Linus Torvalds Promises Profanity Over Linux 3.10-rc5 334
hypnosec writes "Linus Torvalds has released Linux 3.10-rc5, and he is certainly not happy with the changes merged last week. Rc5 is bigger than rc4 and has code scattered across its entire code base because it addresses many outstanding problems. In the release announcement, Torvalds noted, 'I wish I could say that things are calming down, but I'd be lying. rc5 is noticeably bigger than rc4, both in number of commits and in files changed (although rc4 actually had more lines changed, so there's that).' Torvalds has warned that he is going to start cursing again, and said, 'I'm going to call you guys out on, and try to come up with new ways to insult you, your mother, and your deceased pet hamster.'"
Profanity? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Funny)
Profanity is the crutch of inarticulate motherfuckers.
Re: (Score:2)
what are you trying to say?
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Funny)
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Profanity is the crutch of inarticulate motherfuckers.
what are you trying to say?
Beats the shit outta me...
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Insightful)
Expletives are like rim shots. They work well to emphasize a certain point. Trouble is; some people are stuck playing drum solos.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I concede that profanity may add humor when used in the right situations, however it in no way gives greater control of a language. The purpose of language is communication. And there is always a more intelligent way to express an idea than dropping the F-bomb.
Fuck you.
Re: (Score:3)
I must object to this fucking view, on the grounds that the F-word is very versatile [youtube.com].
Re: Profanity? (Score:5, Insightful)
People who make these sorts of arguments against using profanity only convey "I will use and ad hominem to dissuade its use because I personally do not like profanity".
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Insightful)
He did explained, which is "donâ(TM)t stop sending him non-critical stuff, he is going to start cursing again."
Obviously, people have not gotten his memo for the last 10 kernel releases- we've been hearing about this complaint since 3.0.
He is pissed because he has to waste time going thru the code for every single commit that should not go into a RC build.
At this point there's really only 2 things he can do- deny the commits, or/and swear at the dev. What else can he do, fire them?
RC release are for bux fixes, not new features (Score:5, Informative)
At this point in the RC cycle, the expectation is that only bug fixes will be introduced. The latest merge include changes that had nothing to do with listed issues.
New features belong in the 3.11 branch.
Re:RC release are for bux fixes, not new features (Score:5, Funny)
New features belong in the 3.11 branch.
a "workgroup" feature, for example?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Calm and measured explanations of just what the coders are doing wrong would be ever so much more helpful. If all Linus is going to do is mouth off then perhaps it's time he just STFU and GTFO.
I think he should take your advice. Clearly his methods have been unsuccessful [computerweekly.com].
Re: (Score:2)
he just explained what was wrong.
too much shit changing around. that shouldn't be in fifth release candidate.
Re: (Score:2)
He basically said "Stop making cosmetic changes in a release candidtate, or I will get abusive."
There was a bit more to it than that, including a threat to curse their dead pet hampster, but that was the nut of it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Calm and measured explanations of just what the coders are doing wrong would be ever so much more helpful.
Bull mother-fucking pussy. There is not one fucking shred of evidence to support that claim, and you sure as hell haven't written a single good line of code.
You can write an algorithm ten ways, all of which accomplish the task. Objectively, they all work.
But at least 9 of them are going to be fucking ugly and cause problems down the line. It is good for someone to tell you sooner that something you wrote is fucked up than to discover that later.
It's like writing material for stand-up or sketch comedy. All y
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Insightful)
Calm and measured explanations of just what the coders are doing wrong would be ever so much more helpful. If all Linus is going to do is mouth off then perhaps it's time he just STFU and GTFO.
Mostly he's talking to seasoned veterans at kernel development who damn well know what the rules are, they just choose to bend them. They're always pushing and he's the one who has to push back, measured explanations is as useless as explaining to boys that trying to sneak a peek into the girl's locker room is wrong. Of course they knew that but they did it anyway and a "please don't do that" won't discourage anyone from trying again. Even if he rejects the patches unless he talks back he becomes the wall people throw crap at to see what sticks. Usually The I'd call developers who should know better behaving in ways that are destructive to the project a management problem, but he's the project manager so his way of resolving it is to give people a well-deserved ass chewing on the LKML. Don't knock it if it works...
