KDE 4 .. or the KDE Workspace?
What these blog entries are usually comparing is not "KDE 4" with "GNOME 3" but two of the KDE 4 workspace components, Plasma and KWin, with gnome-shell. Little more than that is compared in most of them when the topic is "KDE 4 or GNOME 3?". This is unfortunate because KDE 4 is a lot more than just the KDE Workspace, which is just one product that comes from KDE, just as GNOME 3 will be more than just gnome-shell.
A primary example is the KDE development platform. It consists of KDE's libraries built on top of Qt, Akonadi, Nepomuk/Strigi and others and represents one of the most important products we create. This platform started back in the 90s as a means to an end: getting the KDE desktop workspace functioning and sharing code and functionality efficiently between KDE apps in a way that guaranteed some consistency. These days, while it has kept this same set of purposes as an important part of its mission, the KDE development platform has taken on a much bigger role and a life of its own.
I'd love to see some thoughts that extend beyond Plasma/KWin out there and look at things such as the maturity of KDE's development platform compared to what others are offering right now or, as in the case of GNOME 3, in the near future. I'm really excited how we have Nepomuk shaping up, for instance, or how in the last few releases we have seen integration of KAuthorization which gives us access to PolicyKit (including the upcoming polkit-1 release) on Linux using the same "hide the system level API details" strategy as Phonon, Solid and others which in turn has made the polkit-0.9 to polkit-1 transition painless for KDE applications. We have good, stable libraries built on really exciting technologies. (Just look at what's going on in Qt these days, or Akonadi!)
There are also other products that KDE projects churn out at a remarkable pace as well. Some are released in categorical packages, such as KDE Games (which just got another neat game the other day, a Bomberman-style game which stole some of our time last night here in the house ;), KDE Edu or KOffice; others are released as stand out individuals, such as Amarok. These are all independent projects within the KDE umbrella and most if not all of them are considered part of "KDE 4". They can all be run independently of the KDE Workspace and stand on their own merits.
What I'm saying is that if you lift your eyes up (or cast them further down, as the case may be), KDE 4 is a lot more than the KDE Workspace and we should be sharing those other bits with people too.
"You say you want a revolution"
The other point that keeps coming up is whether there is too much, too little or any actual revolution out there in the workspace. Regardless of what people think of where gnome-shell's approach lands on that scale, there's a subtlety to the Plasma story that I fear may be being missed and it makes me simultaneously beam with pride and cry tears and sorrow. ;)
To be honest: I don't believe in revolutions, because revolutions don't exist except as a story telling mechanism. A "revolution" is a story about an evolutionary series of events with some careful editing: it starts at a random point in time which then gets called "the beginning", skips most of the middle bits and then ends at another point in time convenient to the storyteller that gets called "the exciting end!" If you track beyond the beginning and ends and include all of the middle bits too, it turns out all "revolutions" are actually evolutionary sequences presented in a much simpler (and fun to listen to) way. So maybe we should be talking about the value of different possible evolutionary tracks and what they can or will bring us; talking about revolutions can be left for people retelling our story far in the future?
In any case, several writers have noted that "Plasma" offers a pretty stock desktop with a whole bunch of nice improvements. I would agree there: we've improved the system tray, notifications, widget handling; we've removed a lot of assumptions like "this is the one and only KMenu" or "yes, you must have at least one panel!"; we've added things like a dashboard overlay and multiple widget layouts, extensive SVG based theming and the ability to extend your panels and desktop not only with C++ but also with HTML, JavaScript, Ruby, Python, GoogleGadgets, MacOS widgets and E17 widgets; we've improved workflows associated with device hotplug, application menus, etc. Those are certainly evolutionary and not revolutionary. (Which reminds me, I need to do a new "cool things you can do with KRunner" screencast..)
Beyond what's quite clearly evolutionary, we're introducing things like remote widgets which lets you share and move components over the network between devices without any difficult configuration or set up. A couple of clicks and away you go. We're finally merging Plasma's Activities (multiple widget layouts) with Nepomuk's store and beyond into applications and working on an improved Activities management system. These are a bit more than the usual breed of evolutionary features.
Even then, there's something much more critical to understand here: when I set out to tear apart kicker and kdesktop, the foundations of KDE 3's workspace, I did so with the idea in the mind that this should never need to be so painful to achieve again.
An epiphanous (is that word?) moment for me came in the realization that the current desktop metaphors and ideas are so deeply entrenched in today's users that they can not just be ripped out wholesale and replaced. At least not if you expect any great number of people to actually use it on their desktop or laptop computer. We can evolve it, but we can't just replace it wholesale. But it will evolve and our framework must be able to keep ahead of that curve. That means that even on the traditional form factors of laptop and desktop, the days of building a purpose-built "here's your workspace" system and expecting that to last for any extended period of time are over. The workspace needs to be flexible; it needs to be able to adapt to ideas we haven't had yet; it needs to be able to have a ninja drop into the middle of it and make lightening fast changes to one area to bring that one area forward to the next necessary stage of evolution without running into walls or causing problems elsewhere. It needs to be something completely different than what it is today ten years from now .. without ever being completely rewritten.
Another epiphanous moment (there's that word again!) came when I realized that laptops and desktops were not the only form factors we could target and expect to remain successful with. We needed to build a system that could be remolded with minimal effort and maximal flexibility to fit new places and fit them well. Plasma Netbook makes use of well over a 100,000 lines of code written as part of Plasma for the laptop/desktop space while, by adding a few thousand of its own, offering a user interface that is crafted specifically for the netbook form factor that offers very little in common workflow-wise with the desktop. That means we get compatibility with your desktop/laptop "for free" avoiding the separate silo effect, have invested minimal efforts by changing or adding only what we feel is needed or wanted and can provide something that is both familiar (due to having access to similar features as Plasma Desktop via widgets like microblogging or Google Gadgets) and specially crafted at the same time.
Being able to do this while also being able to deliver a nice and traditional desktop workspace, despite none of that being embedded in the DNA of Plasma itself (it's all in plasma-desktop and a few desktop-specific Plasma plugins), while keeping it all neat, tidy and sane (hacks-be-gone!) has not been the easiest thing to pull off. So I'm really proud when people look at plasma-desktop and observe that it's a nice evolution over what was there before. I also cry a little when people don't realize that there's more to the story. :)
Now, I don't know of a single other serious project out there (in terms of "shipping releases meant for actual production use some day") that is able to pull this same thing off. Do you? Every other workspace project I know is either hyperfocused on one form factor or follows the "here's a toolkit, now rewrite everything above the toolkit for every target application" concept, which is what we've always done in the past.
While designing the fundamental ideas that would later be built by myself and the amazing team of people I get to call my team-mates into this thing called "Plasma", an evolution that doesn't lead to dead ends and lets us sprawl with ubiquity across the computing landscape from device to desktop, from media application to multi-user interaction and wherever else we want to go.
So while we work on the implementation realizations, such as fancy desktop grid effects and what not, we are doing so as part of a big picture that is inclusive of where we've been, where we are and where we may want to go in the future.
Keeping an eye on others without becoming distracted
As a footnote to this entry, I thought I'd share something related but not strictly on this topic that we keep running into with Plasma. We do keep eyes on what others are doing, whether that's Microsoft, Apple, Google, Intel, Nokia, Enlightenment, GNOME or people doing purely academic research work. This helps give us some perspective and reality checks from time to time. It also helps us get some good ideas we may not have come up with on our own. At the same time, we're doing new things in new ways as well, and so while we watch others we also have to remain on guard that we don't end up becoming distracted from our own mission. There's a fine line between keeping tabs on the other cars in a race and chasing their light lights. It's interesting to observe how easy it is for the human mind to start doing the latter. Perhaps that's just part of being a social species?
22 comments:
Hy aseigo, as usual a deep, interesting, and delightfull read.
Thank you!
If I may give you my contribution, without sounding too wise, which I'm not, I just like to read with full attention. There's a few things that don't sound right, namely:
5th paragraph:"released in categorical packages"
Now, while I know this is correct, to me it just sounds weird :P
it sounds like although you may be categorical in your statement the packages may not.
A "revolution" is a story about...
...it turns out all "revolutions" are actually evolutionary sequences...
I don't think you are considering all kinds of revolutions, but only technological ones. So I would suggest you correct that to: most revolutions are a story... ...it turns out most revolutions are...
