A look at GNOME 2.14, comparison to KDE

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Tuesday 21 February 2006 11:37, Janne Ojaniemi wrote:
> I fail to see how you or any other KDE-developer would suffer from bad
> moral if I or someone else tested KDE with an intention to pick every nit.

testing is great. saying "kde sucks", or approaching it from that perspective, 
is hard to take after a while. been there, done that. good news is that we 
can do these things with a positive attitude as well.

> The rationale is that if the tester starts from an assumption that "there
> will be lots of things to fix here", he's more bound to notice the annoying
> things.

there are always lots of things to fix. even when it's pretty damn good.

> In short: If we assume by default that KDE kicks ass, there is a good
> chance that we will overlook some of the design-errors and flaws that there
> might be.

ah, dualism. =) it's either kick ass or it sucks, but it can't be both at the 
same time? personally, i tend to subscribe to a school of thought that says 
something can be great on the one hand and need help on the other, 
simultaneously. it's much easier to feel like you aren't spinning your wheels 
in the mud with that attitude.

and if it sounds like i'm going on and on about attitude and not technical 
issues, that's because when someone comes to me with an idea but no 
willingness or capability to work on it themselves (aka they want me to do 
it) it's usually their attitude that makes me decide to join them or not. 
this is pretty typical.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

Full time KDE developer sponsored by Trolltech (http://www.trolltech.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-quality/attachments/20060221/f468939a/attachment.pgp