From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HSeYb-0004Jw-6c for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:27:13 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l2HJOEmR013325; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:24:14 GMT Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.181]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l2HJOD5l013282 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:24:14 GMT Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a29so170933pyi for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 12:24:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding:from; b=Lno0VwmO6+P3b4Lo7JSf8cYEMyl7FCCy7XYthFzFacZcZgkh4TqwJiOWP88cxS2QKyNN0Oglvn98uuKiPHwjc2tcavCqs/B3uHFBvmrz15XZ8MowdIkujTGW/6b85ZCAsLSV7eWlqNARQEqkyLg0PpYE5WeYYu+o2kmMgGBOuVU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:subject:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding:from; b=TMl/PCJIf/GXi3IQa9zFQQ1VEHWQ6gy8+mLz3sOfH8+7ZaWwPYkedX/bmg3yYiqtevA22B0FMhPVmpmWCH3Zapzf3PJzTA1pa6furO1n9mCH7ddG8+smqPJ0o6FApxZ9DWh8wZ6tYUf5r+RHajHrJMtS6m42rz9e4EVVQMS4qfg= Received: by 10.35.17.12 with SMTP id u12mr4657726pyi.1174159453096; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 12:24:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?64.230.62.19? ( [64.230.62.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id u6sm5594528pyb.2007.03.17.12.24.12; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 12:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Anyone tried xorg-server-1.2.99.901? To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200703171611.01844.prh@gotadsl.co.uk> References: <7a329d910703100823o1f5d91c5n9378510dfddbf027@mail.gmail.com> <200703171611.01844.prh@gotadsl.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:22:51 -0400 Message-Id: <1174159371.6186.10.camel@ShadowBook.Workgroup> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "B. Nice" X-Archives-Salt: df52a862-13e1-4ea0-a1e5-03795f3bc72f X-Archives-Hash: 95f38191f59e3b924d65a834fa36e521 Or to tempt the flame-war that always seems to occur when comparing the philosophy of Gnome vs. KDE. Gnome provides you with what 90% of the users need, and with effort, you can access most of what the rest want. KDE floods you with every conceivable option and leaves it up to you to ignore the un-needed cruft, and hides the option to remove the excess. Who's right. Who cares. IMNSHO it is extremely ignorant and arrogant to assume that one philosophy is superior to the other. Hopefully with the major and minor Desktop Environments competing, everyone can be satisfied. Just a thought On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 16:11 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Saturday 17 March 2007 11:35:35 Duncan wrote: > > > I ... don't even have GNOME installed as for me as a power user, GNOME's > > dumb-down-everything-by-removing-most-choices-as-too-complex policy drives > > me right up one wall and down the other! > > I think its arrogance is on a par with that of Windows, myself. We aren't to > be trusted with any of that clever stuff, so it must be hidden deep. > > -- > Rgds > Peter Humphrey > Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93 -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list