__/ [ Peter Köhlmann ] on Sunday 16 July 2006 08:29 \__
> casioculture@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> ml2mst wrote:
>>
>>> casioculture@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> > Thank god for simple Gnome. I just tried the kubuntu-desktop and it was
>>> > way too much. A hierarchical menu madness, and all sorts of K-named
>>> > apps. So 1990's
>>>
>>> LOL... What a load of crap :D
>>>
>>> If one Desktop environment looks 1990's it's Gnome, with its lack of
>>> functionality and retro look.
Whoa! Steady on.
GNOME is built to suit old hardware. It can be enhanced, shall you wish to
make full use of the resources and be interested in some eye candy (e.g. if
the box is user-facing, not a server).
GNOME OS X
http://www.gnome-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=13548&file1=13548-1.jpg&file2=13548-2.jpg&file3=&name=MacOS-X+Aqua+Theme
MacOS-X Aqua Theme
http://www.gnome-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=13548&file1=13548-1.jpg&file2=13548-2.jpg&file3=&name=MacOS-X+Aqua+Theme
Transforming KDE to look like Mac OSX
http://linuxhelp.blogspot.com/2006/07/transforming-kde-to-look-like-mac-osx.html
Some of GNOME's themes are more brushed than KDE counterparts. Taking Baghira
as an example...
KDE OS X
http://www.kde-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=153&file1=153-1.jpg&file2=&file3=&name=Acqua
>>> Even Linus himself wrote a few months ago something like "Only idiots
>>> use Gnome".
Actually, you are putting words in his mouth. He only said that GNOME
developers are "interface Nazis", as far as I know. He also said that he
recommends KDE to those who ask him for advice. I can find that mailing list
thread if you wish. I doubt he'll be making such comments ever again, having
witnessed the reaction. GNOME is addressing what KDE lacks in terms of
licensing (the whole Trolltech's Qt situation), so it's very important.
>>> Unless you are a total N0ob, Wintroll or lived under a rock the past
>>> year, it's out of the question you've missed that ;)
>>>
>>> I bet you've used KDE for a couple of minutes and then started bashing
>>> here.
I agree. I love KDE for so many reasons. It contains the most innovative
features, which _nobody_ can appreciate unless KDE is used for a long, long
time. It's a cumulative experience (learning one thing at the time and
improving accordingly).
>>> In contrast to gray Gnome, KDE is highly customable and beside that
>>> there is a additional package called *Superkaramba* that adds even more
>>> eye catching applets. 1990's "my ass" :)
That exists for GNOME as well, under a different name. In fact, almost
anything that can be done with one DE can be done with another. The Portland
Project will bridge the gap even further.
>>> However, thank you for providing the joke of the week :D
I agree that the statement must have been an impulsive one. You can judge
anything so quickly unless you assume that the best DE is one that can be
mastered within 5 minutes (figure of speech, e.g. OS X), but rarely ever
allow you to expand and improve the desktop experience.
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Marti
>>
>> Gnome is elegant and beautiful. KDE is geeky and ugly.
Care to provide proof to back this statement? This goes to the OP. It reminds
me of people who say "Linux sucks" because they once saw it in some friend's
house and thought it was too different to what they were already used to.
Different is *not* bad. And KDE boasts many usability experts and involves
studies that strive to refine it.
> There. What elegantly and profoundly written piece of "proof"
> Keep up the good work, as you will convince people by the shedload
I bet the OP will not get very far making an argument in the professional
world. "It's ugly and geeky" doesn't quite make a case.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Rid your machine from malware. Install GNU/Linux.
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/8 Sun Jul 16 08:17 still logged in
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
