Abandon "Default Desktop"

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Naheem Zaffar <naheemzaffar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2009/4/27 Arthur Pemberton <pemboa at gmail.com>
>>
>> 2009/4/27 Christoph Höger <choeger at cs.tu-berlin.de>:
>> > This is a free distribution.
>> >
>> > If you don't like _any_ default choice, feel free to make your own
>> > spin ;)
>> >
>> > That said: I think, a default desktop is needed as well as a default
>> > color sheme or a default name: You need something that helps people to
>> > recognize fedora. That's all.
>>
>>
>> You're going to have to back that up with some reason as who why a
>> default desktop is needed.
>
> A distribution is more than just a collection of packages stored in a semi
> convenient location. New users also need to be given informed choices.
>
> The extreme to not choosing sensible defaults is to present the user with a
> list of all the packages, none clicked and ask them to choose exactly what
> they want. I am sure the users will thank Fedora for that...
>
> Choice is only good when its informed choice. A person can only truly choose
> if he/she knows what the choices entail - a new user will not know what DE
> is better suited by him/her before trying them all, so forcing a choice to
> decide on one is just an illusion of choice.
>
> When Fedora has defaults, to me it means that someone has put some thought
> into this, into making it all coherent. And that is a good thing. If I
> disagree with any default, I can then try to work around it, but that would
> only be a 1% change decision in most cases instead of forcing the end user
> to choose 100% of the components.


What's the criteria being used to decide the default desktop?

-- 
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )