Red Hat's Bluecurve (was: Red Hat 8.0 is 'official')

[Paul Iadonisi]

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 15:24, pll at lanminds.com wrote:

[snip]

> <REALLYNITPICK>
> 
> I know Gnome, and KDE, CDE, etc. for that matter, are more than 
> "window managers".  However, I explicitly asked if you need to be 
> "running GNOME".  This implies, IMO, that I am *not* running Gnome, 
> but rather, using ANYTHING ELSE, but choose to run a Gnome 
> application, of which the Gnome panel is but one.
> 
> Therefore, my question is more than valid, since no where did I 
> equate or even state that Gnome was just "a window manager".
> 
> </REALLYNITPICK>

  Oops, my apologies.  I guess I was gearing up for my major gripe later
in the message.  That's a good question that I'm not certain of the
answer to, but I suppose 'running gnome,' then, is a misnomer.  (Well,
maybe not, since gnome-session is running when you configure your
environment as gnome.)  I believe it's the panel itself that presents
the problem and that you will experience the same problem whether
running fvwm, sawfish, metacity, icewm, or whatever.   I've only tried
metacity and sawfish myself, with the same undesirable results.

> <SARCASM>
> Btw, I have yet to see Gnome or KDE do anything overly useful other 
> than provide a more visually appealing and resource intensive window 
> manager replacement ;)
> </SARCASM>

  Heh, heh.  It is almost that bad, isn't it?  I'm just sucker for eye
candy, sometimes.  There is actually a component architecture behind it
all that makes it possible to use parts of applications within others. 
Don't know to much about it, though, and I can't say I've directly
benefited from it (yet?).
  The Gnome Accessibility project, however, is definitely a laudable
goal that not many (any?) vendors have right, yet.  Let's hope this
bears good fruit down the road.

[snip]

> ><GRIPE MODE="ON" LEVEL="EXCRUCIATINGLY HIGH">
> > Apparently, it is a friggin' *stated goal* to remove many configuration
> > options from Gnome.
> 
> So where's the value add to switch from MS ?  Sure, there's the "it's free"
> argument, but for most users, they don't care.  They paid for "a computer"
> which comes with an OS.  They don't care which one, and as far as 
> they're concerned, MS is "free with the purchase of their computer".
> 
> Therefore, the only diffentiating factor is, what can Linux do that 
> MS Windows can't.  If the answer is nothing, but it looks cool, then 
> we just lost.

  I know, I know.  I can see it now: due to the decreasing functionality
of Linux desktop environments, a new market for a tweakui product
(historically only needed for the customization-challenged Windows line
of operating systems) for Linux emerges.
  It seems that some participants in the Gnome Usability effort fail to
see the significance of the mere *existence* of tweakui.  It exists to
improve the configurability of the Windows UI.  You'd think that would
tell them something -- that people *do* want their UI to be
configurable.
-- 
-Paul Iadonisi
 Senior System Administrator
 Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
 Ever see a penguin fly?  --  Try Linux.
 GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets