Re: Gnome Desktop Only

my point is that to be what we hold dear as "Linux" redhat would have to amke 
sure they did not limit the functionaility of components. providing defauls 
is one thing - diabiling the ability for kmail to be the default mail client  
is another. 

On Friday 27 September 2002 13:24, Jef Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 19:31, Eric Hartwell wrote:
> > as long as they provide the ability to have and use an app (or suite of
> > apps as the case may be) and do not dimish the functionaility of those
> > said apps in RedHat's distro, then all is well. As soon as Linux people
> > see that RH doesnt want them to run certain (and common) programs,
> > they'll bolt. and RH will suffer.
>
> So you interpret having a slim set of default applications in the
> default menus as Redhat not wanting people to run certain applications?
> I don't see that when I see the default menus...but then again as a
> linux person I tweak the crap out of any defaults I find no matter what
> the look like to begin with
>
> Are you trying to say that the idea of a limited set of default
> applications in a fresh install is a bad idea?  You would rather have
> Redhat dump ALL the choices for every type of application out there in
> the menus for people to work their way through?  The UI obsessed people
> would have your head on a spike for such ideas.
>
> What about this:
> What if Redhat added a first time walk through slideshow dialog that
> points out to new installs that the Redhat default menus provide a slim
> set of default applications for common tasks and indeed the application
> choices provided by Redhat are not limited to just the applications
> listed in the standard menus..and the menus can be customized for
> personal preference. Would that change the impression that Redhat was
> taking away choice?
>
> -jef