Hero's don't last for ever. (Score:3)
I have always had an issue with "Hero's" in people minds, either being a religious figure, or a vocal member of some group.
hat
They are all human, and most of us experience some point(s) in our lives where we seemed to do some great things, however we are human we fail, make mistakes, or just loose track, or our morals.
In Open Source Figures such as Linus and RMS, while they did good things in the past, have been using their fame to push what ever tantrum they have at the time. Because of their Hero status t
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Insightful)
You obviously don't appreciate his sense of humour.
If you think he puts other people down, he can do worse to himself. I remember reading emails years ago when he released a kernel update saying in very picturesque language that he stuffed up the previous release.
He has also found being polite, can be worse for people.
I wish I was good enough for him to insult me! However, I am not a kernel hacker, so fat chance.
If someone sends a patch which is terrible from an unknown, he is likely just to ignore it, but a good patch that did the job would go into the kernel with no fuss. If someone competent sends in a patch he doesn't like, with something he thinks is really bad, he will say so in no uncertain terms.
I have been reading what he has written and seeing videos of him, from time to time for over 20 years, so I understand where he is coming from and have immense respect for him.
He is neither a smarmy politician or a hypocritical religious evangelist - he is extremely honest, competent, & caring. Don't judge him by such superficial considerations that you seem to use.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You are truly clueless - I've just read what he actually said, he was actually giving a very mild rebuke in a humours way - and considering the situation, he was more than justified to be harsher!
Re: (Score:2)
Not listening to someone because of their style is not the mark of a rational individual, so I would hope that 'most of us' don't just tune him out because of it. Do his arguments make sense? Is he battling idiocy? If so, vitriol is warranted.
Re: (Score:3)
Europeans sound like dicks to most Americans. What one culture considers to be candid the other considers to be rude.
Re: (Score:2)
Or he could take the correct approach and just deny the commit, rather than spewing noise about it, all the while taking non-bug fixes in an RC and then bitching about it. Why waste the time and energy. Make them resubmit with only bug fixes the way it is intended to be done.
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Profanity? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, there is something wrong with being a dick. It is very, VERY rare that people need to be dicks. What I've find is that people who enjoy being dicks find excuses to be dicks, no matter what.
Re:Profanity? (Score:4, Insightful)
Being blunt and direct is the only way to fight the catty, passive aggressive behavior seen in modern social interaction. If anything, to people like linus, saying dumb things and then hiding behind your feelings when called out on it is dickish.
Re:Profanity? (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Engage in a respectful, carefully thought out conversation weighing the pros and cons of each position, then achieving some sort of consensus.
2. "Agree to disagree", then passive-aggressively do your own thing or otherwise lobby with others to follow your path over the other person's path.
3. "Be a dick", call the person out, and make it clear that, since you're the one making the decisions, you are the one making that decision, not them.
Option 1 is great when you have nothing but time on your hands and/or when you're dealing with someone whose opinion you trust. It's also only useful when there's a clear definition of "right" and "wrong" regarding the topic at hand - more often than not, choices in life and engineering pretty much boil down to "which trade-offs suck less for the domain we're working in", which are more subjective than not in most cases. Option 2 is the default position drilled into our heads during school, which is a useful default when you're dealing with equals or people who you have no authority over - I mean, sure, you can yell and scream at them, but it's not like they're required to listen. The catch with option 2, though, is that, though it leads to less hurt feelings in the short run, you're as liable to have different factions competing against each other to prove who's "right", which can lead to some major issues down the road.
Option 3, meanwhile, is useful when you're in a hurry, a decision needs to be made now, and it needs to be made decisively. The goal here is to nip a problem in the bud before it metastasizes into something serious and political. In this case, Linus wants to enforce some discipline on the code review process because his time is finite and the deadline is near for 3.10 to get out the door, and "receive lots of crap code and reject it" doesn't solve that problem. He needs to not receive non-essential code in the first place. The only way to do that is by convincing those committing code to make only meaningful commits, either through well-defined requirements (tried; apparently that's failing), polite warnings (what Slashdot picked up here tonight), or "being a dick" (Linus will continue the beatings until morale improves if his warning isn't heeded).
