Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #172063

Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates

From	Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject	Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates
Date	2013-04-06 00:24 -0700
Message-ID	<CD851BD1.188B3%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <20130401174031.987@usenet.drumscum.be> <CD7F37F2.184B2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <20130404002159.378@usenet.drumscum.be> <CD820DCD.186CE%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <20130406075428.108@usenet.drumscum.be>

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/5/13 11:08 PM, in article 20130406075428.108@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
<tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2013-04-03, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> On 4/3/13 3:26 PM, in article 20130404002159.378@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
>> <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2013-04-01, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>> 
>>> 8<
>>> 
>>>> If you read my article you will see where I ended by asking for
>>>> ideas on how what I describe could be handled better. Your basic
>>>> answer, it seems, is just to say it is too hard (or whatever) and
>>>> to just give up.
>>> 
>>> Wrong impression. My answer is that it is unrealistic to look at a
>>> distro as a unified system with regards to the UI. The only
>>> feasible "solition" would be to eliminate the existing choice in
>>> environments and settle on a single one.
>> 
>> So to accomplish such a thing (without sacrificing diversity) would
>> be too hard or whatever so you think people should just give up?
> 
> No, not "too hard or whatever". Unrealistic. And no, not "just give
> up". Not trying to shoehorn the concept of a GNU/Linux distribution
> into something it isn't.

Let me clear something up for you: I am *not* suggesting to push anyone into
making desktop Linux into something it is not. Again, you are attributing
things to my ideas which are not *my* ideas.

>>> And even if that was possible (and it most definitely isn't): we
>>> don't want that, do we?
>> 
>> I know I do not want people to give up and settle on a single
>> environment!
> 
> So with the situation of offering two "big" desktop environments that
> are very different (in fact more different today than ever): what
> would *you* suggest to make it possible for an entire distro, offering
> both environments and their applications (plus even other environments
> and applications), to "be a unified system" with regards to the UI?

For the people making the two very different DEs to agree *on some back-end*
things which would allow the open source ecosystem to be better.

> Remember: you have already said that Gnome and KDE can still be
> totally different and you don't want any choice removed.

Correct. I am not suggesting any choice be removed from anyone.

-- 
* cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 22:26 +0000
  Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-03 16:48 -0700
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 06:08 +0000
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 00:24 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 14:01 +0200
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-06 08:33 -0400
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 13:53 +0100
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2013-04-06 08:57 -0400
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 14:05 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:53 -0700
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:52 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:50 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:35 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 23:44 +0000
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 18:15 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 16:56 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 10:39 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 15:31 -0700
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-04-07 08:49 +0200
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-07 09:06 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-07 17:02 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-07 10:43 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-08 07:36 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-04-08 11:28 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 09:44 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-06 14:49 -0400
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 12:04 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 20:16 +0000
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 13:28 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-06 22:56 +0100
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 15:09 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2013-04-08 07:45 -0500
              chrisv proves his cult-like tendencies again Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 06:57 -0700
                Re: chrisv proves his cult-like tendencies again Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 07:03 -0700
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-06 07:00 -0400
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2013-04-06 12:52 +0100
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:48 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-06 11:46 -0700

csiph-web