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

Re: GNOME-2 transition: a first complaint



On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 04:10:54AM +0100, Bastien Nocera scribbled:
> On Sat, 2002-06-29 at 17:17, Marek Habersack wrote:
> > As I wrote previously, the options I've been asked about (and it happens
> > that I've been using them myself) were the workspace switching wrap option,
> > the opaque vs. wireframe move/resize options. For me it's just a matter of
> > personal preference - I don't like the visual effect of moving a full window
> > or resizing a full window - but people who asked me have slightly older and
> > slower hardware where the video card simply doesn't do well when a full
> > window is dragged/resized. That's about the only options I'd like to see
> > configurable somewhere.
> 
> The only person I heard on this list complaining has a 486. The class of
> computers we are (loosely) targetting for Gnome is a 300 Mhz machine
It's not a matter of Mhz in your CPU, it's a matter of what your video
hardware can do. If you have a Trident or S3 that's 4 years (or even more)
old, you will have bad performance even on Athlon 2000+.

> with above 32 megs of ram (it probably works on slower machines,
> depending on the arch, the pieces of software you usually run, etc.)
> 
> Thinking of running a modern desktop on a 486 is just a dream.
The people I talked to are from a school around here that has only K6
machines with 1MB S3 Trio cards. I'm happy they run Linux and GNOME - should I tell them to use
Win3.1 just because they cannot switch a stupid option on or off? I don't
think so.
 
> (BTW, metacity has "workspace switching wrap option", I added it,
> because I used it with Window Maker, and it made sense).
And metacity has no way to turn opaque resizing/moving off. At least I
haven't found such an option.

> > > > Hmm, another question has just popped up in my mind. Looking at the lack
> > > > of the window manager configuration applet in the control panel and
> > > > reading some messages here and there I've gotten the impression that GNOME
> > > > is aiming at tight window manager integration with the desktop (kind of
> > > > the KDE one) - is that true or is it just my (incorrect) impression?
> > > 
> > > We're definitely aiming for tight integration (why wouldn't we?) but there's
> > That's ok as long as the integration isn't too tight - as to the point where
> > one cannot switch to a different window manager.
> 
> Why is the focal point of this community on "window managers" ? I don't
It's on _choice_. The beauty of GNOME has always been in the possibility to
make choices - unlike with KDE or Windows where you have virtually no
choice.

> see any KDE people whinging about the fact that they can only run kwin
And you think it's an argument? That the KDE people don't whine? Besides I
don't _whine_ - I see no reason for you to be hostile. If I can't run GNOME
with a window manager of my choice, I will run crippled GNOME - that's it. I
was just asking, out of curiosity - there's no need for you to jump the gun.

> (or whatever the latest version of it is called). Sawfish has a lot of
> shortcomings, the main one being that nobody really understands its
> code, and that John is busy.
So? That's my problem if I want to use Sawfish not Metacity, right? I just
need an option not to use whatever the GNOME desktop comes with by default.
I see no point in limiting oneself when/where such limitation is not backed
up by any rational reasons.

> Just like there's only one file-manager supported in Gnome, there could
> well be only one window manager supported. Sounds cool to me.
Sounds awful to me. I don't use neither GMC nor Nautilus, for example. If I
weren't allowed to switch them off and to choose NOT to use them, I would
never use GNOME (or any other desktop software that forbids me to do so) - I
hope you're not advocating a monolithic desktop?

> > > Most of your questions would be best answered on GNOME's desktop-devel-list,
> > > rather than the Debian package maintainer's list.
> > I guess you're right ;) - it's just that something inside me is against
> > subscribing to yet another voluminous mailing list, haha :)). But I suppose
> > that would be the right way :)
> 
> *shrug* Talk to your dog rather than to your doctor, when you feel sick,
> the doctor lives too far, right ?
What is your problem? I am subscribed to all the GNOME lists I need already.
Haven't you noticed the smileys? Calm down, please.

marek

Attachment: pgpA4UwCyXSOI.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: