Linked by John Munsch on Mon 30th Dec 2002 19:05 UTC
Why do it? I am asked this question more often than I expected, even by existing Linux users who I expected to know as well as I the reasons for building a next-generation desktop Linux for the home user. So here are some of my reasons for thinking that we must spend the effort to create a better desktop on Linux than any existing version now has. Editor's Note: Due to a technical glitch, the first segment of this article was ommitted for some readers. If you missed the "why" section, before, you can read it now.
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
I'm talking from the point of view of the above average user, also a developer, but not a kernel hacker or something, and still one who wouldn't like complexities where they are not needed.
I think that all users, novice and advanced alike would agree on stuff like not needing that much simple text editors!
Re basic system functions shared between KDE and GNOME: www.freedesktop.org exists to define some standards for them, and RedHat already started patching KDE and GNOME a little in order to make them work together (i.e. shared mechanism for handling tray icons). RedHat also patched some programs (KDE, GNOME, OpenOffice, Mozilla, etc.) to work using the same printing system, and render fonts using the shared standard Xft2.
Re installation and RPM hell: some programs do have an installtion program ("# make install") which works pretty well, asks what's needed, checks the system and installs the appropriate stuff. This is how it is with Windows (InstallShield etc.), which doesn't make it right, but still... If only in Linux there were graphical installers and not command line "make install".
Re configuation files: some things do need such configuration files to maintain customizability (e.g. Apache), some need such files for extended tweaks but a GUI for regular configuration (XFree86), and of course some things should be easily configurable well via the GUI (e.g. printers)
Re shell is evil: I think shell is ok (I use it in Windows as well), and there are some good things you can do with it, but what should be eliminated is the requirement to use the shell, especially for basic tasks like the aforementioned installations. The point is not that it should be supressed, but rather that you could do all that you need without resorting to using the shell!
Re pretty does count, standartized theme: all fonts to be anti-aliased... like forcing all the programs to use Xft2, right?
RedHat's unification of KDE/Qt and GNOME/Gtk themes is great (stop bashing it people!). Not because my KDE and GNOME desktops look almost identical, but because I can run KPPP in GNOME or XMMS configuration in KDE and not care that they use different toolkits!!
Re jargon is our enemy: yayks!! Now that's scary! Couldn't understand almost anything...
Re games are important: I'm developing a cross-platform (Windows / Linux) game using SDL and OpenGL
Re hardware support: it's important to have binary comptability between distributions, so that I wouldn't have to compile stuff to make my digital camera work, and the manufacturer wouldn't have to expose some patents by giving the source code (now those who don't expose the source and do provide the drivers for linux have to compile it for every distribution and kernel version!!!)
RK.