Re: desktop/workspaces terminology issue

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM> writes:  
> I guess it's a bug trying to masquerade as a feature. If all desktops/
> workspaces can have different backgrouns and you can move windows between
> them, then having viewports becomes quite pointless...
> 
> Or in other words - if you have a bug that keeps you from moving windows
> between desktops but can easily support large than real "virtual" desktops
> then viewports might suddenly start sounding like a good idea.

Precisely. Some features are harder to implement in desktops than
viewports, and vice versa, so WMs punt and do the easy features in
each and then have both.

Maybe there are features that are impossible in one and possible in
the other, but I don't think so really. I think it's mostly just
laziness.

Havoc