-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 10:57:03PM +0100, Kent Nyberg wrote: > I think that those who want to be able to work more flexible (though > i think i am pretty flexible and have no clue what it means for you) > are also those who know how to change from Metacity to sawfish or > what ever they like. Do you know how to do this? The steps one needs to take to accomplish it would probably not be obvious even to most experienced users, unless they're fairly well versed in managing the X Window System, and familiar with managing GNOME sessions. I have no real numbers to back this up, but I'm guessing that's probably NOT the vast majority of people using Linux systems. Many of whom are experienced users, and expect to have available to them the flexibility that Linux systems historically have had. With GNOME and RH8, that's just not the case, by default. This is a complaint that comes up very often on several Linux user group mailing lists that I'm on, as well as some of the GNOME lists. > For those who want to kill a program who is not responding i > have found that those program who do not respond at least with RH8.0 in > time gives me a dialog window with the choice of killing it. I may be > dreaming, but this is the procedure i get with RH8.0. > I think this is a good way to handle this problem. > And i also think that not that much focus should be drawn to a for me > unknown fact that newbies complain about not being able to do things > that make sense. The start of this thread is a perfect example. The OP wanted to know where the "kill app" functionality went, because he doesn't know how to use the kill command. > you. So can the user who wants to kill his application with xkill or > what ever. For this specific question (killing applications) i do not > think the newbie should be introduced to xkill or what ever from the > desktop. What to do with buggy application that does not respond should > be something the user reads about in manuals, or what ever. As an experienced system administrator, I'd have to say that's nonsense. For the typical user, if you just want it to go away, you just kill it. There's nothing else to know. You only need to know about the various signals if you're a system administrator, a developer, or some such. > Designing a desktop for killing buggy application seems wrong. If you are designing a task manager, then an obvious action that it should perform is to kill tasks... > I liked using windowmaker and even blackbox some time ago. But after > using redhat8.0/Metacity/gnome2 a time now, i have really gotten used to > things "just working". If i wanted to be able to be flexible, killing > application with xkill or from a terminal, and at the same time changing > windowmanager i could do that. But i do not want to. And I can't dispute any of that. But I can assure you that there are quite a few people out there who are complaining about this. Should Red Hat, as a company trying to sell a product, ignore us? I for one don't think so. But they're certainly able to do so, if they prefer. - -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+C4J8HEnASN++rQIRApJ2AJwL6ywVku/ECf1thYHxvlsOd30EOQCfdU+S XbNPivq8v7Sm8U+jNFR++kM= =jdYu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
