From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 7 17:58:48 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1392A106566C for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 17:58:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx01.qsc.de (mx01.qsc.de [213.148.129.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32E68FC08 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 17:58:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r55.edvax.de (port-92-195-8-222.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.8.222]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD1F3DCBD; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 18:58:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from r55.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r55.edvax.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id oA7HwjgN001496; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 18:58:45 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 18:58:45 +0100 From: Polytropon To: Chip Camden Message-Id: <20101107185845.66745df2.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20101107174106.GB77433@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> References: <20101106190934.GB67566@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> <20101106200239.00004b64@unknown> <20101106203213.GC13095@guilt.hydra> <20101106225446.GC67566@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> <20101107101750.00006bd2@unknown> <20101107174106.GB77433@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tips for installing windows and freeBSD both.. anyone?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 17:58:48 -0000 On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 09:41:06 -0800, Chip Camden wrote: > I'm not here to bash desktop environments, I seriously want to know you use them to > improve productivity. Yes, would be interesting to know. Not that I deny it - I just have no evidence from my experience and observations on how this could be achieved. > I used to be a big believer in GUIs. I may admit that the more I'm using GUI based programs for everyday tasks regularly (e. g. MUA), I get more and more disappointed that it seems that I need to buy a new PC in order to keep the same average speed of operation. > Now I find that any time I reach for the mouse, I'm slowing myself down. A TrackPoint (the little joystick-like pointing device located in the middle of the keyboard) seems to be a good repacement for a regular mouse, and in any case for fingerslime glidepads. > It's more efficient to use the keyboard even to switch focused windows > or to follow links in a browser (provided that the window manager and > browser are equipped with usable shortcuts). Important point! But in reality you see keyboard support more and more left out for the GUI programs - allthough they COULD provide good keyboard support. WindowMaker (as a window manager) and Opera (as a web browser) are, in my experience, examples of how to combine good keyboard support with good mouse support. > I use a tiling wm (xmonad) to maximize visibility, real estate usage, and > navigability. No overlapping windows unless I say so. Tiling window managers, as I've often seen, seem to be the choice of the advanced / professional users. Sadly, their magic didn't open up to me yet. :-) > That's my experience. How does yours differ, and how does KDE/GNOME > help? Again, I may share a very individual opinion about KDE and Gnome. If you're coming from a "Windows" background, things seem to be logical and "as expected" in those environments. If you're from a UNIX / X background, things look overcomplicated, illogical, and somewhat strange (like using the edit buffer for copying and moving files, the inability to handle windows focus and foreground independently). So a person like myself would have to spend many time clicking around in KDE or Gnome in order to configure it into something halfway usable. KDE and Gnome represent "(quite) closed ecosystems": There are programs for KDE, similar ones for Gnome, and they interact well with each other within their ecosystems. Mixed forms, a strength of generic UNIX and X applications, often becomes complicated. Even language issues (i18n) are typical symptoms of that "closed- ness". Coming back to your initial statement: For users EXPECTING something to act in a specific way, KDE and Gnome really "boost" their productivity, as it doesn't force them to question or relearn things they take for granted. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...