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

Groups > comp.misc > #17671 > unrolled thread

Linux archeology: KDE 0.1

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2019-03-28 22:03 -0400
    Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2019-03-29 06:36 +0000
    Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> - 2019-04-04 16:07 +0000
      Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-04-04 17:16 +0000
        Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-04-04 21:15 +0000
          Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2019-04-04 19:03 -0400
            Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-04-05 07:46 +0000
              Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2019-04-05 07:56 +0000
                Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-04-05 16:35 +0000
                  Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2019-04-06 02:49 -0300
                    Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-04-06 09:07 +0000
                      Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2019-04-06 07:48 -0400
                        Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2019-04-06 11:56 +0000
                          Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2019-04-06 09:44 -0400
                            Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2019-04-06 13:53 +0000
                    Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-04-06 13:35 +0000
            Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2019-04-05 13:35 +0000
              Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2019-04-05 13:38 +0000
                Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2019-04-05 16:36 +0000
      Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2019-04-05 12:25 +0300
      Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Steve555 <Steve555@reallybogus.nodomain.nowhere.invalid> - 2019-06-17 21:39 +0000
        Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2019-06-18 00:22 +0000
        Re: Linux archeology: KDE 0.1 Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2019-06-19 06:46 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#17671 — Linux archeology: KDE 0.1

From the «all downhill from there» department:
Title: Linux archaeology: KDE 0.1
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 19:29:15 -0400
Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/129701/linux-archaeology-kde-0-1/

A user by the name of grem75 has uploaded two screenshots of KDE 0.1 to imgur,
and they offer a very intriguing look at just how far we’ve come. I’ve only
found this RPM, no source unfortunately. This is installed on Red Hat 4.1 with
Qt 1.33. Impressive amount of progress for being so early in development. The
project had been announced in October 1996, this package was built in February
1997. There really were no complete desktop environments available for Linux at
the time, most distros shipped with FVWM and some assortment of applications
from various toolkits. Gnome didn’t start until August of 1997. XFCE existed,
but was just a panel for FVWM. I’ve recently made the jump from Windows 10 to
KDE Neon on my laptop, and after so many rocky years through KDE 4.x, I have to
say the KDE desktop environment currently exists in an incredibly polished and
attractive state, striking a perfect balance between attractiveness, usability,
and customisability. KDE is currently an absolute pleasure to use for me, and I
can’t wait to see what else they’ve got coming up (preferably a lot of work on
either reworking or replacing Kmail with a smaller, more focused email
application). In any event, this is the first time I’ve felt at home on a
desktop environment on Linux since the glory days of GNOME 2.x and KDE 3.x, and
I couldn’t be happier. These two KDE 0.1 screenshots remind me of just how far
we’ve come.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#17676

I’m using KDE on Devuan, and it works great. I don’t care for Gnome any
more. In the old days I used Sawfish for a long time.

I’m switching back to BSD gradually (a few kinks to work out before I am
completely switched over), and so far I haven’t replaced fvwm on OpenBSD.
It’s basic but it’s pretty comfy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17753

>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
>>>>> "TH" == Thom Holwerda writes:

 > From the «all downhill from there» department:
 > Link: https://www.osnews.com/story/129701/linux-archaeology-kde-0-1/

 RW> A user by the name of grem75 has uploaded two screenshots of KDE
 RW> 0.1 to imgur, and they offer a very intriguing look at just how far
 RW> we’ve come.  I’ve only found this RPM, no source unfortunately.

	I've toyed with both KDE and GNOME c. 2000, but was unable to
	quite figure out back then what I may need either for.  Neither
	do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop environment"
	is supposed to mean and why I may need one nowadays.

	Granted, I apparently have got some special talent at crashing
	X, so I tend to keep as much of valuable stuff as possible in
	a Screen session (which I can immediately reattach to after
	restarting X.)  When graphics is essential, I use a variety of
	software, which I doubt any specific DE would provide in its
	entirety; such as:

	* XTerm -- for attaching to a Screen session; reasonably
	  lightweight, de facto standard in its field; immensely
	  configurable;

	* Sxiv -- lightweight (libx11-based UI, Imlib2) image viewer;

	* Zathura -- PDF and DjVu viewer; nice less(1)-like navigation;

	* Kicad -- AFAICT, has much better UI than gEDA (although I'm
	  not shy of using Gerbv from the latter); rather heavy, though;

	* Xfig -- though I'm somewhat of an XML fan, this one still beats
	  Inkscape in the easy-to-use and runs-really-fast departments;

	* slock(1) -- lightweight.

