Re: Default window manager

"Christopher T. Lansdown" wrote:

> > Now that the stable gnome-core 1.0.50 will be released
> > I think that it should have another default window manager
> > than the buggy and slow enlightenment.
>         Do you have any proof for this?  Care to site any case studies?
> Provide a link to the paper which did a code analysis of both?
>         It barely matters what WM gnome makes the default.  RedHat will
> still give it a win95 theme, and everyone else will use whatever they want
> in their distros anyhow.  Those of us who know anything will simply move
> to our favorite window managers.  Who's left who's going to download gnome
> by source and compile but not know enough to change their WM to their
> favorite?  Aren't there better things to do than to try to start up
> political flame wars over insignificant issues?  As long as new versions
> of gnome don't overwrite your WM choice when they are installed, it's
> really a very small, one-time thing.
>         -Chris
> --
> "If I had had more time I would have not written you at all." - Pascal
> Linux Programs:
> Linux - Get there. Today.
> Evil Overlord Quote of the Day:
> 12. One of my advisors will be an average five-year-old child. Any flaws in
> my plan that he is able to spot will be corrected before implementation.

Any proof?
I nooticed it my self.. and all people I know..
One of Gnome's goals is to provide a desktop environment
for beginners...
When for instance a beginner install it and use enlightenmnent they noticed
that the memory isn't enough and it's slow... and they think. "Gnome is
slow and buggy, better to use KDE instead".
Why don't just replace enlightenment with another wm?


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