Confused [LWN.net]

Confused

Posted Nov 5, 2011 21:09 UTC (Sat) by kragilkragil2 (guest, #76172)
In reply to: Confused by ovitters
Parent article: Rawhide gets GNOME Shell for all display types

>Seems that people just switch to something else instead. Which is fine as then fallback can be dropped earlier without impact.

It _seems_ that way, at least if you look at internet comments. No way to be sure or is there? So for a hunch you might alienate another part of your user base.

I am really not sure this KDE4/Gnome3/Unity thing where you introduce lots of regressions and try to live with the fallout is really the right way of doing things.
FOSS marketing is basically the people who use it, alienating large parts of those people does not seem like the way to success. If every internet post of your new product sees only lots of bitching on the internet it is hard to get the buzz going. KDE hasn't recovered from KDE4 and it has been nearly 4 years. Every KDE4 post sees major whining, just look below.
Slow gradual change where every version builds on the basis of its predessor seems like the much better way of doing things. Linus&Miguel seem to know that. Desktop designers .. not so much.

to post comments

Confused

Posted Nov 6, 2011 15:28 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (12 responses)

I chose my words charefully. I said seem with a reason. I am aware of everything you think I am not.

Anyway, bringing up a kernel hacker and "lots of regressions" is not going to impress me much. Instead I rather look at GNOME 3.4 and see what we can improve. Just like GNOME 2.x.

We called gnome-panel v3 fallback mode for a reason. I know at least one distribution renamed it to "GNOME classic". That is wrong. You can get the same experience (was intended to make possible), but that was never going to stay forever. This all was communicated before GNOME 3.0 was released.

Having concrete data on how much fallback mode is used would be helpful. Fact is that it is really difficult to obtain that. I find it interesting in this light that you say "KDE hasn't recovered from KDE4". Where is the data to support this claim?

Standing at the sidelines and second guessing is cool, but bit of trust would be nice. I've been around GNOME since around the 1.4 days, same for many others involved with GNOME. Various developers returned with the plan to do GNOME 3.

Confused

Posted Nov 6, 2011 19:16 UTC (Sun) by kragilkragil2 (guest, #76172) [Link] (10 responses)

>Anyway, bringing up a kernel hacker and "lots of regressions" is not going to impress me much. Instead I rather look at GNOME 3.4 and see what we can improve. Just like GNOME 2.x.

That will probably happen, but my point is that resetting major parts of what your users come to exspect from a desktop is not going to win you lots of roses.

>This all was communicated before GNOME 3.0 was released.

I doubt that. See above.

>I find it interesting in this light that you say "KDE hasn't recovered from KDE4". Where is the data to support this claim?

Nearly every KDE4 post on any website that allows comments since 2007.
I was talking about marketing. FOSS marketing is done on the internet.

>Standing at the sidelines and second guessing is cool, but bit of trust would be nice.

Oh I trust that by the time Gnome 3.10 is released most complains will be gone, but I wish user facing components would see gentler migrations, even if that would mean maintaining older components a lot longer and not making progress in other parts that fast. The kernel is a good example IMO. Maybe doing it that way would encourage more people/companies to participate and therefore reduce the burden on devs.
Gnome could have learned a lot from KDE4, but didn't IMO.
But to be totally honest I wish Qt would have been LGPL from the start, maybe we would live in a very different world right now.

Confused

Posted Nov 6, 2011 19:53 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link] (2 responses)

Just because not everyone noticed, doesn't negate that it was communicated. Doubting if that occurred while I am from the team who decided on this and communicated this: oh well. That people will miss such communication is a different topic.

I don't get what you mean with marketing and hasn't recovered. I disagree that FOSS marketing is only done on the internet. Ubuntu is very well known, and it is not due to just internet marketing. You still haven't provided data on KDE marketing. I don't think it is possible to get such data, so we make the best decision. But keeping fallback around forever was never the plan, nor in line with the choices we've made over the last years. Our decisions are pretty predictable.

Comparing GNOME3, to KDE4 is inaccurate. We've been giving pretty much the same answers and promises for a long time. GNOME 3.0 was really stable, we didn't say "oh just a development release" just before releasing. This is mostly what I surprised me about KDE4 (bit buggy + change of message just before release). We have delayed GNOME3 various times to increase the quality.

Think getting lots of criticism on big changes is close to impossible to avoid. The more users something has, the more bugs are discovered. What is stable for 1000 people might be really buggy once 100.000 people use it. But you have to release at one point, because 6 additional months with the same amount of people (1000) will have the same benefit as just having 100x the amount of people using it.
The focus within 3.x is iterative design. Designers are trying things out and changing things which do not work. Meaning: overview mode works slightly different in 3.2, and might change a bit again in 3.4 or 3.6. Same for Contacts and Documents.

Regarding your clarification on what you meant with regressions: I agree that changing user expectations is going to cause frustrations. It is annoying to suddenly have things work in a totally different way. I find most of that criticism totally logical and expected it. I saw the same during 2.0 though, except people seemed to be a bit more patient at that time.

IMO people have really high expectations of what a project can do and that bar raises each time you try and reach it.

Confused

Posted Nov 22, 2011 2:59 UTC (Tue) by Zizzle (guest, #67739) [Link] (1 responses)

Haha, GNOME 3 was only "stable" because it didn't do anything.

Change the font size? No.
Taskbar? No.
Single click application lanuch? No.
Applets? No.

It was like a "high quality" Hello World in my eyes.

I think most people complained about KDE4 for the same reasons. The functionality they were used to was gone. Not because it was buggy.

When something is buggy at least you can be reasonably sure it will eventually stabilize. It's even pretty easy to fix crashers and bugs as someone unfamiliar with the project. Major features, not so much.

When functionality is missing and the devs are saying, "you don't need that, you were doing it wrong!", that is what really annoys people.

KDE4 was quite different

Posted Nov 22, 2011 7:36 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

I think most people complained about KDE4 for the same reasons. The functionality they were used to was gone. Not because it was buggy.

Nope. KDE 4.0 was as buggy as the come. It leaked memory, it crashed all the time. Limited functionality is was just an icing on the cake. GNOME3 is paradise in comparison: sure, some functions are missing, but at least the ones that are there work reliably.

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 6, 2011 19:57 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (6 responses)

Oh I trust that by the time Gnome 3.10 is released most complains will be gone, but I wish user facing components would see gentler migrations, even if that would mean maintaining older components a lot longer and not making progress in other parts that fast.

"Gentler migration" is expensive and userspace is much larger then kernel. This is chicken-and-egg problem: there are very few customers which are ready to pay for desktop thus it's hard to do things like "gentler migrations" and because of regular "rough migrations" it's hard to attract users who will pay for desktop. It's not clear how this circle can broken.

Gnome could have learned a lot from KDE4, but didn't IMO.

They tried - but looks like "fallback mode" was just a waste of resources: looks like people either use GNOME Shell or they drop GNOME completely.

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 7, 2011 7:43 UTC (Mon) by hein.zelle (guest, #33324) [Link] (4 responses)

(Apologies if these comments are unity-specific and don't apply to Gnome 3)

I haven't switched away, and since ubuntu 11.04 I've definitely started using the "classic" interface. I've tried unity for a week, and couldn't find half of the things I wanted to get working, not even with a lot of searching. I think if you want real data, a software-based poll or at least a widely announced poll on the web is required. Guessing either way is probably not adequate.

Personally, what I think is missing (for unity, I haven't tried gnome3) is documentation on how to use it. One of the major strong points of ubuntu was a well organized menu. In unity, I can't find anything. A "how to use unity effectively" tutorial would be a welcome addition, and could resolve a lot of the issues people are having. Having to search on the internet for hotkeys is not the right way, if you ask me.
Examples of things I could not find:

- how do I change the look/feel/behaviour? (answer: install a separate, non-default package. Found via google, not the menu or help)
- how do I make the icons smaller (1680 wide screen)?
- focus-follows-mouse and lazy-lock (can't do?)
- access to the original menu?
- access to the original system configuration tools?

I'll try again in a little while with ubuntu 11.10 to see if things have improved, but that list of problems is a bit too long for my taste. Add to that a couple of software bugs (image viewer won't go full screen, etc), and the fun is complete.

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 7, 2011 10:16 UTC (Mon) by jku (subscriber, #42379) [Link] (3 responses)

Getting real data is much, much more difficult than setting up a poll on the web. Think about it: Any amount of advertizement and announcements cannot remove the bias inherent in that method. A hundred people responding, 10000 people responding... They'll still have the same self-selection bias that cannot be fixed by increasing sample size.

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 8, 2011 9:00 UTC (Tue) by hein.zelle (guest, #33324) [Link] (2 responses)

I don't quite understand your point - I probably misunderstood. If you're trying to find out how many people are actually using the fallback mode of gnome, wouldn't an automatic software solution (like debian popcon) be much more objective than a web poll? Of course a web poll would be easier to implement.

Anyway, I agree that getting objective data is hard no matter which method you choose. It may be enough to get a feeling for how intensively the fallback mode is used, though.

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 8, 2011 16:15 UTC (Tue) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link]

Privacy issues results in inreliable data. Popcon is not used by everyone, and I don't think it measures this. I think we would violate privacy laws if we would add code in GNOME to send such data.

That said, if we'd have something used by many, it would be interesting to see.

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 9, 2011 8:27 UTC (Wed) by jku (subscriber, #42379) [Link]

I was just pointing out that one of the solutions you suggested, a web poll, is useless for the task at hand -- it just can not answer questions like "how many people use X" or even "what percentage of people use Y".

This is chicken and egg problem

Posted Nov 8, 2011 18:53 UTC (Tue) by vonbrand (guest, #4458) [Link]

I had Gnome on my netbook, and found it easier just to switch to XFCE while Gnome shell didn't work there. The fallback mode was too different from real Gnome 2 for my liking (or perhaps too similar, with just the right annoying minor differences).

Confused

Posted Nov 9, 2011 1:48 UTC (Wed) by brouhaha (guest, #1698) [Link]

I am aware of everything you think I am not.

One wonders how you have accomplished such a stupendous feat.