Personally, I've found that the sort of people that claim "being a dick" is the sole refuge of people that enjoy being dicks are the sort of people that have a reflexive inability to defend their opinions under any sort of sustained criticism and just assume that, if their "brilliance" needs to be defended, it's because it's being witnessed by simpletons that just "don't get it". From where I'm sitting, that's a pretty dickish and passive-aggressive position to adopt and I... well, come to think of it, I actually do enjoy being a dick to people that think like that. Seriously, screw them.
Huh. Guess I pretty much proved the grandparent's point right there, didn't I?
Re: (Score:2)
monitor support is a x11/window manager/desktop environment problem not linux kernal problem, the equivalent would be to yell at the NT devs for the failings direct3d.
Torvalds is right (Score:2, Interesting)
When you are maintaining a project of this size and you get bothered by little annoying cosmetical fixes and non-critical bugs you do lose your temper. I have to say he stayed pretty civilized till now. I suggest we start a kick-starter project to give torvalds the vacation he really needs!
Re:Torvalds is right (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Torvalds is right (Score:5, Informative)
I think you haven't been following Linux development very long. There are several branches at all times, each with their own maintainer. Linus controls the final merge, but it's the same basic process used in the other trees.
The question is, when Linus retires, will there be one sucessor or several, not whether there will be any. And that depends on the politics at the time.
Also, somebody needs to be in charge of the final merge. Some one person. If you have several independent trees, each one of them needs someone in charge of the merges into their trees. It's better PR to have one tree that is released. Currently that one's managed by Linus. But note that that's PR. Each distro really manages it's own tree, and they can accept and reject software and patches without reference to what Linus decides. And they frequently do. For eas of reference they generally describe what they're using as a customization of some particular Linux kernel.
Here is my message to Linus (Score:2, Insightful)
Grow up.
Re:Here is my message to Linus (Score:5, Insightful)
Mine is "Thanks!"
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Here's my message to you. No one fucking cares about your opinion. Especially not the maintainer of the linux kernel.
Re: (Score:2)
You certainly aren't that person, Armchair Manager.
Re: (Score:2)
he never claimed to be, but thanks for that waste of space numbnuts
Well... (Score:2, Insightful)
Everyone has to have a hobby, right?
Seriously though, who the hell cares if the RC is bigger than the one before it, or whether the changes are scattered everywhere? If there were any number of concerns that needed to be addressed before the next release then it wasn't ready to go in the first place. Just test the hell out of everything, make sure nothing is broken, and make sure that each change was necessary and correct. In short calm your tits and keep coding.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The point of the release candidate process is to provide something that contains the entirety of the feature set in a release, but to provide it for testing, not release.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
He's angry because many of the changes are to non-critical stuff. That's not the priority, and it gets in the way.
Here's part of his quote in context, which the summary didn't bother to provide:
Re:Well... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent up. (Score:3)
He nailed it. At the rc4/rc5 level, the ONLY things that should be going in are bug fixes against this release. Not "cleanup" or new features. Those belong to the next release.
Linus is dead right on this, and everyone who has EVER done serious development should know it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think you understand how software engineering works, Computer science maybe, but software engineering, clearly not. Or maybe you just didn't read TFA.
The problem isn't that the release is too broken, nor that a lot of critical fixes are needed. It's that devs are committing excessive non-critical stuff. At this point in the release cycle, ONLY critical stuff should be committed.
Linus has every right to be a bit angered. He's done so effectively, in a way that will get the devs attention (hopefully)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
Because people aren't sending him fixes for concerns that have to be addressed before the release. They're sending him "this is a bit messy, here's code that looks a bit cleaner" or "it works but I don't like it so here's a different way to do the same thing". And sometimes as the manager you have to smack the devs with the cluebat to get them to remember that it doesn't matter if the code's messy or ugly, it doesn't matter if there's another way to do it, it doesn't matter if there's a better way to do it, by the time you're at the release-candidate stage the only things you should be sending in changes for are fixes for the things that're actually not working right. If you don't, they'll keep tweaking forever and you'll never get a release. As a dev myself I can understand where Linus is coming from here. I doubt he's even really mad at anyone, just irritated at everyone and issuing a pointed reminder that there's a difference between what the devs want to do and what they ought to be doing before he does have to get mad at anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that they shouldn't submit non-critical code, it's that they shouldn't submit it into a release candidate. It's a time for eliminating bugs. New code means new bugs.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Informative)
Telling a contributor that they shouldn't be submitting the code they worked on is a great way to kill creativity and drive people away from the project.
