Linked by Sean Oliviero on Wed 28th Jul 2004 05:54 UTC
The promise of Desktop Linux (DL) has been long coming. It's made significant progress since the mid-90s when GNOME and KDE came out, giving Linux users a somewhat modern desktop to work upon. However, it's been 7 years and DL hasn't progressed much at all since then. Today, DL is still nothing more than a UNIX-clone with a task bar, a start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it. But why has DL evolved at such a glacial pace?
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
proof is on my box at home: I have only ONE application that really forces me back into that other OS. And as soon as someone points me to something for creating video DVDs with menus and stuff, as easy and user friendly, yet powerful as DVD Lab on Windows, there's none left at all.
Anything else I use my box for, I can do (and in fact do) on linux as well as (if not better than) on windows. And that's not counting the "hee hee i don't care" i get every time I see the daily worm/virus/exploit warnings on various news sites.
Oh and for the Article: there's nothing left to say that hasn't been said already, so I just throw buzzwords around.
"SuSEplugger" "kernel 2.6 hotplugging" "subfs" "SuSEwatcher" "apt-get (apt4rpm)"
Only one thing left to be said: I fully agree with this comment here...
Here we go with another "Linux desktop" article. Can someone tell me what changed from yesterday? Oh nothing, so why the "news" item? Actually it's not news, it's propagandha hype. Can we end all those "ready for desktop" articles please.