[Gllug] Gnome Vs Kde Vs

[Peter Childs]

Ian Norton wrote:

>On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 08:14:54PM +0100, Mike Brodbelt wrote:
>  
>
>>On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 18:15, John Winters wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>The silly thing is, if I'd been a naive new user I'd probably have found
>>>that ages ago.  Trouble was, I *knew* exactly how such things are set,
>>>but suddenly I was wrong.
>>>      
>>>
>>GNOME is unusual among free software projects, in that as the software
>>has matured, my dislike for it has grown..... Now they're even talking
>>about doing all the development in Jave or C#. God help us.
>>    
>>
> 
>I dont think that will ever happen :-p
>
>the moment you make languages 'required' or even preferred, you loose
>developers, if it does happen, im sure there will be a fork that will retain
>some sanity.
>
>gnome has some nice things too it, and it doesnt feel as bloated as kde, What
>im waiting for however is E17 :-)
>
>Ian
>
>  
>
    Hang on gnome is based on the Gtk greaphics library orignally 
written for Gimp. Right?

    This library has a tendency for C hence most gnome packages are 
written in C.

    Early on we in my project we looked at using Gtk and Gnome and 
deceided that that it was too much like hard work.

    Gnome unlike KDE is a lose collection of programs that "work 
together" giving each application the freedom to use want they need to 
get the job done, its a communication infastructor. from the developer 
point of view.
    KDE on the other had has had too much bloat added that any sain C++ 
programer ends up ditching KDE and just using Qt that KDE is based on.
    Both projects need to ditch the bloat, does anyone have any comments 
on GNUstep, does anyone use it?

Peter Childs

    Or at least thats what I had always thought...

Peter Childs
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug