UserLinux May Go Without KDE

Anonymous BillyGoat writes "For the past few days, there has been considerable debate at the UserLinux mailing list about the (proposed) non-inclusion of KDE in the distro. The KDE developers have written a proposal opposing the decision to go with GNOME as the sole UserLinux GUI, while Bruce Perens has posted a response."

UserLinux == Great Idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Except the User part because there won't be any.

Re:KDE is not to be ignored

[mAIsE]

Yes but we all know VI is far superior to EMACS !!

--------------

There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't

Re:KDE is not to be ignored

[satanami69]

Emacs is an early attempt to mimic yacc. It has evolved, trapper keeper style, to include its own kernel. Far beyond the scope of the GNU/Hello World mail client, Emacs can easily be scripted so common tasks can be repeated.

Also a simple editor such as ee, or aee, can suffice in most cases, Emacs is able to live in a symbiotic relationship with the user. Using Emacs over Vi has been suggested as the start of the next Great war by future historians. Also, it will be resolved after Emacs opens a connection through the metaverse where Emacs includes :q!

here's a screenshot of emacs

[SweetAndSourJesus]

emacs in action [arizona.edu]

Re:I am reminded of the PERL mantra

[Our Man In Redmond]

Anyone that insists that there is only one way, and that is their way, is probably wrong.

Or named Guido.

(Don't shoot me! Don't shoot me! I use Python too!)

Make up your damn minds slashbots!

[Jeffery McGrew]

*every* time an artcle is posted about Linux/BSD vs. Windows/OS X usability, someone chimes in that 'if only the open source community could pick one developement platform, and limit user choice, then developers could focus on one platform, everything would work well, things would be easy, new users and business would love it, birds would sing, and MicroSoft would be overthrown'.

Then that guy gets modded up to +5.

Now, someone's making a serous effort to do *exactly that* and everyone's bitching about leaving out KDE and how it limits user choice, forces everyone to work on one platform, and how this will make things harder; when it appears that it has a large part to do with the licencing of QT vs. Gnome, and nothing about KDE or Gnome being 'better'.

Sheesh. And I'm sitting here posting about it. I can't think of what's sadder!

Re:I am reminded of the PERL mantra

[Pseudonym]

Oh, yes, I do so enjoy the diversity of choices taken by application writers. It's wonderful, isn't it, that some may choose to allow me to exit their application with ctrl-Q, some with alt-Q, some with just q, some with :q, and some with Ctrl-X Ctrl-C?

I don't know what you're talking about. Ctrl-Z-kill works fine for me no matter what editor I use.

I do tend to lose data sometimes, though.

TitanicLinux would be a good name...

[Anonymous Coward]

...since it is going under without KDE technoloty built-in...

Re:You just looked a gift horse in the mouth

[CryBaby]

If we are going to impliment a linux migration within the next 24 - 48 months, pay for developers to help us with our transition and possibly write proprietary applications for us, then we need to work in an envrionment that doesn't require we pay for a proprietary developer licensing fee.

Hey, maybe I can become the CTO of a fortune 250 company. At least I know how to spell "implement".

Seriously, while I'm not familiar with QT's licensing fees and I'm too lazy to go read them, there's no way in hell that a few grand in licensing fees can offset the massive savings that would be realized by ditching Windows for a free desktop OS across thousands of PC's.

Also, if you're really the CTO of fortune 250 company (*cough*), why don't you just call up Perens and try to influence the direction of UserLinux by funding a little development that specifically addresses your requirements? Remember, it's called "open source" as in "open to everyone". That includes businesses and even you personally. I realize this. You do not.

Most (non-tech) businesses still view open source software as canned products developed my some mysterious "other" and never even think about taking a direct role in development. In other words, they still don't realize it's true potential or advantages. Think of this situation as "under-utilization of available assets" or "failure to consider a wide array of options."

If you want to make (or save) enough money to substantially alter a large company's bottom line, you have to exercise leadership and creativity. A brilliant, original and trend-setting IT solution will not just show up on your doorstep with a EULA and a pretty brochure. I realize this. You do not.

Re:It's the license

[Anonymous Coward]

So if the goal of UserLinux is to produce a Linux desktop suitable for businesses to build their critical software on, QT/KDE seems to be the better choice. The accountants will get nervous at the thought of spending a lot of man-hours on a project relying on GTK as a base, precisely because there is no single company (like TrollTech) they can write a big check to. Whether the company really needs the 'features' of the proprietary QT license, they will buy the license anyhow....it almost seems like an insurance policy to them.

Congratulations fuckwit, you've just justified developing for Microsoft Windows.