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

Re: FESCo meeting summary for 2009-06-26



2009/6/29 Eric Springer <erikina gmail com>:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Kevin Kofler<kevin kofler chello at> wrote:
>>
>> This x86_64 issue is also a nasty side effect of your design policy: why are
>> we defaulting to reduced performance for the vast majority of new hardware
>> (basically only netbooks and a handful pretty specialized devices use
>> 32-bit-only CPUs these days!) just in the name of avoiding a choice and
>> potential frustration of clueless users who don't know they need the 32-bit
>> version? That's yet another bad tradeoff in the name of usability. I know
>> several people who have accidentally downloaded the 32-bit version when
>> they actually wanted x86_64 because the 64-bit version is hidden the way it
>> is. It's hard to find even for clueful users!
>
> Definitely. You know who I think really gets it right?
> http://software.opensuse.org/
>
> It completely and absolutely leaves Fedora download page for dead.
>
> As for DE's -- I think we can all agree XFCE/GNOME/KDE are all pretty
> solid. So the major selling point of each, is simply what they look
> like.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Screenshot_Tour
>
> So why not have something like
> Fedora_11_(KDE|GNOME|XFCE)_Screenshot_Tour and links to them? And a
> one line selling each: "GNOME aims for simplicity and elegance" "KDE
> aims for control and configurability" "XFCE aims to be fast and
> light".  (And default to GNOME to represent Fedora's position)

Yes Sir! You can link even to more information or use ajax (to prevent
too much extra sites or popups). Thanks!

-- 
LG Thomas

Dubium sapientiae initium


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