> I have run the latest KDE / GNOME
> and they are no where near the responsiveness, intuitiveness,
> userfriendliness that XP's (or M$) GUI offer.
Must we always draw comparisons with XP? True XP is the most commonly
used desktop OS, but then someone who has not used XP at all (or
atleast for quite some time) might think otherwise. I for myself find
the absence of virtual desktops in XP very irritating!
> I dont see any
> userfriendliness being built into GNOME. As a concrete example, I still
> cannot right click any file and associate it with an app. This has been
> a standard in M$ GUI for like ever and even KDE guys added it a long
> time ago.
Yeah this is true. While using FC2, I could not find an easy way to
edit the file-type and application associations. But the
right-clicking functionality is now present in GNOME 2.14.
> it still lacks
> a good "control panel" (infact AFAIK it doesnt have one). KDE is far
> far ahead of GNOME in this case.
Thats again true. Not only that, I can not really differentiate
between the logic behind placing an option in the preferences or
administration sub-menu in the 'System' menu in GNOME. They look very
similar to me. Any idea?
By the way I know one Microsoft employee who claimed that Redhat is a
very bad open-source company, while giving examples about the economic
failures of FOSS based firms. He did not elaborate on Redhat though,
although he gave the example of Mandrake going bankrupt. Wonder how
good a proprietary software company M$ is?
Regards,
Debarshi