OSNews

"Whether or not Free Qt is GPL is not very relevant because its development is tightly controlled by a software vendor in the business of selling proprietary licenses."

Do you even know what GPL means? How can a GPL project be lead to ruin by a proprietary vendor?

"It's not feasible to fork Qt and there is no reason for anyone to want to do so unless they feel that Gtk and other free toolkits aren't good enough. Qt most certainly is a proprietary toolkit although a free, GPL version is also released. It's not a good thing to treat Qt libriaries as system libraries, like kde does."

It's just a feasable to fork Qt as it is to fork the Linux kernel. Should we not use the Linux kernel because IBM, a vendor who sells proprietary licenses, has submited patches to it? I would really like to hear your reasoning why someone should be concerned about using GPLed libraries as system libraries.

And don't give me this crap about Qt being proprietary, it only proves that you have no understanding of what the GPL is or how it works. Using Qt in this respect is no different than using GTK, since both are GLPed.

"To the degree that the applications work. If the applications don't work or if the system is bloated and chashy who cares about a standard, uniform look?
...
Standard configuration of toolbars is not a good reason for anyone to use Kde or not to use Gnome. That's such a minor issue."

It is a minor issue to tech savvy people, which make up the current Linux population for the most part. It is a major issue to everyone else. Continuity reduces confusion.

"Most people who are very concerned with the Linux desktop as users are interested in fashion, and switch on that basis. However, this is a very small percentage of the total desktop users who do want something that just works, or settle for what is widely available (Windows). Most linux users today are technically oriented and can get either Gnome or Kde to work ok, but they don't really need either. A simple Window manager and xterm is enough for them. So they make fashion statments in the desktop they use or identify with. The average desktop users (who currently uses MS Windows) is not concerned with such things."

You are technically correct here, but you've totally missed the point. Since, as you point out, most Linux users would be perfectly functional with wm/xterm, what is the point of projects like KDE or Gnome at all? Could it perhaps be to EXPAND the user base? And how would we go about doing that except by making the transition comfortable for average desktop users?

It appears that you understand the concept of user base about as well as you understand the GPL.

"I don't think we should ignore statistics. But in making a big deal about Kde having more users, Kde is setting itself up for a big fall."

Humans are social animals, and as such tend to follow the rest of the herd. If a new Linux user sees that more people are currently using KDE than Gnome, they will be more likely to use KDE, since that's what everyone else is using. It's the same thing that keeps Windows dominant, just on a smaller scale.

So, how exactly is KDE setting itself up for a big fall by pointing out that more people use KDE than Gnome? Are you expecting that all of those KDE users are suddenly going to switch? Why?