spreading FUD?

    People have begun to become unreasonable about this issue. Begun? What am I saying, they already are. Choice is the essence of the Linux community. This situation with two competing environments is not bad...it's good! Yes, I would like to see them compatible, but that is not the case. Stop worrying about it.

    RedHat has chosen to make GNOME/E their default desktop? Fine and good, I like GNOME. Caldera chose KDE as the default? Alright, I like KDE as well. We just happen to use RedHat here, so using the same starting point as others around you can be a useful practice. For my part I just run Window Maker. I just want something good looking to run my xterms under.

    Please stop the flamewar, and get your feet back on the ground. If you prefer GNOME, then contribute to GNOME. If you prefer KDE, then contribute to KDE. If you are like me and just want your xterms to run nicely and behave themselves, contribute to what you think will benefit the most from your contribution and interests you.

    Frederick Ross, a.k.a. Sgath

    fred@ls.net, http://www.ls.net/~fred/homepage/

  • HUH? Where in the HELL did you see this?

    --

  • BTW, do you prefer a desktop environment like KDE, Gnome, UDE, or just a GUI like WindowMaker, IceWm, Enlightenment, Black Box, and why?

    With regards to this, I would expect most people to fall on one of these sides:

    • The traditional Unix mentality. These people will either (a) think X windows sucks because the only use they see for it is a memory expensive xterm farm, or (b) think X windows rules since it allows them to take advantage of their memory to run an xterm farm. These people don't mind too much editing config files and reading man pages, and will usually go for just a window manager.
    • The GUI user, raised on Windows or Macs. These are not so used to command lines, and prefer to have everything GUI configurable. These people will go for KDE or Gnome.

    As for me, I'm pretty much in the first group. In my desktop I run 2 big xterms, 2 netscape windows and a big emacs. I use Window Maker there because of the all the cool dock apps, the clean, elegan look, and a bunch of other nice features. (I could write pages about WM; I won't here.)

    In my laptop, which is a 486-50 with 24MB RAM and a 200 MB HDD, I run something lighter-- wm2. I just run an xclock, an xterm, an emacs, and xdvi there. I like that window manager very much-- it is very light on disk space (like 50k), and has a very pretty look.

    One thing I like about these window managers, and this is in reply to a comment in this thread, is that they pretty much work out of the box without editing many config files. You can set most Window Maker configuration options from the GUI, and it looks really good in the default config (that's all I run, I mucked around with other presets but they're for the most part ugly). And wm2 has no config files of any sort; if you want to change its configuration, you have to edit the source ;-).

    I've also tried olvwm and icewm, and find them nice, though not as practical as Window Maker or small as wm2. twm, fvwm, 9wm and E I didn't like at all.

    I've tried KDE beta 3, beta 4, 1.0 and pre1.1-alpha1. I find it is too big and slow for what I do. The look didn't bother me at all, unlike many quite vocal people-- it is a very practical look, although not the cleanest or most elegant, compared to my faves.

    ---

  • Where? Is it at Borders? Barnes and Noble? CompUSA? Or do I have to download it with my 33.6 modem?

    http://www.linux-mandrake.com/ [linux-mandrake.com]

    Next time, try doing a search for Linux + Mandrake.

  • Posted by OGL:

    Yet Another KDE/GNOME Flamewar on Slashdot. You people need to get a grip. If you don't like software X that distribution Y provides, then don't install it. If you want something else, download that instead. I don't know if any of you have been using Linux since before today, but usually distros don't carry every piece of software specifically tuned to YOUR exact needs. I like GNOME, and I like KDE. I run them both at the same time and they work great together. Conclusion? You people need to shut up and code. Yelling and screetching about this nonsense won't help your favorite desktop, and it sure as hell won't help Linux. If you do want to help Linux, email the creators of the desktop you DON'T like and tell them what is wrong and how they can improve it. That's all I have to say I suppose. KDE/GNOME forever.

    -W.W.
  • Enlightenment is not the only gnome-compliant window manager these days... currently, enlightenment, icewm, windowmaker (sorta), and scwm(i think?) are...with more to follow. :)

    -herb
  • except opendoc is huge and bloated and a bitch to implement ... if you have specific ideas ... look at baboon and contribute them
  • Not to mention that the gnome panel sucks ... I mean it SUCKS ... it's huge and it looks like windows95 ... not to mention that it crashes all the time .... and midnight commander sucks ... and enlgightenment really really sucks and it's a bloated piece of crap and it's the only windowmanager for gnome ....!!!! And redhat is just doing this because they want to control linux ... and miguel is a really bad coder ... he couldn't code his way out of a paper bag ... just like the rest of the gnome team ... they're just a bunch of incompetent asses that just want to be famous and couldn't think of another thing to work on so they stole all the ideas from kde ... what a bunch of loosers
  • RH denies freedom of choice? My stock RH5.2 came with at least three window managers that I could readily find. If I don't want one, I rpm -e it. Same will go for GNOME - if you don't want it, rpm -e. No mess, no fuss, it doesn't screw up the whole OS like MS claims removing IE will. The only thing restricting your freedom to choose is your ignorance of the available choices.
  • Problems with OpenDoc now however are more legal/political:

    - the OMG isn't doing a lot with OpenDoc lately. IBM & Sun have pressured them to be very focused on JavaBeans. My impression is that the while the compound-document CORBA spec will probably remain OpenDoc, the enterprise component model will resemble language-independent Enterprise JavaBeans.

