On 01/10/2007, Calum Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 18:05 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > > > The big thing that many GNU/Linux distributions lack today is a > > feeling of consistency. Too many of them go to one extreme or the > > other and end up with a mess. That's one of the reasons I think > > Windows and OS X are so successful. The names of software that come > > with the system indicate their purpose and make their usage almost > > obvious. > > A lot of them don't, necessarily, they've just come into common usage. > Who would guess 'Outlook' was a mail client, or 'Excel' a spreadsheet? > (Apple aren't immune either, with 'Quicktime', 'Logic' and similar.)
Well, they obviously all don't make sense, but I tend to think more of them do then not. (i.e. Windows Media Player or Rhythmbox vs. xmms, amarok). > FWIW, the GNOME HIG states that all GNOME apps should appear with a > functional name rather than a pet project name on the Launch menu, > except where the project name is needed to distinguish multiple apps > with the same function. Originally the usability team wanted to extend > this into the applications themselves (for the core GNOME apps only), > but the developers revolted. Hence, we have a "Text Editor" on the > menu, but "gedit" on the title bar, in the docs, and as the binary name. > Ho hum. That's a bit of trivia that's rather helpful to know. Thanks... -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. " --Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
