Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 23rd Sep 2007 13:43 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Just like Eugenia yesterday, I also upgraded my laptop's Ubuntu Feisty installation to Gutsy a few days ago. The upgrade process went completely awry, though, so I was forced to do a fresh install. Not a bad thing, as it gave me the opportunity to take a look at Ubuntu's soon-to-be-released Gutsy Gibbon with GNOME 2.20
Thread beginning with comment 273842
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

Why do people ALWAYS insist in pointing fingers whenever a person points out a flaw in product xyz? It is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

And in case you want to know: I have complained numerous times about the graphical inconsistency in OSX and Windows. I thoroughly HATE it.


People are entirely justified in pointing this out. I don't know if you've noticed, but on platforms where you have a wide variety of software, shipped with the OS, from the same vendor or from lots of ISVs, different applications tend to diverge in their relative looks and behaviour. This isn't always a sign that people want to deliberately make things inconsistent, just that different applications do different things and people use different toolkits for the jobs they want to do. You either get a good choice of applications and somewhat diverging integration, or you get far less applications and better integration. The world has spoke - they want applications.

Now, if you'd rather fanny about and have everything written in the same inferior toolkit, minimising the functionality and overall usability of an application, that's entirely up to you.

Way to be superficial. Qt applications do not only look different, they behave different.

Or should that be GTK applications look and behave differently? ;-)

Hell, GTK and Gnome applications can't even look and behave consistently amongst each other let alone with everyone else. Some of Gnome's control panel applets still don't use the abominable instant-apply standard, but you would think they would if they shared a common, stable architecture between them. Running around everything to make it HIG compliant is just not what a modern development desktop is about.

Talking about getting editable toolbars in 2007 is just plain ridiculous, and any Windows or even Mac developer worth his or her salt is going to laugh at you in disbelief. You implement it once in your underlying toolkit or library, and voila, everyone gets exactly the same, consistent thing. It's that simple, or at least it should be.

They have a different layout, different behaviour, differently organised menus, different types of buttons, different types of just about anything.

I'd go and ask the Gnome people why they decided to go off on a Mac trip and make everything inconsistent with Windows, KDE and every Unix desktop that had gone before. There was zero evidence to back that decision up, other than it's the way that the Mac does things.

It's great that you have no problems running them side-by-side.

I don't have problems largely at all. The KDE people came up with a Freedesktop project called QtGTK that allows GTK applications run within KDE to use the same colours and theme, and to an extent, inherit the look and feel of the KDE environment as well (file dialogues etc.) Using Eclipse, Inkscape and VMware Console isn't quite so painful at all now, but in order to maximise the applications you have available on your platform you can't expect perfection.

But please don't make it seem as if people who in fact do NOT like it, and have clear reasons for that, are idiots.

Listen, if you want to have a good bitch about this, and since this article is about Gnome on Ubuntu, why don't you ask some of the Gnome developers what they're doing to adequately solve this problem and what they're doing to integrate Freedesktop software like QtGTK to help with this? There's quite a bit in there for doing the reverse to get KDE and Qt applications integrated into a GTK environment.

Do not bitch at everybody else if the desktop you're using isn't doing anything to help and ease this problem in a sane manner, other than to lamely rewrite applications in a ten year old, inferior toolkit that Windows, Mac and other developers quite frankly wouldn't touch with a ten foot bargepole.

Reply Parent Score: 4

GhePeU Member since:
2005-07-06

blah blah blah usual rant by segedunum blah blah blah

Tell us the truth, admit that the GNOME developers assaulted your home and gang-raped your dogs, your cats and all your dolls. You keep bashing GNOME everywhere and anytime, there's no other logical explanation for such a pathological behavior: you (and superstoned, who unbelievably has yet to comment on this news) are ALWAYS bashing GNOME, GNOME developers, GNOME users, GNOME applications, GNOME toolkits, GNOME libraries, GNOME programming languages, GNOME bindings, GNOME window manager, GNOME everything!
It's disturbing and a bit scary.

