4 ms·
> Yes and no. It's a different mindset. In many cases Linux can run CLI software from the 1960s just fine but the desktop moves fast and breaks things often. S
by wolfgke 7y ago
> Yes and no. It's a different mindset. In many cases Linux can run CLI software from the 1960s just fine but the desktop moves fast and breaks things often.
Serious question to all the GNU/Linux hackers: why can't we standardize the desktop on GNU/Linux similarly?
- v_lisivka 7y agoI'm ready. Will you pay for my work to achieve your goal?
- wolfgke 7y agoThe problem rather is that even if you do, many distributions will not obey "your" standard. EDIT: So the problem is that it is not a problem of work to be done, but a problem of willingness to standardize.
- JetSpiegel 7y agoSome are trying to, but there is a bazaar of interests. Microsoft has no competing interests, they just enforce it top to bottom. Lennart Poetering is trying to standardize from the bottom up, correctly IMHO, there's some push back, but mostly inertia and lack of resources.
- thedaemon 7y agoNot exactly desktop, but for GUI Linux has GTK and QT. GTK is by far the most common and I'd say the standard. Anyone who argues is a KDE fanboy ;)
- pwinnski 7y agoTwo people can agree on a window manager if one of them is dead.
- wolfgke 7y ago> Two people can agree on a window manager if one of them is dead. But why is there no similar fight concerning CLI software?
- subway 7y agoThere absolutely is. bash vs zsh vs tcsh vs csh vim vs vi vs nano vs joe vs emacs screen vs tmux and thats before you even get to all the configuration tweaks a given user has made to each.