An epiphanous (is that word?) moment for me came in the realization
I believe that what came to you was the epiphany and not the moment, so you might consider using the frasing: An epiphany for me was the realization...
last paragraph:
chasing their light lights
certainly just a typographical error: light lights -> tail lights
thanks again for a great read.
kiberlynx
@kiberlynx: about the revolutions, I actually think Aaron is right in that most revolutions, if not all, are evolutionary if you study them in detail. However, it is often true large changes occur over a relatively short period of time - despite often years of 'preparation' beforehand. And this isn't just true for technological revolutions, but for social revolutions as well. In most, if not all cases, the foundations of the revolution have been building for many years - then it happens in weeks, months. But it would never have happened if the environment wouldn't have become conductive to the revolution beforehand.
Revolutions are, like most things, about timing more than anything.
"I actually think Aaron is right in that most revolutions, if not all, are evolutionary"
So we agree that simply saying all might not be completly correct, because in Aaron's wording "most" doesn't appear, that was my addition, hence it being in bold.
"the foundations of the revolution have been building for many years - then it happens in weeks"
Couldn't agree more, but from this to calling all revolutions evolutionary is a leap which I don't think is correct. If you remember your history, alot of social revolutions weren't at all for the better, and as such I don't think these can be described as evolution, like Aaron does, but devolution in fact.
sic
Just trying to help :)
Kiberlynx
Maybe it's too late at night or my imagination isn't as good as it should be but I must confess I reacted to this:
"We're finally merging Plasma's Activities (multiple widget layouts) with Nepomuk's store "
I use both plasma activities and nepomuk today (although probably not to their full potential) and I can honestly say I can't see what that merger will bring to the table.
I'm sure will be a "duh!" moment once someone's explained it, so could someone please indulge me?
Could the Gnome-shell be written in JS in Plasma?
I like its one stop workspace,window management,journal and start menu approach a lot (Is there a KDE Zeitgeist?)
All non-geek people will probably get it fast.
Very cool post btw. I think Qt/KDE/Plasma have the biggest potential atm. Just don't hesitate adopting good ideas. The new 4.6 animation stuff should be awesome.
Great post and I agree with most of what you say. However, I think what differentiates between viewing changes as evolutionary or revolutionary is your perspective.
As a developer you are at ground level and see the code developing over time in a evolutionary manner. For most users, they see KDE at a much higher abstraction and see how KDE progress in leaps and bounds a more revolutionary manner. This is further enforced by the user's choice of distribution.
From my (non-developer) perspective, when KDE 4.0 was released this represented a revolutionary jump in the underlying framework, and a few regressions in user experience. This revolutionary change has allowed for much easier evolutionary change
Could someone point me in direction of those KDE4/Gnome3 posts and articles?
I searched but I didn't find anything.
I must say that only thing what I can see changed (right now, and only me) on Gnome 3 is the way of task switching.
I like a lot the KDE4's activies. But it is terrible difficult to manage activities. You need first to zoom out and creating new ones and deleting existings are way too difficult. I believe we need to have somekind easy activity manager what would be as easy to use as current task manager. You can just create new, see available and close wanted.
I would love to see easy way to manage plasmoids/widgets (what to call them really?) just by dragging them from activity to another. Just same way as you can drag a application window to other virtual desktop.
And I would really like to see options to have only ONE dashboard when having every virtual desktop having own activity. Now every virtual desktop has own activity and every activity has own dashboard. So having multiple activities and shared dashboard is impossible.
In the end, you need to have so many activities running that you end up having so many plasmoids running what eats all your CPU just by being behind.
And because the activity management is terrible, no one actually want to use them. But if you want to have different wallpapers on every virtualdesktop, you are forced to do so. Thats why I have heard many times that the wallpaper should be possble to set by the activity AND by the virtualdesktop as well. So you can have two activity, with shared plasmaboard and four virtual desktops with own wallpaper.
But I can not see so many differences (yet) on the Gnome 3 to KDE4, so I would just say as well that Gnome 3 only looks so much what KDE4 offers already only by the plasma and when others are not counted at all.
Btw, IMHO the Gnome 3 menu to search applications is terrible. When compared to KickOff or other menus.
@Fri13:
IIRC the Plasma developers are thinking about an alternative to the ZUI, at the moment.
well, I imagined something else when reading "comparing KDE and Gnome 3". Maybe it's just me. I would've been cool to hear such a comparison by a competent person like aseigo. really.
Well first of all the reason behind people's "resistance to change" comes from "trying to change" their behaviour how they interact with the desktop.
So far, KDE and GNOME are trying to invent the wheel again. They are obscenely (is that a word:P ) trying to change people's habits on how they interact with their desktop. Hence, the resistance occurs towards the indifferent GNU/Linux users like me. Although, I find this really really annoying, forcing people to remember new keyboard shortcuts, or get them used to new menus or "widgets" or "workspaces", kinda bugs me out.
As far as I know, software is two edged sword. You need to understand that although people use them there must be someone who need to write or compose a UI for those. Programmers and designers work their bones to create something useful and agile for the sake of users. Hence, they sometimes omit some necessities like graphics or functionality.
Such occurrences happened in the past and today. Like servers and like GNU/Linux shell... These are meant to be used for "geeks" and they do point out functionality more than nifty stuff like pop-ups or eye-candy.
I hope someday that both developer groups of KDE and GNOME understand that software is interaction with user rather than some kind of ego race.
@kiberlynx: "If you remember your history, alot of social revolutions weren't at all for the better, and as such I don't think these can be described as evolution, like Aaron does, but devolution in fact."
evolution doesn't imply any inherent value to the change (e.g. better or worse along some metric) simply that it changes in some way.
moreover, i don't know of any social revolution that didn't have its roots in a long standing social situation, with the people behind it either having been considering the issue deeply for some time or being deeply moved by people who had been.
examples to the contrary are welcome, but i really see only evidence for history as a continuum that is only understandable within the larger context and not just neatly chopped up intervals.
@Jonas: "I use both plasma activities and nepomuk today (although probably not to their full potential) and I can honestly say I can't see what that merger will bring to the table."
the idea is that nepomuk has the idea of "contexts" and plasma-desktop will publish into that context what the current activity is; plasma-desktop and other apps can populate various activities into it as well.
then when you switch activities in plasma, the contents of the active context will change in nepomuk and other applications can choose to react to that.
kwin might hide certain windows, for instance. apps might launch when a certain activity occurs. a different set of network settings (e.g. vpn's) might take effect. etc.
@Tom: "Could the Gnome-shell be written in JS in Plasma?"
not in JS, esp since kwin doesn't have a JS based API for effects.
"I like its one stop workspace,window management,journal and start menu approach a lot"
"(Is there a KDE Zeitgeist?)"
no, though nepomuk could be used to build such a thing.
btw, i'm not a huge fan of zeitgeist type interfaces; i think they are great for certain people and a very cool idea, but in the general case fairly uninteresting. and for much the same reason that search tools are. it's not what individuals tend to want.
i thought it was interesting that the "most exciting" application of zeitgeist so far was using it in one of the gtk+ dock apps to populate "recently used" lists in icons. you don't need zeigeist for that, but it is perhaps one of the bigger impact things you can do with it for the general user population. which says something about the design.
"All non-geek people will probably get it fast."
i think that's something that's yet to be determined, as is the idea that "non-geek" means "beginner who wants nothing more than the most elementary of interfaces"
"Just don't hesitate adopting good ideas."
we try not to :)
@Civciv: "Well first of all the reason behind people's "resistance to change" comes from "trying to change" their behaviour how they interact with the desktop."
people are resistant to change in GENERAL, it has nothing to do with desktops or quality of the change or whatever. evolutionarily, change resistance is a great default strategy, and so here we are as a species that is generally resistant to change in all its forms.
as for making people change their behavior, there are two bits of reality check that need to be done:
* the current desktop structure DOES NOT WORK for many, and probably event the majority, of people. it's already broken.
* people, due to change resistance, usually will say they prefer what they know regardless of how bad it is even if, after they switch, they enjoy the new thing better
so let me just say this: i apologize for making your life better in the long run by ignoring the complaining you engage in that isn't in your own best interests. ;)
"So far, KDE and GNOME are trying to invent the wheel again."
no, we're taking a square and trying to round off the corners.
you're just used to the pain of riding on square wheels and so don't get why people might want something that sucks less.
"understand that software is interaction with user rather than some kind of ego race."
i think both teams have understood that a long time ago. unfortunately some people haven't caught up with that or even bothered to understand what motivates us in the first place.
i do find your assertion rather offensive, however. it implies that we have some ulterior selfish motive that goes in the face of all that's good for the user, which is so out of line with reality and so full of negative implication for everyone who puts their efforts into these things. mistakes do get made from time to time by all sorts of people, but it's rarely if ever an issue of misplaced motives. if you actually knew any us personally, you'd know that.