	I've used several X window managers over the years (such as
	Window Maker and FVWM), but my current preferences are:

	* JWM -- can be made really lightweight, such as by /not/
	  compiling in SVG support;

	* Openbox -- allows for more or less pointer-less operation;

	* VTWM -- having perhaps the least dependencies among the
	  "traditional" WMs in Debian; (Debian JWM package /does/ link
	  against librsvg/libcairo.)

[...]

-- 
FSF associate member #7257  http://am-1.org/~ivan/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17754

Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>        Neither do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop 
>        environment" is supposed to mean and why I may need one 
>        nowadays.

A "desktop environment" is a crutch for the windoze users to allow them 
to be able to use a computer without having to learn much of anything 
in the process.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17756

On 2019-04-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>>        Neither do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop 
>>        environment" is supposed to mean and why I may need one 
>>        nowadays.
>
> A "desktop environment" is a crutch for the windoze users to allow them 
> to be able to use a computer without having to learn much of anything 
> in the process.

Pompous twat. Welcome to my killfile.


-- 
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 21st day of Discord in the YOLD 3185
1. What power do you have?  2. Where did you get it?  3. In whose
interests do you exercise it?  4. To whom are you accountable?  5. How
                  can we get rid of you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17757

In article <ggnagaFt1fU1@mid.individual.net>, Huge  <usenet@huge.org.uk> wrote:
>On 2019-04-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>> Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>>>        Neither do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop 
>>>        environment" is supposed to mean and why I may need one 
>>>        nowadays.
>>
>> A "desktop environment" is a crutch for the windoze users to allow them 
>> to be able to use a computer without having to learn much of anything 
>> in the process.
>
>Pompous twat. Welcome to my killfile.

Well, he didn't say that in the most polite way, but on the whole it's kind
of accurate.  Graphical file browsers are one of the great evils of the
modern world.  Part of the problem is that they make anything other than
trivial operations very difficult, and part of the problem is that they are
forced to bind the same click action to completely different operations.
Click on one file and it opens an editor.  Click on another and it 
executes.  This becomes a severe security issue when people get files
that aren't obviously what they think they are.

I appreciate the urge to simplify the UI, but you can simplify it way
too much, and people have.
--scott

-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17758

On 2019-04-04, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <ggnagaFt1fU1@mid.individual.net>, Huge  <usenet@huge.org.uk> wrote:
>>On 2019-04-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>>>>        Neither do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop 
>>>>        environment" is supposed to mean and why I may need one 
>>>>        nowadays.
>>>
>>> A "desktop environment" is a crutch for the windoze users to allow them 
>>> to be able to use a computer without having to learn much of anything 
>>> in the process.
>>
>>Pompous twat. Welcome to my killfile.
>
> Well, he didn't say that in the most polite way, but on the whole it's kind
> of accurate. 

Even if it is, the comment was pointless as well as rude. No-one is
going to go back to green screens. Might as well rail against electricity.

> Graphical file browsers are one of the great evils of the
> modern world.  Part of the problem is that they make anything other than
> trivial operations very difficult, and part of the problem is that they are
> forced to bind the same click action to completely different operations.
> Click on one file and it opens an editor.  Click on another and it 
> executes.  This becomes a severe security issue when people get files
> that aren't obviously what they think they are.
>
> I appreciate the urge to simplify the UI, but you can simplify it way
> too much, and people have.

Nothing to do with UI's 'per se' and everything to do with
oversimplification and the, by modern standards, simplistic
Unix security model.

-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 22nd day of Discord in the YOLD 3185
1. What power do you have?  2. Where did you get it?  3. In whose
interests do you exercise it?  4. To whom are you accountable?  5. How
                  can we get rid of you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17759

On Fri, 05 Apr 2019 07:46:26 +0000, Huge wrote:

> On 2019-04-04, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <ggnagaFt1fU1@mid.individual.net>, Huge 
>> <usenet@huge.org.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>On 2019-04-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>>>>>        Neither do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop
>>>>>        environment" is supposed to mean and why I may need one
>>>>>        nowadays.
>>>>
>>>> A "desktop environment" is a crutch for the windoze users to allow
>>>> them to be able to use a computer without having to learn much of
>>>> anything in the process.
>>>
>>>Pompous twat. Welcome to my killfile.
>>
>> Well, he didn't say that in the most polite way, but on the whole it's
>> kind of accurate.
> 
> Even if it is, the comment was pointless as well as rude. No-one is
> going to go back to green screens. Might as well rail against
> electricity.

Reminds me of a deputy head of IT (not his title, but that was 
effectively what he did) who have a presentation on the X Window system 
in about 1991.

He said that:
1) PCs were a passing fad
2) UNIX was the future
3) (this is the good one) X Windows was the future because it allowed you 
to have lots of command windows open at once. Nothing else was mentioned.

I use the command line on UNIX most of the time, and have since 1975. But 
I still find a file browser helpful when trying to sort out a load of 
files I've forgotten about. I also like a graphical mail client (and a 
graphical NNTP client). Of course, if I get stuck at the command line 
there's always xdg-open.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17766

On 2019-04-05, Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> wrote:

[snippage]

> I use the command line on UNIX most of the time, and have since 1975. But 
> I still find a file browser helpful when trying to sort out a load of 
> files I've forgotten about. I also like a graphical mail client (and a 
> graphical NNTP client). Of course, if I get stuck at the command line 
> there's always xdg-open.

Like (I suspect) many (most?) Unix users, I use the most appropriate
tool for the job, GUI or CLI. With a "desktop enviroment", I have the
choice. I presently have 5 GUI tools running and 4 CLI's on 4 desktops.


-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 22nd day of Discord in the YOLD 3185
1. What power do you have?  2. Where did you get it?  3. In whose
interests do you exercise it?  4. To whom are you accountable?  5. How
                  can we get rid of you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17772

Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:

> Like (I suspect) many (most?) Unix users, I use the most appropriate
> tool for the job, GUI or CLI. With a "desktop enviroment", I have the
> choice. I presently have 5 GUI tools running and 4 CLI's on 4 desktops.

I'm 4 for six.  And *no* "desktop environment".  X sits on top of
Unix/Linux (so to speak) and a window manager sits on top of X. [1]
A "desktop environment" puts yet another huge load (pun intended) of
complexity on top of X in place of a simple window manager.  It brings
with it all sorts of superfluous stuff that, AFAICT, is mostly there,
as the OP opined, to make *ix "like Windoes".   An example is the
"task bar". Once it's there, app devs require a task bar for their
code to work.  The task bar is just another "do it our way because
it's better and you'll like it" bit of chrome.

Yeah, I'm being condescending to Huge here.  He deserves it given his
intemperate and vulgar responses to folks to disagree with him.  "No
DE" is not the same as "green terminal".  I have to struggle without X
but haven't used KDE since my first Linux install in '99 that I dumped
as soon as I figured out how to replace it.

[1] Managed somehow to kill my window manager without killing X.
    First time that's happened since '89.  It was possible to restart
    twm from an non-obscured xterm and all was well.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17774

On 2019-04-06, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>
>> Like (I suspect) many (most?) Unix users, I use the most appropriate
>> tool for the job, GUI or CLI. With a "desktop enviroment", I have the
>> choice. I presently have 5 GUI tools running and 4 CLI's on 4 desktops.
>
> I'm 4 for six.  And *no* "desktop environment".  X sits on top of
> Unix/Linux (so to speak) and a window manager sits on top of X. [1]
> A "desktop environment" puts yet another huge load (pun intended) of
> complexity on top of X in place of a simple window manager.  It brings
> with it all sorts of superfluous stuff that, AFAICT, is mostly there,
> as the OP opined, to make *ix "like Windoes". 

