Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Mar 2009 18:57 UTC, submitted by Michael
Thread beginning with comment 355075
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: How about making it work?
by bjorn nitmo on Thu 26th Mar 2009 00:59
in reply to "RE: How about making it work?"
RE[3]: How about making it work?
by lemur2 on Thu 26th Mar 2009 01:17
in reply to "RE[2]: How about making it work?"
Correct. I should have said KDE not Linux. Does it change my point? Is KDE flaking out is acceptable behavior after 13 years of development?
KDE 4.0 didn't have 13 years of development.
GNOME 2.0 was equally buggy as KDE 4.0 was ... so would you argue that GNOME developemnt should have kept on with the GNOME 1.x and GTK+ series?
http://www.osnews.com/story/1280
If you would argue so, then we wouldn't have GNOME 2.26 and GTK+ 2 now.
http://www.osnews.com/story/21157/GNOME_2_26_Released
If you would argue otherwise ... then why the inconsistency of your arguement applied to KDE versus applied to GNOME?
After a couple of releases, GNOME 2.4 and later were quite useable.
http://www.osnews.com/story/6662
Same with KDE 4.2 and later. What exactly is your problem?
Edited 2009-03-26 01:21 UTC
RE[3]: How about making it work?
by tonym on Thu 26th Mar 2009 03:45
in reply to "RE[2]: How about making it work?"





Member since:
2008-09-24
""The last straw was when I put in a CD or USB drive and the session would bomb. How can Linux be 15 years old and still not handle this?""
What does KDE flaking out have to do with Linux? It was not Linux that Bombed out it was KDE.