____/ [H]omer on Monday 06 August 2007 03:34 : \____
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>> ____/ Stephen Fairchild on Saturday 04 August 2007 22:28 : \____
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> They can't stay with XP forever. It's from 2001. It's very outdated. Have
>>>> you seen the depths of KDE 4 yet?
>>>>
>>> Is this the same KDE 4 that's being ported to windows? Bit of an own goal
>>> don't you think?
>
> As much as I vehemently despise Windows, KDE is Free software, and as
> such it is not for me, you, or anyone else to dictate how it is used
> (within the terms of the GPL). If that means someone ports it to
> Windows, colours it bright pink, then uses it to destroy planet earth
> ... then so be it.
The reason why many people move to Linux is escape from
lock-in/evil/viruses/whatever. If you give all killer Linux apps (even
Compiz-fusuion) to Windows, that won't be bad for Linux adoption. Au
contraire --- think about the main Linux adoption peril. It's the apps.
Windows will not have the advantage of smoothly running both Linux and Windows
apps (virtualisation aside) because people will no longer /require/ their
Windows applications. It's a cyclic scenario that might take time to explain.
Hmmm.... the debate resembles that which revolves around binary/OS drivers.
>> Linux is more secure, stable, and less expensive. Once you put KDE on top of
>> Windows, then you need to learn a new environment anyway. The only advantage
>> then might be the ability to run Windows applications natively.
>
> Running Windows applications is a distinct *disadvantage*, Shirley.
Yes, see my reply to waterskidoo.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Somebody, give this politician a wedgie"
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 122 total, 1 running, 121 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
