From: Lyvim X. <lx...@ya...> - 2002-12-09 16:55:52
|
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 09:21, Geoffrey wrote: > Mark R. Bowyer wrote: > > In 2.0 it's harder. You have to kill metacity, start enlightenment, > > then tell the Session Properties dialogue not to start metacity=20 > > again, and add Enlightenment as a high priority non-managed > > process. Evolution doesn't talk to Gnome2.0's WM connection > > stuff, so the panel applets for window controls, etc, don't work. > > But otherwise it's fine. >=20 > Personally, starting up gnome, killing metacity and starting E sounds > a bit painful. Start E first, then just execute gnome-panel. It's=20 > certainly faster. Most of the gnome stuff does not work with E > though.=20 > Things like the window list and such. Gnome folks blame E, but I > have a hard time understanding that since Gnome 1.4 worked with E, and > Gnome 2.0 does not. E did not change, Gnome did. Don't want to start > a flame war here okay? Geoffrey, Your comment about 1.4/2.0 Gnome operability with E brings up with me a rather disturbing anology. When M$ started bundling Internet Exploder with winblows, Netscape suddenly and mysteriously started having crash problems. I had customer after customer complaining about not being able to operate Netscape reliably. However, on some older systems this problem did not occur. I noticed immediately that the problem was not occuring on the systems that did not have Internet Exploder installed. Furthermore, later on I made a practice of using Shane Brook's 98Lite installer for winblows, and on those systems (where I had used 98Lite to curtail Exploder installation) Netscape functioned flawlessly. It became clear to me at that time that M$ was making a concerted effort to discredit (and kill) Netscape at the OS level by using dlls designed to crash Netscape. This infuriated me so much that it was at that time I decided I would begin to take a personal hand in promoting the Linux solution. (Recently this has become much easier, as it is the applications that primarily decide the outcome of this fight.) Note that many users blamed Netscape for being unstable when in fact it was M$ that was at fault. It is difficult to explain such a thing to user level peeps when other applications on the system are working fine. This was exactly the plan of the M$ monopoly and it worked flawlessly. The main idea here is that RH is pursuing what looks like the same monopolistic, anticompetitive methods as M$ instituted against Netscape. This would naturally be a strictly antiethical and forbidden route with regard to Gnome and E operability; contrary to all that the Linux community stands for. There exists a huge Enlightenment contingent and they risk alienation of this large population by adopting clearly anti-evolutionary and amoral M$ marketing tactics. The possibility exists that this is an honest error; however the fact of the matter is that they have been pushing Gnome from day one (even when the main E developer was in their employ) and furthermore their relationship with the E developers has not been a relationship to brag about. Their gnome/E bundling fax pas throws more gasoline on the bonfire. To conclude, I regard this situation with extremely high predjudice. > --=20 > Until later: Geoffrey eso...@3t... >=20 > The latest, most widespread virus? Microsoft end user agreement. > Think about it... >=20 Best Regards, LX --=20 =B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0= =B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0= =B0 Kernel 2.4.18-6mdk Mandrake Linux 8.2 Enlightenment 0.16.5-11mdk Evolution 1.0.2-5mdk Registered Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/ =B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0= =B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0=B0= =B0 |