Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 17:06 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)
In reply to: Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget) by rahulsundaram
Parent article: Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

It's certainly a notably popular Gnome3 show-stopper. Hadrons123 makes a good point.

How ironic. We've had this conversation before... about KDE4. But you were defending KDE, and saying that Gnome2 had been just as disruptive. I maintained that Gnome2 was always reasonably well done, if slightly spartan, at first, but that KDE4 was just terrible. Gnome3-shell is worse than anything which has ever come before. Gnome2 is as polished as ever. I haven't kept up with KDE4. But if it came down to Gnome3-shell or KDE4 for my users, and KDE4 didn't pan out for some reason... then.. well... there's always FVWM2 and AnotherLevel. (And no, I can't believe I said that. ;-)

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 17:11 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (29 responses)

Good that you noted that I have argued for KDE 4 and just as I predicted, KDE 4 has settled down and users have accepted it. I distinctly remember how disruptive that GNOME 1 to GNOME 2 transition was for many users till several revisions later. Many users deflected then and among those who stayed some apparently have become such huge GNOME 2 fans that GNOME 3 UI model is a problem for them. 3.8 apparently has convinced some users that GNOME Shell isn't such an issue after all. I suspect we will see more of that with time.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 17:47 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link] (11 responses)

Gnome 1->2 was disruptive in the same kind of way that Bluecurve was. A simplification that the die-hards didn't like. And Sawmill was just crazy with options. Granted, the Gnome devs of the day went a little far. But whereas Gnome 2 opted not to provide, KDE4 couldn't provide, back when we discussed this before. The Gnome2 desktop adapted to users more than the users adapted to the desktop.

OK. So I'll make another prediction. Gnome-shell will adapt or die. File that away and hold it as a hole card for some future year. As a pessimist, I'm generally pretty happy to be proven wrong. ;-)

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 18:06 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (10 responses)

That is a pretty lame prediction. It essentially restates the basic premise of evolution.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 18:25 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link] (9 responses)

Rahul, Rahul... I'd have expected better. You predict that users will adapt to Gnome3, and claim they have adapted to KDE4. I predict that Gnome3-shell will have to adapt to users, rather than the other way around, and make no claim regarding KDE4, at this time. That's not a restatement of the basic premise of evolution. I do agree that something akin to the principles of biological evolution are involved. I disagree with your particular application.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 18:32 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (8 responses)

You seem to have trouble following. Let me break it down for you. KDE users who were upset by KDE 4 seemed to have embraced it much more with incremental improvements in KDE 4.x. Now you can argue that it is KDE 4.x that adopted to users and not the other way around as well but the end result is just the same. More users using an desktop environment they weren't quite happy with before.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 19:18 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link] (7 responses)

Keeping in mind that I'm making no particular claims about KDE4's history after we last spoke about it, long ago... you now have a desktop environment which maintains the name "KDE", and a set of current users. I was a fan of a desktop named KDE back in the late '90s. It morphed a bit throughout the 2000's. And then disappeared. Are you saying that a desktop named KDE is back with more or less the same set of users? Does it matter if they are the same? Or will any old set of users do? I'm not being facetious here. Does it matter, do you think, if you please existing users, or dump them and find others? It matters to the users, of course. But should it matter to the developers?

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 19:32 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (6 responses)

I think it should and atleast to me, it does. You can sometimes trade existing users for new users especially if you think you have a shot at capturing a new segment earlier on but often, your long term users engage with you a lot better than new users. Bug reports from users are much as a validation for me as kudos are because I love the fact that users are using the software I helped develop or maintain. This is especially true if you are voluntarily working on anything.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 20:08 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link] (1 responses)

Very nice post, Rahul. Very honest. Probably a good time for me to stop and say that I have always respected you and your work, and consider you to be an Internet friend, of sorts. I only spar as a hobby. ;-)

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 20:24 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

Thanks. I don't argue with people as much as I argue about technology and I enjoy doing that because it challenges notions and gives everyone an opportunity to learn and of course, it is nothing personal. I will be happy to ack that I agree with anything if I do.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 22:09 UTC (Sat) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (3 responses)

:-)

That's why I happily transitioned from KDE3 to KDE4.

I gather a lot of KDE's troubles were because KDE 4.ZERO was pushed onto users, when the devs were quite open that ".0 status means the API is frozen", not that KDE4 was ready for real use.

