GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
probably because of reliability/stability issues... maybe... never used kde 1.x or 2.x....
That really makes no sense because usually any software deemed unstable is usually preceded by alpha or beta, not by version number alone (except maybe the linux kernel).
By your logic if any software that has a 1.0 or 2.0 status would mean that it is automatically unstable, so I guess all version of linux kernel 1.0 and 2.0 are unstable?
Even though in the Linux kernel version numbering scheme 1.0, 2.0 are deemed stable, and any uneven numbers like 1.1 or 2.1 are deemed development (potentially unstable).
That really makes no sense because usually any software deemed unstable is usually preceded by alpha or beta, not by version number alone (except maybe the linux kernel).
By your logic if any software that has a 1.0 or 2.0 status would mean that it is automatically unstable, so I guess all version of linux kernel 1.0 and 2.0 are unstable?
Even though in the Linux kernel version numbering scheme 1.0, 2.0 are deemed stable, and any uneven numbers like 1.1 or 2.1 are deemed development (potentially unstable).
So, you have your own Gmail account? Congratulations I guess? The color is light blue (which is hard to read against the Earth IMO)? You have your name as your Gmail account? What Kenny? I see nothing special. Mine does the same. See? Except my font is the Default black.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
