| |||||||||||||
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus]McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus]Posted Aug 4, 2012 8:37 UTC (Sat) by Pawlerson (guest, #74136)Parent article: McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus]
Thanks to Ubuntu gnome become quite important, but it seems some stupid morons started to do stupid things. Do they want gnome to become irrelevant (like in the pre-Ubuntu times) or do they just want to turn Ubuntu developers life into some nightmare?
(Log in to post comments)
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 4, 2012 9:30 UTC (Sat) by liw (subscriber, #6379) [Link]
I love me some well-argued, finely crafted, exquisitely worded, fact-based constructive criticism early in the morning.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 4, 2012 13:52 UTC (Sat) by Rehdon (guest, #45440) [Link]
Stupid moron is who stupid moron does! XD
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 8:52 UTC (Sun) by Pawlerson (guest, #74136) [Link]
The fact is a lot of gnome2 users switched to KDE or XFCE when gnome3 came out. Another fact is current gnome3 users complain a lot about nautilus changes. This just proves how stupid some developers are and this proves they want to make Ubuntu life harder.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 10:14 UTC (Sun) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
Do you grasp the fact that Ubuntu does not ship GNOME3 as its default desktop?
It might explain why your post has caused so much unintentional hilarity.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 10:47 UTC (Mon) by Pawlerson (guest, #74136) [Link]
The talk was about Gnome2 if you didn't notice. Gnome3 is the least popular environment compared to KDE and Unity.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 0:55 UTC (Tue) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
The "talk" was:
> Thanks to Ubuntu gnome become quite important, but it seems
How can you argue that "thanks to Ubuntu gnome become quite important [sic]" when Ubuntu doesn't ship GNOME3 by default? Similarly, how can you argue that "Ubuntu developers life" will become a nightmare because of GNOME3? Have you heard of this thing called Unity? That is what Ubuntu developers are working on, not GNOME3.
Have you even used GNOME3, or are you just using Unity without knowing the difference? This is a serious question.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 1:53 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Ubuntu had been shipping (by default) a somewhat polished version of GNOME2 for a long time. And yes, that helped GNOME's popularity.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 4, 2012 16:22 UTC (Sat) by tjc (subscriber, #137) [Link]
Gnome wasn't irrelevant in pre-Ubuntu times, having been used by Red Hat as their primary desktop since 1999. "October Gnome" through the end of the 1.x series was quite nice.
The unhappiness didn't start until Gnome 2 arrived, and Ubuntu didn't happen until after that.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 4, 2012 20:06 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Gnome 1x w as a terrible terrible mess. 2x was much better, but people blasted gnome devs for the changes and dumbing down the interface.
Now people are blasting gnome devs again because I guess now gnome 2 is all of a sudden wonderful now the gnome devs are no longer working on it.
People need to cut the f-ing drama already. It isn't helping there case and I do not blame gnome devs being sensitive to 'tone' considering the massive shit they take every time they make a minor change. When people take every mention of gnome in any article on any website as a opportunity to act like children and say that the sky is falling it makes it really difficult to tell what is legit complaints and what is just people fuming with some alternate motive.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 2:44 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
> Now people are blasting gnome devs again because I guess now gnome 2 is all of a sudden wonderful now the gnome devs are no longer working on it.
This is completely misleading. Gnome 2 was at very high version when it was discontinued, which means that there were many iterations before it became good and mature. This actually shows that people were objective. Once the product became good, they praised it.
> People need to cut the f-ing drama already. It isn't helping there case and I do not blame gnome devs being sensitive to 'tone' considering the massive shit they take every time they make a minor change.
Minor change?
How is introduction of overview a minor change? How is complete lack of visibility a minor change? How is more cumbersome mouse/graphical UI a minor change? How is total inability to customise a minor change?
> When people take every mention of gnome in any article on any website as a opportunity to act like children and say that the sky is falling it makes it really difficult to tell what is legit complaints and what is just people fuming with some alternate motive.
Easy. Just _listen_ to _objectively_ argued complaints. Ignore the rest.
What infuriates me the most is "philosophical" nonsense regarding UI design being pushed by Gnome developers.
Example of a "philosophical" goal: minimise distraction. Sure, some people like to avoid distraction. Fine. Give them the ability to do that. Some others thrive on it. They want lots of small windows and notifications flying everywhere. They are digressive multi-taskers. So, give them _that_.
