On Wednesday 30 January 2002 10:22, Robert P. Goldman wrote:
> For that matter, I'm pretty convinced that coming up with a nearly
> icon-free screen would be a big help. Icons are ambiguous and suck
> ("oh, yeah, the tyrannosaurus head, that means a web browser"). Words
> like "mozilla web browser" are a lot better.
So perhaps part of the future of desktop Linux will be for applications to
start calling themselves by names (and icons) that are intuitive instead of
inside jokes. You've got to give Microsoft credit: "Internet Explorer" is a
perfect name for a Web browser. Heck, it's more precise than the term "web
browser," which outside of the computer realm means an animal that eats
spiderwebs off of bushes. "Mozilla" doesn't mean anything, "Opera" means
something unrelated, and don't get me started about "GIMP" and "LAME." Might
as well name your new brainchild "SUCKS" or "CRAP."
So why is it, exactly, that the KDE archiver program isn't named archiver?
Did its programmers start calling it "ark" to save the trouble of pronouncing
two extra syllables, or did an early release allow only two of each kind of
file? (I suppose I could write to the authors, but asking in public is more
fun. ;-) --Ben