On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 07:12:00PM -0500, R. C. Dowdeswell wrote:
> 
> On 1016660800 seconds since the Beginning of the UNIX epoch
> Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> >
> 
> >> The question is, if it is wanted to compete with linux/windows 
> >> on the desktop. From my experience ease of use equals loss of 
> >> stability - nothing that I want.
> >
> >This is only true if the easy-to-use parts were done poorly.
> 
> The other thing to remember is that the `easy to use' parts are
> maintained by third party vendors.  There is no reason why the
> NetBSD OS cannot maintain its traditional level of stability,
> regardless of the GUI developments.  If third party software is
> stable, then great.  If not, then as individual users we can decide
> whether to install it.  Given NetBSD's userbase, I do not think
> that the base system will suffer any loss of stability---even if
> KDE/Gnome are crash prone and buggy.

True, however, a GUI can and will bring a system down.

X does crash, and it's even more likely when you are pushing it really
hard with a fancy GUI.

Plus, even if the OS stays up, it's damaging to lose context and have
applications die because they lost X or lost connection to a front-end
in X.

So I still think the GUI parts need to be very, very solid.  Certainly
they need to be better than they are.  It's stupid that X can set my
keyboard or graphics card in a state that requires me to toggle reset.


-- 
UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza__________________________________shannon@widomaker.com