So, instead of minimal distraction "philosophy", there should be a purely functional "desired flexibility" goal. Then users would not complain. Just like they stopped by the end of Gnome 2 series, when everyone could do their tasks, while making their desktop the way they wanted it to be.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 4:36 UTC (Sun) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
> Easy. Just _listen_ to _objectively_ argued complaints. Ignore the rest.
So when the Gnome Devs attempt to do that by telling people to stick to technical issues in bugtracks and filter blog posts don't go around accusing them of purposely filtering input to create some sort of isolation bubble of positive feedback.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 4:52 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
I think you may have confused a few posters here. I never accused anyone of doing that.
However, I do think that many Gnome developers do not accept or listen to valid, objective and constructive criticism of real usability issues they introduced in version 3.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 16:56 UTC (Tue) by walters (subscriber, #7396) [Link]
The feedback cycle is pretty broken, for sure; in multiple ways. It's often hard to extract signal from noise, and in the end, not everyone can be happy.
The most important thing, cheesy as it sounds, is just to try to stay constructive.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 16:02 UTC (Mon) by tjc (subscriber, #137) [Link]
> Gnome 1x w as a terrible terrible mess.
I'm not sure what you mean. Releases prior to 1.0.53 were unstable, to the point of being unusable, but it worked well enough after that.
From a design standpoint it was a bit incohesive, but I prefer that to what came after.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 8:53 UTC (Sun) by Pawlerson (guest, #74136) [Link]
Red Hat is and was irrelevant on desktops. Even if we count it, gnome2 had much smaller market share than KDE in pre-Ubuntu times.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 5, 2012 21:07 UTC (Sun) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
Can you provide the methodology for how you are doing the counting where you come to that conclusion?
Counting linux usage is a pretty difficult thing to get correct. Counting specific desktop environment usage even more so. So if you are going to be making comparative claims as to market penetration, please describe the analysis process and data sources you are using to generate the numbers. Without some sort of published methodology, any the credibility of any claim with regard to market impact is difficult to assess.
-jef
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 10:09 UTC (Mon) by fb (subscriber, #53265) [Link]
Somehow I have the impression that your standards wouldn't be set so high if the GP poster was complaining about Ubuntu.
IIRC the Linux Journal popularity polls consistently gave KDE more than 2/3 of the Linux desktop users preferences. Those polls were not perfect, but AFAIK they were the best we had to measure project popularity.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 10:28 UTC (Mon) by slashdot (guest, #22014) [Link]
Maybe, but at least personally, the impression was that GNOME had always been regarded as "the" free software desktop environment, resulting both from the support of the most important Linux distribution (Red Hat then Ubuntu, with Debian neutral), as well as the fact that Qt was initially non-free and in general did not mesh much with free software conventions.
And that's why the destruction of GNOME by their current maintainers is so irksome: they devastated the trademark that once was the reference for the free software community, and are the cause of the current unprecedented fragmentation of efforts and mindshare into XFCE, Mate, Cinnamon, Unity and KDE.
In addition to that, they also fragmented the underlying technology panorama by introducing a GTK 3 that isn't a smooth upgrade from GTK 2 (e.g. GTK 2 themes don't work with GTK 3), and introduced Clutter, which due to the OpenGL requirement cannot currently be used in low-overhead virtualization and thus cannot be used in a non-niche desktop.
Overall, the GNOME 3 effort has probably been the biggest setback for the Linux desktop ever, a true catastrophe without equals.
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 7, 2012 0:14 UTC (Tue) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
> the cause of the current unprecedented fragmentation of efforts and mindshare into XFCE, Mate, Cinnamon, Unity and KDE.
Yeah, the latest and rather visible cause for sure. I was hoping that with the introduction of freedesktop.org, the fragmentation would diminish. No such luck for now, I'm afraid... :-(
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 16:03 UTC (Mon) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
I try to be very consistent with my call for methodology.
Thanks for the LJ reader's choice awards reference.
Looking back at the pre 2006 readers choice awards, KDE was indeed consistently polling higher
2000:
2001:
2002:
2003:
2004:
2005
McCann: Cross Cut [the future of Nautilus] Posted Aug 6, 2012 10:56 UTC (Mon) by Pawlerson (guest, #74136) [Link]
There were polls and the most important distributions were shipping KDE3 as a default environment. Then came Ubuntu and gnome become more popular. If you want to prove it wasn't like that feel free to do so. Todays, Ubuntu doesn't ship gnome3 and it's the least popular desktop (ignoring some tiny ones). Btw. you're biased.
|
|||||||||||||