Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 17th Mar 2003 22:49 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces So many operating systems and so many graphical desktop environments... This article is a comparison of the UI and usability of several Desktop Environments (DEs), that have been widely used, admired and reviled: Windows XP Luna, BeOS 6 (Dano/Zeta), Mac OS X Aqua and Unix's KDE and Gnome. Read on which one got our best score on our long term test and usage.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
@oGALAXYo
by makkus on Wed 19th Mar 2003 13:01 UTC

Your talking about looking like. Yes Gnome has some things that look like < os9. But API wise it is a total different , horse. I programmed on them too (Siemens used them with some of there medical equipment).

The rest of what you're talking about is FUD. Gconf isn't the windows registry or clone. Fighting against it on that grounds is dishonest when you claim you know how gconf works.

I'm still amazed by the fact that you ignore the contents of my posts which points too your FUD claims and only talk about 'looking like': Gnome 'looks like' <=OS9, gconf 'looks like' Windows registry. But if you're so knowlegdable as you claim, then you also know that the comparison stops by 'looking like'. This means your are FUDDING and suppressing information to make a point which you're not able to make when you were completely honest about the subject.

Now tell me in your Amiga days how many solution for toolbars did you count? How many solution for the file-selector? How many different approaches for buttons (skinnable and not), dropdown-combo boxen? How many API for this. Do you want to talk about that? Claiming that the Amiga delivered a one API solution is lying, Commodore delivered something but the community delivered a lot what made the Amiga and its package of components (just like Gnome) or are you ignoring Miami (TCP/IP stack), MUI (widget set), Dopus (workbench/filemanager replacement) etc. No, the Amiga was like Gnome now, compenents could (and would) be replaced, it sure wasn't a KDE windows clone. how dare you critizing gconf on false grounds, that is on grounds of windows hate and the same time promote the windows API cloning approach of KDE. This is called double standards! Disclaimer I've nothing against KDE, I'm questioning oGALAXYo in his FUDDING.