Red Hat Introduces Desktop Linux Competitor

[Jim Cornette]

James W. Bennett wrote:
> For your information KDE was a desktop before gnome was even conceived. 

Thanks for the info. I didn't realize that GNOME was developed for much 
the same reason that xfree86 and xorg exist recently.

QT tools? I guess redhat not having KDE, then having it later doesn't 
mean GNOME was older than KDE. It is good that the qt issue is pretty 
well over for the developers.

Jim


> On Sat, 2004-05-15 at 14:31, Jim Cornette wrote:
> 
>>jim tate wrote:
>>
>>>Why is it, that Redhat so dislikes KDE? the number one
>>>choice of linux users.
>>
>>I've used GNOME since RHL 5.2. KDE was added later. I used KDE first 
>>when Mandrake was an RHL 5.2 distro with KDE added. I played around with 
>>KDE for awhile, then switched back to RHL.
>>
>>I don't know what survey the above statement is based upon. Redhat added 
>>KDE as a choice. GNOME and other desktops were before KDE.
>>
>>I rarely use KDE, but install it as a failsafe and for different 
>>choices. I don't dislike KDE. I just feel more comfortable with GNOME.
>>
>>Having an option to choose one or the other is my preferred option. I 
>>can understand if streamlining products to less choice is a corporate 
>>strategy. They might have a better grasp on the common used.
>>
>>
>>>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1583814,00.asp
>>>
>>>I read this article, and I assumed that they will still offer KDE
>>>as a optional install in Fedora2.
>>>Every time Redhat makes a move, it's counter to the majority of
>>>the linux community. I am for them making money and staying
>>>in business, but WOW the way they go about it.
>>>
>>>Jim Tate
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>What happened last night can happen again.


-- 
What happened last night can happen again.