But to be honest, I think the same applies to KDE, which has a lot of customization options and, therefore, many potential issues users can cause. On the other hand, desktop environments like Gnome or Cinnamon remain simple while limiting customization as much as possible for the user.
I fully approve of choosing Fedora over OpenSUSE. OpenSUSE adds extra customization and settings options that arent necessary, make things more complex. Fedora, on the other hand, keeps it simple, only providing the settings available in the chosen environment without any additional configurations.
Dude, relax, that’s not what I said. It all depends on who the distribution is for. The article says it's for public sector employees who may not be tech-savvy. For them, it makes sense to remove settings and keep things as simple as possible for the tasks they need to do on that computer. ^^"
Yes, that could be a solution. Absolutely. However, it's important to keep in mind that this is not intended for developers or IT experts, who will likely use other distributions, such as the standard Fedora with RPM packages.
It needs to be ideal for transition without pissing people off and have some degree of flexibility and customiseability. The proposed choices make total sense for the current day. An excellent initiative!
Comments
Who decided this ?
First motto: "Users are stupid"
The other is to protect dangerous settings by an admin pw and implement a "reset settings" fonctionality.
Seriously IBM!