Edited 2007-09-24 13:57

Reply Parent Score: 4

DeadFishMan Member since:
2006-01-09

Dude... Shill! ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I couldn't say it better.

Reply Parent Score: 2

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Tell us the truth, admit that the GNOME developers assaulted your home and gang-raped your dogs, your cats and all your dolls. You keep bashing GNOME everywhere and anytime, there's no other logical explanation for such a pathological behavior......... Yada, yada, yada, someone said something against Gnome, how dare they, it's terrible, I don't want to read it! Arghhhhhhh!

I recommend reading and digesting it sweetheart. Your comment (if you can call it that) is as far off-topic as it's possible to get because it addresses........nothing regarding what I wrote.

If you have difficulties doing that then I'm afraid that's just not my problem, is it? It's more a reflection on your own mental problems accepting criticism on anything that might be dear to your little heart.

If you want to respond to what's actually in there in a sensible and adult manner I'm all ears, but I'm not holding my breath.

Reply Parent Score: 0

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Now, if you'd rather fanny about and have everything written in the same inferior toolkit, minimising the functionality and overall usability of an application, that's entirely up to you.


Minimising what? I can do whatever I need to do on GNOME, and I can do whatever I need to do on KDE. You make it seem as if I'm in some way 'pro-GNOME' just because I do not wish to mingle Gtk+ applications with Qt applications. That's kind of a weird deduction there.

It's fine you hate Gtk+/GNOME (be honest about it for once), but please don;t try to shove me in a pro-GNOME corner. There's enough to not like about GNOME/Gtk+.

Or should that be GTK applications look and behave differently? ;-)


In a Gtk+ environment, Qt applications stand out like an eyesore. In a Qt environment, Gtk+ applications stand out like an eyesore.

I'd go and ask the Gnome people why they decided to go off on a Mac trip and make everything inconsistent with Windows, KDE and every Unix desktop that had gone before. There was zero evidence to back that decision up, other than it's the way that the Mac does things.


Well, this approach hasn't been very ineffective. Basically all major Linux distributions default to GNOME right now, so I'm not entirely sure where this "zero evidence" comes from. Het heeft hen geen windeieren gelegd, so to speak.

Listen, if you want to have a good bitch about this, and since this article is about Gnome on Ubuntu, why don't you ask some of the Gnome developers what they're doing to adequately solve this problem and what they're doing to integrate Freedesktop software like QtGTK to help with this? There's quite a bit in there for doing the reverse to get KDE and Qt applications integrated into a GTK environment.


For the millionth time: I don't have a need for Qt applications in a Gtk+ environment! Jesus Christ, how many times do I have to repeat this? Gtk+ applications serve my needs JUST FINE. What's up with this militant approach of trying to shove applications down my throat that I don't want, nor need!

Do not bitch at everybody else if the desktop you're using isn't doing anything to help and ease this problem in a sane manner, [ bla bla pointless flame]


A big, deep, and long sigh. THERE IS NO PROBLEM. I'm content with the Gtk+ applications as they are, and when I'm in a Gtk+ environment, I haven't a need a Qt application could fulfill. Is that so hard to understand?

Reply Parent Score: 1

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Minimising what? I can do whatever I need to do on GNOME, and I can do whatever I need to do on KDE.

What's the problem then?

By minimising what I mean is that when you have a lot of people writing lots of applications that you can run then they tend to be less integrated with different toolkits and look somewhat different. That's what you get with diversity to an extent. When you have less applications, or you decide to stupidly rewrite what's already there, then you end up with less applications and functionality because you're cutting yourself off from what's out there. Not a good idea.

It's fine you hate Gtk+/GNOME (be honest about it for once)

Oh, here we go............

I don't like it for the very reasons I've stated, speaking primarily as a developer (which have knock-on effects for users). I'm not making them up and I'm not dumbing them down for political correctness. If people want to get upset then that's entirely up to them. If people want to debate, then great!

but please don;t try to shove me in a pro-GNOME corner.

It's always a dead give-away when people start talking about pro or anti anything ;-).

Well, this approach hasn't been very ineffective. Basically all major Linux distributions default to GNOME...

This is an argument usually wheeled out when people have nothing left to say ;-).

You know, people have been telling me this for the last seven years, and it doesn't seem to have made one iota of difference to the people out there who are actually using Linux desktops or one iota of difference to the relative popularity or usage of Gnome. Go figure that one out. This 'default' stuff has been done to death for years and years - and people are still trying to re-state it ;-).

But, we're off the beaten track there, as we always are over these things....... ;-)

...so I'm not entirely sure where this "zero evidence" comes from.

The 'zero evidence' bit came about because there was no evidence at all as to why they suddenly went and did this with respect to consistency with Windows and the rest of the Linux/Unix world, apart from the feeling that Mac OS is right about everything. The right/left button ordering is merely a preference Apple made. Nothing more.

The whole 'Oh everybody defaults to Gnome so it's OK!' argument is just the sort of ignorance I'd expect, because people run applications under WINE (Paint.Net for instance), they also have a lot of older Motif applications that they run and they may actually have Qt applications running, because apparently, it's not so bad at this cross-platform thing. Apparently people run quite a few custom applications and things of that nature. I suppose they should all rewrite them for GTK to get consistency then......................?

You make it seem as if I'm in some way 'pro-GNOME' just because I do not wish to mingle Gtk+ applications with Qt applications. That's kind of a weird deduction there.

You're the one wading in and moaning about different toolkits, different looks, different behaviour etc.

In a Gtk+ environment, Qt applications stand out like an eyesore.

Whose fault is that then? I thought this didn't affect you anyway?

In a Qt environment, Gtk+ applications stand out like an eyesore.

What is a 'Qt environment'?

If you're running KDE, that effect is minimised because people actually put some considerate work into this and accepted that people might like to run GTK applications. Not perfect, but OK.

For the millionth time: I don't have a need for Qt applications in a Gtk+ environment! Jesus Christ, how many times do I have to repeat this?

W-h-a-t a-r-e y-o-u t-a-l-k-i-n-g a-b-o-u-t t-h-e-n? If everything is perfect and OK with the world, and everything is GTK for you, where's the problem? Everything should be consistent, right?

This discussion came about because someone said that toolkits shouldn't matter - and they shouldn't. You might get some differences here and there, but as long as there is some effort on integration and as long as the developer feels that they're using the right tool for the application then that benefits the end user. Moaning about 'differences' is neither here nor there because ultimately, a desktop environment has to attract and support applications that people want. Those who can do that, get ahead ;-).

Gtk+ applications serve my needs JUST FINE.

Go and use them then. For everyone else they have different applications that they use and they have some people who are fortunately willing to put some effort into integrating them and making them look OK in that environment. The net effect of that is that that environment gets more applications, and then more users ;-).

What's up with this militant approach of trying to shove applications down my throat that I don't want, nor need!

No one is. Amarok is a pretty good media player that apparently quite a few people use, and it seems popular. If you don't like it, don't use it. If the developers of your desktop that you use don't want to put effort into application integration then that's entirely up to them.

THERE IS NO PROBLEM. I'm content with the Gtk+ applications as they are, and when I'm in a Gtk+ environment, I haven't a need a Qt application could fulfill.

Hmmmmmmmm. Are you sure?

"Even though it obviously comes with The GIMP, I really also want a simple MS Paint like paint program to come pre-installed."

Kolourpaint:

http://kolourpaint.sourceforge.net/

If you don't want to use that because your own desktop environment doesn't have that functionality, it's written in some foreign toolkit or the developers of your desktop don't want to do any integration work then that's fine. Go without.

"Another personal pet peeve is the complete inability to edit toolbars."

Then use a desktop environment with a proper set of underlying infrastructure and you won't have that problem. Like I said, in 2007 it's a bit daft that anyone is talking about that.

You're either able to attract all sorts of applications to your platform in the long-run, and that ultimately means more toolkits, embracing diversity and change, or you hit the bricks.

Reply Parent Score: 3