This is a discussion on Re: The Desktop is The Application - KDE ; --===============0811400278== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1653570.u7R691ALTn"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --nextPart1653570.u7R691ALTn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 08 of September 2005 11:47, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > NOTE: I'm sending this from webmail, so the "Reply To" might be incorrect. > ...
On Thursday 08 of September 2005 11:47, email@example.com wrote:
> NOTE: I'm sending this from webmail, so the "Reply To" might be incorrect.
> Pls. check it before replying.
> > On Wednesday 07 of September 2005 20:11, Janne Ojaniemi wrote:
> >> On Monday 05 September 2005 22:24, Michal Vaner - Vorner wrote:
> >> > What does it have in common with running the same applicaton more
> >> times?
> >> > I was not talking about that at all
> >> I assumed that when you talked about the plasmoid bringing the whole
> >> system
> >> down, you meant using several plasmoids carrying out several different
> >> tasks
> > Read what I wrote please, it leads nowhere if you do not read.
> you wrote that if you have one process doing tasks X and Y, and Y crashes,
> it will bring X down as well. That is what you wrote.
> That said, I still fail to see the problem. Konqueror is a one process
> that does several tasks, and people have no problem with it. And if the
> plasmoid crashes, the user will lose whatever he was working on, but
> nothing else. And I fail to see how a bug in filemanagement-stuff (for
> example) could crash the plasmoid while it was doing email for example,
> since the two would not be running at the same time.
They are in one process, they are running both.
> If the plasmoid=20
> crashes, the user simply restart it (or it restarts itself). And if the
> plasmoid crashes when doing filemanagement, the user would not lose
> unfinished email, becaseu the two tasks are not running in the same time.
> And, FWIW, I have had cases where I have had Konqeror-browser and
> Konqueror-filemanager running in separate windows. The browser crashed,
> but filemanager did not flich.
Two windows of konqueror are two separate processes, no matter if of the sa=
> > I was NOT using it as an example of low-powered machine, I was saying
> > that 300
> > MHz does not match together with 128 MB RAM, that you have a bit
> > different point of view.
> You are arguing about stuff that is basically pointless. How much RAM some
> hypothetical computer has is besides the point.
> FWIW, I had 128MB of RAM (a bit later upgraded to 192MB) in my 450Mhz
> Celeron (overclocked from 300Mhz).
> > Of course I can know how much of the memory is unused NOW. But that does
> > not
> > mean it will be free for ever. If you take it to speed up some possible
> > start
> > of some application that user may start or may not, another application
> > can
> > not take it when it really needs it.
> People don't seem to complain when Konqueror gets preloaded. Why get
> panties in a bunch over this thing? And this behavior could be
> configurable. It just seems to me that you are simply trying to find
> faults in this proposal, even though they might not be faults at all. If
> the user doesn't like it he can
> a) not run the plasmoid at all
> b) not preload anything
No, I just do not like you denying all my things I said as it is not true o=
it does not matter to anyone. It is why I argue - the principle. If you=20
implement it, then we can say who was wrong.
> > NO, YOU DO NOT READ PROPERLY. That was reaction for you saying that spe=
> > checking is system wide. You do not even check, if you write truth.
> When I said that spell-checking is system-wide, I meant that it was
> running for all apps. It works in just about all KDE-apps I use (Kmail,
> Konqueror, Kate etc. etc.), so it is "system-wide". How it's implemented
> deep down is irrelevant as far as the user is concerned.
> > And typing commands not?
> Why should the user write commands? Seriously? If the user wants to write
> an email, why should he first type "kontact", and then type the address,
> instead of simply typing the address? What benefit would we gain from
> requiring the user to memorize different commands? users do not want to
> run applications, they want to get their job done. Launching an app to
> carry out the task is a necessary evil, and this proposal tries to make
> that unnecessary.
You can do that with email address, but copying files like
firstfile --> secondfile looks a bit odd to me, I definitelly would prefer=
If you want to implement it, nobody can stop you of course, this is=20
opensource. But I just said I do not like the idea and why. Thats all. I=20
would leave it, as you take my arguments as 'something I want to find at al=
costs', they are pointless. But they are not.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscrib=