TCLUG Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [TCLUG:3331] Windows NT pricing





On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, Christopher Palmer wrote:

[some good comments deleted]

> Three things:
> 
> 1. You make an extremely important point -- thank you! A major benefit of
> Linux is its efficiency. X and *especially* KDE/X impinge on that
> efficiency.
> 
> 2. User-friendliness != inefficiency (remember how much memory Mac OS 1.0
> had to do its thing in).
This is true.  However, I was generalizing and therefore stand
corrected.  I was thinking of graphically-oriented layers of
library code providing windows, icons, etc.  I, seem to remember
that much of the early Mac toolkit was provided as firmware.
Not having ever been a Mac user, I may be wrong about this.

> 
> 3. KDE is not a window manager (kwm is), and cannot rightly be compared to
> window managers.
> 
I admit to not having used KDE myself, but I do know people
who do.  These people, while they like the KDE environment,
have commented on its resource usage.
> 
> Again, I disagree on this. It costs nothing in terms of efficency to
> design with users in mind. (Towards this point, I'm working on a book
> review for Slashdot on UI design. Expect it in two weeks.)
I would be very interested in seeing more on this...

> This is not necessarily so. Small, elegant code bits of the Unix variety
> can be well-integrated into an easy-to-learn shell (unlike *sh) -- it's
> the CLI that is unlearnable, not the programs themselves.
I am sure there are ways to incorporate the small-is-beautiful
concepts into current thinking and design, so no argument from
me there.

[elaborations deleted]
>
[my words] 
> > My primary hope is that Linux itself remains freely
> > available so that no software developer competing in
> > the Linux marketplace can ever hold all the cards!
> 
[your words]
> So why doesn't this apply to applications, too? ;P
> 
It certainly can.  I was alluding to the idea that commercial
competition could take place among applications, leaving the
OS freely open and available to everybody to even the playing
field for all concerned.  There is no reason that both the
current commercial model of proprietary code and GPL code 
could not co-exist such as some of the commercial apps for
Linux can live right along side GPL apps.  But, leave the OS
free and open to all.

Tony