Posted Aug 10, 2012 6:38 UTC (Fri) by bojan (subscriber, #14302)
In reply to: Day: GNOME OS by thebluesgnr
Parent article: Day: GNOME OS
> Ah, I see; they purposefully create a new piece of technology from scratch in Javascript due to its extensibility; they make extensions work day 1; they invest a significant amount of time on the web infrastructure required to make extensions.gnome.org work; they review hundreds of extensions posted by users in their free time.
And all to remove accessibility icon, for instance. Or to not have to press Alt to shut the system down. Ridiculous. Objectively, forcing someone to write Javascript to move/remove an icon or set basic options is a regression when compared to Gnome 2. Maybe even Windows 3.1?
> And instead of getting thanks, they get accused of doing all that work just so they can pry and torture their poor users from the beloved taskbar and windows 95-like application menu.
Only because the newfangled "overview" requires significantly more GUI/mouse actions to do things, provides no visibility of the desktop or minimised/obscured windows and attacks users with visual elements that they never wanted to use. These are objective, measurable regressions.
> I mean, imagine if two extensions conflict with each other! The horror!
Yeah, the horror indeed. The combinatorial explosion of possible conflicts is mind boggling. And all to do what? Something that all other desktops can do already, without writing any code?
Look, I understand why the home screen is removed from view when I start an app on my Galaxy S2. There isn't enough space to have the home screen and the app on that device's screen at the same time. But to remove my windows from view for me to start an app on my 1600 x 900 laptop screen? Or someone's 27" 2560 x 1400 screen? What's that about?