Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:56:05 +0200 From: Oren Sarig <sarig@bezeqint.net.il> To: Chris.Smith@raytheon.co.uk Cc: James A Wilde <james.wilde@telia.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Which X-window to choose? Message-ID: <3881F825.DB13CD06@bezeqint.net.il> References: <00256866.00426B86.00@rslhub.raytheon.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
WindowMaker was nice, but the reason I dropped it (drums, please).... I want that bar on the bottom I can choose what window I want from. Seriously, when I have 10 windows open, it's a real pain (you know where) finding the one you need without that bar. When the selection came between KDE and GNOME, I picked GNOME because (drums again)... GTK looks nicer than QT. Seriously, GNOME is a whole lot more stable now, and offers about the same features as KDE, so there is no big difference. Just my $.02, though I probably haven't said anything useful here. -- Oren Sarig sarig@bezeqint.net.il Chris.Smith@raytheon.co.uk wrote: > > Hi, > > Here are my views > > > Thanks, Nils, you asked the same question I was about to ask. However, I > > have an additional criterion. Are any of these systems establishing > > themselves as standards? I know of Gnome and kde, and that Redhat has > just > > dropped kde for Gnome which presumably gives Gnome an edge, but how are > the > > camps dividing themselves among FBSD users? > > RedHat have far from dropped KDE from their installation. The latest 6.1 > installation allows a 'KDE' desktop to be installed rather that 6.0's Gnome > one and without pissing around for 2 hours with switchdesk. There also > appears to be a _huge_ amount of commercial backing for KDE from various > sources. Gnome looks nice, but it's hardly stable and not very practical. > I personally dumped both of them for the raw speed and power of > WindowMaker. So it doesnt have a native file manager? So it doesnt have > feature x and y. It has so many more good points:- > > 1. It's rock solid > 2. It'll run speedily on a P90 > 3. It's easy to use - not overcomplicated like the win9x/2000/gnome > desktop > 4. It's simpler than most and therefore less bugs. > 5. It's very customisable. > > This is my view, but I'd recommend KDE as a good second and possible a > first for new UNIX users. I wouldnt recommend RedHat though for anyone. > It's got more holes than a seive. > > Regarding standards, KDE has adopted it's own 'standard' known as > KOM/OpenParts (I think). Gnome uses an existing standard but it's a > 'commercial style' one which I dont like. I compare it to Microsoft DCOM > which is foul and should be burned at the stake :o) > > Chris Smith > Raytheon Systems Limited > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3881F825.DB13CD06>