At 07:30 �� 12/3/2002, you wrote: >Ian Pine wrote: > > > In my opinion we should be looking at small tweaks to the OS, > > finding opportunities to make it more efficient, adding only enough > > features to make it keep up with hardware developments, while > > keeping it compact. > > Larger projects should certainly be developed, but they should be in > > the form of application layers, that can be loaded or not, as the > > user chooses.
Not a disagreement here, that's the beauty of having a totally tweakable OS :-) > > > > If it moves too far from the original QL look & feel - more > > Windows-like or more Unix-like and users aren't given the choice of > > which interface style to use, the platform will lose its identity, > > then what is there to make us choose it over a PC running one of > > those other operating systems? Perhaps we should take a risk and > > stay defiantly different - that might attract some new users who are > > curious, attracted precisely because it IS different. But some of > > the minor irritations need to be tidied up first. Nobody talked about NOT having a choice! >I agree. SMSQDOS will never be a mainstream OS and if we try to make >it one we'll just end up losing its distinctive character. That is SO NOT True! Whether you add a GUI or not or the ability (in a clear and concise matter) to add features to the OS, this cannot change its character. What QDOS gives is present and will be present, no matter how many "layers" you add up to it, you can always strip it down, unlike Windoze... As for the ability to be more user friendly, I think the whole thing proves itself... The fact that many QLers have moved from QPC1 to QPC 2 proves that if someone is given the choice, they go for the extra colours and the "useless" features of Windoze. I don't see anyone getting a super-duper Athlon XP 2000+ and adding up PC-DOS 2000 which would give you the Internet access and make your PC 10 times faster than its equivalent counterpart running Windows and adding on top of that QPC 1... That would be a lot cheaper too to do but no one is doing it! The point is that given the chance to have all these things on a QL - given the trends I observe-, IMHO users would take a new GUI no questions asked! >Also, we should be wary of asking for too much and ending up with >nothing. Marcel and Jochen have reluctantly concluded that if anything >is going to get done, they're going to have to do it. We should be >grateful for whatever they are able to do to WMAN and encourage them >to make further "surgical strikes" on SMSQ/E . That is absolutely true... you have to learn to walk before you can run but I don't see anything wrong in gearing up towards a more user-friendly approach, even if this is done slowly and cautiously. >John >-- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. �� ����������� ������ ����� >�������� ���. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.333 / Virus Database: 187 - Release Date: 8/3/2002
