Talk:Computing minimalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Categories

I'm confused - should this be classified as an anti-pattern? I thought anti-patterns conote something negative or counter-productive. --harburg 2005-09-25 20:55:35 UTC

I agree, and I edited to remove the cat. --24.98.115.175 00:16, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
I've replaced it with the category that should've been there in the first place. --Maru (talk) Contribs 05:57, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mozilla?

Umm... you chose mozilla as an example in a computing minimalist screenshot? Will someone please fix that? --Ctachme 04:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I second this. The Fluxbox screenshot is beyond horrible. For a truly minimalist UI, see www.wmii.de.
I agree. The 2nd screenshot is all, but minimalist.
Pfft. wmii minimalistic? Don't make me laugh. I've posted a true minimalistic screenshot. --maru (talk) contribs 22:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
I finally found my ideal desktop. 1024x768 blue pixels. At last!
Yeah, Mozilla is not a Minimalistic Browser, Mozilla Firefox is closer to be minimalistic, but it is't, :I think that a real minimallistic browser for X Windows System is BrowseX. Check the screenshot: http://browsex.com/brxshot1.jpg LuiSoN

[edit] Beginners appreciate loads of features?

"Computing minimalism is usually endorsed by computer literates rather than beginners, since beginners appreciate the easy to use, feature rich environments that are presented to them (usually by default)"

As far as I am aware, the more that is presented to a beginner, the more difficulty they have. They are overwhelmed by options. I'm not sure whether to change it or not. --wht.rbt 14:48, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

It depends on what minimalism is, if it is shutting down deamons etc, then it is just computer literates who care about that, if it is having an uncluttered interface, and less to poke, then beginners benefit and like that. I reckon you should change it, it doesn't really have an effect on the article as it is. Craighennessey 00:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Infact, after taking another look at this article it seems that it is all opinion, and made up at that? I personally used to find FVWM better, and now I like KDE, meaning that as a beginner I liked the simpler things. When we are presented with choices, and in the virtual world of computing we are, everybody is different, so why have an article on it at all? Could it not be "differing views on computer minimalism" or something? Craighennessey 00:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes. The article is bloatware and the examples are all overcrowded. Take the hatchet to it, someone, it was written by maximalists.

[edit] Lightweight markup languages?

Lightweight markup languages?

[edit] Three screenshots

I think those constitute original research. - Sikon 16:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

You are entitled to hold your own opinion, of course, but the minimalist screenshots are all of applications that have been labelled minimalist. I don't see the OR there, and you may be interpreting OR overly broadly there. It originated as an anti-crank physics defense, not as a method to make us avoid stating the obvious unless we track down citations for each and every word in the article. --Gwern (contribs) 16:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
The Windows screenshot seems quite contrived, nobody in their right mind has a screen that looks like that. Why not show an example where someone is doing actual work, as in the other two? --CliffC 02:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Performance of the user

This phrase seems to be used in quite a far stretched context - surely it should be performance of the computer, and productivity of the user? It just doesn't seem to make sense... Craighennessey 00:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of the word Shell

This article's use of the word shell is quite strange to me. Isn't the proper word Windowmanager?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/m/Talk%7EComputing_minimalism_bdf0.html"