Cheers,
Wol

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 16, 2013 21:38 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (1 responses)

That is the usual rationale cited for the 4.0 release but it is clear that many users didn't expect that and 4.0 release announcement didn't mention it either. That was one of the reasons for the initial backlash and 4.1 announcement did include such a note. Chalk it up to lesson learned.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 13:47 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

In hindsight release 4.0 should have been the one with the codename "Krash", not 3.9something.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 16, 2013 23:51 UTC (Sun) by pboddie (guest, #50784) [Link]

To be fair, only the most enthusiastic had KDE 4.0 pushed onto them. Indeed, some of us have avoided KDE 4.x almost completely until now. Apparently, KDE 4.x is quite usable provided that one is prepared to adjust it somewhat to behave as one might expect.

As I pointed out elsewhere, perhaps the most significant problem for the KDE and GNOME developers is not what these environments can do or support but how they are delivered to users by default, especially when those users expect something else and are not willing to experience a learning curve for the sake of it (maybe because they're only getting version upgrades infrequently, not at every opportunity, and thus experience the resulting big paradigm change as a sudden shock).

Still, I think it is regrettable that only as various environments reach their x.7 release or so (where x is the controversial major version number) are they regarded as picking up from where the previous major version series left off.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 19:29 UTC (Sat) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link] (1 responses)

@rahul
Disclaimer:
If you think I 'm personally attacking you, I am really sorry if it came out that way. Its not my intention. But I always liked you for your contributions in fedora and massively respect your involvement. But the LWN "gnome-is-always right/everyone loves gnome-shell" posts of yours is misleading. I am using fedora f19 with XFCE.

>KDE 4 has settled down and users have accepted it.

If there was a choice people shall opt for it. Shoving down the throat with an not-so-interesting interface is what gnome users are facing right now.
You always argue that gnome UI is loved by everyone and try to project that the people who doesn't like it are a minority. Well honestly its not the case and you tend to use the freedom of speech to high-pitch your opinions on others on every other gnome-shell issue case. I always find some gnome-devs who doesn't disclose their position coming into support gnome-shell as well, at LWN. For all the love you have with gnome-shell try googling "I hate gnome-shell" without the quotes. There are like 2 dozens of threads in every linux forums about how they hate gnome-shell. I hardly find as much threads about how "I love gnome-shell" anywhere even with gnome 3.8.
There is very good chance that you might argue that forums are wrong place to look for statistics or info. I do understand that, but there are not many options out there.

>3.8 apparently has convinced some users that GNOME Shell isn't such an issue after all.

Do you have any base for your assertion?
If people don't talk about it, either they are done talking or already moved on to something else.
If gnome-shell is not such an issue why red hat is opting for a classic mode? (please save your self some time of implying how gnome-shell classic mode is also the gnome-shell, we already know that fact.)

> I suspect we will see more of that with time.
You are expecting us to get convinced and not bitch about gnome-shell?

>That is a pretty lame prediction. It essentially restates the basic premise of evolution.
I have lost lot of features in gnome apps in the last 2 years and I had to switch to XFCE. If that's evolution so be it.
There are alternatives in fedora as well with MATE/cinnamon.

>sbergman27 : Gnome-shell will adapt or die.
Its already adapting to red hat with classic mode. You can't market modern gnome-shell to workstation guys. Red hat knows that very well. They refer that "they want continuity in interface for a customer moving from gnome 2 to gnome 3".

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 15, 2013 19:37 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

"But the LWN "gnome-is-always right/everyone loves gnome-shell" posts of yours is misleading"

Let me stop you right there. I don't think GNOME Shell or GNOME is always right at all. They have made a lot of decisions which they themselves recognize as wrong and reverted and some I still think they have a long way to go but when I see people pretending that some change is universally hated or has no chance at all, I step it to point out, that isn't the case (be it KDE 4, GNOME 3 or Anaconda UI) and I am willing to take the heat for it. I don't expect that "bitching" about anything will solve any of your problems but hey, it is a free world.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 16, 2013 13:57 UTC (Sun) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (11 responses)

GNOME 1 to 2 was disruptive because GNOME 2 had very different code, and was initially quite buggy. The UI framework was unchanged though, other than that it focused on simplicity.

Further, the UI changes in GNOME 2 came about *BECAUSE OF* systematic, semi-scientific HCI testing, initiated by Sun, which led to a coherent HIG for GNOME. The GNOME people had objective *EVIDENCE* that the GNOME 2 UI changes significantly improved things.

I've asked here several times before, where are the HCI studies that justified the GNOME 3 UI changes? Not yet received a pointer to any such studies.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 16, 2013 17:49 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (10 responses)

GNOME 1 to GNOME 2 issues wasn't about a differences in codebase or stability as much as it was about the substantial UI changes and all the different configuration options in GNOME 1 that didn't exist in GNOME 2 and most of which never came back. As for HCI studies, I suspect you already know the answer. It was a one off thing funded by Sun because they wanted to replaced CDE.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 13:16 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (9 responses)

That HCI studies on GNOME 1 were funded by Sun for some reason in no way answers the question:

Where were the HCI studies on GNOME 2 that provided the objective evidence and rationale for the GNOME 3 UI changes?

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 16:52 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (8 responses)

HCI studies in GNOME 1.x won't explain GNOME 3 changes anymore than it would explain KDE 4 changes. GNOME 3 changes were driven via the current GNOME Design team.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 16:56 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (7 responses)

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or do have such a great compulsion to have the last word that you must reply even with such ridiculous off-the-point answers?

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 17:18 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (6 responses)

I gave you a pointer to the team driving the changes so that you can ask them about the process directly. Did you find that too obtuse for you?

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 20:10 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (5 responses)

It's a really simple question, with no reference to GNOME 1 or KDE required:

Where were the HCI¹ studies on GNOME 2 that provided the objective evidence and rationale for the GNOME 3 UI changes?

There's no need for a politician-like evasive answer, just "I don't know of any" or "Here's the link: ..." will do.

1. Or any other systematically obtained data or evidence.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 20:19 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (4 responses)

Let me try again for the last time. I am aware of some usability studies but I don't know if they have been published online. If you really want to know, you should talk to the people involved rather than asking here randomly and hoping the relevant designers will see and answer you.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 20:21 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (3 responses)

Ah, so now you know of studies, but can't tell me anything about them. Can you give me the contact details of a person involved in such a study so I can contact them?

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 20:45 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (2 responses)

Again, you are insisting on asking the wrong person. You have to talk to the GNOME designers involved.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 21:04 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

Oh come now. Yesterday you didn't seem to know of any studies, except the Sun one on GNOME1 that led to the GNOME2 HIG:

Posted Jun 16, 2013 17:49 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram
… As for HCI studies, I suspect you already know the answer. It was a one off thing funded by Sun

Today you seem to claim you do know of some relevant to the GNOME2 → GNOME3 changes. So, as you have only just learned of them, you must have this information close to hand. Why be so unhelpful as to refuse to pass along a more exact pointer to something that surely must be almost at your fingertips?

In other comments in this article you seem willing to go into detail about and/or are quite confident you understand: what the design decisions were for the GNOME3 UI; what you have heard from the GNOME designers; why RedHat fund GNOME; etc. Why suddenly would you become so coy on the evidence question?

As of this point, there is still no answer to my question:

Where were the HCI studies on GNOME 2 that provided the objective evidence and rationale for the GNOME 3 UI changes?

with any pointer to any objective evidence.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 17, 2013 21:12 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

You are confusing the context of what I said and jumping to conclusions. You were talking about the Sun HCI study in GNOME and I pointed out that it was a one off thing funded by Sun because they replaced CDE. I honestly don't have any further information to provide to you.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 21, 2013 19:26 UTC (Fri) by strycat (guest, #91546) [Link] (2 responses)

KDE 4 is still a long way away from being the working DE that KDE 3 was. We've only "accepted" KDE4 because Gnome (2, 3, whatever version) still sucks more than KDE4 and the "Trinity" fork seems to still be just one or two people working on it.

Many of us recognize that because KDE is less popular than Gnome it just doesn't have the manpower to have good viable forks and alternatives grow. Gnome on the other hand has legions of coders who have made everything from Gnome Classic to Gnome Cinnamon.

So for us KDE people we're stuck with either using the inferior KDE 4, switching to the even more inferior Gnome, or go with something that is being maintained by just one person.

I accept these are the choices, but please don't say we've accepted KDE 4.

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 21, 2013 20:39 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (1 responses)

There are a lot of us who have accepted KDE 4.

As someone who's been running it for several years before 4.0, I have to say that I don't know what is missing from KDE 4 that was there in KDE 3

Red Hat discloses RHEL roadmap (TechTarget)

Posted Jun 25, 2013 19:27 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Multi-key shortcuts? (Sure, not hugely important, but I have them in Emacs so I want them on my desktop! Also I have huge fanout of literally hundreds of shortcut keys and I don't think I can fit them into the keyboard with single keys without using up all my bucky bits just on KDE shortcuts, leaving none for Emacs.)