User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users

Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users

Posted Nov 11, 2012 0:04 UTC (Sun) by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
In reply to: Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users by sorpigal
Parent article: Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users

Um, firstly that's a pretty pointless analogy since GNOME 3 certainly doesn't bring massive enforced loss of irreplaceable data. And secondly, if you started in 1997, then you'll remember the GNOME 1.4 → 2.0 transition. That was nothing if not jarring, and yes, at the time we heard all the same complaints: it's not really GNOME anymore, they hate power users, they're trying to make a UI for idiots who will never use Linux, why aren't they developing both in parallel, these fascist 'designers' have really gone too far this time (interesting how no-one ever scare-quotes 'coders', by the by), etc, etc.

And yet, here we are ten years later, hearing the exact same arguments for keeping that unusable, idiot-focussed, 'designed' desktop.


(Log in to post comments)

Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users

Posted Nov 11, 2012 0:12 UTC (Sun) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link]

You and I remember it differently. I remember that most of the stuff that was removed was put back later, because it wasn't a good idea to remove it in the first place. Cycling 'round again, here we go.

Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users

Posted Nov 11, 2012 13:25 UTC (Sun) by JMB (guest, #74439) [Link]

It is not pointless, as distributions are forced to use GNOME 3
instead of GNOME 2 as GNOME 2 is no longer supported.
Yes, you can maintain it yourself - as a folk ... done as MATE,
but was GNOME 2 really that good and stable?
In 1997 there was no large share for GNOME - ridiculous to make
analogies to the path to GNOME 2.
Which distros were common that day - what was the standard?
When industry (Sun, HP, IBM, ...) got behind GNOME (as CDE successor;
long ago - and even forgotten now - well, I liked CDE more anyway,
NOT kidding) even experts I know ask - GNOME? Maybe I should have a
look at it ...
With Linux kernel 2.0 Linux distros were full capable as Desktop systems
for scientists - predominantly using fvwm and later fvwm2.
They were accustomed to CDE/MOTIF - and that was a nice fit back then.
Concerning sorpigal's statement: well said. (+1 :)


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