Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jul 2011 01:51:19 -0500
From:      Joshua Isom <jrisom@gmail.com>
To:        perryh@pluto.rain.com
Cc:        cbergstrom@pathscale.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore
Message-ID:  <4E23D7E7.7060602@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4e242fab.s4vpgxxZEUq0LFDq%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
References:  <20110717071059.25971662@scorpio> <CAGwOe2YpUXgFx1f_1UWHNt4S=p=X1Soa348KWR9BTrjxF0bAwA@mail.gmail.com> <4E22DFE9.7050007@pathscale.com> <201107172016.30727.lobo@bsd.com.br> <4E23989F.7010701@gmail.com> <4e242fab.s4vpgxxZEUq0LFDq%perryh@pluto.rain.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 7/18/2011 8:05 AM, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Joshua Isom<jrisom@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 7/17/2011 6:16 PM, Mario Lobo wrote:
>>> On Sunday 17 July 2011 10:13:13 C. Bergstr??m wrote:
>>>> I hope gnome does [go Linux-only]..   Maybe then more
>>>> people would forget about it and focus on making KDE better ;)
> ...
>> What about enlightenment?
>
> For us old-timers :)
>
> What's the advantage of any of these "desktop environments" (Gnome,
> KDE, enlightenment, Xfce) over ordinary X11 with (say) FVWM2 or TWM?
> Certainly there are some useful apps that, for better or worse, are
> built with gtk or the KDE toolkit, but what does the full-blown
> environment really contribute (other than bloat)?

Desktop options are why linux has grown so well.  If gnome and KDE 
didn't exist, linux wouldn't have gotten the market share it did. 
Desktop environments are a foot in the door technique for server 
environments.  Windows clearly isn't the best server, especially older 
versions, but it's popular because desktop Windows is popular.  The 
"server" editions of linux distributions are almost mirrors of their 
desktops, gui and all.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E23D7E7.7060602>