In praise of Windows
Tim Van Dyne
Tim.VanDyne at valleyair.org
Fri Jun 11 16:11:42 UTC 2010
>> Am I alone in finding the old (classic) Windows XP control panel
>> greatly superior to the KDE analogue?
>>
>IMHO, it is never a good idea to compare what one has in GNOME or KDE
to
>what is provided in Windows. It doesn't bring about the best response
>in many people. Just saying what you don't like about a feature is
>better, IMHO.
>
>And, FWIW and IMHO, making a subject with "praise" and "Windows" is
only
>done by most people for effect or to garner attention and takes away
>from what one really wants to address. It already places a negative
>slant on things...IMHO.
>
>But, I feel, if one has a hard time expressing what they don't like and
>really need to compare they should compare current to current. As in
>the latest GNOME/KDE features with latest Windows 7 (or maybe Vista)
>equivalent feature.
>> I find Windows' My Computer much better
>> than any Fedora counterpart, too.
>>
>> The network interface through the "Connect to" icon
>> is also more intelligible than the NM interface, in my view.
>>
>Of course, all that you've said is you like milk chocolate instead of
>semi-sweet.
>> On the whole I find Fedora/KDE much pleasanter to use than Windows,
>> which I suppose I use about 5% of the time.
>> In particular I find if something goes wrong in Windows
>> it is far more difficult to correct.
>>
>> But there are several features where Windows wins, as I have
suggested.
>> I hope the Fedora/KDE developers look carefully at Windows,
>> to see what they can steal.
>>
>>
>So, you think making GNOME/KDE look more like Windows (in some areas)
is
>a good idea?
>
>FWIW, I like that I can configure the KDE System Settings to look like
>the old KDE Kontrol Center. And I prefer the Application Launcher
>Classic Style over the Kickoff Style. In both cases I find the ones I
>prefer to be more concise and easier to find things than the "Icon
Style".
>
>
Also...one of the primary issues with comparing *nix to NT is that most
GUI interfaces in *nix are an afterthought to its primary focus. The
whole idea is to be able to edit the config files much more quickly than
opening a GUI & click-click-clickedy.
I've networked 6-8 Fedora & Ubuntu systems together for LAN parties in
the past & I setup half of the systems using the CLI in like 2 minutes
whereas a friend of mine who goes for GUI's only takes at least twice as
long...and he clicks through dialogs quickly. It's a matter of adding
all of that up over time and I've spent half the time doing twice the
work as someone who relies on a GUI to configure a system. Much can be
said about the focus of Linux vs. Windows by what's happened with RHEL6
for example. They've done away with most of the system-config-* GUI's
in favor of the "just edit the conf directly" approach.
That being said, just like Ed points out...comparing the 2 at a
usability level is pointless, especially if all involved have not
mastered both approaches and can objectively compare the 2. Even then
it'd be mostly subjective even w/ any objectvity.
Otherwise it's just flame-bait.
More information about the users
mailing list