Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:12:02PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Olav Vitters (2014-08-11 11:21:14)
> > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> Quite a few places in the World have poor and/or expensive internet
> >> access. Larger default desktop will hurt the most in developing
> >> countries: non-techies gets discourages to use Debian at all, or when
> >> using it may apply security fixes less often.
> > How poor is poor?
> Poor enough that they bother visitors coming from different places in
> the World asking them to please consider bring install data "by
> sneakernet" (e.g. on CDs but could just as well be floppies or uSD
> storage embedded in iPhones - physical media type not important).
> I call it "bother" not because I have experienced actually being
> bothered by such request, but because I have experienced being treated
> like a king in India and Indonesia yet asked that - surprising to me -
With "how poor is poor" to please give numbers. Something to work with.
Regarding bringing install media: Been there, done that. Including the
bits of passing it along various people because cd's got "lost" in the
post. I urge you to be concrete. Numbers.
> > I've been participating since having a theoretical 64KB/s cable
> > connection, which in practice only did 3-5KB/s (provider: BART in
> > Rotterdam)! A cd would take about 24 hours to download (net install
> > was sometimes unreliable, so I preferred a cd). Having a poor
> > connection means you get creative. I shared the cd's I downloaded,
> > used rewritable to push the cost down, etc.
> How poor was that example of poor?
I gave exact numbers, please don't give vague replies. It's not helpful.
> > I've checked http://explorer.netindex.com/maps which shows the Speed
> > test results across the world. According to that site, the minimal
> > speed I can see in various African countries is at least 0.75 Mbps.
> > Much higher than the speed I was used to.
> How expensive is such average speed? Not measured in dollar, but
> measured in something more locally tangible, like "work hours"?
How about doing that research yourself. You're saying to take into
account third world countries, yet not giving any numbers. I gave you
the average speed of a lot of countries. It seems to not match with your
expectations. Cool, then it is NOT up to me to figure out why your still
might be right.
> > Always having a slow connection changes means you're tolerance level
> > is different. I used to download a cd in 24 hours. Nowadays the same
> > takes maybe 35 seconds.
> Still you are talking about cost in time. Few I have met in developing
> countries were poor measured in time available.
No, I am not just talking about cost in time. I gave concrete measures.
You've entire reply lacks anything concrete. Nothing to work with *AT
I've said before I have experience with working around low bandwidth,
but it seems nothing is acceptable. That's ok, because then this usecase
cannot be fulfilled anyway.
> > I don't get the doom and gloom unless you're more clear.
> Please elaborate what is unclear.
- Why this problem did not exist when GNOME used to be a default
- In case it was a problem before, why GNOME was still used
- In case it was acceptable, why isn't it acceptable now
- Why is XFCE acceptable
- Why is the only acceptable solution changing the default DE for
- What install size is acceptable
- What install size was it with GNOME before
- What bandwidth is acceptable
- Why cant this be solved by e.g. mailing cd's?
- If Debian 6.0 200MB netinst cd uses GNOME
- If Debian 7.6 290MB netinst cd uses XFCE
Your arguments come up as arbitrary, especially when considering GNOME
used to be a default. Coupled with vague non-specific replies comes off
as pretty disrespectful.