    In other words, don't expect anything amazing from the OMG re: OpenDoc. CORBA on the desktop doesn't seem to be a primary goal anymore.

    - OpenDoc is 'considered' dead. IBM/Apple don't develop for it anymore. The web turned out to be an easier to use & distribute compound-document solution [though it's a very crude/primitive one at that]. Once HTML took over, it became rather hard to push "Programmatic Compound Documents!" when HTML+Java+Plug-ins were doing just that (again, primitively, but the declarative perspective vs. imperative really is what caught people's eyes...)

    - OpenDoc should be released open source so the community can continue leveraging its wonderful ideas, but IBM's policy so far is just to freely distribute the toolkit.. you can't yet extend the sourcecode legally. This sucks, and is what REALLY is leading to NiH syndrome. Ditto for IBM's Taligent technology: there's a lot of stuff left over from CommonPoint that really should be made free.

  • "Gnome is a work in progress, and we would be better served to expand [KDE] rather than build an alternative."

    Fuck you, Caldera. I'm not interested in serving *your* needs. You should go into another business since you haven't a clue what Linux is about.

  • Oops. (Score:1)

    by Daverz ( 1471 )
    I took the "we" in "we would be better served if..." to mean the entire Linux community. I apologize if I took it wrong, but it was a little ambiguous.

    Still, I think it's a mildly FUDish thing to say.

    GNOME is a work in progress because it started later. So they should just say, "We went with KDE because that's what is available now," rather than dismissing efforts by a large part of the community.
  • When I see Todd thursday, I'll slap him for saying that.

    But it would be great if Gnome does mimic OLE...it would make for great interoperability.
  • This is a beatiful example of "I don't care what you say about me, as long as you spell my name right." Whether we as Linux users disagree about choice of software components is irrelevant. The underlying message is that Linux users have more choice. Arguing over a choice that others simply do not have is a luxury. If articles like this teach mainstream users that Linux gives them choices, it's a good thing, even if we're in the midst of criticizing some of the options.
  • The advantage of Linux is that if you don't like what one Linux vendor comes out with, you can go vote with your dollars for another Linux vendor, plain and simple. You can't do that with Microsoft since they are the sole supplier of the OS.

    So if you don't like Red Hat's decision not to include KDE with their version of Linux badly enough, complain to Red Hat and tell them that you're switching to another Linux vendor that will include KDE with their product.

    If enough people do that, then Red Hat will relent. Its called competition, the free market, what you will. It is what keeps Red Hat or any other Linux vendor from charging $600 for the operating system and $100 for upgrades, the fact that other Linux vendors will compete, that the OS itself is freely available.

    Red Hat can't control the market. It can try to lead the market and encourage standards but it can't force them the way that Microsoft did.

    Onto the eternal GNOME/KDE flamewar, the average computer users don't want or need a choice of desktops and window managers. Or rather, what they want is a well established default setting that they can live with and not have to tamper with.

    Red Hat and others realize this, and plan to establish GNOME and eventually some associated window manager as the default choice. Power users can go and use something else if it pleases them but the average user just wants to stick the CD-ROM in and have a nice desktop appear at the end of the process and not have to make a choice.

    Choices scare the average end user, especially when they don't know the options involved or what it will cost them. They want good choices made for them already and in time if they don't like them, they can go modify them.

    Computer manufacturers are also in the same boat. Most of them will need to come up with some sort of standardized installation for machines that they pre-install Linux on. Odds are good that it will end up being GNOME/Enlightenment as the default desktop.

    Choice is important, but defaults are important too.
  • I am moderately displeased with this article.
    I think that the author was in a little over
    his head for the subject matter. I know that
    I did not say that GNOME "is multilingual and
    language-independent". As for the OLE stuff, I
    really did try to explain it to him, but when he
    asked me what OLE stood for I realized that we
    had a problem. He didn't include any of the other
    9 reasons to run GNOME which I explained to him;
    I think he was short of time. When he called me "a technical manager at ISP MindSpring", I felt like replying back, "I don't call you reporter at magazine Infoworld!" Alas.
  • "Comparing DCOM and CORBA okay, but hearing
    that "Gnome mimics Microsoft's OLE by using CORBA" drive me nuts !

    Except that it's (almost) true. GNOME has Baboon, an interface which is built on top of CORBA but modeled after OLE, which allows one to embed other apps within their own, in much the same way you can have a live Excel chart in a Word doc under windows.

    I wish that people would investigate this stuff before just flaming away on it.
  • Except that when Miguel asked if he could do just
    that, he was told that KOM was someone's masters
    thesis, and therefore they were not accepting any
    changes to the architecture, since half of the
    thesis was already written based on the already-
    extant arch.

    I don't blame the KDE or the GNOME folks for the
    fact that their are two different architectures.
    I do blame some of the people here for being morons about the whole matter.
  • Is Baboon OpenDoc compatible or interoperable? As I understand it, OpenDoc is the architecture OMG is developing for the CORBA 3.0 spec. There's probably gonna be alot more developers who become familiar with OpenDoc if only because it will be available for just about all the systems. It'd be nice if Linux was one of these, and if GNOME was the one to do it (maybe it could be implemented using the Baboon API underneath).
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Right now there is no selection of window managers in Gnome. You are supposed to launch your window manager before the GNOME session manager.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • I've tried other wms like Enlightenment. E's not ready for my likes yet, perhaps when it reaches version 1. I haven't tried WM or icewm. I like fvwm2 for just about everything I need. If it were made GNOME-compliant (hell KDE-compliant too but I don't use that so I don't care about it) that would be great. I took a look at the fvwm2gnome site and it doesn't seem to me they're actually making the window manager GNOME-compliant, just providing configs that work well with GNOME.

    If fvwm2 were GNOME-compliant (and if it could scale icons to become mini-icons ;-), there would be no question for me. BTW, I agree, RedHat's fvwm95 config for fvwm2 bites. I change it right away to my tried and true config. RedHat needs to realize that you don't have to make the wm look (even vaguely) like winXX to make it easy for people to transition (note that the default E theme now looks kinda like winXX). They'd probably have more luck making it look like mwm (which I also don't like, but which many Unix users are at least familiar with).
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • ftp://rawhide.redhat.com:

    /i386/RedHat/RPMS:

    kdeadmin-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdebase-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdegames-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdegraphics-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdelibs-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdemultimedia-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdenetwork-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdenonbeta-1.1-1pre.i386.rpm
    kdesupport-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm
    kdeutils-1.1-2pre.i386.rpm

    so there
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • I had to download a workable version of GNOME. DAMN THOSE REDHAT ROGUES!
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • CDE is more popular than KDE. Yet you can't even *download* that, you have to spend $$ for it (and it sucks nonetheless).

    If you don't like RedHat, vote with your dollars, not with your hot air. Go get SuSe or OpenLinux etc. etc. When you own RedHat, then you can make decisions for them. In the meantime, if you don't like what they provide or don't provide, don't use them and stop whining about it. This ain't windows, you have plenty of choices of distribution, you can even roll your own. Tell your friends not to use it. Who cares!
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Seems like you need a history lesson. GNOME was not started by RedHat, RedHat simply hire some GNOME developers to help support the project.

    It seems to me if anyone is dividing the Linux community (btw I never knew it was united), it's the idiots who flame everything they don't like for Linux. I don't use KDE, I prefer GNOME, but I don't go around flaming KDE.

    BTW, Debian have chosen GNOME too. Oh, they must be trying to dominate the standards. So clueless...no wonder you have to post anonymously.
    Doesn't Linus control Linux? Doesn't Bruce Perens and the LSB control Linux standards? Nope. As long as a project is *open source* no one can control it. Or were you too busy hopping on whatever the latest bandwagon happens to be.

    Get a life.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Well put. It's a shame that the idiots who replied before me (and I say idiots not to flame, but because they don't seem to be able to read more than a paragraph before they jump to conclusions...shows a lack of intelligence to me) just didn't seem to get what you were saying.

    Here's a message to them: IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT....DON'T USE IT!!
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • If they decide
    to do somethingthe RedHat way (e.g. to follow some other RedHat 'standard'), it will be difficult to rewrite the whole stuff in another manner.


    I'm not sure what you mean. You just said SuSE even had better GNOME integration than RedHat. Why is RedHat suddenly the target of everyone's disdain; that everyone assumes RedHat is out to control Linux. They have never made a proprietary change to Linux...they can't because it's all under GPL. Do you think Miguel (who, by the way, IS the head of GNOME) would allow GNOME to be un-workable in other distributions?

    This is all just a backlash against commercial involvement into Linux (not necessarily on your part, but a general sentiment abounds). But interoperability between the commercial world and the Linux world is necessary if Linux is to grow anywhere beyond where it is now. That doesn't mean Linux becomes commercial, it means the business models of companies will change. RedHat and other companys, such as SuSE, are wonderful examples of this. They just don't package up and redistribute Linux, they make meaningful contributions to it, and they are open source nonetheless. RedHat felt that GNOME was important enough to the growth of Linux that they should take a direct role in supporting it. Does Caldera actually hire KDE developers? You know, us programmers have to eat too. I think getting paid for producing open source software is just about the best job one can get. Some people apparently want us to get paid by companies to produce proprietary programs, then expect us to come home at night and spend all *our* time making programs for *them*, so that they can feel happier using software that a company never was affiliated with. Those folks need to wake up. The rest of us need to ignore them in the meantime and stop believing *their* FUD. Open source will change the commercial world, as long as the clueless folks don't destroy open source first. Again, I'm not directing this to you, but to the many folks who took this article as an opurtunity to gather attention in their meaningless lives by flaming RedHat/GNOME/KDE/GTK+/Qt/LinuxWorld/whatever.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Ever try a comparison? Note that the poster didn't say that GTK had more language bindings than Qt, he merely stated that C++ is harder to bind other languages to than C, which is absolutely, positively true. C++'s mangled names and virtual function lookups are not covered by standards, meaning that C++ libraries on the *same* platform, compiled with different compilers probably won't work. How can you write Perl bindings for a library when you can't predict the name-mangled symbol names?

    This is all coming from a C++ programmer. I don't like using C, but I recognize C++'s deficiencies.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Debug doesn't make any difference. The debugging info is not loaded into memory if you aren't debugging.


    Incorrect sir. Debug info is embedded into the program itself. The OS does not strip this info when you aren't debugging. If it did, it'd take forever to load the program.

    Therefore, at the minimum, debugging stuff makes the program more bloated in memory.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Isn't your mommy calling you? Don't you have better things to do than waste our times with your rants? Everyone has an ego, especially you it seems.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • That's funny, I didn't know RedHat owned Infoworld. Oh...wait you must be right because your reasoning is in bold. I am so sorry what was I thinking?
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Well if RedHat or SuSE or Caldera, et al. can make a business out of distributing and developing open source software, then *what's the problem*?

    As to the Infoworld article, it was misquoted. Blame that on Infoworld instead of jumping to conclusions.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • You'd be a wise fool.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Don't forget about Visual Basic. Love it or hate it, lots of people use it (not on Linux, but nonetheless..)
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Well at this point I was more speaking to the community at large who wants to simply flame RedHat. If you took my arguments personally I apologize.

    I have no problem with someone criticizing RedHat or any other company for things they include or don't include in their distribution, as long as those criticisms are valid. You said that RedHat was doing the Linux community a great disservice by not including KDE. These are strong words, and I made the point that if they are so far in the wrong, then don't use them and don't advocate their use. Posting your complaints to Slashdot isn't going to get you anywhere. If you honestly want to help RedHat, send them your suggestions and indicate why you don't use them and why your friends were dissapointed with their copies, etc.

    The fact is that if RedHat makes a bad choice about something, they are doing a disservice to themselves. In Windowsland, people may get used to the Microsoft or nothing aproach, but if they want to succeed in Linuxland, they have to learn that there is no single entry point. As Perl programmers say, "there's more than one way to do it."

    When I started with Linux, I installed Slackware (because RedHat 4.2 wouldn't read the CD right). I purchased a large (Que) book on using Linux because, although I had some experience with Solaris, I didn't know how to administrate a system or any of that. The book came with Slackware, RedHat and Caldera, and I liked that because it gave me somewhat of a choice of which one to install. For those people who ran to CompUSA to spend $40-$50 on RedHat without doing even a little investigation, well they get what they get. It's called buyer beware. If it turns them off of Linux altogether, then perhaps they are not ready for Linux yet.

    I think RedHat is doing us all a great service by supporting GNOME. Whereever your allegience lies, in the end both KDE and GNOME move Linux forward. The people working on GNOME are doing so for their own reasons. Some of them used to work on KDE some didn't. If you prefer one over the other, use it. I prefer GNOME, so I'm happy that GNOME is an alternative to KDE. Others feel differently.

    In the end, RedHat makes the final decision about what's in their distribution. If you're not happy with that, or don't feel like taking the time to give them some constructive criticism, then just don't worry about it and advocate a different distribution.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Exactly how are they? Are they members of some diabolical conspiracy to make Infoworld clueless? Your rant makes no sense.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Paid by RedHat? Try again.

    Huh? I'm paid by Xerox, so you try again. (Although I admit I wouldn't mind working for RedHat.) Anyways, if you think RedHat would waste their time and money responding to flamewars on Slashdot, then you got a lot of schooling ahead of you.

    It doesn't matter who started the project, it's important who has the most influence. And that's probably RedHat. Whether they abuse their influence is a different question.

    Have you any proof that RedHat itself, and not just people who work on GNOME and work at RedHat, have the most influence on GNOME?

    OK, you're just flaming everyone who isn't flaming KDE :)

    What are you talking about? I don't flame anybody. Sure I call people names sometimes, but that's because I geniunly feel that that is the way they are representing themselves (not that they are always like that, just that they came across that way). I always back my stances up with some explanation. If you thought my post was a flame, you better read Slashdot a little more often.

    I don't think anyone should be flaming GNOME or KDE. If they have valid criticisms, I don't mind, but if I feel their allegations are wholly without merit (e.g. "RedHat has become bad for Linux" or "GNOME sucks" or "KDE sucks") and they cannot back them up with reasonable arguments, then I think I have the moral duty to point out their fallacies. I also don't attack them personally unless provoked.

    OK, you're just flaming everyone who isn't flaming KDE :)

    I didn't say you were flaming Gnome, only that others are. You were (kinda) flaming RedHat. Although you did cite your reasons for not liking them, you failed to cite any overwhelming evidence of your allegations.

    BTW, Debian have chosen GNOME too.

    And I believe they are planning on shipping GNOME. They may ship KDE too in the future, and that's fine, it doesn't affect me anyways because I don't use Debian. I was just pointing out that RedHat isn't the only folks using GNOME. From what I can tell, SuSE not only ships GNOME (and KDE), they actually integrate it better than RedHat.

    Once KDE uses Qt 2.0 and/or the GPL issues are resolved, this isn't relevant any more.

    Well that was one of the motivations for GNOME wasn't it? And it *still* hasn't been resolved. As you imply, until it is resolved, it is relevant (not to me, since I don't care about Qt's licensing [other than I can't develop a commercial app using Qt without paying Troll Tech money], but apparently to Debian).
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • another person's point of view....

    tried to compile glibc under Slackware. even followed all the README and INSTALL notes. result? core dumps in ever glibc-linked program

    installed RedHat, didn't have to try to install glibc (BTW, RedHat certainly isn't the only glibc distro). As for kernel compiling, I don't know what you were doing wrong, but I'm using RedHat 5.1 with kernel 2.2.0pre4-ac1 and it's just fine. Did it occur to you that the source of your problems was, in fact, not RedHat?

    As for GNOME, I got news for you, even if you are using RedHat you're on your own. Any documentation you find there is either (a) out of date or (b) incomplete. It's because they are still in development.

    Do you think the GNOME team would deliberately sabatoge their own project by making it depend on RedHat, no matter what RedHat pays (a relative few) of the developers?

    As for rpm, do you know what RPM stands for? Let me tell you: "Red Hat Package Manager". Hmmmm. Nonetheless, when I was running Slackware I installed rpm and it worked fine, except that it didn't think I had any of the core packages that most rpms depend on (but there is an easy workaround for that by specifying which packages you do have in the config file).

    And debian must want control because the deb packager is for Debian. And slackware must be the saints because they don't use any package manager and it's all guess-work (not to slam slackware because I liked it when I used it, only it's not glibc and that's a deficiency, IMO).

    Did you ever think that these things say things like "its best to use X" because that's what they've been designed and tested for. RPM was not designed as a universal package manager (although in many regards it has become a de-facto one, due to other distros like SuSE using it), it was designed for RedHat systems (hence the name). That fact that it has grown out of its original intent is a testament to its benefits (although I won't start a flamewar by saying it's the best packager, because I don't know that it is).

    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • So RedHat isn't cool, they're just making good PR (just like this Infoworld FUD article)


    Either that's a conclusion or you really are an idiot.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Maybe you oughta wait until they actually release them (E is not even version 0.15 yet) before you review them. Instead of giving Slashdot testomonials to your failures at using them, why don't you submit some bug reports and hope they fix the problem. After all, that's what developers releases are for you know.

    BTW, I don't even use E because it's not up to snuff yet and I don't feel like testing it. I use fvwm2 with GNOME (which I do feel like testing).

    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • No it's just that alot of people act like idiots alot, not excluding myself (or yourself), and I call them on it.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • It's called a reference, you may check a dictionary for that one.


    Then enlighten me, which article were you referring to that said that RedHat wasn't cool and they are just making good PR and that the Infoworld "FUD article" was part of RedHat's plans?

    And I'm sorry but making a statement "it is good PR to be prasied by Infoworld" is a conclusion, it doesn't refer to anything directly, therefore it's not a reference. It may be true, but it is a conclusion nonetheless. Also, "...and drop a misleading note..." is a conclusion. You have concluded that RedHat dropped a misleading note about license problems (was it misleading? are you suggesting Qt hasn't had, and don't have now, issues with their license?) and i18n support.

    Then you confuse your stance by admitting that it was Infoworld's fault, but you still think RedHat dropped the misleading note? Which is it? Was it RedHat's fault for the misinformation or Infoworld's?
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Ha, grep the 'idiots' in your posts and then come back again.


    Again, if you think "idiot" is a flame you need to stick around and read /. (or better yet, usenet) some more. If you think that's the best I could do at flaming, then you underestimate me ;-P


    Will you tell me that you do what *you* want, and not what XEROX wants, at work?


    I work on a project started by Xerox, funded completely by Xerox, and designed to work only with a Xerox product, and it wasn't started and maintained by a group outside of Xerox. And AFAIK, Xerox doesn't distribute open source software, nor have they modelled their business around it in any way. I don't see the correlation...I guess that's just me.


    Yeah, just as the DOJ fails to provide overwhelming evidence that MS has abused it's market power...

    Actually they have alot of evidence. Whether you feel its overwhelming or not is your opinion.
    You're so nasty, how could you ever think I would use words like s*ck (terror!). This does sound soo much like one of these 4letter words, and I'd never use that in the american public.

    Um....okay. I didn't say you said those things (except you did say the first..or did you...how would I know?) Thanks for taking my quote out of context. I doubt anybody but you and me are reading this thread so I'm not sure what you gained by it except maybe self delusion. I can only refer you to the post in question and hope you understand it without my further assistance.


    But "Redhat ... bad" is plain English, and it is backed with arguments.


    Well that remains to be seen. I haven't heard any good ones from you yet.


    Maybe it'll take some time, but RedHat definitely has monopolistic tendencies.


    Every company has monopolistic tendencies.


    They're playing rough against other Linux distributors and projects, which is something new in the community (where we kill each other without
    professional help).


    If you could show me some proof of this. Some testamonials maybe. Maybe a little more than a misquote in an Infoworld. In the meantime, I think *I* reserve judgement.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • I actually like that better than "Gimp Toolkit". I mean Gimp Toolkit was nice when it was used just for Gimp, but now it's used for just more than the Gimp.

    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • no, InfoWorld IS THE CONSPIRACY.

    I thought that was the Illuminati?


    if it made sense it wouldn't be a rant, now would it? sheesh.

