Re: How interested in promoting GTK apps? [was Re: real marketing or just catchy slogans?]

On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 10:21 +0100, Quim Gil wrote:
> En/na Murray Cumming ha escrit:
> > I see no need to have separate GTK+ and GNOME brands. Let them be GNOME
> > applications.
> This is all I wanted to read. If it's clear we have 'GNOME applications'
> able to run on MS Windows, then we can shameless promote GNOME as (also)
> damn good free software you can easily download and try on MS Windows
> (as well).

I agree fully with this, I would actually see this as a branding thing
for developers also, tbh.

There are lots of valid reasons for not wanting to link into GNOME - not
wanting to depend on GNOME, not wanting the extra memory requirement,

Maybe there should be a "GNOME Basic Profile" and "GNOME Full Profile"
or something? I think it fits the kind of thing Project Ridley is
basically doing, and would be easier to describe to people (e.g., 'the
full profile is the basic API plus features X, Y and Z....') - it works
for other technology; Java is split up similarly.

This would have huge benefits, too, if the basic profile were something
you can run on embedded devices like maemo. So, you can run GNOME apps
on w32, embedded, wherever, and the "full cream" desktop is positioned
as a real step up.

I don't know if this idea fits neatly with reality (in terms of the
actual software), but it simplifies the various technical jargon in the
GNOME world, and a more unified brand is pretty obviously going to be a
stronger one.



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