| 1 |
On 21/08/2015 17:05, Alan Grimes wrote: |
| 2 |
> What in god's name are these "semantic desktops" good for any way? The |
| 3 |
> only thing nepomunk ever did was consume CPU resources, I think I |
| 4 |
> intentionally broke the e-build on that one to prevent it from |
| 5 |
> installing such a useful, resource hungry, piece of crap. =( Who do you |
| 6 |
> think I am? A windows user??? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Well, let's see. It's not like Nepomuk and the concept of a semantic |
| 10 |
desktop wasn't a university research project sponsored by the European |
| 11 |
Union, and the researchers chose KDE to implement it on (presumably |
| 12 |
because OSS is an excellent fit for exactly that kind of thing). It's |
| 13 |
not like there aren't many web pages out there that fully describe the |
| 14 |
origins of Nepomuk and what the purpose of the research was, and that |
| 15 |
Google can't find all of those issues for you in mere seconds. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Nope, it wasn't like that at all..... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
The purpose and goal of Nepomuk is not in doubt, not even slightly. The |
| 20 |
first implementation though, turns out to have been less than ideal, |
| 21 |
particularly the backing store. So Nepomuk was eventually considered a |
| 22 |
flawed prototype that demonstrated what not to do (this is the *real* |
| 23 |
purpose of prototypes - ask any successful engineer), and Baloo written |
| 24 |
instead. The intent is to get the benefits of a semantic desktop without |
| 25 |
having to use all available resources to do it. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Not everything in this world warrants a clueless rant you know. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 34 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives