|
|
|
|
|
|
by syshum
3463 days ago
|
|
|
>> when a collaborative project would be able to reduce that by a huge factor and benefit everyone. Or benefit no one because you create a Desktop that no one likes because it is developed in a way to pisses everyone off Gnome users do not like the KDE Experience Awesome Users do not like the Gnome Experience XFCE users do not like the Awesome Experiance This is the reason these products exisit, and no it is not "duplicating efforts" any more than have different models of Cars is "duplicating efforts" Do you really believe the automotive industry would be better off is all the Auto Manufacturers did away with all Models and simply made 1 car. |
|
|
Nope, nobody believes that. Which is why any argument attacking that sort of thinking is nothing more than straw-man arguing.
What people believe is that some situations exist where fragmentation of effort produces far inferior results to coordinated efforts. The different factors that determine this are numerous and complex. Suffice to say, this sort of situation where fragmentation is indeed bad is common but far from universal in software.
The comments in this thread show some people insisting that this type of issue exists (and they are right) and some other people insisting on some dogma that fragmentation and competition are always fine (or something that sounds like that) and are arguing with straw men who think that coordination is always good and fragmentation is always bad.