[Gllug] Windows -> Linux

[Simon Stewart]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 11:57:58PM +0000, Nix wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Simon Stewart uttered the following:
> > From a personal perspective, I'd actually recommend the KDE over
> > Gnome. IMHO, the environment as a whole is better integrated
> > (konqueror is wonderful)
> 
> Thus speaks someone who hasn't seen Galeon-1.0. 

Not so, I've used galeon quite a lot and love it to bits. Perhaps you
haven't had a chance to use Konqi with the KMozilla KPart? :) In any
case, KHTML does a more than passable job on almost every page that I
view in my day to day work and life.

> (For web browsing, that is. For file access, I can't comment; I hate
> graphical file browsers with a passion.)

Well, this is part of the point. People are now getting used to being
able to browse the web and manage their files using the same basic
interface. If you are providing a desktop to users, then providing
this functionality to a newbie saves you from the "but Windows can do
it" bleating. This isn't saying how advisable this approach is, in any
way, just that it's something that people now expect.

Having said that, you'll prolly reply with a salient point about
Outlook and email.... :)

While I'm more than happy on the command line (am typing this from a
console running at a nice high res on the framebuffer) FWIW, using
konqueror as a file manager can be almost pleasurable. This is partly
because of the way that the KDE has abstracted IO into the KIOSlaves,
and so I can use the same interface to manage files over FTP, SSH, or on
the local file system, to name but a few of the available plugins. Not
only that, but the same level of functionality is provided
pervasively throughout the KDE (try opening "ftp://server_name/" in
one of the normal KDE dialogue boxes)

Personally, I think that rocks.

> >                          and the whole lot feels a bit slicker. The
> > memory contraints are a bit of a PITA, but Gnome is also reasonably
> > heavy.
> 
> I'd recommend the exact opposite, with, er, exactly the same reasoning.

:)

Pick one. Stick with it. A QT version of Evolution sounds like a nice
idea *drh*[1]

> > I've also got some "issues" with the direction that Gnome is heading;
> > the leaning towards .NET worries me slightly.
> 
> That makes me wince a bit, too, but there's no need to use that crap.
> At least it's got *decent* language bindings for a silly number of
> languages; KDE is still rather C++-tied (and while I like C++, I like
> linguistic diversity more).

It's getting better, but you're right, the bindings are a little
lacking. Still, there are now some proper C bindings out there, so
perhaps it's just a matter of time.

Cheers,

Simon

[1] Not trying to start something here, but if you avoid loading GTK
    and the Gnome libs, then you make a significant memory saving, and
    therefore avoid hitting swap for that little bit longer.

-- 
"I wrote a song, but I can't read music. Every time I hear a new song
on the radio I think 'Hey, maybe I wrote that.'"
     Steven Wright

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug