| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
GNOME biasGNOME biasPosted Jan 5, 2006 14:36 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1)In reply to: The Grumpy Editor's Obviously Incorrect 2006 Predictions by henning Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's Obviously Incorrect 2006 Predictions Bias toward GNOME? The applications which have done best in recent reviews have been things like amarok and kmymoney... If you see bias, could you point it out, please?
(Log in to post comments)
GNOME bias Posted Jan 5, 2006 15:45 UTC (Thu) by henning (subscriber, #13406) [Link] I didn't want to criticise, please take that comments with a grain ofsalt. :-) I know this is a very difficult topic. ;-) But if you read the mentionend articles, someone could come to the conclusion that the editor don't like it to admit that the best applications in this case don't come from GNOME.. If you add three gtk+ based music managers to the review, i think the addition of a second popular KDE based (for example JuK) would be "fair". And in one case, (i don' remember the exact article) you criticise the fact that the application need some KDE services to work, and so the app-startup was slower. And this is IMHO no valid point to critizise. But overall i really have no problem with the whole series. I like them very much, like the rest of LWN. Thanks a lot for your work!
GNOME bias Posted Jan 6, 2006 22:39 UTC (Fri) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] While I agree that covering another KDE application would be nice, I think it should be pointed out that not all GTK/GTK+ applications are GNOME applications. It's just a toolkit, like QT.
GNOME bias Posted Jan 7, 2006 12:49 UTC (Sat) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164) [Link] i did like the review of the several music players... tough indeed, heforgot the default music player in KDE, juk. the nice thing about the article was that he clearly set of, trying to find a nice GTK audioplayer, but in the end, he had no choice but to admit they all sucked, and amarok was much better ;-)
|
|
||||||||||||