Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Transforming GNOME Into A Linux-Only Project?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by archibald View Post
    It's interesting to see some Linux user's view of BSD: it seems similar to many Windows users' view of Linux: "That's a niche OS: slow to move on, good for servers, but don't try to run a desktop on it."
    The difference is we already know the system while Windows users usually don't. ;>

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
      .... I think those numbers are about 15 years old. Last I heard, MS was down to about 80% and falling. Fruitcakes hasn't moved in 30 years.

      And your numbers don't add up....
      Hence why he used,~ which means "approximately". 80% is too low but I'd believe 85 with apple somewhere between 8-12.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
        According to a user's limited perspective, this may possibly be the case.
        From the perspective of somebody wanting a desktop OS this is absolutely the case.

        And when you add all those together what do you have? I'll tell you... its called a UI. Not an OS, not by ANY stretch of the imagination.
        It's not a OS by itself. You have to have other components... like a kernel, init, shell environment, C language libs, etc etc.

        But it's certainly more of a OS then the Linux kernel is by itself.

        Lets put this into perspective.... If you start in runlevel 3, does the computer still process? If the answer is YES, then GNOME is NOT part of the OS, but rather just junk added on top of it.... specifically, the UI.
        By the time you get to telinit 3 your already using a massive amount of software that is completely outside of the Linux kernel.

        The part that is 'linux' is that 30MB or so vmlinuz file in your /boot directory, the modules inside of /lib/modules and a few other odds and ends. Meanwhile the vast majority of code your running on your system, at this point, is actually written by GNU.

        That's why people made a big deal of 'GNU/Linux'.... because without the GNU part you can't actually build or run any software, nor do you have a user interface.

        Don't forget we are talking about _DESKTOP_ operating systems. Not just something you can run OpenSSH from.

        This the entire point of the discussion. Should Gnome just support Linux? Should it still support swapping out parts underneath it?

        If that is true then should Gnome try to aim to work like the Linux kernel were the developers are free to improve and specific versions of the software for the rest of the OS in order to get best performance and best user experience?

        In particular the Init...

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by archibald View Post
          It's interesting to see some Linux user's view of BSD: it seems similar to many Windows users' view of Linux: "That's a niche OS: slow to move on, good for servers, but don't try to run a desktop on it."
          Well Linux desktop is still a nitch. It's a much larger nitch then BSD... but I would like it to be much more of a mainstream choice and I am sure that the Gnome developers would also.

          The current approach we take with Linux with distributions and such provides a decent enough OS, but it's not good enough.


          A couple of examples:

          The Linux Gnome/KDE desktop pre-dates OS X, but OS X was able to achieve things within one or two releases that Linux still is struggling with.

          Meanwhile we have Android which within a couple years have a huge number of software packages and has very good commercial success in mobile products. The Linux desktop has not had anything remotely close to that sort of success despite being around for decades.

          When Linux mobile developers tried to adopt the traditional Linux approach to mobile OS... it flopped. I think the ideas and approach for things like Meego is pretty cool. Lots of cool things and probably more open then Android, and it fits better with my personal aesthetics to a OS.... but you have to realize that this is not a new development. People have been working on turning out a mobile Linux distro for years.

          Nokia has had commercial products out there using Maemo since 2007. Development started in 2005 or earlier. There was efforts before that.


          My point here is that I think there is distinct merit it just trying out a different approach. Just concentrate on making a Linux-Gnome desktop the best desktop it can possibly be and not worry about anything else besides that. Don't worry about how well it runs MySQL or runs apache, don't worry about whether or not the software is portable or Debian/Redhat friendly or anything.

          Just create a intense focus and work towards a specific goal instead of trying to be everything for everybody.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by drag View Post
            The Linux Gnome/KDE desktop pre-dates OS X, but OS X was able to achieve things within one or two releases that Linux still is struggling with.
            KDE started in 1996
            GNOME in 1999
            NeXTStep was released in 1993

            So NeXTStep was around about 3 years before KDE came about. MacOS X heavily is based on NeXTStep/OpenStep.

            So to state it "pre-dated" OS X is kinda a lie. Yes if you are treating OS X 10.0 as a new desktop it's younger than KDE/GNOME (being released in 2001), but the underlying API is MUCH MUCH older.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by mouring View Post
              KDE started in 1996
              GNOME in 1999
              NeXTStep was released in 1993

              So NeXTStep was around about 3 years before KDE came about. MacOS X heavily is based on NeXTStep/OpenStep.

              So to state it "pre-dated" OS X is kinda a lie. Yes if you are treating OS X 10.0 as a new desktop it's younger than KDE/GNOME (being released in 2001), but the underlying API is MUCH MUCH older.
              I am treating OS X 10.0 as a new desktop. Because it was. It wasn't just NextStep although it's certainly based on it. The fact that it is using code that dated from a much earlier time is a bit besides the point and only some of the desktop APIs come from NextStep.


              The same thing can be said of Gnome or KDE.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by drag View Post
                I am treating OS X 10.0 as a new desktop. Because it was. It wasn't just NextStep although it's certainly based on it. The fact that it is using code that dated from a much earlier time is a bit besides the point and only some of the desktop APIs come from NextStep.


                The same thing can be said of Gnome or KDE.
                Rhapsody, the first Nextstep-Mac OS merger OS that was renamed OS X Server for 1.0, was demoed in 97.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                  .... I think those numbers are about 15 years old. Last I heard, MS was down to about 80% and falling. Fruitcakes hasn't moved in 30 years.

                  And your numbers don't add up....
                  If by "Fruitcakes" you are referring to Apple then you are sorely mistaken. In 2002-2003 the Apple market share was around 1-2%.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                    If by "Fruitcakes" you are referring to Apple then you are sorely mistaken. In 2002-2003 the Apple market share was around 1-2%.
                    But they were in much better position to conquer the desktop market - it was their main goal since beginning. The ground they were standing on was much more solid than Linux'. Linux still has some problems in graphics and audio, but hopefully Wayland and future releases of PA will fix this.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Very stupid move indeed. There is BSD, and other platforms. Even windows. Even if I hate it and its company.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X