Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 8th Nov 2012 20:54 UTC, submitted by Elv13
Permalink for comment 541615
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Gnome has always worshipped Apple and Mac OS, but they've always completely, totally and fundamentally misunderstood the world that Mac OS operates in. It operates in a world of straight-jacket hardware and options such as theming because it just isn't intended to be Windows, isn't intended to run on a wide variety of hardware and doesn't have the extremely wide range of software written for it. Even then, amusingly, Mac OS is far more configurable than Gnome is.
Gnome is fundamentally at odds with those two things - yes it does need to run on a variety of platforms for its userbase (it's supposed to be a 'Unix' desktop for fuck's sake) and it desperately needs applications and developers to move forwards. Put those two things together and you have why Gnome is dying in its own vomit.
What's more funny is how the Apple worship and general 'usability' direction came about. It didn't come about because Gnome's developers genuinely believed that it was the right direction to go. It was because the functionality that they needed to write to compete with KDE, Windows, and Mac OS for that matter, was simply too difficult to do. Gnome is still the same hashed together, poorly thought out technical mess loosely based around Gimp's toolkit that it was in the mid-nineties when it was thrown together as a response to KDE.
They then dressed up cutting features and configuration you would find in all those other desktops as being for reasons of 'usability' to hide these uncomfortable facts. In fact, I don't think Gnome's developers have even consciously thought about this. It just seems to be an endemic mental disease in the project. People like Jeff Waugh over the years have exemplified all this, and the whole notion of a Gnome 'brand' - whatever that is.