On 04/16/2016 02:30 PM, Yui Hirasawa wrote:
One of the accusations made against GNU/Linux is that there is no
established "native" look-and-feel on it - GTK programs look different
from Qt programs, JUCE programs look different from Qt programs, Tk
programs and FLTK programs look different
> One of the accusations made against GNU/Linux is that there is no
> established "native" look-and-feel on it - GTK programs look different
> from Qt programs, JUCE programs look different from Qt programs, Tk
> programs and FLTK programs look different from everything else and so on.
Windows
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Fabio Pesari wrote:
> One of the accusations made against GNU/Linux is that there is no
> established "native" look-and-feel on it
if you use a wider set of applications, you'll find there is no established
look and feel for other platforms
On Saturday 09 April 2016, Fabio Pesari wrote:
> What I care about is consistency, predictability, usability and
> accessibility, so when I say "ugly" I don't mean it as the opposite of
> "beautiful", but as a violation of those four parameters.
As I said before, the relative stability of free
On 04/08/2016 11:38 PM, Will Hill wrote:
> Multiple tool kits with long term continuity that work well together are a
> free software strength. I regularly use best of class applications from KDE,
> Gnome, Trinity, Window Maker, and others on E16. I'm able to share
> information between these
Multiple tool kits with long term continuity that work well together are a
free software strength. I regularly use best of class applications from KDE,
Gnome, Trinity, Window Maker, and others on E16. I'm able to share
information between these programs, on multiple computers, in ways that
One of the accusations made against GNU/Linux is that there is no
established "native" look-and-feel on it - GTK programs look different
from Qt programs, JUCE programs look different from Qt programs, Tk
programs and FLTK programs look different from everything else and so on.
This claim isn't