Re: GNOME3 Ugh! What specifically didn't work.
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 18:52 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 07:28 -0800, keitho@strucktower.com wrote:
> > >
> > > The most serious issue is, that some professional FLOSS apps were
> > > written for GNOME 2, with GNOME 3 we fall back to an amateur OS
> > > regarding to some apps.
> > >
> > > - Ralf
> > >
> >
> > OK, I'm a n00b, so I don't always understand how things work. But that
> > sounds backward to me.... why would one write "professional" software that
> > depended on a particular version of a particular DE or WM? Wouldn't it be
> > smarter (more reasonable) to write the DE or WM around the needs of the
> > software or at least the kernel?
> >
> > Keith
>
>
> Some apps might be part of the DE, but I refer to apps that base on some
> runtime libraries, perhaps it's a GTK issue, but IIUC GTK depends to
> GNOME and Qt depends to KDE. You can run those GNOME apss on KDE and KDE
> apps on GNOME, but when GNOME 3 replaces GNOME 2 some libs are missing
> or incompatible.
>
> More precise it might be an issue to basic libraries. But I'm not a
> Linux coder, somebody else might correct this half-truth.
PS: Frontend vs backend ;) Not the whole software became unusable, but
the GUIs.
Note that FLOSS ships with several issues, just go back a few years ago,
Jörg Schilling's CD stuff became an issue just regarding to different
points of vies. Currently you can't use NVIDIA's proprietary 3D support
legally regarding to a stupid GPL interpretation, if you use an
important real-time patch.
Well-meant easily can become a disadvantage. Linux isn't a company with
a boss, but a libre community.
Reply to: