On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 14:36, Brook Humphrey wrote: > > Er, I don't quite understand that. This is exactly the segment GNOME is > > aiming at. By default it behaves rather more like Windows than KDE does > > (double-click is default, window behaviour is similar) and the whole > > philosophy of the 2.x series is to simplify things down as far as > > possible...can you back up the argument that KDE 3 is "simpler" than > > GNOME 2? > > Well I would answer you but Jean Michael has done a better job of explaining.
I don't see that anywhere...but then, Cooker seems to have been missing messages again lately. > Gnome is fine for more advanced users the kind on this list that is why you > guys don't see it but there are allot of users out there that think the > computer is like a toaster you just flip a button and it works. There is no > use explaining the difference between software and hardware because it's all > a computer right? If it wont start because windows is messed up they tell you > the system wont start and when asked they suggest that it simply doesn't turn > on when in reality windows only needs to be installed. > > I'm not trying to start a war here it's just the facts. Allot of users are Except you keep just posting stuff like the paragraph above, which *isn't* facts, it's vague assertions. It's true, but unless you start relating it to specific things in KDE and GNOME, it doesn't wash. If you *can* relate it to specific things that aren't already being worked on, I'm sure the GNOME team would like to hear from you. (This isn't trolling - I genuinely want to know what you think the difference is, and you haven't spelt it out yet.) > barely competant to use even microsoft word let alone understand what is > going on with the system. So for all you power users out there go live it up > enjoy your gnome but don't ask me to install it by default for my business > users who can barely even turn a computer on much figure out all the setting > for the window manager. You guys unless you do the it stuff for some big > places really don't have any idea. I just don't see the difference, to be honest. Your average luser runs an email client and a browser, right? I just don't see the difference between giving him a desktop with KMail and Konq buttons, and one with Evo and Galeon buttons...most business users would probably prefer Evo to KMail, too, since it's a dead ringer for Outlook. > In finishing there are some outstanding gnome apps. Evolution, xchat, gftp, > and gaim comes to mind but until the ease of use is there for all their apps > it's not feasible. By the way I have both installed on my own system not that > it matters. xchat and gftp aren't GNOME apps, they're GTK+ apps, not part of the GNOME project. There's a difference. They don't integrate with the GNOME framework at all (afaik), intentionally. gaim is almost the same - its GNOME integration is optional and currently very limited. -- adamw
