class=”article first_main_article” readability=”78″>

desktop environments are our link with the internal processes that are happening on your computer. We could say that are like our limbs, usefully controllable, unlike our internal organs that are always there working. It would be difficult to imagine the days when computers were not something everyday, when necessary to know to use them and do something useful. Of course, innovations are we covering the memories of the old story computational things more and more colorful and more intuitive to use. keys, then mice and now to the tips of our fingers .

 500x350 gnomekde1 Reflection on GNOME and KDE [Opinion]

The story could go back to Xerox Alto but we desviaríamos the approach in question. Once popularized personal computers, once written and once made Linux operating system, had to be improved appearance . In the first instance, wanting to achieve a unified suite of applications that the user experience, there Kool Desktop Manager in 1996, better known as KDE.

Almost instantly

his eternal competition arises, GNOME, in 1997. However, this latter arose due to the dependence of the first with Qt, a library at that time was not yet free. Miguel de Icaza, co-founder of GNOME, said to have thought of writing a free replacement for Qt following the refusal to include KDE Red Hat. This would have required much work and not getting the expected results. Then came the idea of ​​GNOME desktop environment and component of the GNU project.

After a couple of years of work environments, in 1998, appeared KDE 1.0 and a year later, GNOME 1.0. This time, KDE had already begun to address the Qt licensing issues would be solved finally in 2000 to release the code and adhere to the GPL. Thus we enter the new millennium, and GNOME with KDE version 1.2 and 2.0 develop. Both continued an important development path that led them to produce their large version : GNOME 2.6 and KDE 3.5 in 2004 in 2005.

So begins a story of two great free software which, at some point, the user must decide for one or the other. For every new version release, an endless series of reviews published. Or KDE 4 or GNOME 3. Again, sometime you have to decide on one , but not generate an absurd confrontation but by its nature so different and sometimes incompatible.

dispute extends even within each environment: some people prefer the line of GNOME 2 or KDE 3.5 compared to current versions. Then it is inevitable to ask, why insist on change rather than adapt to change and remain stable for longer? Well, it’s understandable ambition of the developers. While the program is much more related to mathematics and logic to art, no denying that the person behind the developer consider an alternative art work .

course could be criticized the way in which change occurs . I remember when I came out KDE 4, the new output distributions Fedora 17, continues to attract me.

Well, I did not say much (although it would be interesting to follow the subject in the comments), but to round I could say that the effort both environments are doing is great version to version . Whether we like it or not, have come to put the face of a system, which used to be seen as a completely unsightly container terminals, and take it to levels comparable graphical quality with any other commercial product. Although most magnificent I think these projects were born of young minds that might show how far you can push a project community.

No related posts.

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | WordPress Amazon Plugin | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

class=”article first_main_article” readability=”50″>Richard M.

Stallman, founder of GNU, has made some recent statements that refer to the possible emergence of a client, the famous Steam online distribution system for games created by Valve, for Linux. In fact, Stallman assesses whether that customer, that would make many games were available in DRM operating system which would hurt or benefit (for the interest it would generate) operating system GNU / Linux .

Richard Stallman Stallman and his opinion about Steam and games with DRM in Linux

In the message published in the official GNU site begins with a curious statement in it: “If you go to use these games, it would be best used in GNU / Linux than Microsoft Windows. At least you will avoid Windows does damage to your freedom “.

However, this mixed message from someone who always been very hard and radical in their fight against proprietary software becomes clear soon after, when he says that it does not matter what you have in your system proprietary drivers and games are:

GNU / Linux distribution that includes software to offer those games will teach users the goal is not freedom. Non-free software in GNU / Linux and works against the goal of freedom. Add these games to a distribution would increase this effect.

So (surprise surprise), Stallman is against the presence of Steam and game distribution system owners. As usual in these matters, I disagree with RMS , and I think that in certain sections that “assignment of freedoms” is logical and compensates.

What is certain is that companies who develop these games are not going to do Open Source, at least in the short term, so enjoy them directly on Linux I think is good. Above all, it will be optional : who does not want, do not install Steam on Linux (when you leave, if he leaves), and whoever wishes, let him do and enjoy all the games you want from Linux.

No related posts.

Tags: GNU / Linux, Games, Linux, Open Source, Richard M. Stallman, Richard Stallman, RMS, Free Software, Stallman, Steam, Valve, video games

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | WordPress Amazon Plugin | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

first_main_article” class=”article readability=”42″>

repository software is one of the best known around the world, and as mentioned a few hours ago Linus Torvalds himself has used it recently to serve as mirror Storage Linux kernel .

 500x303 github What is the opinion of Linus Torvalds on GitHub?

However, the availability of the kernel on GitHub seems only temporary , and some wonder what opinion you deserve GitHub Linus Torvalds.

Well, we could have the first statements on this subject by Torvalds. At least this is indicated in a post on this blog that publishes a certain Nick Mudge theoretically comments Linus has made on the subject:

“It seems to work well as a hosting site, but I’m not too impressed by the infrastructure that helps” build “things. It is clearly too easy to create requests for minor issues, and “pull requests” seem to have been designed for someone who does that pull without even thinking about what you are doing – which is against everything I believe to be be a project manager. “

Linus

also states that they sent some criticisms and suggestions to those responsible for GitHub, and that could perhaps make this platform to become a valid alternative for the Linux kernel.

That, of course, if the blog author has interviewed actually says Linus and have done. No external links , except kernel GitHub, and a personal project of Linus, also on GitHub, and they can log their underwater diving (sport that is very fond).

So for now we will take statements as possible … but not necessarily authoritative.

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement | WordPress Tutorials