| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Do the actually not like their users?
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 23, 2008 17:56 UTC (Wed) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)In reply to: Do the actually not like their users? by pr1268
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor encounters the Hardy Heron
That's. Just. Hideous. Does the GNOME team not like their users? (Ducks to avoid barrage of flames)
From the brief and unpleasant interactions I've had with GNOME developers, I would conclude that they do not like their users. Well, I voted with my feet. XFCE for me, and my kids independently chose KDE after trying GNOME and KDE. Unfortunately, some GNOME annoyances are difficult to escape such as the stupid file browser that hangs for 10 seconds in large directories. Firefox 3 uses GNOME (well, I guess GTK) widgets by default. Here's the magical firefox incantation to get a usable file browser again:
about:config and then set ui.allow_platform_file_picker to false.
(Log in to post comments)
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 23, 2008 19:11 UTC (Wed) by jorism (subscriber, #21807) [Link]
Thanks a lot for the magical firefox incantation! If I use the standard file browser to pick the application "gv" in /usr/bin, I have to wait about 50 seconds until the contents of /usr/bin is displayed (!!!). I always thought that this bug would be noticed by many people and thus get fixed soon, so I never bothered reporting it. I now realize that I have been waiting for a fix for more than two years already... and in the mean time, I even got used to this strange behaviour. But your trick reduces the waiting time from 50s to about 0s...! I wonder what the standard firefox file browser is doing with the list of files that takes so long...anyway, thanks a lot for this workaround!
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 23, 2008 20:26 UTC (Wed) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
I always thought that this bug would be noticed by many people and thus get fixed soon, so I never bothered reporting it.
In the spirit of civic-mindedness, I opened bug 430532 with mozilla.org.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 23, 2008 23:51 UTC (Wed) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
While I agree that the GTK+ file browser could be faster... if Firefox bothered to integrate with the GNOME platform at all then instead of picking 'gv' from a /usr/bin directory containing (on my system) 3740 files (a pathological condition if ever I saw one) then you'd just pick it from a dropdown of other applications capable of opening image files.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 0:41 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
instead of picking 'gv' from a /usr/bin directory containing [...] you'd just pick it from a dropdown of other applications capable of opening image files.
Ye gods, no! That means that Firefox would totally ignore software it doesn't know about or recognize. It means that if you're not part of the GNOME Universe, you may as well not exist, which is the most objectionable aspect of GNOME anyway!
It would also do nothing to solve situations that really need arbitrary files, like "File : Open"
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 8:45 UTC (Thu) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
Nothing prevents there from being a way to add arbitrary programs to the list. This user interface has already been designed, fer-christsake, it's just up to mozilla.com to use it. Now you should both be happy; you who want to pick some random image viewing program that doesn't fit in with the rest of the desktop out of a directory of 3500 other files; and the ordinary user who just wants to view an image! http://imagebin.ca/view/KGirIbR1.html for a screenshot...
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 13:43 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
This user interface has already been designed, fer-christsake, it's just up to mozilla.com to use it.
But that would introduce a dependency on GNOME rather than just GTK. And that's completely unacceptable to those of us who do not use GNOME.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 13:48 UTC (Thu) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
No no no it absolutely would not create a dependency on GNOME. And people who don't understand that it wouldn't should quite frankly shut the hell up instead of spreading more FUD.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 15:09 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
OK, sorry, I didn't realize the "helper program..." dialog was part of base GTK. I still dislike the interface, but for personal reasons rather than because it's part of GNOME.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 25, 2008 5:00 UTC (Fri) by vapier (subscriber, #15768) [Link]
"spreading FUD" generally implies purposefully doing so. correcting people who are simply mistaken does not deserve a "shut the hell up".
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 10:44 UTC (Thu) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link]
And those of us who don't use GNOME are left out in the cold?
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 11:00 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
Just use Epiphany. I really don't understand why anyone would use Firefox with GNOME. I particularly can't understand it why someone, after making that choice, would then complain about FireFox's lack of system integration...
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 23, 2008 21:57 UTC (Wed) by tjc (subscriber, #137) [Link]
From the brief and unpleasant interactions I've had with GNOME developers, I would conclude that they do not like their users.I think they mostly like Microsoft's users, which is where a lot of the discontent comes from.
It's a lot easier to keep make-believe users that you don't really have happy than it is to please the ones that are actually using the software. As a result, features are added (and removed) that no-one actually requested.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 1:04 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
*zing* Yow! :-) I must put the parent post in my .sig.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 6:20 UTC (Thu) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]
I would definitely agree with that comment, especially in my own pet-peeve case: file-selector widget sorting. GTK/Gnome has the setting to sort folders separately from files fixed in stone (well, in the source code, but it might as well be in granite), with a snarky little comment about how this is the One True Way and it will Always Be That Way. Fortunately, a little snip-snip with the editor, and a recompile, and the One True Way disappears into the ether. :) When I say I want things sorted by last-modified date, that's exactly what I mean, d*** it. It doesn't matter that the last-modified thing is a folder or not--whatever it is, put it at the top (or the bottom, if the sort is reversed)!
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 7:59 UTC (Thu) by debacle (subscriber, #7114) [Link]
Could you please post, where I have to change this? Patch or filename+number would be OK. TIA.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 16:53 UTC (Thu) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]
When I patched it out before, it was lines 5644 to 5707 of gtk+-2.10.14/gtk/gtkfilechooserdefault.c. You'll probably be able to see what to cut out and rearrange (essentially, remove the COMPARE_DIRECTORIES macro calls). I'm grabbing 2.12.9 right now, and I'll see if it's the same way--if so, I'll post a diff.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 17:04 UTC (Thu) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]
It is still the same in 2.12.9. Following is a patch. I didn't choose to remove the definition for the COMPARE_DIRECTORIES macro, because it won't make any difference in the generated code, but you can take it out if you want to be extra-neat.
--- gtk+-2.12.9-orig/gtk/gtkfilechooserdefault.c 2008-04-24 09:57:46.000000000 -0700
+++ gtk+-2.12.9-modified/gtk/gtkfilechooserdefault.c 2008-04-24 09:59:23.000000000 -0700
@@ -6278,8 +6278,6 @@
GtkTreeIter *b,
gpointer user_data)
{
- COMPARE_DIRECTORIES;
- else
return strcmp (gtk_file_info_get_display_key (info_a), gtk_file_info_get_display_key (info_b));
}
@@ -6290,14 +6288,10 @@
GtkTreeIter *b,
gpointer user_data)
{
- COMPARE_DIRECTORIES;
- else
- {
gint64 size_a = gtk_file_info_get_size (info_a);
gint64 size_b = gtk_file_info_get_size (info_b);
return size_a > size_b ? -1 : (size_a == size_b ? 0 : 1);
- }
}
/* Sort callback for the mtime column */
@@ -6307,14 +6301,10 @@
GtkTreeIter *b,
gpointer user_data)
{
- COMPARE_DIRECTORIES;
- else
- {
GtkFileTime ta = gtk_file_info_get_modification_time (info_a);
GtkFileTime tb = gtk_file_info_get_modification_time (info_b);
return ta > tb ? -1 : (ta == tb ? 0 : 1);
- }
}
/* Callback used when the sort column changes. We cache the sort order for use
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 25, 2008 9:02 UTC (Fri) by regala (subscriber, #15745) [Link]
What can be sure is that you people don't like people but yourselves. Read what you wrote, insulting fair developers who try to make a desktop environment for the people not you, you, you. Some project choose a way, a policy, some others, another and so one. So instead of spreading a hell of FUD just you and you and you there, hidden behind the pillar, just speak yourself what you are about to frentically write, and notice you are just among GNOME-haters here. Brain-masturbation isn't it ?
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted Apr 24, 2008 2:23 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link]
I thought "ooh good, I'll do that", went to about:config, and discovered it was already set that way. Hmm. I wonder when I did that? And how long it would have taken me to remember what needed sorting out if it had been silently reset on upgrade? And why anyone would tolerate, even for one second, an environment where that kind of rudeness was not only tolerated but expected...?
Config changes and upgrades
Posted Apr 26, 2008 8:42 UTC (Sat) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
Surely you back up your home directory (which contains your Firefox profile on Linux) on upgrades? In any case, very few application upgrades would touch anything in your home directory, so this is something of a non-issue. I do recommend a home Wiki to track this sort of config change, which is particularly useful if you do a fresh install or want to do the same change on other machines.
Do the actually not like their users?
Posted May 14, 2008 1:43 UTC (Wed) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link]
about:config and then set ui.allow_platform_file_picker to false.I'm a bit late, but thanks for that information. I can't stand that file picker and suffered silently for a long time.