__/ On Sunday 28 August 2005 15:35, [Michael Black] wrote : \__
> Juha Siltala (jsiltala@xxxxxxx) writes:
>> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 18:55:21 +0000, Michael Black wrote:
>>> The Brown Suit distribution. Or maybe "Linux Business".
>>> But it will be a drag to write all those applications so the weirdly
>>> titled apps don't have to be included.
>> You don't have to rewrite all the apps. GNOME application menus already
>> use labels such as "Music Player" instead of "Rhythmbox". Some
>> distributions (especially the corporate ones) further clean stuff up and
>> hide the app names from window manager titlebars, hiding them to the
>> "About" box or such. After all, their users really want a "web browser"
>> and not "Epiphany".
> That's true, I was doing something the other day and was a bit annoyed
> that it didn't specify what it was.
> On the other hand, I use the console pretty much of the time, so the names
> are important to me. It can't be legit to rename an application so
> when you install it it says "text editor" instead of Emacs or Vi.
Calling something "text editor" would a poor decision because it perils the
(friendly) competition and makes it hard to argue which text editor
surpasses which (I actually wrote about editors only 1-2 hours ago <
Even MS call their common editors Wordpad and Notepad; Mac used to call it
simpletext (BBEdit is currently one of the popular commercial ones). I am
in favour of binding a /description/ to a name though. It wasn't until 2
days ago that I realised KBear is an FTP client. I have it had installed
for 2 years and never used it (glad I didn't...).