Linux, what are our objectives?

[dsr-mzpnVDyJpH4k7aNtvndDlA at public.gmane.org (Dan Ritter)]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 08:37:26AM -0500, markw-FJ05HQ0HCKaWd6l5hS35sQ at public.gmane.org wrote:
> They got rid of desktop icons ? more or less. They are no longer files or
> directories in your desktop folder, but something different. Does it
> bother anyone that they did this? One of the things I like about the
> historical UNIX model is that things that seem similar, are similar. The
> notion that icons on the desktop are different than icons on the file
> browser troubles me. It seems like a divergence from a coherent model to a
> more complicated and confusing one.

I do away with all desktop icons completely on my machines.
Desktop real-estate is at a premium (he says, looking at a
1680x1050 display next to a 2048x1536 display) and not to be
wasted on application launchers.

> So the question I have is this: is [K]ubuntu really the direction in which
> we as a community wish to see Linux go? Is it like the republican party,

Kubuntu is the direction which the Kubuntu group likes.
Xubuntu is the direction which the Xubuntu group likes.
Ubuntu is the direction which Shuttleworth likes.
Red Hat is the direction which the Red Hat corporation likes.
Debian is the direction which the Debian community likes.
SuSE is the direction which Novell likes.
Gentoo is the direction which a bunch of crazed tweakers like.

All of them are Linux.

-dsr-

-- 
http://tao.merseine.nu/~dsr/eula.html is hereby incorporated by reference.

You can't defend freedom by getting rid of it.