| ▲ | zamadatix 3 days ago | |
> You put the things in quotation marks but I do not see these phrases in the thing to which you're commenting. Quotes are overloaded in that they are used for more than direct citation. In this case: to separate the "phrase" from "the sentence talking about it" (aka mention distinction - as used here as well). "s are also seen in aliases, scare quotes, highlighting of jargon, separating internal monologue, and more. If it doesn't seem to be a citation it probably wasn't meant to be one. On HN, ">" seems to be the most common way to signal a literal citation of something said. This is a fair enough, even more detailed, summary of the history, but I'm still at a loss for stitching this history to what KDE should be doing today. Similarly, for why this relationship results in good reasons for GNOME OS to exist but KDE Linux? E.g. are you saying KDE Linux should have been based on something like openSUSE (Plasma is the default there) instead of Arch, that they should have stuck to several more decades of not having a testing distro, or that they should do something completely different instead? I don't use GNOME or KDE as my DE, so I genuinely don't know what GNOME might be doing that KDE should be doing instead (and vice versa) all that deeply. The history is good, but it's hard for me to weed out what should be applying from it today. Or maybe I completely read to far into it and it was only a statement that GNOME has historically been more successful than KDE. It's known to happen to me :D. | ||
| ▲ | lproven 2 days ago | parent [-] | |
I thought I spelled it out clearly. Let me emphasise the executive summary: 1. KDE was first. 2. KDE used to enjoy significant corporate backing. 3. Because of some companies' actions, mergers and acquisitions, etc., other products gained ascendancy. 4. KDE is still widely used but no longer enjoys strong corporate backing. 5. Therefore KDE is going it alone and trying something technologically innovative with its showcase distro, because the existing distro vendors are not. The KDE Linux section of this recent article of mine spells out my position more clearly: https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/10/kde_linux_and_freebsd... | ||