Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 1st Jun 2008 09:40 UTC, submitted by tbutler
Linux Back in 2001, there was a company who thought they could launch a sustainable business model around a file manager. They wrote the file manager itself, and figured they could profit from offering online services delivered through the file manager. However, the company ran out of money quickly, and wen they released version 1.0 of their file manager, they had to fire everyone, only to go down a few months later. That company was Eazel, and the file manager was Nautilus. Apparently, some saw this as the demise of the Linux desktop - others didn't.
Thread beginning with comment 316609
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Skins are NOT vision
by hhas on Mon 2nd Jun 2008 11:40 UTC in reply to "KDE has a vision"
hhas
Member since:
2006-11-28

Innovative user interaction is vision. Scalable, easy-to-use data management is vision. An installation/configuration/troubleshooting process that doesn't lead to white screens on boot/logout due to some opaque, unmentioned hardware conflict or longstanding kernel bug followed by hours and hours of trudging through inadequate FAQs and user-to-user forums in an enthusiasm-destroying attempt to find some sort of fix would be major vision.

Skinning is the domain of idle hacks that want all of the attention without doing any of the hard, thankless but necessary work that goes into making a platform genuinely not suck. I get more than enough silly eye-candy from OS X already; if Linux wants to retain a place on my boxen then it's going to have to better the competition in ways that actually matter. Otherwise it's just another partition I can find a more productive use for.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Skins are NOT vision
by superstoned on Mon 2nd Jun 2008 17:13 in reply to "Skins are NOT vision"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

It seems the ppl above confused visuals with vision...

Luckily, the KDE project has both ;)
Unfortunately, the first one depends on taste, so not everyone recognizes it. The second one is, despite being much less tangible and obvious, easier to see.

Reply Parent Score: 3