So what? Not everything about Windows is bad. Objecting to features
merely because they're "windows-like" is just yet another example
of the arrogance and hubris common among IT types 

>  An example is the
> "task bar". Once it's there, app devs require a task bar for their
> code to work.  The task bar is just another "do it our way because
> it's better and you'll like it" bit of chrome.

So don't do it their way. And, oh look, you don't. So you're
busily objecting to something you don't use. Illogical, much?

> Yeah, I'm being condescending to Huge here.  He deserves it given his
> intemperate and vulgar responses to folks to disagree with him.

People are welcome to disagree with me. What they are not welcome to
do is be arrogant, patronising and bigoted. What do you expect
in response, a bouquet? For example, your response (mostly) has
a reasoned argument to it, Rich's was just ignorant bigotry.


-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 22nd day of Discord in the YOLD 3185
1. What power do you have?  2. Where did you get it?  3. In whose
interests do you exercise it?  4. To whom are you accountable?  5. How
                  can we get rid of you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17775

Huge  <usenet@huge.org.uk> wrote:
>So what? Not everything about Windows is bad. Objecting to features
>merely because they're "windows-like" is just yet another example
>of the arrogance and hubris common among IT types 

If you want Windows, and lots of people do want Windows, then run Windows.
That's what it's for-- people who want a system like Windows.

In a world where everybody tries to make everything like Windows, there is
less freedom of choice for one thing.

Much of the point of Linux (and Unix in general) is that everything is
modular and you can swap stuff in and out.  Want a desktop, you have a
desktop.  Don't want a desktop, you don't have to run a desktop.

However, there have been recent attempts to integrate all the parts
together into big monolithic blocks like gnome3.  This kills that
modularity, and it becomes much more difficult to customize your system
to make it precisely what you want.  This is very bad.
--scott

-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17776

On Sat, 06 Apr 2019 07:48:47 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Much of the point of Linux (and Unix in general) is that everything is
> modular and you can swap stuff in and out.  Want a desktop, you have a
> desktop.  Don't want a desktop, you don't have to run a desktop.
> 
> However, there have been recent attempts to integrate all the parts
> together into big monolithic blocks like gnome3.

And systemd.

> This kills that
> modularity, and it becomes much more difficult to customize your system
> to make it precisely what you want.  This is very bad.

Agreed. 



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17778

Bob Eager  <news0073@eager.cx> wrote:
>On Sat, 06 Apr 2019 07:48:47 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> Much of the point of Linux (and Unix in general) is that everything is
>> modular and you can swap stuff in and out.  Want a desktop, you have a
>> desktop.  Don't want a desktop, you don't have to run a desktop.
>> 
>> However, there have been recent attempts to integrate all the parts
>> together into big monolithic blocks like gnome3.
>
>And systemd.

Which is now tied into gnome3!  Soon it will all be one lump.
--scott
-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17779

On Sat, 06 Apr 2019 09:44:58 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Bob Eager  <news0073@eager.cx> wrote:
>>On Sat, 06 Apr 2019 07:48:47 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> Much of the point of Linux (and Unix in general) is that everything is
>>> modular and you can swap stuff in and out.  Want a desktop, you have a
>>> desktop.  Don't want a desktop, you don't have to run a desktop.
>>> 
>>> However, there have been recent attempts to integrate all the parts
>>> together into big monolithic blocks like gnome3.
>>
>>And systemd.
> 
> Which is now tied into gnome3!  Soon it will all be one lump.

Oh dear. Oh well, doesn't affect me!

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17777

Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
> 
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
> 
>> Like (I suspect) many (most?) Unix users, I use the most appropriate
>> tool for the job, GUI or CLI. With a "desktop enviroment", I have the
>> choice. I presently have 5 GUI tools running and 4 CLI's on 4 desktops.
> 
> I'm 4 for six.  And *no* "desktop environment".  X sits on top of
> Unix/Linux (so to speak) and a window manager sits on top of X. [1]

Same here.  With Fvwm2 being the window manager.

> A "desktop environment" puts yet another huge load (pun intended) of 
> complexity on top of X in place of a simple window manager.  It 
> brings with it all sorts of superfluous stuff that, AFAICT, is mostly 
> there, as the OP opined, to make *ix "like Windoes".