Know what's an even better way to drive people away from a project? Never ship a high quality release, so your users give up and stop deploying your program. Adding immature developers to a project isn't a gain either, and that's what this whole "you'll kill my creativity" angle is--a mix of immaturity and ego.
You can adopt tactics toward tight change control to try and reduce bug count, or you can let developers work with an unbounded target where people can change things forever. But you can't do both, and Linus is running a project where it's important to ship releases. In every project there are some developers with an ego or authority issue, ones who think the rules around release candidates don't apply to them, that their changes are important, and surely they cannot introduce bugs. But that's how amateur coders think, and adding people with that attitude doesn't benefit any serious project.
Re: (Score:2)
He's not telling them not to contribute.. He's telling them they're trying to place their contributions in the wrong tree. They don't belong in the -rc trees.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously though, who the hell cares if the RC is bigger than the one before it
The maintainer of the kernel does. You fucking ignorant twit. When you are a fucking kernel maintainer, then we will listen to what you have to say. Until that time, your opinion is of as much use as an asshole on my elbow.
Re: (Score:3)
It's *much* worse than that. Every change is a potential new bug, even if it fixes a standing bug. Well, if it fixes a standing bug, maybe it's worthwhile. But if it doesn't, it means that all the pervious tests haven't passed the new code. This is extremely bad. It's not good even in documentation. (I've had an important part of a system fail because of a bug introduced when documentation was changed. But that's VERY rare.)
At the release candidate stage ONLY bug-fixes should be accepted. In the lat
Yell at the release manager not the developers (Score:2)
It's the release manager's call to decide what to take. He could've said "no" but didn't. Heck, he could've yelled at the developers and said "HELL @#$^ING NO" in public, but he didn't.
It's also his job to take the heat for unpopular decisions and defend them if necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get what the developers are thinking (Score:5, Interesting)
Not news (Score:2)
Who determines what gets comitted? (Score:2)
Does someone oversee what gets into a RC? Or do the kernel maintainers get to commit whatever they want?
I'm not a linux kernel developer, but in my company when we get into the RCs, we have pretty tight control in which bugs/enhancements get added.
What's Linus' specific role in this besides "yelling and screaming"?
Re:Who determines what gets comitted? (Score:5, Informative)
It's a three-layer process. Devs themselves are expected to adhere to the rules. Then the subsystem maintainers are supposed to filter changes to their subsystems. And finally Linus is the final arbiter on what gets merged into the release branch. Technically devs can check in anything they want, but it has to go through the subsystem maintainers and Linus to get into the release. Linus' role here is prodding the subsystem maintainers and the devs themselves to remember the rules and stop sending him so many things to sort through. It's easier on him if it's 90% rubber-stamp approvals and if a few stragglers get through it's not causing any widespread issues, as opposed to if it's 50% cruft and if he doesn't scrutinize everything carefully it's going to be a mess.
Re: (Score:3)
Deciding how to refuse to accept changes without alienating the coders. So he's reluctant to reject the code they've worked so hard on without a specific reason. Here he's reminding people of what the reason is when a release candidate is being worked on. (He's also suggesting that they stage it for the next version.)
Anyone who gets offended at this particular post is just being silly. It's not directed at anyone in particular, it's just a general notice that they should notice that the version says "Re
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
No, it's why Linux has made so much progress. It has nothing to do with why "businesses choose Microsoft."
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Business also choose microsoft because microsoft has a special budget line for "greasing" key factors at those businesses.
Re:profanity (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux the kernel runs extremely well on everything from smartphones to supercomputers, obviously it's more than ready for the desktop. The challenge (remember, we don't have problems anymore) is the desktop environment and the applications, none of which are Linus' responsibility. And right now I'd take bets that Android hybrids conquers the desktop before Unity, Gnome 3, KDE or any of the existing solutions do. Too bad we can't clone him so he could run those projects too, because he's got both the doer gene and the manager gene. Forget about the kernel for a moment, remember the BitKeeper debacle? Other managers of a huge project like the kernel might do a lot of things, but I don't know anyone else but Linus who sits down and cranks out git on top of everything else. He's not just floating on past glory, he keep earning that respect he enjoys.
All maximized all the time (Score:2)
And right now I'd take bets that Android hybrids conquers the desktop before Unity, Gnome 3, KDE or any of the existing solutions do.
That depends on how quickly other Android distributions adopt a way for applications to opt in to Samsung or Cornerstone multiwindow mode, which allows applications to opt into having variable window size, through the manifest. Currently, the Android CDD allows applications to assume that the screen area will never change after an application is installed, and this mentality of all maximized all the time leads to workflow problems analogous to only having room on your desk for one piece of paper at once. If
Re:profanity (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And the profanity heard in such rooms is in direct proportion to the number of Windows servers...
Linus has the advantage of being able to curse personally those responsible for shit; whereas Windows admins can all only insult Microsofties collectively...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'll PM Linus right now, and tell him that he should never apply for a job with Mr. Anonymous Coward. And, which of the Fortune 500 companies do you work for, Sir?
Re:profanity (Score:5, Insightful)
Business owners aren't reading the linux kernel mailing list.
Re:profanity (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh come on. Did people shun Microsoft when Ballmer did the Sweaty Monkey Dance or threaten to "fucking kill Google"?
No one of consequence cares when Linus Torcalds acts like a petulant child - if they have an interest in Linux, they're more concerned about support availability and duration.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This is why businesses choose Microsoft.
Ah yes, no raging, chair-throwing, monkey-boy dancing whack-jobs running a solid organization like Microsoft, after all.
Businesses are Fucking Profane (Score:3)
Of course, what you don't often hear is the response to that question, where they decided through intensive bureaucratic meetings to compromise between the two positions and make a browser, but make it such a bad browser that it would slowly drive them out of business. The rest is history.
Re: (Score:2)
Businesses who choose microsoft do so because they prefer to be literally fucked over rather than just threatened..
Re:profanity (Score:4, Funny)
This is why businesses choose Microsoft.
Until they watch a video of an overweight Ballmer sweating, shouting, cursing, and throwing chairs at his own people.
That's also why many businesses switched to Apple when Steve Jobs was around. Steve Jobs was well known for his saint-like patience and composure with his underlings.
Re: (Score:3)
This is why businesses choose Microsoft.
That's right! Businesses care about Profanity Hardened Kernels when the kernel would be used on a desktop. Everything else is a-oh-kay. Cars, supercomputers, servers, printers, routers, phones, tablets, cameras, toasters, Large Hadron Colliders, space stations... There's no business in any of that so PHK doesn't matter there.
However, on the desktop, it really matters. Fuck you Linus!!!!! Your potty mouth alone is what holds back Linux on the desktop!!!! It's the only market Linux sucks at and it's the
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because businesses get so involved in the day to day discussions amongst the developers at MS!
I suppose you want released kernel to have an untested change wedged into it at the last moment?
Re:profanity (Score:5, Funny)
That's right. Instead of cursing in public, Microsoft executives throw furniture...
Re:Yay; Linus the motivator (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A release candidate is NOT!! the place for streamlining and tightening the code. It's a place where only bug-fixes should be added to anything beyond documentation.
Your comment reveals why Linus is tearing his hair out trying to get the release candidate changes smaller.
Save the cleanup and streamlining for the next version, NOT for the release candidate.
Re: (Score:2)
You understand what "release candidate" is right? A release candidate is not a time for adding new enhancements. It should be for streamlining and tightening the code for release.
That "streamlinin and tightening the code" is the problem; he wants only bugfixes for critical issues, not code cleanup and no minor bugfixes.
Re: (Score:3)
Soooooo to make sure this is always the case, Linus should obviously be reaching out to code obfuscators. Obviously legible, robust code is not at issue -- shorter, smaller code using more geeky twists and obfuscations is the best possible fucking idea for any huge, gigantic-ass code base.
