Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #172108

Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/6/13 5:01 AM, in article kjp2m0$475$1@dont-email.me, "TomB"
<tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 04/06/2013 09:24 AM, Snit wrote:
>> On 4/5/13 11:08 PM, in article 20130406075428.108@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
>> <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 8<
> 
>>>>> 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.
> 
> Well, clearly it is their choice *not* to do this. If they wanted to do
> this, they already would've.
> 
> You (and others I'm sure) want KDE and Gnome to agree on "some back-end
> things"; KDE and Gnome *choose* not to.
> 
> Now, would it be a bad thing if KDE and Gnome /did/ choose to agree on
> "some back-end things"? No, I definitely don't think so. But in the end
> it's their choice, and their decision to make. And I don't see it
> happen. They are *competing* environments - just like Windows and OSX -
> that happen to run on top of various UNIX-like operating systems.
> 
> Do I /want/ them to cooperate? It simply doesn't matter; it's up to
> them. They are the ones that should want it, and if they don't then so
> be it.
> 
> Personally I think it's pretty naive to believe that there can be a
> level of cooperation between KDE and Gnome in the face of spin offs like
> Unity, Cinnamon and Mate, which takes the diversity (and thus
> "fragmentation") even further. That alone should be a *huge* eye opener
> for people like you.
> 
> As a good GNU/Linux advocate I simply accept that one of the big
> strengths of GNU/Linux (diversity) also introduces a number of downsides.
> 
I think you are misunderstanding my point. The fact that you have spinoffs
such as the ones you list *back* my view - they do not contradict it.
Programs made for Gnome work well in any of those environments. And let me
define "work well": I do not mean they just run, or to run without crashing,
I mean they "fit in" with each of the environments - in the ways I have
described that are well accepted to benefit productivity, efficiency, and
error reduction. These are goals shared by *all* of these projects that you
list (and many more in the open source community). For simplicity sake let's
just refer to this as "usability" (not that the things I have discussed are
the only things that help build usability, but they are a major factor).

Here, to show my point: Can you give an example of how a program written for
Gnome would not work well in a Cinnamon environment? In the Unity
Environment? In Mate? In what way are the competing options working against
the working *against* usability, intentionally or not? I have not worked
extensively with all of the environments so perhaps there are some ways, but
none come to mind off hand for me. If you cannot think of any then I think
this is a very strong sign that your claims are faulty.

With KDE and Gnome: Just because they have not co-operated more fully than
they already do is not, to me, an indication that they will not work to
achieve their mutual goals in even better ways than they do now. Current
lack of success and a current lack of a specific focus to achieve what they
both want is not a sign that they will *always* fail.

Imagine if they always had shown the same level of defeatism as you are
showing here. The KDE project would never have been started (as you have
been shown, the primary goal of the project was - and largely still is - to
succeed in the ways I have described). Even if started that would not have
been enough. You are the one who recently pointed me to Kubuntu to show how
successful they have been over the last few years... how much progress and
success they *have* had in the very ways I have been talking about *would*
happen. I have been proved, in that area, to be correct... and this was when
many of the "advocates" in COLA told me that what I was describing was not
needed, was not wanted, was not possible, or was even in some way against
the open source philosophy. I have *always* disagree with that - to the
contrary, improving usability is a very big part of the wishes of most
people in the open source community, and I do not think anything will be
able to stop the community from improving in this area (and others) and
getting better and better.

Remember: much of what I spoke of as a benefit for desktop Linux and
predicted would happen, and the "advocates" insisted I was wrong about,
*has* happened... so I have a good track record of showing an understanding
of these issues. This does not mean, of course, that my predictions of the
future are assured to come true, but I think it is a bad idea to bet against
me on this one.

One last thing: I did a quick search of the KDE and Gnome sites. I did not
find anything on the Gnome site to back what I am saying, but read this from
the KDE site:

<http://www.kde.org/presspage/>
    -----
    It is important to make the distinction described above. An
    application written with the KDE Development Platform can run
    anywhere and not just in the KDE Workspace, fitting in well on a
    Windows, Mac or Gnome desktop. Likewise, the KDE Workspace works
    well even with applications not written with the KDE Development
    Platform. It integrates application notifications and other such
    functionality thanks to extensive efforts to support standardization
    on the Free Desktop.
    -----

The KDE team recognizes the benefit of doing the very thing I speak of!

You speak of competition. I am all for it. But competition does not mean
that cannot also cooperate - and they do. It is not as black and white as
you seem to believe - either all cooperation or all competition. They can -
and do - engage in both.


-- 
"There's a mountain of evidence that I've committed forgeries."
- Brad cc Wiggins 

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