Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 16:57:16 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> To: "Robin S. Socha" <lart@socha.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: XFCE Window Manager Message-ID: <20000606165716.A54718@physics.iisc.ernet.in> In-Reply-To: <20000606060226.A4959@kens.com>; from lart@socha.net on Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 06:02:26AM -0400 References: <00060117263800.82982@chip.wiegand.org> <3938AF9C.89EEDA7C@gorean.org> <xzpvgzn8948.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20000606145721.A3237@physics.iisc.ernet.in> <20000606060226.A4959@kens.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robin S. Socha said on Jun 6, 2000 at 06:02:26: > * Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> [000606 05:28]: > > Dag-Erling Smorgrav said on Jun 6, 2000 at 11:13:59: > > > Doug Barton <DougB@gorean.org> writes: > > > > > I used KDE for a long time, but got tired of it crashing all the damn > > > > time. > > > > > > I've been using KDE on several machines (including my primary > > > workstation) for several months, and have never ever seen it crash. > > > > Me neither, and it's nearly 2 years now. We're still using KDE 1.0, > > though. > > Reality check 1-2-3: what exactly are you guys talking about? "KDE" as > in "the entire *D*esktop *E*nvironment" or "KDE" as in "kwm and kpanel"? Everything in the startkde script except the sound programs, which I manually commented out. > trying to emulate). It's lean, it's consistent, and it certainly is a > hell of a lot different from anything a Wintendo luser expects. Does one > want to cater to the pathetic needs of these lusers and - coming back > to why KDE sucks so bad - sacrifice tried and trued concepts like "one > job one tool" in the name of user friendliness? Exactly how does it sacrifice that? It has a window manager for managing windows, a panel for launching menus and apps, a file manager for browsing your file system and help pages (and launching apps if you want), a background manager for controlling your backdrop, etc etc. Unlike, well, some window managers which try to do all of the above and more. > Change your viewpoint: what does KDE give you? What is the added value > of running KDE over twm? You get a bloated WM, a sucky Windos emulation, > loads of crappy toy^Hols, random crashes (yes, I have rarely seen KDE > crash, yes, I have seen loads of really, really bad apps using QT). So > where's the added value? I don't know KDE 1.1.x, but there's no way I'd call 1.0 "bloated". It has a lot of stuff which Windows doesn't, and seems to owe more to CDE than to Windows. But you can leave out what you don't want, just edit the startkde script. I just don't get this "KDE is like windows" thing at all. The decorations, the panel, and the apps are nothing like windows, or no more like windows than lots of other unix things. In fact the start button and task bar look like the only common things with windows to me, and even they look different. And it's nice of you to blame KDE for bad QT programs. R. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000606165716.A54718>