GNOME in the Year of the Monkey 227
An anonymous reader writes "GNOME Foundation's Tim Ney describes some of
the project's efforts marking the Lunar New
Year of the Monkey with a tip, "Never sit with your back to a lobbyist for proprietary software." GNOME is rapidly becoming popular
in developing countries and you can donate to
help."
Year of the Monkey cant be that good... (Score:5, Funny)
We all know where this is going to lead
Re:Year of the Monkey cant be that good... (Score:5, Interesting)
Components, Components, Components!! ("Universal coupling" [geocities.com]).
Seriously, GNOME needs more work going into bonobo. IMHO its the only area where it lags behind KDE. That's the reason why you hear Abiword and gnumeric a lot more than kword and kspread, but you hear of koffice but not of gnome-office.
Loose coupling is not necessarily a bad idea though. For example gnome apps start quickly when you're in KDE but not vice versa.
Re:Year of the Monkey cant be that good... (Score:2)
In general, KDE apps start very marginally slower if I have NO KDE apps started. If even one is started, it's pretty much on par.
Gnome the way to go? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a big fan of KDE, and a few years ago I found Gnome a little bit cumbersome to use on a daily basis (this is not troll... those days I didn't find KDE too special either).
However... recently, I've tried it once or twice, and man, how it has improved!
I always liked Gnome because of its GTK+ (C coding is great!).
I'm even considering switching to it, thanks to Dropline Gnome [dropline.net], a version especially crafted for Slackware. I'd like some opinions from its users (Dropline Gnome).... anyone around?
c coding is great, but not for this (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Gnome the way to go? (Score:5, Informative)
I've been using it for some time now, and I haven't found anything missing (besides win32 video codec drivers
Also they update packages fairly often (stuff like mozilla); they even provide an applet for panel that checks for updates.
Overall, strongly recomended for any slacker outhere!
Re:Gnome the way to go? (Score:2)
BTW Kde 3.2RC1 is nice on slack 9.1(actually slack-current) but anyway..........
Re:Gnome the way to go? (Score:3, Interesting)
Dropline rocks! (Score:2)
Re:Gnome the way to go? (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope it continues, and I like that people have the choice to use KDE as well. It's all good.
year of the monkey (Score:5, Funny)
Huh? Year of The Monkey can only be good for Ximian Desktop [ximian.com].
GNOME's logo desn't look like a monkey's print anyway.
Re:year of the monkey (Score:5, Funny)
It's just a pretty rare species is all. And not a monkey really, an ape. The Great Octal Ape. Found only in the deepest jungles of Cambridge, MA.
They do have a cousin though, the Lesser Bonoboctal Ape, found only in the misty, magical land known as Berserkly.
KFG
Re:year of the monkey (Score:1)
Yes, but, where are they in the poll [slashdot.org]? ;)
Re:year of the monkey (Score:1)
Developing countries? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the only problem I see for GNOME and KDE. Powerful and flexible as they are, they're so bulky and huge that they don't feel much faster than Windows XP. If we want to give people an incentive to switch, we want them to FEEL that their machines are faster under Linux. Instead, you can see on message boards around the Net first-timers stating that Linux is "slow" and "bloated" because of this.
I hope at some point KDE and GNOME developers really make headway into the bloat and performance, because otherwise it's not only unusable for any machine built earlier than 2001, but also doesn't give a good impression. Linux was always known as the speedy, svelte and lighweight OS - this image is being eroded.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:5, Interesting)
Have to disagree with you there. I use GNOME on a P3-450Mhz at home, and it feels almost as fast as the WinXP I use on a P4-2600Mhz at work; nearly five times the machine!
As you say, RAM does matter (I have 262Mb on the home machine) but memory is cheap. What's the big deal?
Re:Developing countries? (Score:3, Insightful)
The big deal is that some people use GNU/linux because they can get it for $0.
We don't want Little Johnny to have to ask his parents to upgrade before he can give GNU/linux a whirl.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Are you saying the machine he's going to run it on was free? RAM is 5% the cost of a machine. You pay more for a video card.
