User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Another comic success!

Another comic success!

Posted Sep 29, 2012 15:17 UTC (Sat) by thebluesgnr (guest, #37963)
In reply to: Another comic success! by Rehdon
Parent article: GNOME 3.6 released

"for a desktop environment supposed to just work right out of the box to cater for less computer-savvy people, that's just ridiculous."

It does work out of the box for less computer-savvy people. Both my mom & dad use GNOME 3 and they don't even have tweak-tool or dconf-editor installed on their systems. They never asked for anything that would require it either. (And a little anecdote: they both learned about suspending over shutting down their laptops thanks to GNOME 3).

As for your workflow related problem: some workflows people learned in past environments simply don't work in GNOME 3 and never will. For instance, there are people that store dozens of documents or application launchers on their desktop. You could tweak GNOME 3 to poorly support that (up until 3.4), but ultimately that's not what it was designed for. It's not going to provide a great experience for users who insist on working that way, and the GNOME devs are fine with that I would imagine. They're not really trying to provide software that instantly works just like whatever users are currently used to; they're taking some steps in new directions, and some of that is going to pay off wonderfully, and some of it will need adjustments.

I'm familiar with Windows, OS X and GNOME 2 and still use them in a professional environment. For me, the experience provided by GNOME 3 with the overview, dynamic workspace management and integrated search for launching apps and documents is unmatched.

(Log in to post comments)

Another comic success!

Posted Sep 29, 2012 19:56 UTC (Sat) by Rehdon (guest, #45440) [Link]

Thank you for providing a well exposed rationale for the current state of the Gnome desktop, and let me say that I'm glad that you and other users find it useful. On the other hand, your post reminded me of that crucial point in Kung Pow where the badass bad guy comes up saying "From this day forward you will all refer to me by the name... Betty" (, meaning that I understand the literal meaning of your words, but they still don't make any sense to me.

So the Gnome designers wanted to explore new directions? Sounds great, but:

- where are the usability studies proving that their approach is sound? where's the theory? f.i. from what little UI theory I know, hiding stuff from the user is bad, so why so many things (from overlay mode to the infamous press-alt-to-show shutdown dialogue) aren't immediately visible in Gnome Shell? where are the real users' tests showing that the initial design was actually sensible?
- why did they have to effectively kill Gnome 2, making the transition so much harder for users? (and please no technicalities about how the Gnome 2 libraries can still be installed aside the Gnome 3 ones...)
- why did they start a war on existing features, depriving former users of functionality they were well accustomed to and relied upon? why the vandalism? (oh, and a nice touch f.i. when they wrote that split panel in Nautilus was removed because "not very discoverable" ... after hiding all sort of stuff)
- why did they ignore their current user base feedback? I'd better say the outrage, and believe me, it wasn't (always) fear of change: I know many people who sticked to Gnome during the 1 > 2 transition (heck, I'm one of them), and this is *not* the same thing; but anyway, why the arrogant attitude? even the most harsh and rude criticism, provided it's not just trolling, is an indication that you're doing something wrong ... and that transpired in the "official version" as well, see B. Otte's post
- isn't Betty a woman's name?

Admittedly, the last question is more Kung Pow than Gnome Shell related ;) but that's just to highlight how sometimes all of this looks a bit "unreal" to me. No offense meant, but I don't see any "big design" here, just a bunch of different ideas, some good some very less so, mixed together, prettified on the visual level and then unloaded on the unsuspecting masses. Not the way to bring "a free and open computing environment to everyone" IMHO.


Another comic success!

Posted Sep 29, 2012 22:31 UTC (Sat) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]

> - why did they have to effectively kill Gnome 2, making the transition so much harder for users? (and please no technicalities about how the Gnome 2 libraries can still be installed aside the Gnome 3 ones...)

What's wrong with Classic mode?

Another comic success!

Posted Sep 30, 2012 14:20 UTC (Sun) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

It's hard to depend on Classic mode when the maintainers of it are hostile to it and have made it clear its going to be excised ASAP - e.g. when it's feasible to software-render gnome-shell (has Fedora already switched to soft-rendered gnome-shell for fallback? They were planning to for Fedora 17).

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds