Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Aug 2012 21:04 UTC, submitted by suka
Gnome In a recent interview with the Austrian newssite derStandard.at, GNOME designer Jon McCann talks about GNOME OS, the consequences of Canonical leaving GNOME behind, the purported removal of features and the future role of Linux distributions. "I think there was a time when GNOME had kind of a crisis, we didn't know where we wanted to go, we were lacking goals and vision - that was the end of the GNOME2 cycle. So we pulled together and formed a vision where we want to go - and actually did something about it. And now we have been marching on that plan for quite some time."
Permalink for comment 531582
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Let the devs do as they like
by trev on Tue 21st Aug 2012 01:08 UTC
trev
Member since:
2006-11-22

In the end it's the devs that decide where it goes so let them take it where they want.

IMO the 2.x to 3.x series marks a transition from an average/business user releases to testing/experimental releases. I say this for the following reasons:

1. Lack of migration plan
This simply shows GNOME is not ready for anyone that wants a consistently usable desktop. When they stopped supporting the 2.x series there was no transition plan to get users to 3.x AT ALL. It was a drop them in the desert and let them find a way out. For mom, pop, most average computer users this is huge problem.

2. Release before ready
The 3.x versions released before EOLing 2.x were not even stable. Before the 3.2 it was really barely even usable and IIRC 2.x was EOL (no more updates) before 3.2. I am going from memory here so forgive me if this is not correct.

3. Untested UI design
It looks a lot prettier but there are more keystrokes and steps to doing most of the common tasks (launch commonly used apps, access commonly used folders and documents, get basic information you want all the time, etc, etc) resulting in a noticeable loss in efficiency. It does do some things better (search) but most other common tasks take longer.

4. Lack of feedback loops
I'm not sure where this fell down but it was clear users were clamoring with input of which almost all was ignored. This was like the whole spatial browsing thing but on a much more fundamental level.

This is not to say all 2.x releases were good. There were definitely very bumpy spots but this shift seems considerably deeper and substantial than any of the 2.x issues. I'm grateful to the devs for giving us the 2.x series but I would have appreciated a heads up on the change from user oriented to experimental releases. For those of us pitching Linux as a viable alternative on the desktop this blindsided many of us and it quite clearly fragmented the landscape considerably.

I am just glad there is XFCE to pick up the slack. Even so it is a decreased user experience from GNOME 2.x IMO.

Reply Score: 8