Re: More Political Stuff

[Sean Middleditch <sean middleditch iname com>]

> That's just too bad. If find it a shame that we can't communicate
> better within the free software community.
> But if they had started their work on free software packages only,
> probably the GNOME wouldn't even exist...
> KDE seems to be a nice desktop but in my opinion it won't go anywhere
> before they recognize and solve their licensing issues.
> 

It's only a few people that do this, mind you... it's not the entire KDE
team.  It's just that it's always the morons that get publicized, not
the intelligent people.  ~,^

> I am afraid not, seeing how it is going now.
> 

So what exactly will make GNOME 2.0 so different that it can't just be
1.6?  If it's going to use the same libraries, etc. what's so important
about it?

GNOME DOES need some streamlining.  I can tell its built upon something
built upon something built upon something... at least integrate it for
the end-user, so all they need to know is "there's a new GNOME-libs, new
GTK, etc." and not have to keep track of 10 million packages.  Even the
Helix-Updater requires people to select the packages, and it can be
daunting to the newbie.  Yes, OSes like Windows require 10 million
different "components" to be upgraded, but almost no-one on Windows
does.  Linux or UNIX, you have to.
 
> AbiWord is barely useable, Gnumeric is not yet complete. StarOffice,
> as I can see it, is a way for us to be able to say "hey people,
> GNU/Linux is now even useable for end-users; you can now drop you
> proprietary programs and switch to our free system." without them to
> have an excuse.

So in short, yes, we're stuck with StarOffice?  Not to start pointing
fingers are starting a war or anything, but, for example, the KDE team
put together an excellent office suite all on their own.  Seriously,
many people who say Linux is ready for the desktop get criticized not
over the lack of office suites, but the lack of quality.  Bringing in an
inferior system wont make GNOME any better, its just going to show that
we cant develop our own software that works better.

Seriously, it is going to be a TREMENDOUS amount of work to port
StarOffice to GTK/GNOME/Bonobo.  In that time, perhaps developers could
make AbiWord usable, complete Gnumeric.  And they both have a lot more
potential than StarOffice.  I'm certainly not pleased over the prospect
that GNOME is simply going to make use of inferior technology just to
get something done quickly.

Also, GNU/Linux isn't even close to ready for the desktop.  Even if
GNOME was complete, there are still way too many problems.  The whole
issue of "root" for example is confusing to newbies.  You'd be better
off developing a stable gnome-su and whatnot so that there is never a
need to open a terminal and su as root.  If someone has to do that even
once, then the desktop isn't ready.

GNU/Linux is also extremely unstable, in comparison to other
UNIXes.  While Linux itself doesn't crash that often (in 1.5 years of
use, I've it crash once, and that was because of a faulty patch I put
in), almost all of the software on it does.  XFree86 locks up, a
lot.  Even the old 3.3.x series.  Most of the 'stable' GNOME crashes a
lot.  You can throw in all the nifty programs you want, all the office
software you'd ever need.  But other OSes already HAVE all that.  So
what would be the point?  Really, the two reasons I stopped using
Windows was the crashing and lack of control.  I have lots of control in
Linux, but not by using a GUI: GUI's dumb the system down, no matter
WHAT you try to say, it's true.  The stability is only apparant if you
run in a console, too, or run the venerable x-lib software most distros
still come with.

And finally, GNOME is about a lot more than Linux... if adopting
StarOffice is to make just to make Linux SEEM ready for the desktop, why
are we screwing over the OSes that use GNOME?
 
> If people still wish to develop other software, then I think there
> will be place for those. It just takes developers willing to spend time
> on those programs coding and *maintaining* them.
> 

And are these developers that don't maintain their own software going to
want to maintain the StarOffice ports?

> 
> Wolfgang
> -- 
> A chicken is an egg's way of producing more eggs.
>

OK, that was a large rant about GNOME/Linux/etc. all in one.  Really, I
tend to bitch a lot, but aren't these valid points?  Are these kinds of
things taken into consideration by most developers?  What reasons do we
truly give people to use GNOME?  Yes, I use it.  But I'm not
dumb.  Windows is still easier, KDE is still faster, more stable, AND
easier...  GNOME is trying to put together a million features, a million
pieces of software, and we're rushing it.  No usable system was ever
made in 3 years.  KDE wasn't.  Windows wasn't.  MacOS wasn't.  We can
try to get everything done NOW, and screw it all up in the process.  I
love GNOME.  I love all of it.  But it feels like in the last couple of
months everything's been sort-of heading downhill... 
 
Oh, yes, let this be a warning to you all: don't try to talk about this
kindof stuff 30 minutes after you've just woken up, or you end up with
the above kinda cruft.

Sorry for being critical, but I want a clear understanding of where
GNOME is heading, and I want to make sure all of you have a clear
understanding of where you're going.

Sean Middleditch

> _______________________________________________
> gnome-devel-list mailing list
> gnome-devel-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devel-list