How GNOME and KDE Spend Their Money 167
bluescarni writes 'A side-by-side analysis of GNOME's and KDE's quarterly reports sheds some light (and dispels some myths) on the nature and the quantity of the funds of the two projects.'
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
How GNOME and KDE Spend Their Money
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin
What? No Pie Charts? (Score:2, Funny)
What? (Score:5, Funny)
Shocking!!!
simple. (Score:5, Funny)
KDE: blackjack & hookers
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
It's obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Slashdotted (Score:5, Funny)
Re:simple. (Score:2, Funny)
KDE is investing (Score:5, Funny)
Re:already slashdotted (Score:3, Funny)
> When elephants fight it is the grass under their feet that suffers the most.
True. Also, when elephants make love it is also the grass under their feet that suffers the most.
So, GNOME and KDE orgs not a big factor? (Score:4, Funny)
This seems to be saying that the GNOME and KDE organizations' funding are not a significant factor in the development of their related software.
In other words, this comparison tells very little of the actual funding that supports the development of either system. Presumably, those efforts are primarily funded through other entities (such as Trolltech, Linux distros, embedded device makers, etc.)
How are we supposed to have a GNOME v. KDE flame war without any significant data? That's like trying to have a debate about whether EMACS or vi is a superior editor on a device that has no keyboard!
Crap, I need a car analogy; can someone help me out here?
Re:Well, kind of obvious... (Score:4, Funny)
Considering most large enterprise distros (RHEL, SUSE, etc) ship with KDE as the main DE
Both SUSE's Enterprise offering (SLED) and RHEL default to GNOME. I don't know about etc.
Re:Since it is already down... (Score:5, Funny)
Arggh, getting confused here. If the article is in the comments, am I supposed to read it?
Re:What? No Pie Charts? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What? No Pie Charts? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Since it is already down... (Score:5, Funny)
Arggh, getting confused here. If the article is in the comments, am I supposed to read it?
No!
No matter how they try and trick you as a /.er you should never allow yourself to come into contact with the facts of a situation before commenting thoroughly.
Now after you have commented to your hearts desire you can ( If you choose to.) read the articles and even dive deeper into the facts of the situation. Just make sure you are "Fact Pure" while you are posting.
Re:So, GNOME and KDE orgs not a big factor? (Score:1, Funny)
Actually, it's more like comparing the speed of two cars with engines, but not wheels. Each side is standing still while claiming that their engine sounds faster.
Re:So the Beer and Hookers crowd (Score:5, Funny)
Re:simple. (Score:2, Funny)
You can bite my shiny Plastik ass.
Fixed that for you.
Re:already slashdotted (Score:3, Funny)
What part of "A well regulated militia" do you not understand?
I think it's the 'A', definitely. I mean, when someone says "A..." whatever, what exactly are you supposed to infer from that? It has always confused me.
Re:already slashdotted (Score:2, Funny)
"So, in other words, you're completely fucking wrong, you idiot retard. God bless." - ShakaUVM
Who is ShakaUVM, and why do they think everyone is fucking wrong and an idiot retard?
Re:Well, kind of obvious... (Score:5, Funny)
To be fair, a lot of Ubuntu users haven't heard of Linux either.
Re:already slashdotted (Score:2, Funny)
Eye Owl wise ewes a spill chucker - mcgrew
A bird, a sheep and an australian sex-toy?
Re:simple. (Score:3, Funny)
For those of you who think this is a troll, KDE3.5 FTW.
Re:simple. (Score:3, Funny)
GNOME: beer & smokes
KDE: blackjack & hookers
GNOME: gbeer & gsmokes
KDE: kblackjack & khookers
Fixed that for you.
Re:Huh (Score:3, Funny)
Re:simple. (Score:3, Funny)
KDE parties has a lot more girls attending
WHAT?! you're joking right?! THAT'S NOT FUNNY!
Re: inference (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, when someone says "A..." whatever, what exactly are you supposed to infer from that?
That they are Canadian?
Re:already slashdotted (Score:3, Funny)
> If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
Good thing I have other plans!
Re:insanely motivated (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, mouth breathers and trolls will claim that developers dont listen to users.
KDE developers don't listen to users. If they did, they would remove the $%*@%&#% cashew from the desktop.
What are you saying? (Score:3, Funny)
Are you saying that this Ubuntu can run on a computer without Linux underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me.
If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers with a Ubuntu. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that Linux is more than just the kernel ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.
Linus just spent $9 billion and many years to create Linux, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Linux. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Linux.
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Ubuntu could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of Linux. Not possible.
I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.
(This is an adaptation of an original work of art which can be located at http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=31199&messageID=579806&start=43 [zdnet.com])