Re: Some Stuff...

[Chuck Dale <bug aphid net>]

Hi Cory,


> If you dig a little deeper, the list gets longer, as I believe imlib
> requires all the assorted image type libs for functionality (libpng,
> libtiff, libungif, libjpeg).  Granted, gdk-pixbuf will replace imlib, but
> at the same time, this takes away the advantage that imlib is on alot of
> stock Linux systems.

Gnome is a *big* system. It is not an easy or useful operation to reduce
the number of requirements. See later for why this isn't a problem.

> <tangent>
> All these rewrites make Gnome better, but now people are going to have to
> have both Imlib and gdk-pixbuf installed, same goes for alot of other libs
> that get rewritten, because alot of the programs I run are not gnomified.
> </tangent>

I think you've made a false generalisation here. gdk-pixbuf is one of
the only libraries I can think of that rewrites the functionality
(obviously with extra bits) of a different library. Almost all the other
libraries have not replaced any other library, they have created new
functionality that was not previously available.

[...]
>  but part of the
> attractiveness of Windows and MacOS is that the user has one 'package'.

You've got one package! Install RedHat Linux 6.1 from a CD. You have a
Gnome set up. Maybe the Gnome interface isn't complete yet, but the user
has just installed one big "package", RedHat Linux. Gnome is not
primarily designed to be downloaded and installed by new users, it is
designed to come on a distribution CD. New users won't have any clue how
to get to the downloading stage unless you give them Gnome first. 

> One thing that Linux has always sported as both a detriment and benefit is
> the extensive use of shared libraries.  Keeping up with them gets to be a
> nightmare sometimes, but is an amazing tool at the same time.

Again, you are talking from the viewpoint of someone keeping up with the
latest development releases. The end user doesn't have to bother with
keeping up with libraries. They just buy a distrobution CD and install
it. It works. No downloading, no tracking libraries, nothing. It works.

> On a tangent, has anyone ever thought of creating a CD of Gnome software,
> and perhaps writing an installer?  Not necessarily a distro (not another!),
> but a collection of the gnome packages in some native package format (RPM,
> deb, or something nice and detached, we seem to like rewriting
> everything;).  These things could be given out at all the shows were KDE
> seems to get all kinds of play, but Gnome doesn't. (In the yumminess of
> competitive spirit)

Sounds like a <insert favourite distribution> CD to me. Again, what's
wrong with just handing out a RedHat 6.1 CD? It's got reasonably new
Gnome on it (or 6.2 when it comes out). And it's all done for you, in
RPM. There's no need to put all these packages on a separate CD and
provide an installation interface for them, it's all there.

And if they want to upgrade to the latest Gnome they wait till RH6.2 and
do the upgrade. It's all tested, works seamlessly etc.

That is where the user interface needs to be strongest for new users.
Having to download lots of packages may also be a hassle for experienced
users who want to upgrade easily, but that's a different question. In
that case you may want a graphical tool which pulls all the right
packages etc.

> If we want to make strides on to the desktop of John Q Public, we need to
> cater to them.  Gnome is moving rapidly, and I couldn't be happier with
> 1.1.4 of core and applets (1.1.5 in a few minutes), its beautiful and
> functional, but my little brother wouldnt have a snowballs chance in hell
> of getting it installed, even if he could install Linux;)
> 
> Maybe someone should just hide Linux from the user, integrate gnome and
> Linux in a fashion similar to the way Win98 works, Windows over DOS.

Again - this has been done by almost all the major distributions! 

Chuck