3 ms·

I would suggest that retaining an option needed by some users with unusual perceptual requirements is a 'very good reason' (Personally, I do leave my XFCE4 des

I would suggest that retaining an option needed by some users with unusual perceptual requirements is a 'very good reason' (Personally, I do leave my XFCE4 desktop on default settings, but I do alter defaults in some packages)

jodrellblank 14y ago
If it was the only terminal emulator, there would be a good reason. The person in the link commenting "PUT IT BACK EVERY OTHER TERMINAL EMULATOR HAS IT" is more baffling. Both wanting choice and options, but at the same time not wanting to have to change when there are other options.
- keithpeter 14y ago
  "If it was the only terminal emulator, there would be a good reason." Gnome Terminal may (effectively) be the only terminal emulator available to you if you do not have rights to install software or to change default software.
  - jodrellblank 14y ago
    If you are in an environment where you have to take what you are given, then whinging to the software developers to add in the functionality your boss won't let you have seems like the wrong move.
    - mpyne 14y ago
      Yes, you're right. They should apparently be whining to their boss to use something other than GNOME instead instead of trying to fix their work environment at the source.
      - jodrellblank 14y ago
        I'm assuming the said boss would not have approved the update to GNOME without first checking that all the features they require the workforce to have in order to work, are present. Then yes, they should. If the boss gives you lemons, you don't go to the lemon tree and ask if it can make lemons that read email, browse NFS shares and change screensaver settings. You go to your boss and say "just-lemons isn't good enough".
        vacri 14y ago
        When you cook, do you just give people a bowl of nutrient paste, saying "that's all you need to remain functional"? But we'd like something with texture and flavour. "So what, it's not like those things are needed to be functional. You can get by without them."

jodrellblank 14y ago

If it was the only terminal emulator, there would be a good reason. The person in the link commenting "PUT IT BACK EVERY OTHER TERMINAL EMULATOR HAS IT" is more baffling. Both wanting choice and options, but at the same time not wanting to have to change when there are other options.

keithpeter 14y ago
"If it was the only terminal emulator, there would be a good reason." Gnome Terminal may (effectively) be the only terminal emulator available to you if you do not have rights to install software or to change default software.
- jodrellblank 14y ago
  If you are in an environment where you have to take what you are given, then whinging to the software developers to add in the functionality your boss won't let you have seems like the wrong move.
  - mpyne 14y ago
    Yes, you're right. They should apparently be whining to their boss to use something other than GNOME instead instead of trying to fix their work environment at the source.
    - jodrellblank 14y ago
      I'm assuming the said boss would not have approved the update to GNOME without first checking that all the features they require the workforce to have in order to work, are present. Then yes, they should. If the boss gives you lemons, you don't go to the lemon tree and ask if it can make lemons that read email, browse NFS shares and change screensaver settings. You go to your boss and say "just-lemons isn't good enough".
      - vacri 14y ago
        When you cook, do you just give people a bowl of nutrient paste, saying "that's all you need to remain functional"? But we'd like something with texture and flavour. "So what, it's not like those things are needed to be functional. You can get by without them."