|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 07:12 PM EDT |
I think the reason for the creation of Gnome (creation of a truly free desktop)
was admirable. I liked and *still* like Gnome 1.x (I still have it installed on
an old system). It was far from perfect but I like the attitude that seemed to
inspire it, including that funky icon for the control center. With Gnome 2.x
there were needed improvements but I thought the basic attitude of limiting
(protecting?) the user was a major step backwards. And I never liked the idea
of a Microsoft style registry (OK, not a completely fair characterization, but I
still didn't like it). I've had no desire to look at Gnome 3 or Unity.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Ditto - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 27 2012 @ 07:54 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 28 2012 @ 11:30 AM EDT |
It seems to me that the issues are not being clearly identified. There is a
difference between the GNOME "project" failing and the GNOME
"product" failing.
If the goal of the "project" is just to give the developers something
fun to code, then the goals of the project are just the personal choices of a
few people and GNOME 3 can be considered a success. However, it would be only
natural for those people to have differing views on what would be fun next.
Therefore the project should just die off as the developers find other projects
that interest them.
If on the other hand the goal of the "project" is to make a desirable
"product", then the developers should listen carefully to the users.
Users have been saying for years what they don't like about GNOME and the dumbed
down direction that it has been taking. Of course it is loosing market share.
When the developers don't care what the users think, what else could possible
happen.
I had always assumed that developers didn't listen because their goal was not to
make a good "product", but just to have fun, which is totally and
completely fine. As a developer, that is their right. If the developers goals
and the users needs happen to overlap for a while, great. When they stop
overlapping, each can go their own way.
So, to avoid the abyss, GNOME developers first must decide what the purpose of
the "project" is: to just have fun making something that very few want
to use, or to produce a good GNOME "product" that many want to use.
If the developers choose fun only, they should not be surprised by a loss in
market share. If they want to make a product they have to start thinking
clearly and listen to users, starting with Linus. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: artp on Saturday, July 28 2012 @ 12:47 PM EDT |
It always strikes me as ironic that Gnome was started to
protest the non-free license of Qt, and ended up spawning a
less-free demon (not daemon) in Mono.
Now both Gnome and KDE are was too bloated to use on
anything less than the power-beast monster computers that
developers use. Neither really works well on the recycle
center cast-offs that I have been using for the last 12 or
14 years. But, again, if you lean your head sideways, put
your tongue in your cheek and squint, you can make yourself
believe that both work very, very well indeed!
There are a lot of alternatives out there now. Explore! I'll
use anything that gives me multiple desktops, lets me
configure it as I want, and stays out of my way otherwise. I
want a DE, not another application.
---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- The Irony - Authored by: N_au on Saturday, July 28 2012 @ 04:25 PM EDT
- Faster than MS-Windows - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, July 28 2012 @ 04:57 PM EDT
- The Irony - Authored by: Wol on Saturday, July 28 2012 @ 06:10 PM EDT
- The Irony - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 29 2012 @ 11:01 AM EDT
- The Irony - Authored by: UncleVom on Sunday, July 29 2012 @ 11:56 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 30 2012 @ 01:06 PM EDT |
To me it seems that Gnome and KDE think they are commercial vendors, who
constantly need to change things to have something new and shiny to offer to the
masses. But in doing so they take away from their users what they appreciate,
and instead they target a different group of users.
There is nothing wrong with targeting a new audience, but don't alienate your
old one. Make a new project, a new desktop system for the new group, using the
old system as a starting point, and don't leave the forking to frustrated users
who want their old desktop back.
Mature software doesn't need to change constantly, and mature software users
don't need a constant feed of new shiny things to keep them happy. A slower rate
of progress and more stability is probably what existing users want. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
