Re: GNOME info

>Our Office is in the process of implementing serveral Linux servers for
>everything from BIND to NFS to APACHE. My posistion is that GNOME is a
>lightweight, flexible UI to standardize on for all of our servers. However,
>we have some pretty KDE focused folks in the group and I am trying to come
>up with every possible reason I can as to why we shouldn't use KDE on our
>servers. Any reasons, ideas, rants you might have would be appreciated!

1. By default all of the Redhat really-slick-tools are available from 
Nautilus in GNOME

2. In my experience KDE has lots of problems in multi-user enviroments and 
experiences strange lock ups.  Of course,  on the server console you only
have one user,  but it is troubling none the less.

3. GNOME (IMHO) is simply more future focused.  Yes, CORBA, Bonobo, 
GNOME-db, etc... have taken a l-o-n-g time to mature,  but I think in 
GNOME 2 these things will really start to take off.  CORBA based admin
tools and such can theortetically at least make admining multiple
servers alot easier.  And imagine being able to write script that 
harness the power of things like Gnumeric and so periodically e-mail
you a nice graph of system performance.

4. You can load lots of scripts into Nautilus so M$-weenie admins can
do things like grep logs with a right-click.  You'll never get these
guys to actually learn how something works.

Ximian GNOME, Evolution, LTSP, and RedHat Linux + LVM & XFS

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]