On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 10:17:37AM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You seem to be ironic on that, but in fact I think it's a serious issue.
> The amount of work and time wasted in parallel projects doing the same
> things ten times is tremendous, and it's a shame that so much of people's
> time
OZ>> FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD. Why can't the dumbwits, who run
OZ>> those distributions and borrow ideas from each other, unify
OZ>> their efforts and create The One True and Giant Distribution
OZ>> (TM, under penalty of anti-blasphamy laws)?
You seem to be ironic on that, but in fact I think
> > it seems to me like so much double work on parallel KDE/Gnome
> > components is being done on one hand, while the differences between
> > the K and the G become smaller and smaller on the other hand, it's
> > just absurd.
>
> Curious to notice that no one speaks about the horrible, criminal a
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Dvir Volk wrote:
> but the unifying of the GUIs is something that should come from the
> _desktop developers themselves_. both Gnome and KDE, and especially us
> as users, could benefit from unified themes, widgets, styles, and
> interface consistency.
>
> it seems to me lik
> The coin has two sides.
> About the Ultimate Goal, if it is to beat MS, then I am very concerned.
> The Ultimate Goal had better be to help users get their jobs done, and be
> empowered to do whatever they want to.
true enough
> I don't think that unifying KDE and Gnome would do the trick.
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Oleg Kobets wrote:
> One of the lines say, that it's the best thing happened to linux, and I
> agree. Having unified desktop is much more organized, makes support much
> easier and besides, if linux was organized enough it just might beat MS to
> the masses. We do want that
