On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:51:44 -0700
Joshua Tinnin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 July 2004 11:41 am, Vulpes Velox
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If you want to use kmail under XFce, just find which menu you want
> > to put it under, click add and set it to run kmail :)
>
> Yeah,
On Wednesday 21 July 2004 11:41 am, Vulpes Velox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you want to use kmail under XFce, just find which menu you want to
> put it under, click add and set it to run kmail :)
Yeah, already done, but thanks. Next, I'm planning on checking out the
goodies ... most are pro
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:57:26 -0700
Joshua Tinnin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've used Pine a great deal in the past. Right now I receive far too
> much email, which I need to be able to access quickly in ways that
> Pine can't do as well for me. I need a complex folder tree and HTML
> view (thou
On Wednesday 21 July 2004 07:07 am, Wojciech Puchar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > and start browsing. :)
> >
> > I just installed the newest XFce today, and wow, it's nice. Very fast. I
> > don't
>
> compared to KDE - for sure fast.
I know that. Obviously something like XFce is going to be fas
> > and start browsing. :)
>
> I just installed the newest XFce today, and wow, it's nice. Very fast. I don't
compared to KDE - for sure fast.
> want to give up KMail, but like a lot of other KDE apps, it runs other KDE
no problem to run KMail without KDE except it will take lot of CPU too.
> p
On Tuesday 20 July 2004 10:00 pm, Vulpes Velox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:13:03 -0700 (PDT)
>
> "Joshua Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > DESKTOP:
> > If you are planning on this being a desktop replacement then I can
> > fully understand wanting to have a cool desktop.
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:13:03 -0700 (PDT)
"Joshua Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> DESKTOP:
> If you are planning on this being a desktop replacement then I can
> fully understand wanting to have a cool desktop. KDE is very popular
> as well as GNOME. You can see screenshots on their respective
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 08:37:13PM -0400, Robert Storey said:
> Dear Chris,
>
> I'm sure you'll get a lot of answers to this one, but I'll dive in.
>
> First off, I guess you mean Xwindows, not Windows X.
No. It's not called X Windows.
As quoted from the X11 man page:
The X Consortium re
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:55:05 -0500
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am a new user to FreeBSD. Is Windows X an extremely basic windows
> program. I loaded your CD that I purchased from Microcenter onto my
> computer and I was not able to see anything except a very primitive
> wi
> space, it does slow down the system, and more software means potentially
> more security vulnerabilities.
just having X running doesn't seem to slow down system. only using slow
and memory hungry software may do it.
but i don't see anything wrong in having X on server if it's used as
workstatio
> following sources will probably yield the richest results:
>
> o the freebsd handbook (perhaps the best OS handbook out there):
> - http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/index.html
> - you also have a copy locally installed at /usr/share/doc/handbook.
>
> o the freebs
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:55:05 -0500
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am a new user to FreeBSD. Is Windows X an extremely basic windows
> program. I loaded your CD that I purchased from Microcenter onto my
> computer and I was not able to see anything except a very primitive
> wi
Dear Chris,
I'm sure you'll get a lot of answers to this one, but I'll dive in.
First off, I guess you mean Xwindows, not Windows X. Xwindows by itself
is basic - you need a window manager to make it look nice. FreeBSD comes
with a few good ones. Most people who want bells and whistles use KDE,
w
13 matches
Mail list logo