    No I think rants can make sense, just like a screaming toddler can make sense- not very much sense- but sense nonetheless.

    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Damnit I could have sworn I responded to this...must have hit preview and forgot to hit submit.

    Anyways, here's the short version:

    I didn't mean to be aggressive towards you, I was merely pointing out that both GNOME and E are in development and it's not fair to complain about bugs/lack of functionality in development code. If you don't want to help the testing of these projects, then I hold nothing against you; but don't complain about how bad they are until they are released and can prove it for themselves ;-)

    As for "lurker", I don't remember calling you that (I wouldn't know anyways if you don't post alot). Hey I like to lurk around things too. Get comfortable here, and don't take anything seriously, we're all just a bunch of folks with nothing better to do on the weekend but flame each other.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • You are AC....the other poster was AC....
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Uhm. Give me one major Linux vendor promoting and pre-announcing 2.2 as much as RH is promoting Gnome.


    RedHat, for one. They have already announced that they will be using 2.2 for RedHat 6.0. That's all they announced for GNOME. They gave their rationale for not using KDE. Some of that was misquoted, some of it may just be wrong on RedHat's side, but they were giving their point of view. Debian has done the same thing WRT the licensing conflicts (which will still exist even when the QPL actually does apply to KDE).


    Also, last time I looked RedHat was not lying about Linux competitors like it lies about Gnome competitors, although I may be wrong about that.


    What lies do they say, keeping in mind that Infoworld misquoted them in the article. There is a license conflict between the old QT license (which, BTW, I believe still applies until KDE uses QT 2.0, but I certainly may be wrong about that), there will still be a conflict between the GPL license and the new QPL license.

    Really I haven't seen alot of articles about RedHat and GNOME. I've seen articles about GNOME itself. Usually these are very vague, and don't even really talk about what it is. Often, uninformed journalists think it is a replacement for X or a window manager (just like what happened to E in the last article about Rasterman). Most often, it's just mentioned as an aside, as a project seeking to increase usability on Linux. If those journalists missed KDE in their research, then take it up with them. If you think that RedHat has control of the media then you are vastly overstating their position.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • My point was that there's no way for me to tell the difference between the two ACs. I think this is the most irritating side-effect of ACs on /.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • seems to me window managers for any unices have a long way to go before being comparable to the macos user interface

    Window managers are probably never going to be "comparable to the MacOS user interface", as they provide only one part of the GUI.

    A more interesting question is how far desktop environments such as KDE and GNOME have to go before being comparable to the MacOS user interface, as they are intended to provide a lot more of the GUI.

  • seems to me window managers for any unices have a long way to go before being comparable to the macos user interface. nyself, i use e.14 on a tinkpad133 w/32 ram, and am quite content with it's performance. i also use(on a variety of machines at work)afterstep, fvwm, WM, openwin, motif, and 4dwm. IMHO the bottomline is not which is better or worse, but which functions best for the 98th percentile, and currently none of the unix window managers address this ease of use and intuitive nature.

    for those of us designing, modifying, or configuring window managers, it may behoove us to study "macintosh human interface guidlines" by apple. design of an excellent gui is not only look, but feel. intuitiveness and understanding of an object(physical or visual) without instruction or reading explanations is an extremely difficult thing to do. manufacturing firms spend millions of dollars and man hours studying this elusive topic.

    time will tell which of the gui's for linux will win the acceptance of the general populace, in the meantime, we should root for our own favorite underdog window managers quitely, but collectively work together to make them all user friendlier and more intuitive.
  • Don't bother to reply if you can't put your name behind it.
    I think this is a very bad attitude. Arguments are either good or bad no matter if they are stated anonymously.
    There are good reason to remain as anonymous as possible on the net, especially in times where 'total surveillance' is nearer to reality than ever (remember the European ECHOLON and ENFOPOL cases).
    When I lowered the threshhold, I found that some AC response to you (not really offensive) had been rated down. I don't know if you are a moderator yourself, but in any case it is inappropriate to generally "ban" AC responses to comments of a specific person...


    Now back to the topic:
    1. Qt 2.0 isn't out yet.
    So what?

    2. QPL compatible with GPL?
    Maybe yes. The QPL isn't finished yet, and people are trying to come close to GPL compatibility (although this is literally impossible; apparently even linking GPL to X is illegal -at least under German law). Help them if you want it to succeed.

    Besides that, neither Open Source nor free software implies the GPL; it is just *one* option.
    It's the GPL's fault that it isn't compatible with other licenses (and this is intentional).

    Miguel is implementing that object model if anyone has any real objections to how it is done I suggest they show us all how it should be done.
    Why not try and work with KDE on KOM/OpenParts to improve/adapt it, or at least try to be compatible?
    There is still time to find a common ground, as Baboon is not finished yet. KOM/OP works well in KOffice, so it could work well in Gnome, too.
    Gtk and QT have agreed on a common DnD protocol, why shouldn't KDE and Gnome be able to agree on a common object model?
  • BUT I still have no respect for those who can't stand up for their opinions. They are cowards and
    I rather not have them respond to me.
    It's not about opinions, it's about arguments. If you don't like couterarguments, or critical replies, you are the coward. If you post on /., you have accept anonymous posts. If you don't like them, go to another site. (Note: I'm also annoyed sometimes, but there are also very useful anonymous posts.

    What would have happen if the likes of Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, or Gandhi didn't stand up for their beliefs?
    They posted on /. as well? Great!
    But seriously, people may prefer not to be shot or imprisoned for their /. postings :-}
    In fact, /. is a *very* intolerant place, and people with deviating views -even justified ones- are usually spammed and flamed to death. So AC posts are sometimes used -e.g. by Windows developers- to bring up new, unconventional arguments.
    If they are offensive or useless, moderators will rate them down and they won't bother you anymore.

    Thus, your anti-AC attitude is unnecessary...

    Back to the topic:
    Miguel said this (among other things): "I talked to Torben at the Kongress about this
    and he did not seem very interested in redoing OpenParts/KOM with something different, as it is part of his master's thesis."
    The Linux Kongress was long ago, and Baboon wasn't started until much later.

    So I guess decided, again, that he was better off doing it a way he though was better, just like GNOME was started.
    Yes, you could say another NIH, but this time without the justification of an inacceptible license. Even if Thorben didn't want to change all the things himself (which is understandable within a thesis), nobody prevented Miguel to do it himself, or at least in a compatible way.
    According to Thorben, his thesis is about to be finished, so he'll surely be willing to talk about extending KOM/OP.
    Actually there wasn't much discussion among the other Gnome developers about Baboon (AFAIK), so maybe some of them favour a compatible object model over the one chosen by Miguel.
  • Look, if you reinvent the wheel, it doesn't hurt as long as it is only for you. But when others are affected, you should try to do something sensible.
    If you build another railway track, you *don't* use a different rail distance than the aready existing tracks! People don't want to change trains at the end of your track, even if you track is superior.

    You know that OLE2 is more mature thatn KOM/OP, so why didn't KDE make KOM/OP OLE2-compatible? Because they didn't want to, and that's their right.
    OLE on Corba doesn't exist, so there is nothing to be compatible to. A newly coded OLE on Corba wouldn't be more mature than KOM/OP.
    Besides, Baboon doesn't use the OLE2 API, it's something special just like KOM/OP.
    Believe me, there is really little reason not to work together on that subject (Miguel stated some things he misses in OpenParts like caching, but it's not vital and it should be possible to add it relatively easily).

    Let's stop the KDE/GNOME flame wars and let both groups continue development, and let users vote by using one or the other (or a hodgepodge of both),
    I can't hear these senseless statements anymore!
    This IS development. It's vitally important to have a compatible object model, because the "hodgepodge" is the future. There is no point in having a lot of applications, but still being unable to make them work together. The general interoperability via COM is *the* most obvious advantage of Windows as desktop platform. If Linux/Unix splits up on that point, it's really a pity. I don't want to wait until somebody dublicates Gnome efforts under KDE and vice versa, I want to be able to use Gnumeric embedded into KWord and KIllustrator within GWP, without further hassle. This is absolutely inevitable if we want am up-to-date desktop system.
  • I do agree with the above reader that splitting would have been an option (after all, the argument with the thesis is an understandable one).

    Different architectures shouldn't be the problem, as the CORBA object model is intended to make different architectures work together. So saying "it can't be done because of the differences" is pointless, as this technology is exactly meant or this case.

    Baboon is still not finished, so it would be possible to evaluate if KOM/OP can be adapted to Gnomes nees relatively quickly.
    And even if Baboon will be used as currently proposed, we should consider ways to make it work with KOM/OP right from the start.
    Embedding Gnome apps into KDE and vice versa would be really cool!

    (And please, don't be so quick to call people morons.)
  • If NIH brings competition on the application level, it's good

    If it is on the protocol/standard level and prevents necessary cooperation, it's bad.

    NIH comes from the Motif/OpenLook wars, which cost Unix the desktop.
    In the current situation, I'd say it's good to have competing toolkits, but they need to cooperate on the standards level, and they did (XDnD protocol).
    It's nice to have two desktops, one more for fancy looks, one more for a consistent interface, but apps should be interoperable, down to the level of embedding app objects from one desktop into another.
  • If someone is risking to be shot or or imprisoned for what they say here they either live in a society they should work to turn around (not wasting time here) or they shouldn't say it.
    I have never even gotten an e-mail due to my postings here.

    Somebody complained he got several threats of murder after a posting (to a political topic).
    I am fiercely against discrimination people (here: their opinion) because of their origin, profession or preference (e.g. Windows background etc.). Works should be judged by the results, statements by the quality of the arguments. Judging people by the name (or their willingness to make them public) in unacceptable to me. If somebody gives his name, I tend to trust the facts more, but whenever an argument is based on logic and reason, the name is entirely irrelevant. Linking this to a name seems to me a sign of intolerance and prejudices. The internet offers freedom of speech even to those who would otherwise do not dare use it. Anonymity is a privilige, not a stigma.

    This is of course my personal opinion. Others, who value personal integrity (which you would assume under a name) more than logic and reason, may have a different one.
    So we might prefer to 'agree to disagree' on that matter.