Exactly.  And auspicisiouly to make it 'easy', but in reality simply 
hides so much that the user who does not know how never learns how, and 
the user who does know how, is hampered by "not following the DE's 
rules".

> An example is the "task bar".  Once it's there, app devs require a 
> task bar for their code to work.  The task bar is just another "do it 
> our way because it's better and you'll like it" bit of chrome.

Yep, and there is, sadly, a lot of that type of thinking in the DE 
space.  And Gnome is esp. bad at attempting to force "the one and only 
true way" that the dev's believe onto anyone using it.

> Yeah, I'm being condescending to Huge here.  He deserves it given his
> intemperate and vulgar responses to folks to disagree with him.

There is a reason I added him to my kill file a long time ago.  His 
postings are about 75% him being an insulting arse.  The remainder 
seldom ever add anything of any substance.  So he earned "kill file" 
status here a long time ago.

> "No DE" is not the same as "green terminal".

Also correct, but the Huge arse (pun intended) in the group seems to 
believe that there is either a VT100 green screen or a full bloated 
hand holding DE with no options in between.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17763

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <ggnagaFt1fU1@mid.individual.net>, Huge  <usenet@huge.org.uk> wrote:
>>On 2019-04-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> wrote:
>>>>        Neither do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop 
>>>>        environment" is supposed to mean and why I may need one 
>>>>        nowadays.
>>>
>>> A "desktop environment" is a crutch for the windoze users to allow them 
>>> to be able to use a computer without having to learn much of anything 
>>> in the process.
>>
>>Pompous twat. Welcome to my killfile.

Good thing I've had Huge in my killfile for months due to being an arse 
a majority of the time.

But the strong reaction implies that Huge is exactly one of those 
windoze users who need the crutch to be able to use a computer at all.

> Well, he didn't say that in the most polite way, but on the whole 
> it's kind of accurate.  Graphical file browsers are one of the great 
> evils of the modern world.  Part of the problem is that they make 
> anything other than trivial operations very difficult, and part of 
> the problem is that they are forced to bind the same click action to 
> completely different operations.  Click on one file and it opens an 
> editor.  Click on another and it executes.  This becomes a severe 
> security issue when people get files that aren't obviously what they 
> think they are.

Yep, many a windoze exploit has come from the UI trying to coddle the 
'Huge' lusers out there way too much.  I.e., the email attachments of 
"invoice.doc.exe" that show up as "invoice.doc" given recent windows 
versions decisions to hide the file extensions by default.

> I appreciate the urge to simplify the UI, but you can simplify it way
> too much, and people have.

Yup.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17764

On Fri, 05 Apr 2019 13:35:12 +0000, Rich wrote:

> But the strong reaction implies that Huge is exactly one of those
> windoze users who need the crutch to be able to use a computer at all.

He actually doesn't have any Windows computers at all.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17767

On 2019-04-05, Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2019 13:35:12 +0000, Rich wrote:
>
>> But the strong reaction implies that Huge is exactly one of those
>> windoze users who need the crutch to be able to use a computer at all.

No, Rich, I just think that you're a cunt. And your arrogance and
bigotry rather lend weight to that argument, don't you think?

> He actually doesn't have any Windows computers at all.

Precisely.


-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 22nd day of Discord in the YOLD 3185
1. What power do you have?  2. Where did you get it?  3. In whose
interests do you exercise it?  4. To whom are you accountable?  5. How
                  can we get rid of you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17789

Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> writes:

> 	I've toyed with both KDE and GNOME c. 2000, but was unable to
> 	quite figure out back then what I may need either for.  Neither
> 	do I have any better understanding of what a "desktop environment"
> 	is supposed to mean and why I may need one nowadays.

While I use Awesome (a tiling window manager) on my Debian desktop, on a
laptop I've found KDE convenient. Laptops usually have special keys to
adjust volume and screen brightness etc and then one might need to turn
off or on one or more of the radios and so on.

Desktop environments tend to map these extra keys so they work and they
provide handy widgets for controlling the radios for example. I don't
think window managers do that for you automatically.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web