> > > (1) You control the interface. You have a choice of window managers, > > > GNOME, KDE. *You* get to decide how you want to interact with the > > > computer, not Bill Gates. > > > Hans: > > In the first place these window managers are Windows look-alikes, especially > > KDE that was intentionally designed to be as Windows as Windows can be > > i.m.h.o. In the second place, I do not have this insurpressibke urge to > > "decide by myself" if others offer a good solution, named Bill or not. > > Fair enough, although these environments are not Windows look-alikes (or > work-alikes).
If that was K's goal they missed it sadly. It's more CDE like than MSwin like. But, I don't think that was their goal, as much as to have an office suite that was new, that was *ours* by which they mean all of us, because they tried to use the GPL. [flame wars about Qt's compliance will be sent to /dev/null. flame warriors should see my own editorial a few months back in Linux Gazette.] Use fvwm95 or qvwm if you really want a windows-alike. Or *seriously* munge with the controls on your Gnome-complient wm. For any of you coders out there looking for a fun hack moment, add Gnome compliance to fvwm95 without mangling its interface. In the name of "making it easy" for themselves, most themeable "modern" (read, gnome and K compliant. humph.) wm's could look a *lot* more like MS, but, most folks have settled for themes that only *almost* look like MS. My most recent client with this complaint ended up using IceWM since one of its spare themes was "closer" enough. * Heather Stern * star@ many places...
