Arch Linux Forums

Nice. FYI: kate is part of kdesdk and not kdebase.

Allan wrote:

BTW "To install Bluefish, use the `geany`"!  Wow, that would be strange...

Oops! Fixed.

Pierre wrote:

Nice. FYI: kate is part of kdesdk and not kdebase.

Really? Last time I installed KDE it was in base... in fact the Kate website still lists it as there. Oh well, you'd know wouldn't you. Fixed!

Everyone: Thanks!

Great work, it was a good read

Last edited by strankan (2009-04-02 03:56:37)

well done! i really enjoyed reading it!

klixon wrote:

Awesome job! Although you misspelled "rant" on the last page

I never used the word rant...

Well done. Nice reading, especially commandline-fu. Long ago I've read how to change back to previous directory and forgot that command. Now thx for reminding me of `cd -`

On page 4 I found a typo: last sentence in first column reads

If you want a little help
slimming down .your options, please read
on.

The period between "down" and "your" should be removed(?)

After reading the DE comparison I have to complain a little (or even a lot). This really sound like the usual trolling that can be found on the net everywhere. Did you really use those different DEs on a production system for at least several weeks?

KDE: Never compare any DE to Windows. They are very different. Comparing the size of the different DEs is useless. If youz install whole KDE you get a lot more apps than any other DE offers. And I don't think KDE is dedicated to beginners; its focused on "power users", which does not mean beginners cannot use it. And I don't get it why eye candy does imply decrease of simplicity. Don't forget that KDE 4 has change in alot of these aspects compared to KDE 3.

Gnome: It has different goals than KDE. They focus on a simple UI which does not confuse computer beginners. Gnome also has a clean and consitent look. And that Gnome uses less RAM than KDE is just not true. Their usage is very similar. Also, Gnome is nice for people who just want to use their PC and don't spend any time in customizing. So its quite ideal for the so called office PC.

XFCE: Well, people often say that it is lightweight. But at least with recent versions I don't see any difference to Gnome in performance or memory usage. And of course it is not as full-featured as Gnome or even KDE.

So, I hope you don't get me wrong. I just wanted to point out that's very difficult to compare different DEs. (apples and oranges, you know?) They all have different goals. The best way is to outline those and maybe show up- and downsides. But be carefull with comparing.

What about this: let people who acutally use a certain DE present it to show its benifits and problems. So you would have some kind of "DE of the month" and the user may decided which one fits his needs best.

I am nitpicking, but Page 5 last word "intentional" is spelt wrong-- "intentionalf" -- an additional "f"

Page 6 - "Dwm is probably the smalles" - missing t in smallest

Last edited by Inxsible (2009-04-02 12:26:07)

Ghost1227 wrote:

Inxsible wrote:

I am nitpicking, but Page 5 last word "intentional" is spelt wrong-- "intentionalf" -- an additional "f"

Page 6 - "Dwm is probably the smalles" - missing t in smallest

Are you looking at the same thing I am? The only time the word intentional is used in the whole magazine it's "intentionally" and it's spelled right. And dwm is on page 5 - and the t isn't missing.

Edit: I guess I'm just nitpicking the nitpick.

I just used the download link you gave.
Aah !! I am glad I have the copy of the pdf. Let me show you the screenies...

   

Last edited by Inxsible (2009-04-02 12:54:44)

Inxsible wrote:

Ghost1227 wrote:

Inxsible wrote:

I am nitpicking, but Page 5 last word "intentional" is spelt wrong-- "intentionalf" -- an additional "f"

Page 6 - "Dwm is probably the smalles" - missing t in smallest

Are you looking at the same thing I am? The only time the word intentional is used in the whole magazine it's "intentionally" and it's spelled right. And dwm is on page 5 - and the t isn't missing.

Edit: I guess I'm just nitpicking the nitpick.

I just used the download link you gave.
Aah !! I am glad I have the copy of the pdf. Let me show you the screenies...

http://omploader.org/tMWgwMw   http://omploader.org/tMWgwNA

Uhm, your looking at the PREVIEW ....... not the newest version.
Try this LINK instead.

Last edited by crouse (2009-04-02 13:17:40)

cool.., I hope you can improve the format though.. with all the amazing web technologies out there why choose pdf?

Nice, it will be a nice reading I'm sure. For me, pdf is fine, for offline reading, as I'm not always connected.

Thanks!