[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [desktop] why kde and gnome's menu situation sucks

On 10/23/2002 8:06 PM, Marek Habersack at grendel@caudium.net wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 01:41:38AM +0200, Joakim Kolsjö scribbled:
>> desktops, only letting the diffrent looks become the choice the user has
>> to make? Redhat's attemt to do this was not so popular(IMHO, they overdid it
>> a bit) Or did i misunderstand your intentions?
> Nope, you got them right. The desktops should not be unified look-wise,
> that's a mistake.
Hmm, well, perhaps they shouldn't be unified to the extreme of Redhat
Bluecurve.  But some unification is in order I think.  How about a Debian
theme common to KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment, etc. with themes, wallpapaer, and
- dare I say it? - the Debian Swirl logo right where the "Start" button is
on the task bar?  Mandrake, SuSE, Red Hat, Lycoris, etc. do this sort of
branding, and I think Debian should too, so long as no licenses or
copyrights are violated.  (And yes, other wallpapers and themes would be
available for the user to customize his/her system.)

> They should provide similar (or identical, if possible)
> navigation (menus, desktop items etc.) but that as far as it should go,
> IMHO. 
Largely agreed.  Very similar menus across all the GUIs.  And descriptive
labels rather than program names.  "Burn CDs" would appear in all menus in
the same place under the same sub-menu.  But under Gnome it would pull up
gtoaster, under KDE - KonCD, and maybe under non-QT, non-GTK GUIs, pull up
xcdroast.  Those are just examples by the way, not definitive best-of-breed

> The whole idea of having two (or more) desktops is that of giving
> people the choice - as to the looks, the way the applications work, the way
> they are integrated together (but mostly the looks, because the ideas behind
> both environments are the same... and an average Joe User doesn't give a
> damn about whether GNOME uses GTK+ and Bonobo and KDE uses Qt and some other
> stuff). And RedHat, as usual, tried to make a splash effect - "let's make it
> loud and people will rush in", naaaah :)

Heh.  Loud.  I like that.  Well, I would say that Red Hat's whole look is
pretty and easy on the eyes. Bluecurve can be a bit harsh and boring in its
look.  The other things Red Hat did, while permissable under the GPL,
weren't so nice and polite.  They had their reasons, but they were a bit

Luke Seubert

Reply to: