Hi all.
OLPC dev considering the support of XFCE in future builds is music to my ears.
After getting to experience hands on an actual XO machine running
Sugar a few months ago, I encountered the following issues:
1) The Journal / lack of a real file manager:
a) accumulation of too many no
Carlos wrote (regarding Sugar on an XO):
Apps need to be sugarized.
This is true when Sugar is the primary interface of the target user
population. But the Subject of this topic is XFCE. I am going to
make the assumption that an user sophisticated enough to use XFCE
will be sophisticated
Here's a delicate scenario that I see:
Inevitably, when comparing the XOs running Sugar to those running
Windows for evaluation (this is happening *right now*) - MMSs (that
is, MicrosoftMinistries) will argue not only on GNU+Linux vs. Windows
technical merits, but also the GUI will come up as a
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Sebastian Silva wrote:
Here's a delicate scenario that I see:
Inevitably, when comparing the XOs running Sugar to those running
Windows for evaluation (this is happening *right now*) - MMSs (that
is, MicrosoftMinistries) will argue not only on GNU+Linux vs. Windows
Or you can just yum install xfce* and work your way to nirvana from there.
Sebastian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Sebastian Silva wrote:
Here's a delicate scenario that I see:
Inevitably, when comparing the XOs running Sugar to those running
Windows for evaluation (this is
But now that you mentioned it, bonus points for getting a tightly
integrated Debian based XFCE4 (with as little trouble as possible). Only
thing I dont like about this is losing the native and standard sugar...
but oh well its just to compare and make adults feel more at home.
Sebastian
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Sebastian Silva wrote:
But now that you mentioned it, bonus points for getting a tightly integrated
Debian based XFCE4 (with as little trouble as possible). Only thing I dont
like about this is losing the native and standard sugar... but oh well its
just to compare and
sebastian wrote:
Or you can just yum install xfce* and work your way to nirvana from there.
Sebastian
indeed. this is how i run my G1G1. A simple Do you want to run
sugar? dialog that runs from .xsession determines which manager
i run. what i've never done is make XFCE nice -- and it's
Ok, so my point is this:
If this is the quickest / simplest / best way to get a XFCE system as
tightly integrated to the XO, then this should be in a very visible
place and spread around. As much as I love sugar, I'd vehemently prefer
to have XFCE + GNU than Sugar + Windows.
Sebastian
[EMAIL
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:35 AM, Edward Cherlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Edward!
1) The Journal / lack of a real file manager:
Simple remedy/workaround:
In Terminal,
yum install mc
Yes, I know about running midnight commander from the terminal and
have been using it for months now, but it
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 19:37 +0800, Carlos Nazareno wrote:
These days, 433MHz may seem unusable to the average Moore's
law-spoiled user, but it was more than enough for me who grew up on a
4.77MHz 8088 as a kid (yeah, that's nothing to you guys over here who
are older :P), a Pentium 166 MMX
That doesn't change the fact that using the XO is like walking neck deep
in treacle. ... The real problem there is it's
hard to isolate the slowness, I think largely due to the fact that the
problems aren't isolated.
Is there any central repository for information about where the speed is
12 matches
Mail list logo
