51–60 of 90 posts
I could understand Gnome as an ideological hack back when KDE wasn't completely open source or when Ubuntu pushed beautiful and polished versions of Gnome 2. And when KDE was on version 4. Today, why would anyone choose anything except KDE?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think in this context, WhatsApp is better than Telegram. In Telegram, you'd upload your files in a way that the server can see them. In WhatsApp, the server won't be able to see the contents. (Even in general, I think that Telegram is no clear win over WhatsApp, and in fact I'd consider it worse in terms of chat message security.)
WhatsApp has a documented history of all kinds of shadyness from uploading unencrypted (yes, unencrypted) backups to Google under an agreement that let Google rummage through them(!) to their "send the data in a sidechannel directly to Facebook for analysis while also sending it end-to-end-encrypted to the recipient". I really can't understand why you bright folks here on HN falls for WhatsApps marketing. E2E means a…
I don't have that backup enabled. Does that mean that WhatsApp is secure for me with everyone who also has that disabled?
I don't see how Telegram is better in that respect; the server sees all messages directly. It doesn't even need a documented backdoor like you described.
> under an agreement that let Google rummage through them(!) to their "send the data in a sidechannel directly to Facebook for analysis while also sending it end-to-end-encrypted to the recipient".
*EDIT*: Can you give a link to that agreement? It'd interest me. :)
> But if you mean no one should ever touch it
That's not what I said.
I could understand Gnome as an ideological hack back when KDE wasn't completely open source or when Ubuntu pushed beautiful and polished versions of Gnome 2. And when KDE was on version 4. Today, why would anyone choose anything except KDE?
For me, it’s the wonky Active Directory integration/support that is the dealbreaker.
I could understand Gnome as an ideological hack back when KDE wasn't completely open source or when Ubuntu pushed beautiful and polished versions of Gnome 2. And when KDE was on version 4. Today, why would anyone choose anything except KDE?
There also still are big issues in KDE that "just work" on basically every other system (including Windows and macOS). KIO, Akonadi and Baloo come to mind immediately - all great ideas that in reality never really work.
(I say this as someone who daily drives KDE on both Wayland and X11 - to me, the features are certainly worth dealing with the issues)
I could understand Gnome as an ideological hack back when KDE wasn't completely open source or when Ubuntu pushed beautiful and polished versions of Gnome 2. And when KDE was on version 4. Today, why would anyone choose anything except KDE?
GTK != Gnome. KDE is extremely bloated and so that is why I avoid it. One KDE package wants to pull in pretty much all the dependencies for a full desktop environment which isn't what I want to do.
In the context of the prior comment which was choosing between Gnome and KDE the fact that applications require you to have half of KDE is meaningless as you are if you pick KDE going to install all of KDE already.
In the context of installing KDE apps outside of KDE this is fairly overblown. Most people have hundreds of GB to TB of storage available and will install games which require 60GB. At this point in time worrying about KDE installing a few gigs of deps is like worrying about the difference in ram used by Emacs vs Vim.
Perfect! Works great for an alpha release. Few years ago i had kde and used kde connect, but i didn't want that much qt in my life (can't stand it), and switched to gnome. There was gsconnect but it wasn't that realiable. Used that for a while but in the end i switched to sway, becaus twms are great and everything is so much snappier. But one thing was missing, kdeconnect. I didn't want qt, and gsconnect was a gnome…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn’t tell me anything. How does it work? What apps are compatible? How is the connection between devices set up? Wire guard? If not, then what? How does it control apps and receive notifications? At first it sounded to me like an alternative X11 thing I hate it when projects/products only state what you can do (or at least what they envision), and not explaining the actual workings. Especially when data and access…
I am quite the opposite, many projects now just have a wall of text about the technology they use, but completely utred to explain in simple terms what it does. It seems some devs assume that everyone can guess from the tech stack. By all means have a page explaining the technology, but the front page should tell me what I can do with it.
I could understand Gnome as an ideological hack back when KDE wasn't completely open source or when Ubuntu pushed beautiful and polished versions of Gnome 2. And when KDE was on version 4. Today, why would anyone choose anything except KDE?
GNOME does at least get a lot of corporate development and backing to make it integrate into Active Desktop, centrally-managed settings (aka group policy), and accessibility functions. These aspects are rather large reasons that big enterprise distributions default to GNOME over all other choices.
Most users care about none of those features. Some people just like GNOME. Some people like KDE. It's simply a choice.
I could understand Gnome as an ideological hack back when KDE wasn't completely open source or when Ubuntu pushed beautiful and polished versions of Gnome 2. And when KDE was on version 4. Today, why would anyone choose anything except KDE?