Joined: Feb. 2007
||Posted: Dec. 01 2007,16:21
|you've moved on to some other fashion statement |
I take strong exception that replacing xtdesk with dfm represents a change in style rather than change in substance. You're probably not as aware as some of the rest of us of the discussions that went into what became DSL 4, but the changes were to make things more user-friendly across the interface. With xtdesk, icons are used for one thing: to launch applications. That's it. It's not so easy to configure, it's static. and it doesn't interface with anything else.
With dfm, icons aren't so static. The desktop is now fully drag and drop -- something users of other operating systems take for granted and which wasn't possible with pre-DSL 4 (unless users installed dfm or rox from MyDSL or apt-get). It works between applications, not unto itself. It has low overhead but it's versatile and Robert has done a lot since the first release candidates to make it easy for users to customize.
I appreciate your view on the issue of the book, but operating systems rarely stay in a state of stasis. The underlying function -- the substance -- of DSL hasn't changed. It's a 50ish MB ISO that's extended via MyDSL and can be installed in a variety of manners according to the tastes and needs of the user. Robert is maintaining the 3.x series for those who are content with it. Anyone who purchases the book and is disappointed that DSL has changed to include more user-friendly features can still download a pre-4 version. And anyone who wants to litter his or her DSL 4+ desktop with icons can do that, too. By default? I don't think so -- you're talking about some users who still have 640x480 monitors (20 icons * 32x32 pixels = 640 without space between them, no?).
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)