I've been playing around.

ray

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:12:28 -0500, George Peatty wrote:

> On 7 Dec 2007 11:43:18 +0100, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote:
>
>>So, did we ever definitively decide which is better, emacs or vi?
>
> Such mystical, transcendental questions have no solution. It's like asking,
> what is the value of pi?

3.141592653589+

Darrell Stec

Mark South wrote:

> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 06:27:05 +0000, Dan C wrote:
>
>> On 2007-12-07, ChrisC wrote:
>>> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
>>> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
>>> just an observation.
>>
>> I'd score this a 1.25 (out of 10) on the Troll-O-Meter.
>
> Trolls get weaker towards the weekend as their beer levels drop.
>
> So, did we ever definitively decide which is better, emacs or vi?
>
> Mark

No. The discussion got sidelined by the Nano advocates.

--
Later,
Darrell Stec darstec@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages

Meat Plow

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:

> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

Haven't noticed. I haven't had a crash in KDE 3.5.6 that I can remember.
I use gnome and qt apps also in kde.

ray

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 06:06:06 +0000, Bit Twister wrote:

> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:
>> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
>> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
>> just an observation.
>
> Change distributions. I run Mandriva Linux and yet to have a crash.
>
> I recommend you boot a rescue cd and run memtest overnight.

Good point - I would suspect hardware problems if either one has
significant problems. The only desktop I've ever had problems with was E17
about two years ago - and it's still under development.

Mark South

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:12:28 -0500, George Peatty wrote:

> On 7 Dec 2007 11:43:18 +0100, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote:
>
>>So, did we ever definitively decide which is better, emacs or vi?
>
> Such mystical, transcendental questions have no solution. It's like asking,
> what is the value of pi?

355/113 :-)

If you need a better approximation, you're building very big things, or
taking the universe apart.

J.O. Aho

ChrisC wrote:
> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

First, I make an assumption that you mean Gnome2 when you write Gnome, IMHO
you shouldn't mix those products, a good environment with Miguel de Icaza in
charge and a product I would cal bloat ware, cpu hog by Havoc.


No, I haven't noticed that at all, and I use KDE 9-12 hours per working day at
work and at least the same amount at weekends at home out over the couple of
hours I use it when I get home from work.

I have noticed the slowness, instability and the feeling of bing a prisoner
like when using microsoft explorer environment.


I should say that I loved Miguel's Gnome, but that Havoc ruined the name...

--

//Aho

Hadron

ml2mst <ml2mst@gmail.com> writes:

> ChrisC wrote:
>
>> just an observation.
>
> Or flamebait?
>
> I use both DE's on a regular base and neither of them frequently
> crash.

Hey marti, remember the last time you started throwing around unfounded
insults to posters here? Yes. You had to apologise. Unless you KNOW
someone is trolling then have the good decency to STFU. No one cares who
think is a troll or not. Save it for COLA.

To the OP - yes, I did indeed find KDE less stable than Gnome - but the
last time I tried it was over a year ago. I also found it generally
kludgier and over stuffed with useless features that personally I don't
need or want. Gnome does exactly want I want it to do - provide a clean
stable desktop from which I can select the applications I need to do
real work. A lot of people rave about Konqueror but frankly I hated it -
it is trying to be too many things to too many people.

And don't forget you can always use Gnome but still run your favourite
KDE apps too.

--
Remember: use logout to logout.

spike1@freenet.co.uk

George Peatty <peattyg47-1230@copper.net> did eloquently scribble:
> On 7 Dec 2007 11:43:18 +0100, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote:

>>So, did we ever definitively decide which is better, emacs or vi?

> Such mystical, transcendental questions have no solution. It's like asking,
> what is the value of pi?

Oh, that's EASY.
It's exactly...
the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference...

--
__________________________________________________ ____________________________
| spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
| in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
| Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moog

Dan C illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
> On 2007-12-07, ChrisC wrote:
>> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
>> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
>> just an observation.
>
> I'd score this a 1.25 (out of 10) on the Troll-O-Meter.

Perhaps, but then again, I do find it difficult to run KDE3 without
hitting constant sigsegv's

--
Moog

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the
leather straps."

Sanukk

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 12:11:40 +0100, Wim Cossement wrote:

> What kind of beer?

It's got to be Singha:
www.singhabeer.co.uk
Wonderful Thai beer, love the stuff :^>

-S