This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!

You don't get it

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 27, 2006 05:43 AM
As already mentioned and summarized <a href="" title="">here</a>, you completely misunderstand the goals, aims, specs and working idea behind, LSB or Portland.

None of these (!) tries to unify the desktop as you state. You cannot compare these to things like bluecurve or others.
Why should they try to unify? They have completely other aims:
- LSB aims for a standard ABI
- aims for a common base which can be shared between desktop environments
- Portland aims for easy tools for 3rd party vendors to exectute simple tasks.
And, all were quite successful until know, and each of them is still developing further and further.
(Examples: Portland is used in Google Earth and others, freedesktop produced a common input system (scim), a common communication system (dbus), and so on, and the LSB is well known and used in enterprise Linux environments).

The only project which really aims for the unification is the only one you haven't mentioned: the Tango project. The try to unify the desktop with naming schemes for icon-sets and wallpapers to give the desktop environments the ability to share the same icon set - which results in the fact that standard icons are the same among all apps.
And, they already did a great job, and the naming schemes implementation is in strong development in KDE as well as in GNOME right now - so they are successful.

Sorry to say it with so hard words, but since you completely missed the aims of the described projects, and also, which is even worse, missed the most important project in the described topic, your article is not worth reading - and should not be on such a famous place!


Return to The Portland project: No silver bullet for hairy problem of multiple desktops