On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Frank Rocco wrote:
> I also heard good things about Caldera.
It's ok... a lot better than Corel. But far from being perfect - the
things I don't like about Caldera are primarily:
- they boot into framebuffer mode, and then run a normal X server on top
of it (you should never do that, as it completely breaks on some
hardware, and causes problems switching from a console to X and back on
some cards)
- some of their customizations are IMO weird (no close button on KDE
windows)
- some of their packages are quite outdated (for example, they're still
with XFree86 3.3.4, apache 1.3.4, bzip2 0.9.0b, grep 2.2 and KDE 1.1.1)
- They're KDE only, not even the base libraries for running GNOME
applications are included.
- Their installer and config tools used to be closed-source (I think that
was fixed recently though; but I think they still aren't GPL).
> The thing that confuses me the most
> is GNOME or KDE as a desktop. It seems that the apps for KDE are farther
> along.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages - that's why Red Hat
Linux gives you the choice.
Purely IMO, most of the basic tools in KDE are farther along than GNOME,
but right now, there's no KDE tool that is comparable to, for example,
gnumeric (unless you get a KDE 2.0 pre-alpha snapshot).
I don't see a problem in keeping both around (or focussing on one, but
keeping at least the basic libraries of the other in the
distribution. If the libraries are there, it's not a problem to run a
GNOME application within KDE or vice versa).
LLaP
bero
--
Nobody will ever need more than 640 kB RAM.
-- Bill Gates, 1983
Windows 98 requires 16 MB RAM.
-- Bill Gates, 1999
Nobody will ever need Windows 98.
-- logical conclusion
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
