begin quoting Leonardo Menezes Vaz as of Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:24:31AM -0200: [snip] > Most applications work fine without a system tray, but NetworkManager > for example needs it.
Ah! A concrete example, thanks. > > I disagree. > > That's your right. ;) :) > > There are systrays available for those who want them. The push to make 'em > > part of the default distribution or to build 'em in is a judgement call by > > *people*. > > I see, but what's wrong in provide a built-in resource? Ah, here we get into philosophical preferences. In general terms, nothing that is available by default is ever optional. If you provide a capability, there will be programs written that *depend* on that capability[1]. In time, if you try to opt-out of that capability, the system is effectively crippled. That means it isn't really opt-out anymore. And that's what's wrong. With the systray, we already have applications (you mentioned NetworkManager) that *depend* on the systray being there. No systray, no application, no application, no capability. Consequently, to get a capability that you want, you've gotta use the systray, and suck it up. Let the package managers make a systray dockapp a requirement for such applications, rather than making it a feature of every possible desktop environment where there are people who won't use or who will actively resent it. [chop] [1] Consider C++. Widely despised by its critics for being full of useless features, it is defended by its advocates who assert that you don't HAVE to use those features. In practice, you do, because someone else will have used a feature you 'excluded'. -- Stewart Stremler -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
