<span class="gmail_quote">On 2/20/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Kurt Pfeifle</b> <<a href="mailto:k1pfeifle@gmx.net">k1pfeifle@gmx.net</a>> wrote:</span><br>
<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">And a large percentage of those have *choosen* it by their *own* will,<br>and have not been ordered by their bosses or husbands to use it. There
<br>must be a reason for this, no? -- Can you imagine that a quite<br>significant minority of KDE users are even "fans" for their desktop<br>platform? And that this is mainly because of the power and of the<br>configurability it provides to them?
<br></blockquote></div>"Alot
of people like it, so there's no reason to change" is a ridiculous
argument against improving. Sure I may prefer kde over gnome, but that
doesn't mean that KDE is the pinnacle of desktop environments. And it
is also a fallacy to say that, because ours is more powerful, we can
make the interface as terrible as we want.<br>
<br>
A full-featured and yet usuable interface is possible. We should be
always striving towards those goals, but not forsaking one for the
other, and certainly not ever doing as you suggest, and ceasing to
improve because it's popular.<br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Micah Wylde