I mean, I can understand getting pissed about new features being added. But obviously the point of a release candidate is to slowly compress and obfuscate the code into smaller and smaller renditions until it's humanly unr
Re: (Score:2)
fuck - the rudest word in the universe.
you fuck.
Re:Leave my late pet hamster out of it! (Score:4, Funny)
the rudest word in the universe.
Belgium.
Re: (Score:2)
Only 'cause you got the American version. For everyone else it's "fuck".
Re:Whew (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Whew (Score:5, Funny)
Your mother *and* your dead hamster?
But, I thought your mother *was* a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm still running Debian on 64 MB of RAM. With Xwindows and icewm. I can even browse the interwebs for a while with firefox until I hit a page with javascript requirements that beat the OS requirements. Sadly that is becoming the norm (I'm looking at you gmail)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still running Debian on 64 MB of RAM
I can still Windows on 64mb of RAM, as I long I don't specify the version either...
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW, I believe that he was taliking about Debian stable. (Sorry, I don't remember the name.)
OTOH, that's a guess, as I've never tried to run in that particular configuration.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still running Debian on 64 MB of RAM. With Xwindows and icewm. I can even browse the interwebs for a while with firefox until I hit a page with javascript requirements that beat the OS requirements. Sadly that is becoming the norm (I'm looking at you gmail)
Yes, because 64MB of RAM should be enough for anybody, amiright?
Just because you can, doesnt mean you should. In the age of large and cheap computing resources, saving every last byte and cycle is less of a concern than it used to be.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't bother talking about my 4-megabyte Linux forays because I thought it might sound cheeky. (I didn't graduate to X11 until I had 8MB.)
And I'm here to tell you that sloppy programming costs billions of real-live dollars in hardware annually.
And everyone cares about their own pocketbook.
Put that in your rapid-development pipe and smoke it.
Re:first (Score:5, Interesting)
I would ask though whether that's useful or just technological masturbation.
When RAM is plentiful and cheap and even your average smartphone has more than 1GB of RAM are you sacrificing anything by only using a few MB of RAM instead of GBs?
There clearly is purely wasteful uses of RAM but there is also fully utilizing your available resources. RAM is cheap and plentiful. I would rather a system be responsive and fully featured than tick off some statistic on how few resources it uses. A 486 uses less power than an intel core i7. But you'll get a lot more per watt out of the i7.
Ultimately the metric I care about most is productivity.
Re: (Score:3)
And you'll get more per watt from a lower clocked i7 or an ARM... And power is all important on battery powered devices...
And although ram is cheap, it still has a cost, and that cost soon adds up... Think of hundreds of workstations, or installations of virtual machines etc, halving the memory requirement could be a significant saving.
Re: (Score:3)
When RAM is plentiful and cheap and even your average smartphone has more than 1GB of RAM are you sacrificing anything by only using a few MB of RAM instead of GBs?
Your *average* smartphone? I don't choose to throw out a perfectly workable smartphone Every Damn Year, so my year old phone only has 384MB of RAM. It still works, but some modern apps that add glitz at the expense of functionality are becoming seriously painful on it.
You sir, are what is wrong with the planet today. Too many teenage developer
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
No - I refuse to restrict myself to your definition of "modern full-feature DE's". There is really no need for these desktop environments. Eye candy is eye candy, and it adds little to nothing to the user experience over something such as Enlightenment or Mate. Further, there are various desktops that are more "lightweight" yet, and some of them are quite attractive. (personally, I don't find them ALL to be attractive - but that is somewhat beside the point) Waste is waste, it's really that simple.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember looking at Enlightenment and thinking how bloated that was.
UI needs less chrome, not more.
Metro^WModern UI looks nicer these days, but it still doesn't hide the fact what's under the hood.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:first (Score:4, Informative)
No. For a comparison, you need to look at usage requirements. If all you need is something on the level of fvwm, you can't get there with Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
A masterful troll.
Re:Enthusiasts are limited (correction) (Score:2)
correction: "then"
Re: (Score:2)
Actyuallym, unless or until you get off of your ass and start managing a fork, yes it is. So get moving, MUSH!