On Thursday 18 May 2006 08:08, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > Well you argue that KDE has all the necessary features and then you > go on to call it bloatware because it has those features. Barring the > slightly unintuitive "Start button", it is a very good desktop > environment. It has everything anyone would want (regardless of > whether you want it or not). If you want less then you have gnome, > even less you have xfce. The minimalist would fall in love with > fluxbox/blackbox.
No. Even KDE doesn't match up with Windows' UI. I call it bloatware because it consumer a lot more memory than GNOME and is generally slower than GNOME. But a heck lot more userfriendly than GNOME. What I fail to understand is why GNOME / KDE guys want to reinvent the wheel? Rather why dont they adopt what is in existence and improve it? There is no problem if they copy the Windows UI and add their own improvements. It will make transition for first timers much easier. I know there is XPDE but its still very nascent. -- Dinesh A. Joshi -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
