Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 23rd Sep 2007 13:43 UTC
Permalink for comment 273852
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-06-29
Minimising what? I can do whatever I need to do on GNOME, and I can do whatever I need to do on KDE. You make it seem as if I'm in some way 'pro-GNOME' just because I do not wish to mingle Gtk+ applications with Qt applications. That's kind of a weird deduction there.
It's fine you hate Gtk+/GNOME (be honest about it for once), but please don;t try to shove me in a pro-GNOME corner. There's enough to not like about GNOME/Gtk+.
In a Gtk+ environment, Qt applications stand out like an eyesore. In a Qt environment, Gtk+ applications stand out like an eyesore.
Well, this approach hasn't been very ineffective. Basically all major Linux distributions default to GNOME right now, so I'm not entirely sure where this "zero evidence" comes from. Het heeft hen geen windeieren gelegd, so to speak.
For the millionth time: I don't have a need for Qt applications in a Gtk+ environment! Jesus Christ, how many times do I have to repeat this? Gtk+ applications serve my needs JUST FINE. What's up with this militant approach of trying to shove applications down my throat that I don't want, nor need!
A big, deep, and long sigh. THERE IS NO PROBLEM. I'm content with the Gtk+ applications as they are, and when I'm in a Gtk+ environment, I haven't a need a Qt application could fulfill. Is that so hard to understand?