| |||||||||||
does the desktop matter anymore?does the desktop matter anymore?Posted Sep 28, 2005 15:09 UTC (Wed) by mmarq (guest, #2332)In reply to: does the desktop matter anymore? by man_ls Parent article: KDE 4 promises radical changes to the free desktop (NewsForge)
" I do not desire to have interchangeable browser engines. I don't want to separate application from management. I just want good, robust desktop programs; if I can choose between two or more good ones, even better. "
With respect but you are confused !?... because what you express is exactly what you have now. And if your robust big applications start sharing common elements most probabily you wont notice a thing rather then everything having a more common look/behavior in dialogues and other parts.
Just read about RuDI http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/1398 , is completely orthogonal to applications, **you can always have your big monolithic app** if you wish.
I dont know about interchangeable browser engines, but i belive you gonna start to have much much more separation of applications from management, simply because big monolithic apps are very expensive to develop and worst than greesy pigs to maintain.
(Log in to post comments)
does the desktop matter anymore? Posted Sep 28, 2005 15:51 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] With respect but you are confused !?... because what you express is exactly what you have now.With respect too, if we really had good robust programs people would not complain about desktops. **you can always have your big monolithic app** if you wish.As a matter of fact, I do not like big monolithic apps (the proverbial "swiss knife" paradigm); I rather prefer small lean tools (the "set of knives" paradigm, you might say). Even better when engine/daemon and GUI are separated. From what little I understand, the RuDI framework you are referring to is a different concept; some kind of "protocol" to "interoperate". The mention of SOA (Service Oriented Architecture), BPEL and WSDL near the end scares me a lot. I have had to suffer two of them at work, and they are horrible, hairy beasts. I dont know about interchangeable browser engines, but i belive you gonna start to have much much more separation of applications from management [...]I thought "interachangeable browser engines" was what you meant when you were talking about using Konqueror and changing from Gecko to KHTML dynamically, sorry if I misunderstood. I still hope that more people get the Unix and X way to develop programs. IMHO client/server is a great paradigm and has a lot of life left, when implemented right. I don't see the need for these "advanced" concepts which just reinvent the wheel every few years.
does the desktop matter anymore? Posted Sep 28, 2005 19:51 UTC (Wed) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link] " if we really had good robust programs people would not complain about desktops. "
But we have good and robust programs, some of the very best in all IT world. People complain mostly is about desktops because they want consistent *good* look & behavior. They want the management of the desktops to be more intuitive, interactive, and above all be consistent with all the programs/applications.
Better or worst they will soon seam to be wanting to have a *butler* inside their destops, being them at a thin client in a completely server/client approach or a fat PC, that responds to them with 'yes master' and above all do the *cleaning* of the house for them automaticly and transparentely.
Desktop is a completely different methafor, which main function is to present/expose and *manage* interfaces of the systems to the users.
They (programs and desktops) should cooperate heavly and not be incompatibles. So If all applications could use desktop services or features for better interacting, where could it be a problem or a clash ?
" I thought "interachangeable browser engines" was what you meant... "
That is just a *possible* (and i say possible because it is so) example of heavy interaction between applications/programs taking advantage of desktop services/features.
" I still hope that more people get the Unix and X way to develop programs. IMHO client/server is a great paradigm... "
Agreed. Striking example is Linux Terminal Service Project(LTSP) serving dozens of *Graphical Desktops* with dozens of applications/programs running(even other services/servers) to diskless old or cheap worstations, and all that from a single server. So if i understood correctly what you meant, the traditional Unix and X way is not dead, it only evolved and changed to a better form.
" I don't see the need for these "advanced" concepts which just reinvent the wheel every few years. "
That is your prerogative, but belive me that nothing stays exactly the same, not even for a picosecond.
My prerogative is that i always did and still do complaint about the lack of firm and decisive move into the desktop arena of Linux/Open Source, forcing the evolvement and changing of the old Unix and X way in the process. My view is that the real power in IT as in many other fields resides on the masses of users and not on servitude(servers/services). The goal is for Linux/Open Source to gain more traction and last longer, because i have no ilusions and some day Linux/Open Source will be replaced or have to evolve and change to something different and more fit to future problems and paradigmas.
|
|||||||||||