Re: [tlug] Desktop alternatives

[Attila Kinali <attila@example.com>]

On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 14:18:16 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com> wrote:

> which is why the decent session
> managers are all DE-dependent), and application integration, in a
> standardized (and usually greatly simplified[1]) workflow.  Anybody
> who's been in the business for very long doesn't need any of that, and
> the standardized workflow will typically cause a lot of annoyance.
[...]
> Footnotes: 
> [1]  In the sense of "removing options", not in the sense of "sensible
> defaults so you hardly ever need options".

Which is something of the most annoying things of DE's, and something i
can hardly understand. Over the last decade, i've used a dozen or so
window managers. Some better some worse, but all had defaults that made
sense in their mindset and i needed to change very little to get
to a good productivity level. With the current DEs (that's not only the
g and k words, but also lxde) most of the defaults feel like i'm crippling
myself to something the author of the software is using. It migh make sense
to him, to his arangment of monitor, keyboard, mouse, applications in use...
but not in the general mindset of the DE and definitly not in my environment.

Why can't the modern DEs get the thing right that all these old WMs got right
years ago? Has this knowledge gone the way of the dodo? Or is there something
substantial i do not understand yet?

				Attila Kinali

-- 
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
use without that foundation.
                 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson