SimpleKDE Thoughts and Views

[Mark Watson]

I understand what your getting at, however I have to disagree. We shouldn't 
equate having extra features with being less appealing to the user. A good 
example of this is Microsoft Office. Office has so many features, yet it is 
used by so many people. I think the key to making an application do what 
someone wants is having the features to do what someone wants, and putting 
them in the right places so that people can take advantage of them with a 
small learning curve, something that MS Office does not do well. Of course 
the exception would be an organization where certain features shouldn't be on 
because they might not be wanted. In that case then the best thing to do is 
to use Kiosk.

Just my opinion,
Mark

On Tuesday 27 September 2005 9:20 am, jedihobbes at gmail.com wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>    I've been looking at SimpleKDE for a little while now, and in an
> organisation where we're looking at rolling out KDE to "the masses",
> it seems an elegant and simple addition to the software we're planning
> on rolling out anyway. That having been said, some of our developers
> and IT staff are more open-source "aware" (for want of a better term)
> then the average user. We could, of course, allow users to select
> whether they want SimpleKDE or "normal" KDE, but that is a time
> consuming and resource intensive process. What I'd like to see is
> SimpleKDE integrated into KDE so that either an administrator or a
> regular user can enable/disable the "advanced/complicated/confusing"
> aspects of straight KDE. In other words, how about an interface more
> in line with VLC's where, when you're working in the configuration
> system, you have the choice of either globally enabling or disabling
> "Advanced Options". By default, KDE can ship with it ON, and we can
> universally turn it OFF in our organisation. How much could this
> possible add to the final code?
>
>    Of course, if the aim of SimpleKDE is not JUST to clean the
> interface, but to clean the code base too, then we are in a bit of a
> fix, as KDE+SimpleKDE would still leave us with the "dirty" code that
> SimpleKDE wants to clean out. Perhaps SimpleKDE could continue in its
> existing "clean code/clean interface" fork (is it a fork,
> technically?) whilst still contributing changes to KDE concurrently,
> thereby making KDE "clean-interface-ready", if not "clean-code-ready".
> Ok, now that I've sufficiently wrapped my neck round my arm (twice),
> any views on this?
>
> Thanks,
>    Riccardo Spagni
> _______________________________________________
> kde-quality mailing list
> kde-quality at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-quality