"But it will evolve and our framework must be able to keep ahead of that curve."
so where's my webkit as default engine? because khtml is still so far behind the curve... and qt offers a good enough webkit (see arora). just my complaint because I'd love to see konqueror compete with firefox and chrome. and I understand the reasoning has something to do with api? if I recall. so I don't see how your framework is keeping ahead of the curve.
I would like to say though that for the most part I love kde4 and have been using it since 4.1. I think plasma and widgets are hot. I esp like widgets on the screensaver and the folderview (esp since 4.3) I think the outrage against folderview is undeserved. I think the device notifier is a total regression in thinking, and doesn't work well.
now that 4.3 is out and stabilizing I think that it's ready for real user using... my personal opinion is 4.0.x was more like 4.0-alpha, 4.1-beta, 4.2-rc, 4.3-release. we all know that bugs and optimizations, and misfeatures can be found after the release. so I expect 4.4 to be much more smooth.
@xenoterracide: "so where's my webkit as default engine?"
we use QtWebKit as to render web content in Plasma, but you weren't really sticking to the topic:
"just my complaint because I'd love to see konqueror compete with firefox and chrome"
to be clear: this has nothing to do with Plasma, which is what i was writing about in the "revolution/evolution" bits.
to answer the question, however, people have begun to work in earnest on QtWebKit integration for KDE.
hopefully we'll see meaningful results for the end user in short order.
"I esp like widgets on the screensaver and the folderview (esp since 4.3)"
yes, both are very cool.
"I think the outrage against folderview is undeserved."
undserved, but understandable from the perspective of people hating change, my sense of humor not coming across well in the "no more desktop icons!" blog post introducing it (so partly my fault there), our user population having no internal controls (well, there is a lot more now than there was then, but it still leaves much to be desire IMO) and f/oss "journalists" being little more than cranky editorialists.
"I think the device notifier is a total regression in thinking, and doesn't work well."
you will need to explain what you mean by that for anything positive to come of it. right now, all we have here is a complaint without content and that's not very fun.
"my personal opinion is 4.0.x was more like 4.0-alpha, 4.1-beta, 4.2-rc, 4.3-release."
honestly, i really don't care what anyone thinks the various dot numbers are or were. it's a moot point: we can't change the past and it was exactly what we, as a project, needed to do so as to get to this point.
if you want KDE 4.4, we had to do 4.0 first. without rewinding the last N years prior to that, there was no real way to avoid 4.0 and still get to 4.4. i don't expect people who didn't work on 4.0 to understand the why's of that, so you'll just have to take our word for it.
constantly discussing whether 4.0 was an alpha or what not (especially when we said it wasn't for production deployment anyways) is not helpful in the least and it gets really tiresome to wade through it all again and again.
all i can say is that the results are speaking for themselves, we've come to a very nice place with lots of room left to grow, and that's what matters.
please don't waste more time complaining about a past that got us here. unless you have a time machine. and several dozen additional bodies to bring with you to work like geniuses on the 4.0 codebase for the 2 years prior to its release. oh, and bring a few dozen more to help Trolltech get Qt4 out and stable with all the features we relied on sooner, too. ;)
@aseigo
you will need to explain what you mean by that for anything positive to come of it. right now, all we have here is a complaint without content and that's not very fun.
I'm subscribed to several bugs involving it. but really I think it's quite user unfriendly.
some of it's problems are related to the way hal works, and I think hal can be modified (config wise) to work better but solid has no interface. one of my big complaints is mounting by label rather than device. see my biggest use has been to mount cd's for wine apps. and wine creates drives now by pointing symlinks. well what happens when a drive mount changes every time? I can't symlink as easy.
There's also no easy way to say automount this device, or make automounting the default behavior. what if I don't want to click to mount it?
also the notifier doesn't minimize after a timeout which is annoying.
"brainstorming" I think there should be more of a device notifier daemon with some kind of a frontend to configuring it and a maybe a popup notification event like other system notifications. and a tray icon for each device plugged in. I also notice a problem with removable media in amarok. I can't unmount it with device notifier until all apps stop using it. I realize this is fairly standard behavior. but maybe the notifier should be able to send some kind of eject requested signal. that way amarok can't continue to hold it open as a resource. I realize that may not be a universally perfect idea... and it may be more of a bug that amarok is keeping it open... and I know amarok isn't kde.
basically speaking device notifier solves next to zero problems for me and creates a few. where in kde3 the automounter code (or whatever did it) solved problems for me. so I think of it as a regression, and I haven't seen it improve much through the various releases like I have almost everything else. and automounter code was one of the reasons I moved to kde over fluxbox in the first place.
p.s. yes I know I ranted a bit offtopic.
I'd also like to know that nepomuk using 12% of 6G of memory.... is kinda a problem for me. things like nepomuk, strigi, and akonadi are awesome but if the consume a huge amount of resources... I don't see them as worth it.
@xenoterracide: "one of my big complaints is mounting by label rather than device."
HAL issue, not our problem.
"There's also no easy way to say automount this device, or make automounting the default behavior"
being fixed for 4.4 (outside of plasma; this again isn't the job of plasma-desktop)
"also the notifier doesn't minimize after a timeout which is annoying."
already fixed for 4.4 (in plasma this time ;)
"I think there should be more of a device notifier daemon with some kind of a frontend to configuring it and a maybe a popup notification event like other system notifications."
you just described HAL -> Solid -> Plasma Device Notifier.
"and a tray icon for each device plugged in."
this would work for a few people, but the one-icon-that-expands-to-show-all works better for the general case.
"but maybe the notifier should be able to send some kind of eject requested signal."
i'd love to see this added to HAL if it already isn't available (i don't think it is?)
"and I know amarok isn't kde."
amarok is certainly a part of kde and uses kde's frameworks extensively.
"basically speaking device notifier solves next to zero problems for me and creates a few. "
it does improve the workflow for many people over what we had in kde3; and what you are complaining about in the kde4 version not only existed also in kde3 but represents problems lower in the stack.
"where in kde3 the automounter code (or whatever did it) solved problems for me."
you are confusing automount with hotplug notification.
"I haven't seen it improve much through the various releases like I have almost everything else."
rejoice: we've reworked it in several ways for 4.4 and automounting is also being worked on as a separate issue.
"I'd also like to know that nepomuk using 12% of 6G of memory."
i've really spent too much time already answering random questions on this blog entry. please stay on topic. as for nepomuk, it's challenges and what it's good for, planet.kde.org has been chock full of blog entries on the topic in the last few weeks. google might help you there.
@aseigo
HAL issue, not our problem. from what I've read (feel free to correct) it's a hal default, meaning it's configurable. you should fairly easily be able to provide a frontend to change the behavior. although it may require superuser abilities. I may be wrong. I actually don't care that it's the default I just want an easy way to change it.
tbh though you mention me getting offtopic in the conversation... you did mention, solid, nepomuk, plasma and more...
you are confusing automount with hotplug notification.
no'm not. I think after notification it should automount, and I understand why that may be considered undesirable to some so I'm happy with it being optional. sometimes problems are in several layers deep and users only describe the first layer, because it's the visible one.
although back to mention that maybe it should be in systray even if it were a single icon it seems a more appropriate place for it to sit... since then it would hide when not in use. I can literally go months without plugging in a flash drive or cdrom.
I look forward to advancements in the notifier in 4.4
Thanks for answering Aaron, very interesting.
It is really great to see that the issues I currently have are being worked on.
Sure I would like a great customizable Webkit browser and an easier way to manage activities now, BUT I love bog standard KDE4 on my netbook. I will support KDE and Nokia (buying a N-phone next) wherever I can.
You guys are doing the most interesting work in FOSS and to read that you will adopt great features without prejedice is really cool .. I am just sorry that I want BtrFS, Time sliders, real time and all the cool things the future will bring NOW.
Maybe that is also just human nature to want everything now.
People can't wait while resisting change ;)
I love reading this blog because I come out of it energized and optimistic about the desktop without the use of the cheap rah-rah 'let's give the community a pep rally speech' that many feel the need to use.
I dont need Tony Robbins.
Good work.
For people complaining about getting Webkit over KHTML: Why I consider keeping KHTML important.
Sorry if this comes across as spamming my blog, feel free to delete/disapprove this comment, but the reason I wrote that blog post in the first place is because I'm quite tired of repeating my reasons over and again. ;)
Post a Comment