Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on November 27, 2003 10:56 PM
Look at what Qt can do before you reply. You obviously don't know, so how can you claim it is FUD? In development tools terms, Gnome has absolutely nothing to compare to Qt Designer and KDevelop. Glade just doesn't even come close. That is a cast-iron fact. You can split hairs and talk about the merits of APIs and what-not, but Qt widgets and tools are just so much more refined. Look at the built in spell-checking etc. for textboxes and other items in Qt. GTK is a good toolkit, but it most certainly isn't on a par with Qt. It is apparent, even in just look and feel. Look at the following screenshot (and this is just a beta), compare it to something like Evolution, and tell me what most users are going to like. <A HREF="http://www.kontact.org/pics/kontact1.png" TITLE="kontact.org">http://www.kontact.org/pics/kontact1.png</a kontact.org>. You're obviously going to tell me something else, but you will know it to be true.
The licensing isssue is real. As you said yourself, "You can use a variety of open source licenses". Maybe they may want to use a closed source one.
No it isn't real, but people like Nat Friedman like to tell people it is. Using an open source license does not mean you have to release it to the world. People like Nat Friedman also paint the picture that it threatens open source licenses. Qt doesn't at all. What license you publish under is a consideration. A closed license is such a consideration, and it is a decision most companies will never need to take or know about unless they are involved in development.
What planet are you from. You may want that but I can garantee you that businessed do not.
Planet Earth (being able to spell businesses would be a good idea as well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)). I can guarantee you that businesses do want this, otherwise a company like Novell/Ximian would not think that it could get away with charging licenses for simple little free desktops. Ho, hum.
Crawal out from under your rock and actually try Gnome.
Already have. Gnome just doesn't have the development architecture underneath it and doesn't have the innovative features such as components like Kiosk, and even the printing system. They've tried to cut down on the Control Panel as well, with the side-effect that many good configuration features are missing.
KDE looks like a cluttered childs desktop, and don't even talk about power. They both do the same.
No they don't. Taking a hacksaw to a desktop environment does not add up to useability, and this is what has sadly been done to Gnome. KDE is far from being a child's desktop. Gnome tries hard to be, but fails. As I've already mentioned, where is a killer component like Kiosk? Where is a file manager that is on a par with Konqueror? I have never found them, apart from cut-down spartan looking versions. Look at the DCOP infrastructure in KDE. The Gnome people spent a heck of a lot of time re-inventing the wheel and came up with D-BUS.
People like you, who have only used KDE and have no idea about Gnome should keep there uninformed opinions to themselves.
People like you, who have only used Gnome and have no idea about KDE should keep there uninformed opinions to themselves. Where are the equivalent features in Gnome then?
So you like KDE, Great. Use it, but don't try to tell others that everything else is crap.
Try telling that to people like Nat Friedman. I certainly haven't. A lot of FUD and crap has been spat about KDE, particularly from the Gnome/Ximian people. People then, quite rightly, spit back and point out some uncomfortable home truths.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Not A lot of Point Really - Lock in to Ximian?
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 27, 2003 10:56 PMThe licensing isssue is real. As you said yourself, "You can use a variety of open source licenses". Maybe they may want to use a closed source one.
No it isn't real, but people like Nat Friedman like to tell people it is. Using an open source license does not mean you have to release it to the world. People like Nat Friedman also paint the picture that it threatens open source licenses. Qt doesn't at all. What license you publish under is a consideration. A closed license is such a consideration, and it is a decision most companies will never need to take or know about unless they are involved in development.
What planet are you from. You may want that but I can garantee you that businessed do not.
Planet Earth (being able to spell businesses would be a good idea as well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)). I can guarantee you that businesses do want this, otherwise a company like Novell/Ximian would not think that it could get away with charging licenses for simple little free desktops. Ho, hum.
Crawal out from under your rock and actually try Gnome.
Already have. Gnome just doesn't have the development architecture underneath it and doesn't have the innovative features such as components like Kiosk, and even the printing system. They've tried to cut down on the Control Panel as well, with the side-effect that many good configuration features are missing.
KDE looks like a cluttered childs desktop, and don't even talk about power. They both do the same.
No they don't. Taking a hacksaw to a desktop environment does not add up to useability, and this is what has sadly been done to Gnome. KDE is far from being a child's desktop. Gnome tries hard to be, but fails. As I've already mentioned, where is a killer component like Kiosk? Where is a file manager that is on a par with Konqueror? I have never found them, apart from cut-down spartan looking versions. Look at the DCOP infrastructure in KDE. The Gnome people spent a heck of a lot of time re-inventing the wheel and came up with D-BUS.
People like you, who have only used KDE and have no idea about Gnome should keep there uninformed opinions to themselves.
People like you, who have only used Gnome and have no idea about KDE should keep there uninformed opinions to themselves. Where are the equivalent features in Gnome then?
So you like KDE, Great. Use it, but don't try to tell others that everything else is crap.
Try telling that to people like Nat Friedman. I certainly haven't. A lot of FUD and crap has been spat about KDE, particularly from the Gnome/Ximian people. People then, quite rightly, spit back and point out some uncomfortable home truths.
#