On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 17:02:29 -0700, markzoom wrote:
>
> Rick wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 21:46:05 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
>>
>> > Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> >
>> >> __/ [ yttrx ] on Wednesday 06 September 2006 19:47 \__
>> >>
>> >>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>> Ebuntu
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Enlightenment Ubuntu Project
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> >>>> | Currently there is no project release yet. But you can use the
>> >>>> | ELive CD.
>> >>>> `----
>> >>>>
>> >>>> http://www.ebuntu.org/
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So there's GNOME (Ubuntu, Edubuntu), KDE (Kubuntu), Fluxbox
>> >>>> (nUbuntu, Fluxbuntu), XFCE (Xubuntu), and now Enlightenment
>> >>>> (Ebuntu). I'm sure there are more Ubuntu forks (any FVWM-based
>> >>>> Ubuntu?), including mainstream distributions like Mepis, which use
>> >>>> Ubuntu as the 'root'.
>> >>>
>> >>> No matter what anyone says, enlightenment is a dead project.
>> >>> Rasterman is long gone, and the dipshits involved in its
>> >>> "development" now have been "developing" DR17 for three years.
>> >>>
>> >>> Its a stupid idea for an ubuntu.
>> >>
>> >> But one can mix and match to get the best of several worlds, I
>> >> suspect.
>> >
>> > Mix and match what???? All the application SW is the fucking same.
>>
>> The windowing environments and managers are NOT.
>
> Well HOO-HAA.
So, you like looking stupid?
>> >> Aragorn once said that GNOME can Sawfish, Enlightenment, windowmaker,
>> >> or whatever else. I am not very familiar with these (I entered the
>> >> Linux world when GNOME and KDE ~2 existed), so it didn't make sense
>> >> to me at the time. Could a user, for example, give up kwin easily?
>> >> Overall, as a visual environment, I have always fancied Enlightenment
>> >> the most. KDE is more usable and effective though. It's a toolbox,
>> >> not a DE. *smile*
>> >
>> > Does this make sense to anyone out there?
>>
>> Yes, it does, but you have to be able to understand non-windows
>> operating systems.
>
> And had a very boring life.
No, you just have to be able to understand non-windows operating systems.
>> > Is it any wonder projects are failing all the time with this type of
>> > advocacy and thought process?
>>
>> Is it any wonder you are so clueless?
>
>>From where 97%+ of users are standing, all of desktop Linux is a
> failure. Looks more like Linuxers are clueless from outside your little
> fishtank.
No, it looks like you are an idiot.
>> > Dont you realise that this "mix and match" is what is screwing up
>> > Linux left, right & centre.
>>
>> Nothing is screwing up Linux right and left.
>
> It does it all by itself.
Nothing is screwing up Linux right and left.
>
>
>> > get something done *right*. Get it done finalised. The days of getting
>> > a stiffy from being able to "poke" a memory address to get some "neat
>> > trick" are long gone.
>>
>> Are you really this stupid and dishonest or is it just some game?
>
> ???
I guess you really are that stupid.
>> > If the linux code bases continue to branch at the rate they're doing
>> > so that some pimply programmer can reease his own WM or distro then
>> > theres no hope for any of us.
>>
>> .. or maybe you are just scared of uncontrolled information and
>> software.
>
> Sighh... what he is saying, halfwitted moron, is that an OS needs as many
> people as possible cooperating to produce ONE near-flawless OS, not every
> little geek or little gaggle of geeks stickytaping their own buggy toy
> "OS" together from old bits by themselves. Making a modern OS today is too
> big a job for any small group of dipsticks.
... like IBM, HP, OSDL, Novell, Red Hat ...
> But hey, if you all want to reinvent slightly different wheels, go ahead.
> BG keeps laughing all the way to the bank.
>
--
Rick
<http://ricks-place.tripod.com/sound/2cents.wav>
|
|
