Re: Hrm. Now I know why this list is dead

[smooge redhat com (Steve Smoogen)]

On 20 May 1999 17:57:48 -0400, Case Roole <cjr@xs4all.nl> wrote:

>Speaking of "competition" - especially given The Microsoft Situation - too
>easily suggests a one-vendor-takes-all solution of the problems of
>differentation. Instead we want a situation where standards are defined to
>create a situation where applications can be used uniformly regardless of any
>one desktop environment, while at the same time differentation is possible in
>components where standards are (not yet) fruitful. This works for window
>managers and it could work for desktop environments.
>
>The idea of having desktop environments "compete against each other" is
>detrimental to users and developers alike. I think the very existence of this
>list is based on the idea that the development of GNOME and KDE can lead to
>shared components and even to defined standards that third projects can adhere
>to. 
>
>I am not disappointed that nothing much is happening in this area - let me
>write the first lines of code, right? - but I am disappointed that the
>benefits 
>of cooperation are perceived so little.
>

Ok I can see where you are coming from.  The biggest problem with
competition is Not Invented Here Syndrome. The only way to get past that
is through some level of co-operation.

What I was looking for in competition is one group getting new feature
A,B, and C. The other group extends those features and adds X,Y, and Z.
Group 1 then adds onto X,Y, and Z and comes up with D,E,F.  The two
groups would need to have some sort of co-operation going though.



-- 
SJS  --  Red Hat Technical Support   
[Please be aware I cannot always answer email directly emailed at me. I
 try to answer on the news groups for more people to see the information
 and correct me if I am wrong :)]