Re: Owen Taylor's paper

Doc, Nadim, Others: Red Hat made a choice. They have their rationale for it.
They shared this rationale with outsiders. That was courteous of them. If a
person does not like this behavior on Red Hat's part there is nothing in
particular that forces them to use or stay with Red Hat distributions.

Can we leave it at this level and not turn this place into "yet another
loud abraisive discussion group?" Gholly, the ghod of such discussion
groups, is worshipped enough other places it is not needed here, is it?

{^_^}
----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
> Nadim,
>
> With all due respect to your arguments, I don't agree with your position
that
> Red Hat should have chosen one desktop to support and discarded the other.
I
> think Owen did a pretty fair job describing Red Hat's strategy to mitigate
some
> of the more glaring differences between the two most popular desktops. It
seems
> to me Red Hat is taking an "honest broker" position on an issue where they
> clearly have a vested interest, namely continued developer and end-user
support
> for two competing desktops with increasingly divergent capabilities. As
you say,
> chosing one and discarding the other would have a drastic impact on those
cut loose.
>
> --Doc Savage
>   Fairview Heights, IL
>
> P.S. "unifying Windows user interface and Apple's"?? I thought they both
stole
> them from PARC.
>
> On Monday, September 16, 2002 Nadim Bitar wrote:
> >
> > The justification for the unification of the 2 desktop environment is
> > the most illogical paper. From a UI stand of view there is no way you
> > can unify KDE and GNOME they are 2 different environment and unifying
> > them is plain stupid. It's like unifying Windows user interface and
> > Apple's. I think what redhat did was create a much better environment
> > for, ONLY, first time users and destroyed both GNOME and KDE for the
> > other users.
> > What Redhat should have done was decide on one of the two environment
> > and dedicate its resources to make that environments UI flawless. The
> > end result would have been much better. It is a lot harder to fix User
> > interface problems when you are working on two desktop environment than
> > one.  I really wonder if Redhat has any UI guru on their staff because
> > what they did is probably logical for a programmer but is a massacre of
> > UI principles for any UI expert. I know deciding on one of the two
> > environments would mean loosing half their customers but if they would
> > want to do these drastic changes to their desktop that would have been a
> > much better solution.
> > I hope they would see their mistake and stop their non-sense in future
> > releases.  For now I am ok with the changes since i can re-customize my
> > desktop and make it the way i want without too much problems, i am not
> > sure that would be the case in the future.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Limbo-list mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/limbo-list
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent from Peaknet, Inc.
> http://www.peaknet.net/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Limbo-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/limbo-list