Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Apr 2007 22:00 UTC, submitted by michuk
Graphics, User Interfaces "Red Hat has recently shared with the world the first ISO images of the system that is supposed to be installed on the OLPC laptops. I suddenly felt an irresistible temptation. I downloaded 291 MB ISO, burned it on a CD and started testing. Here is what I got."
Permalink for comment 229377
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
By any other name...
by chrono13 on Tue 10th Apr 2007 22:41 UTC
chrono13
Member since:
2006-10-25

There have been other reviews of Sugar, and I haven't read one overly positive one yet.

While I do not believe any effort to reinvent is in vain, for if nothing else you learn what makes the originals work so well.

But with Sugar clearly lacking compared to almost every other WM, why is it seemingly being pushed... forced.

I'm afraid that if Sugar is clearly not good, it will still be used. Meanwhile, a few custom text files in any of the other WMs could achieve almost everything Sugar has without issues and serious lack of polish or features for that matter.

Most of these other WMs have been in heavy development for a decade or more. Solid as a rock, polished to a high shine, and easy to configure to meet almost any need.

I can see the need for customizing the applications, and tying it all together with a common theme and easy to understand interface. By the videos, the reviews and the details, Sugar lacks any feature that another, more stable, already developed, already tried-and-true and heavily tested WM doesn't already or couldn't easily offer.

Sugar, by any other name, would taste just as sweet? Not this Sugar.

Reply Score: 1