I'll re-iterate my point: I use Linux as my sole OS on a 5 year old consumer quality machine. It does great, and with the improvements in the 2.6 kernal I hear about, I probably won't need to upgrade my hardware for several more years.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:4, Insightful)
Read the parent post again, and note what he writes about developing countries and older PCs.
Memory is not cheap when you are poor, so, it's indeed a big deal.
For those of us that are priviliged, and still want to use older machines, we may have trouble getting more memory. For instance, I've got a Dell Dimension L466cx that can only use PC100 memory. Now, the online stores in my country only sells PC133 memory, so more memory may be hard to get.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
The PC I had problems with were all Dells, ranging from Celeron to dual PIII. The dual PIII's where using PC600 memory, and would not accept most of the PC800 available today. We're using those old dual PIII (1GHz) for development, and on those machines we should actually have 1GB memory for comfortable debugging. Of all the PC800 I tried, just one older 64MB didn't hang the PC.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
As you say, RAM does matter (I have 262Mb on the home machine) but memory is cheap. What's the big deal?
Memory is not cheap! Take an old pentium-era computer (without 168pin SDR DIMMS) and try to buy enough memory to bump it up to 256M.
Ne'ermind that in some areas, there is shipping costs, and tariffs on that memory.
Finally, if you are doing things the *right* way, the $20 pricewatch special isn't the way to go - you want quality memory chips from a quality manufacturer.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Pentium-era computer? I once tried to load Windows 95 on a Pentium 90 and it took five minutes just to boot up. Once it did, it was too slow to be usable. (This was back when the machine was less than a year old, it was the latest in consumer technology.)
If we're going to contemplate the memory and processing required by GNOME and the computer resources available to the poverty stricken, we at least need to consider the possibility that *no* usable desktop may be available. GNOME may not be as light as a
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
It ran very decent, all things considered, especially with my Voodoo!
Re:Developing countries? (Score:3, Interesting)
Uh, first of all, I was in high school before IBM's first PC. I'm not some flippant high schooler who doesn't understand the concept of value and investment... and neither, hopefully, are my kids.
Second, half the PC100 RAM in my machine came from my company who was going to throw it away! I'm not proposing you go out and buy a new machine to use GNOME. Just the opposite!
Lastly, poverty is not caused by making wise use of current resources, which is exactly what I'm talking about. There's no insistance
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
It said you should have 1GHz proc and 1GB of RAM if you were going to use KDE or GNOME!
I usually run icewm and fvwm2, but what is up with those specs!
Typos?
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
The gig of RAM figure is pure bullshit though; you don't need anything like that much just for KDE or GNOME. They should be perfectly happy with 256meg of RAM. That may sound like a lot, but it's entry level for a modern machine, and very cheap to buy to upgrade an older machine with if necessary. I'd be rathe
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2, Informative)
Performance. (Score:2, Informative)
> headway into the bloat and performance
This point would be right now. As of version 3.2, KDE apps are routinely faster and lighter than equivalent third-party apps (mostly because of their strong policy of code reuse, I think, up to 80% of any given app's logic is exported to libs that are shared with all the other KDE apps, and only need to be loaded once). I've successfully run it on a Pentium-class computer. It works completely fine.
And
Re:Developing countries? (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean on the server. Which it still is. The *nix DEs never had much of a reputation for speed (except maybe wmaker and other niche WMs). Please don't confuse the two. I remember KDE 1.x being very slow on the hardware of the day. Today's KDE and GNOME are certainly way faster on today's hardware.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Also KDE 1.x performed pretty well on the hardware of the day IMO. At least when
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2, Interesting)
Often older equipment is more expensive and harder to get, and harder to get support on.
Developing countries have computers... it's the software licenses that dwarf the cost of those computers that hurts.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
Most developing countries use quite different locales. So I think it might have to do with the fact that GNOME's Pango engine is very great for truly internationalized apps, including very good bidirectional support.
Then again, I don't really know about KDE's i18n/l10n capabilities since I've hardly used it for quite a while.
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
In the heady days of 199
Re:Developing countries? (Score:3, Informative)
You can't complain about performance if you *never* touch a PC, right? You can't have a reference frame when you can't simply use a computer.
I need pretty much the same hardware to run Win 2000/Office/MS Development tools, and still pay a few thousand bucks to MS if I want to perform any other action than play solitaire (is solitaire still in XP?). And it's that or use pirated versions...
For being productive as a developer in Windo
Re:Developing countries? (Score:2)
However my point is not about 32MB PCs, because as I can see there is lots of much better PC around in developing countries I was visiting. In profitable commercial companies and in goverment agencies
It doesn't (Score:2)
Innovation (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Innovation (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Innovation (Score:2)
This sounds more like issues with Metacity than GNOME. While Metacity may be the default window manager for GNOME environments, there are plenty of others that play nice with GNOME. Move to one of those.
Fortune? (Score:2)
I don't get it.
Is it some kind of ximian-mono/redmond-# joke?
Re:Fortune? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fortune? (Score:3, Funny)
Hopefully we won't have to add "and Mono" to the list.
Re:Fortune? (Score:2)
Unfortunately for Spyglass, Microsoft gave away IE for free. Any percentage of 0 is still 0. Spyglass however should have come back and sued the pants off of Microsoft for a percent of each copy of Windows when Microsoft told the DOJ that separating IE from Windows was impossible because Windows is IE and IE is Wi
Re:Fortune? (Score:2)
Saying the obvious: Gnome started as a reaction
to KDE based on closed Qt. So what does Gnome do...
they begin to based on Mono. Nuts.
Re:Fortune? (Score:3, Informative)
Besides, Mono is a GPL implementation of the
I don't like Microsoft's business practices and I can't stand Windows, MS Office, etc. but Mono, C#, the CLR and, by inference,
"Rapidly Becoming Popular" (Score:2)
In a recent topic we had an "increasing trend in bad documentation" as if people completely forgot the acres of bad documentation of years past.
Sure, i'm sure there is somebody out there in a developing nation who is adopting gnome, so for him, it is indeed rapidly becoming popular. but without real evidence, this is just so much foofaa. (not to mention bad journalism, but remember where we are!)
From my observations... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:From my observations... (Score:2, Informative)
You're new here. (Score:2, Interesting)
Back in 1999, Slashdot was pro-GNOME/anti-KDE.
Once KDE started to pull ahead feature-wise, the people here started loving it. Oh, and Qt going GPL didn't hurt either.
Re:You're new here. (Score:2)
The KDE `fans' on slashdot can be pretty um, vocal about their preference, but in general there seems to be a preference for Gnome/GTK.
Indeed, Gnome's influence seems to be increasing rapidly; to the extent that it matters, KDE's license change appears to have happened a little too late.
[This mirrors what I see in the non-slashdot world, BTW.]
Never turn your back to a lobbyist--OSAIA (Score:2)
You can get your Congressperson's contact info on that site also. We recommend faxing your letter as well as sending it via post mail. The mail facilities at the capitol still are not 100% after the anthrax incidents of a few
Re:This lunar year (Score:3, Informative)
Strictly, the Chinese calendar is a lunisolar calendar [wikipedia.org], not a lunar calendar [wikipedia.org]. I believe that lunisolar calendars have leap years whenever 12 months won't fit easily into one year. Hopefully this means Gnome will enjoy many leaps;)
Re:Gnome (Score:5, Funny)
I have NO idea why anyone would choose vi over EMACS. Perhaps it's time the supporters of VIM and BSD switched to supporting EMACS instead.
Also does anyone use Macs these days? I just got an Amiga and it is shhweeet. Decent pre-emptive multitasking and a real command line, not like a Mac where you have to install the Multifinder just to have more than one app running at once. Command line? Ha.
Anyway, I'm converted to Amigas and EMACS forever, I do hope the community gains control over its senses and switches to supporting just these two.
Re:Gnome - vi (Score:1)
Re:Gnome - vi (Score:2)
An experienced emacs user with mittens on would beat an experience vi user. You'll outgrow vi. You'll cling to it for as long as you can because you've invested so much time in using it, but emacs is the only editor that scales to very advanced usage.
Re:Gnome - vi (Score:2)
Emacs is for smart users (Score:2)
Just did. We had to edit many (few thousands) files on several programming languages with several formats of configuration files and with syncronizing of some data elements in those files with few databases.
The vi guy quickly gave up to do it only in vi and finally decided to create Java program that would do all the work of such big refactorying.
I've finished defining and debugging the last macros in el
Re:Gnome (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Gnome (Score:2, Informative)
Besides, we all know we can't run EMACS on Amiga... yet.
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
Not if you run Linux on that Amiga. Wherever I run Linux I have Emacs.
Re:Gnome (Score:3, Interesting)
But it isn't always like that - once per year, I try to install 2-3 distro's, and watch what will come out of it.
Usually everything goes smooth, until I have to choose - KDE or Gnome. And to be honest, while KDE isn't always feel comfortable for me, its A LOT easier to understand than Gnome, especially when you switch from Win.
The only positive point about Gnome over KDE, I
Re:Gnome (Score:3, Interesting)
WinXP is it's own punishment. I can swap out my motherboard, change my video card, and use a different hard drive, re-install Linux in 15 minutes, and never have to report to Gates Inc as to why the registry keys don't add up.
But I see your point. KDE is more like MS Windows, and you can even make it look and feel almost exactly the same, though most Windows users never figure out the "how", and most Linux users never justify the "why". Gnome is a little more light-weig
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
Were you able to fix that yourself? Or did you have to call someone to get permission first?
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
Which isn't saying much. It's like saying your experience with Chinese culture is limited to ordering dim sum
Re:Gnome (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Gnome (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
Oh horrors! Someone forgot to weld the car's hood shut!
Re:Gnome (Score:4, Interesting)
Tried KDE 3.2? Gnome has a lot of work ahead.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you tried KDE 3.2 beta or rc? I'm currently running on KDE 3.2 rc, and I'm not all that sure whether Gnome will continue (or even start) surpassing KDE. The 3.2 preversions still have some bugs, but boy, is it snappy and sweet! This was the first time a Linux desktop passed winxp in point-and-drool usability.
Gnome is doing alright, I guess, but it still doesn't approach KDE. I'm waiting for Gnome 2.6, hoping it will be snappier (and less buggy) than 2.4. There are no reasons why Gnome wouldn't "win" KDE in the "end", with all the corporate support (at least in spirit, if not developer hours) and superior licensing (LGPL vs. GPL-or-pay-up), but meanwhile, KDE continues to Work Better (tm) and I will continue using it on my home desktop. I give every new version of Gnome a chance, trying to keep using it for a few weeks or so, but I always go back to KDE.
For starters, Konqueror just kills Nautilus. Does Nautilus have a shortage of developers or what is wrong with them? If Konqueror could just be ported to use GTK...
Re:Tried KDE 3.2? Gnome has a lot of work ahead.. (Score:2)
Yes.
Re:Tried KDE 3.2? Gnome has a lot of work ahead.. (Score:2)
I don't want to play with monkeys... I want konquer the net.
Re:Tried KDE 3.2? Gnome has a lot of work ahead.. (Score:2)
The keyboard layout switcher doesn't work. I run Gnome 2.4 on Fedora, and haven't seen a fix, so I guess the bug is still here. It renders the system unusable for me.
How does it work better for you?
It's mostly about Konqueror being better than Nautilus. I use "multicolumn" view on Konq to see as many files as possible, and Nautilus doesn't offer that. I can also right-click for "create new fi
Re:Tried KDE 3.2? Gnome has a lot of work ahead.. (Score:2)
Been there, done that. It doesn't work like on windows and KDE, instead the listing becomes "sparse", and the icons are still above the name, instead of the left side where the listing would be much more compact and readable.
As I said before: provide valid points.
I don't know what points I could provide to illustrate the fact that KDE is faster. It just feels faster.
That was all?
Pretty much. If Gnome fixed the points I list in their 2.6 release I
Re:Gnome (Score:5, Informative)
1. More consistentcy between apps due to the Human Interface Guidelines
2. Nicer interface layout. Better spacing, and I like the OS 9 style menu up the top, feels less like a windows clone, taking the best from both worlds. Also less flashly, more standard than KDE.
3. Options. Apart from Gconf, GNOME comes with far less options. KDE is nice, but trying to locate an option in the KDE Control Center is hell. GConf is a far better way to go.
4. Apps. GNOME/GTK2+ has all the apps I want. Gems like Rhythmbox and the GIMP when there is nothing that compares on KDE. Also the old standbys like Abiword, Bluefish and Gnumeric.
5. Lastly, the GNOME community! Sites like planet.gnome.org and gnomedesktop.org help GNOME rock just that much more.
Re:Gnome (Score:4, Informative)
This used to be a point in favor of KDE didn't it?
2. Nicer interface layout. Better spacing, and I like the OS 9 style menu up the top, feels less like a windows clone, taking the best from both worlds. Also less flashly, more standard than KDE.
The menubar isn't OS 9 style. KDE can do an OS9 style menubar up the top, GTK can't. OS9 style menubars are per-application, not for the desktop. The two are incomparible because they create a different user intereface style, one that focusses on the application more than the file.
(Disclaimer: I prefer Gnome-apps to KDE apps, but run ROX.)
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
Perhaps, but KDE really hasn't radically changed UI or HIG wise since 2.0 came out. What was state of the art back then is not acceptable today, so just by working as it always has done before it has actually become relatively worse. I'm not knocking KDE, they're really on the right track with 3.2, which fixes a lot of the problems I have with it (like the current on-crack context menus). The same can't be said for the "new and improved" Debian installe
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
KDE has HIG as well
KDE also has (if you wan to) OS 9 style menu. UI is a matter of the taste, but it's alot easier for KDE to tweak their UI than it is for GNOME to create a background-technology (Kparts, KIO, DCOP etc.) that rivals that o
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Understanding the options dilemma (Score:2)
GNOME gives you the possibility to change some basic-settings via a GUI. KDE does that as well, and in addition to that, you can also change some advanced settings via GUI as well. But if you want to mess with only the few basic options, you can do that just fine. And once you know where to find
Re:Understanding the options dilemma (Score:2)
Think a step further. Why do you want to change it? If you want to change it then there's probably something wrong with the default configuration, or you want to unbreak something. The obvious solution is to either fix the bug, or provide a better default configuration.
And this, my friend, is the GNOME philosophy.
GNOME is not KDE. It has different goals and is targeted towards a differe
Re:Understanding the options dilemma (Score:2)
I'd have to say there are actually good odds that you are an INDIVIDUAL. That means things like, you have personal tastes, you don't think identically to the teaming masses, you are in some manner unique.
The problem with GNOME is, it aims for the lowest common denominator. And, guess what, that's only hitting about 40% of the population. I'm not saying KDE is better at the moment. However, in the long run it can
Re:Understanding the options dilemma (Score:2)
Duh, because not all people think and behave identically. Desktop that was configurated accodring to your needs and wants might not be suitable for me for example. Some of use lots and lots of virtual desktop, some use just one. Others want their toolbar vertically, others want it horizontally. There is no "correct" way to set things like that up, we all bave personal needs.
Re:Understanding the options dilemma (Score:2)
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
1. More consistency between apps due to not having gimp among the native apps
2. Nicer interface layout. Better spacing, and while I don't like the OS 9 style menu up the top, I have the option. Also nicer, more eye-candy options.
3. Options. GNOME has very few options. GNOME is nice, but I like to configure things my way and Gconf is hell. KDE Control Center is a far better way to go.
4. Apps. KDE/Qt has all the apps I want. Gems like KOffice (PDF edition) and K3b when there is
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
If you knew more about what HIGs are about, you would know that a toolkit and back-end libraries don't count for shit, its a design issue.
That being said, the GNOME HIGs are bad and their apps break them in even
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
I must admit to going hunting for one after I got very annoyed by the auto-line breaking in KatePart constantly completely fucking up my formatting. That and having to rejig all the keybindings away from windows style defaults.
In the end I discovered CVS Emacs compiles with GTK+ these days (and looks very nice when it does so!). Voila, excellent autolinebreaking, on the fly spell checking, superior syntax highlighting, and (unsurprisingly) em
Re:Gnome (Score:5, Informative)
Note that desktop environment usability should not be judged on its similarity to another. If you've only ever used Windows, and you like the Windows interface, and you judge everything against Windows, KDE may seem more appealing. But that doesn't mean KDE (or GNOME) is better.
For many of us, the Windows interface is not ideal. I might also question the quality of the SuSE GNOME environment, too, since they have long been a KDE based desktop (confession: I've never tried it). Try a GNOME-centric distribution (like Fedora [redhat.com]) and try GNOME, you might find it more appealing.
Finally, GNOME's widgets can all be themed, did you only use the default? art.gnome.org [gnome.org] hosts tons of widget, window and icon themes with which I could nearly convince you your environment was any number of other OSs.
Re:Gnome (Score:3, Insightful)
and
art.gnome.org hosts tons of widget
And there you find that the most download theme is eXperience.
http://art.gnome.org/themes/metacity/index.php?so r t_by=popularity&thumbnails_per_page=24
gnome developpers need some monkey to shout to them "users! users! users!".
Users are used to one interface and NEED to find it when they use their computer, before they switch the interface, if ever. Most USERS i know Dont want to switch interfaces, wheth
Re:Gnome (Score:4, Insightful)
Heh, the theme you linked to prove your point was only uploaded today. Downloads per day at art.gnome.org is calculated over a very recent period. (Like maybe even 24 hours.) So popularity is nowhere close to indicating the most number of downloads.
GNOME users are not some homogeneous group. (Are the other desktop's users?) We come from Mac9, MacX, Win95, WinXP, KDE, Solaris, the command line, and others. So to define your "one interface" is perhaps not as simple as you seem to think it is.
Half of the real question about the quality of a desktop environment is how well it works for someone who has never used a computer before. (The other half being for someone who has.)
Re:Gnome (Score:2)
You're right.
GNOME users are not some homogeneous group. (Are the other desktop's users?) We come from Mac9, MacX, Win95, WinXP, KDE, Solaris, the command line, and others.
Are you talking about users or developpers? I was explicitly referring to users and implicitly excluding developpers by the reference to steve ballmer's "developpers!
Re:Gnome (Score:5, Interesting)
The ability to drag and drop just about anything is good. Try dragging and dropping a file from Nautilus into a Gnome file dialog. It switches to that file and its directory. That eliminates any complaints I have about the file dialog. Also, little things, like the theme configuration menu, you can drag and drop a theme onto it. You can drag and drop a file onto a program shortcut to execute the program with that file.
Gnome panels are pretty nice. All the little mini-apps you can add to them are cool (weather, mail checker, etc). The drawers are pretty nice, too.
And then there's the apps:
Gaim, Evolution, Rhythmbox, Totem, Gimp, etc.
KDE is great, but Gnome is great, too, and fits much better for me and has made my Linux experience much nicer.
BTW, I know I'm responding to a troll (the part about supporting a single GUI gave it away), but I'm sure someone is truthfully saying exactly what this guy is saying.
If you haven't, try the latest Gnome. And I'll try the next KDE release when it comes out of beta. I'm not committed to either, I'll use the one that works the best for me. Right now that one is Gnome.
Re:Where's the news? (Score:2)
Re:Funny attitude towards lobbyists.... (Score:2)
Just because it was doesn't mean it still is. If GNOME *only* exists because of political reasons then it must have died a long time ago because QT is now GPL'ed. Yet it still exists. That means GNOME's existance is definitely not entirely political.
And GNOME's goals are differen than KDE's. Comparing the one to the other and say A must die because B is "better" is like saying oranges must die because apples are better.
"Isn't it still considered techn
Re:I guess I'm really confused. (Score:2)
Things that it does that I haven't found another mail client to do for me
1) allow me to purge old mail messages automatically from a folder after they get to a certain age (essential if you are reading high volume mailing lists)
2) Single key (space bar) navigation down each message, unread messages in folder, over all folders (except trash)
Those two simple things have kept me back from switching from KDE to Gnome.
Re:I guess I'm really confused. (Score:2)
Mutt [mutt.org] will do this with folder-hooks.
2) Single key (space bar) navigation down each message, unread messages in folder, over all folders (except trash)
Mutt [mutt.org] will do this easily, just rebind the keys.
Re:Want to remove Gnome? (Score:2)