    My 'attitude' isn't anymore unnecessary than anything you want to raise your voice against. Such as your questioning about why GNOME isn't using KOM/OpenParts - the users and the developers will choose what they prefer, so your attitude is unnecessary. Voila.
    This is a bad comparison: It is absolutely necessary to discuss which object model Gnome will be using, as (potentially) millions of users will be affected.
    If Gnome's object model is compatible to KDE's, we will have overcome the borders of the desktops nearly immediately, resulting in a highly competitive environment with many choices (choice meaning not just running parallel, but embedded within each other).
    If the object models remain incompatible, we've lost the last chance of 'reuniting' the project on a high level, while remaining the individual character of each. Much time would go into reimplementing apps for the other project, and commercial software vendors would have to choose one (or they'll simply not implement any distributed object technology at all). The best we could posibly get are memory-consuming wrappers to make the two models speak to each other.

    To sum it up, the comfort of many users, and perhaps the future of the free Unix desktop is at stake, so I'd hardly call this discussion unnecessary. Once the decision is made, the *users* can't make a decision anymore. They have to accept the fact that they can't use KFormula within Gnumeric.
    And, believe me, users would always choose the compatible solution!
  • Gee what a nice objective article, that managed to state nothing without implying something negative about the "other" project.

    What a crock.
  • I can't say this single thing means that Redhat wants to take over GNOME or Linux or anything else, but it sure has made me on my guard. Have you read the new GNOME documentation, for beginners and stuff... it was made by a guy at RHAD and it totally denies the existance of any linux dist other than Redhat. Sure, i don't mind that they only give install instructions for Red Hat if they don't have the time for other dists, but how well the fact that other dists exist is left out of the docs really makes me think...
  • People need to quit bashing Enlightenment for memory usage. At home I run the thing on a Pentium 100 with 48mb of RAM and it's completely smooth and usable. Sure, I turned off the sliding windows and translucent dragging, but that's what you do on sucky systems.

    Enlightenment itself does not suck RAM. It's full screen backgrounds and the extra eyecandy (which can easily be turned off) that do.
  • A quick note to all those Red Hat nay-sayers. I really like and admire Red Hat.
    They really do seem to understand about enlightened
    self interest. There are lots of examples of this
    you guys know them already. I'll just mention one
    more for non Australians.
    Australian Personal Computer has just published
    "The Linux Pocketbook". It costs AUD 14.95 and
    includes the full Red Hat 5.2 distribution plus a
    few more goodies. The Pocketbook is REALLY good. I even
    felt comfortable about trying FIPS with its help. Anyway the authors credit Red Hat with help in obtaining a distribution even though Red Hat 5.2 costs AUD 79.00 in retail outlets here. The pocketbook is really all you need even as a novice to get up and running. Red Hat undercut their own distrubtion channels in helping APC out because they know that this way they can reach a new bunch of users. Every piece of software Red Hat has written has been licensed either GPL or LGPL. I think they're totally cool, just what the leading Linux Company should be.
  • So by your definition everyone that doesn't include more than one version of each piece of software in their distribution aren't being "open and fear" and haven't given the user a choice?

    RedHat isn't forcing you to use Gnome. You can choose not to install it. You can download KDE if you prefer KDE.

    RedHat made a choice for their distribution, but they don't have a monopoly. If you don't like their choice, fine, but don't whine about it. RedHat is even allowing people to take their entire distribution, remove Gnome and slap KDE on it, and redistribute it and SELL it, without paying RedHat for it.

    How's that for open and fair?

    Oh, and RedHat gave a decent reason for not including KDE - the non-free QT license. I'd rather run a distribution from someone that care about the license issues, like RedHat and Debian, than someone who's ignored it.

  • Ohh.. RedHat doesn't include program X but they include program Y, they don't give me any choice. Man, do I really have to DOWNLOAD it to use it? They're just evil bastards that want to become the next Microsoft...

    Not... They're not forcing you to buy their distribution if you think it's so horrible to download packages they don't ship on the CD. Guess what? No matter what distribution you choose, you'll probably have to download an application they don't ship sooner or later, so what's you problem?

    You can even buy RedHat based distributions like Mandrake that does include KDE. And RedHat allow anyone to take their entire distribution like that, and modify it.

    So how are they not giving you a choice? Without RedHat, distributions like Mandrake and several other wouldn't be out there.

    And without RedHats funding, Gnome wouldn't be nearly as mature, and we wouln't have a real choice of desktop suites yet - we'd be stuck with KDE.

  • There's a whole lot of other stuff they could easily put on the CD's too, that I'd much rather have than KDE.

    It's time you realize that the world doesn't revolve around you. RedHat has a commitment to their users. If they believe their users are best served by not shipping KDE, because of the license issues, that is their right. And you have no reason to bitch about it - you have more than enough choices in other distributions, including RedHat based distributions that include KDE.

    I for one is a RedHat user that believe RedHat did something good by putting a focus on the nasty license issues the old QT license caused with KDE.

    And the Microsoft vs. Netscape thing is a result of Microsoft being an extremely dominant player. RedHat isn't forcing it's distribution onto anyone. They even allow people to copy it, and make money of it and modify it without paying them any licenses, including full source. If Microsoft had done that with their core products, I wouldn't have had anything against them anymore either.

Slashdot Top Deals

One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.

Close