Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:54 UTC, submitted by Elv13
Gnome "Theme development is a tedious and difficult task, and for the GTK devs to be so careless in breaking their API at every turn disrespects the many hours people put into making themes for it. [...] I was given to believe that this breakage stems from a Microsoft-like climate of preventing users from customizing their systems, and deliberately breaking the work of others so that your 'brand' is the best. Anytime I hear the word 'brand' being used in Linux, I know something valuable is being poisoned." I find the tone of this one a bit too harsh and overly negative at times, but his point still stands.
Thread beginning with comment 541693
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Why not use Qt?
by zima on Fri 9th Nov 2012 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why not use Qt?"
Member since:

LXDE [...] looks and feels like what it is - a mid-to-late nineties post-CDE, barely-better-than-a-window-manager, not-quite-a-desktop that even a small minority of Linux desktop users use. Now that is small. Ditto XFCE.
There's a reason they are used by a minority and only by those who believe they can see miniscule time delays on extremely modern hardware and believe that if they run it on modern hardware it will be blazzzzing fast. Or something.
People are not going to trade features and functionality for your perception of 'slowdowns' I'm afraid.
[...] 80/20 rule [...] the problem is it is never the same 20% of features that people use.
They don't even define lightweight either, but they don't tell you what it is - software that looks like arse and does less.

All linux desktops are used by a small minority - much closer to themselves than to the big boys.

Anyway, I'm not using desktop environments, I'm using applications; DE needs to just get out of the way.
Apps should be loosely integrated, so I can choose what I consider the best full-featured combination, and not on the basis of their relation to particular DE.
^it's perfectly valid approach, /me thinks...

Also, there are older computers out there. For example, a mini-webcafe at one institute was set up with old, surplus machines - just for browsing and ~office. For quite some time, they were running KDE 3.x (and OpenOffice, not KOffice...). But KDE 4.x was a bit overkill; now they run LXDE just fine - BTW, similarity to Windows is a desired trait.

And you know, there's one saying about opinions and arses :p

Ever see any software companies marketing 'lightweight' software, 'lightweight' word processors or 'lightweight web browsers? No? That's because there isn't a market for software with less features and with the tagline 'lightweight'. You just don't see it.

~Marketing surrounding for example Opera often goes in that direction. BTW, it's a rather full-featured browser...
(though yeah, the market seems limited; but Opera does see decent success in CIS, where machines tend to be older/slower; and a significant success in mobile, where the handsets are often very slow)
But Chrome and Firefox were also marketed similarly, at one point or another. And browser is one of most significant apps used by people nowadays.

Reply Parent Score: 2