Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Jul 2009 21:38 UTC
Permalink for comment 373549
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.




Member since:
2005-07-07
When I say gnome, I say gtk-ish side of Linux and OpenOffice support "integration with gnome" (and dropped KDE). I just say that when you look at all these apps, they don't behave the same at all but are installed together (except cinelerra) on default distributions desktop.
gtk is only small integral part of gnome. OpenOffice just uses theme that behaves according to default gnome theme and gtk open/save dialogs. Just watch widgets in open/save and for example Properties in OO.o. They aren't the same. you mix distro defaults with desktop defaults. if you change gnome with distribution name your comments would gain on validity
In Mac OS, all (Carbon/Cocoa, not unsupported X11 port) application look native and similar, something that you don't find in Linux. That's my point and I really think it is a valid one.
It is valid yes. But it is so much easier when cooks are the same (you used only apple based frameworks, OSX has a lot of them). This is why I use only pure gnome applications. If you use some X11 software on OSX it looks outlandish, if you use java app... result is the same. Many cooks, many flavors.
But then again, themes were always the sucky and inconsistent part of OSX, The ohh so many themes on OSX. Maybe that got a little better, I don't know... I avoid mac like plague. Last time I was forced to use mac (2 months ago) I rather went to half broken windows machine after 15 minutes of counterproductive work on mac with leopard. But then again my needs were specific... a lot of terminal, a little browsing, and boy ohh boy does mac terminal suck (but not so much as default mac keyboard and mighty(???) mouse).