Re: What is GNOME office?

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik ireland sun com>]

No cc: foundation-list gnome org

On 16 Nov 2000, Lauris Kaplinski wrote:

> > Lauris Kaplinski <lauris helixcode com> writes: 
> > > I suggest everyoune to try to distinguish between 2 goals:
> > > 1) We want 'politically' conquer world desktops
> > > 2) We want to produce techincally best desktop in world
> > > Current state of things seems to suggest, that they do not fit well
> > > together. Techincal excellence just involves too much code rewrite and too
> > > slow progress to compete with inferior products. And becoming the dominant
> > > desktop creates huge backward-compatibility intertia.
> > > 
> > 
> > I don't agree - I think Microsoft and Apple technologies are extremely
> > high quality in general, in many, many ways ahead of us. Beating them
> > will involve making our technology at least as good as theirs, if not
> > compellingly better. So I think 2) is an essential step in 1). You
> > can't win on marketing alone. People are using free software because
> > it meets their needs.
> 
> Hmmm...
> I personally would consider those to be a huge pile of mud, containing
> some diamonds. But I have not seen the actual code...
> Anyways, think about:
> Windows/DOS vs. MacOS
> Windows/DOS/MacOS vs. Amiga
> Windows/DOS/MacOS vs. Unix
> ...
> 

But the present Apple technology isn't MacOS, it's MacOSX. 

And you can't say MacOSX vs. unix, it's not really all that much further
away from Unix than say AIX (which people do consider Unix). So it's
rather:

	Unix with Aqua vs. Unix with X
or 
	Unix with Aqua vs. Unix with X & Gnome (or KDE or CDE or ...) 

And should Apple decide to make their desktop available on non-MacOSX
systems (no, I haven't seen the source code, but it is separated from the
core), the life of the other Unix desktops would definately becode harder.

> Lauris
> 

	Sander

.sigless