Linked by David Adams on Fri 12th Sep 2008 16:34 UTC, submitted by irbis
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth announced Wednesday that his company, Canonical, will hire professional designers and interaction experts to improve the usability of the Linux desktop software ecosystem. They will work closely with upstream developers to bring a better experience to users of the open source operating system.
Thread beginning with comment 330309
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
leech
Member since:
2006-01-10

The menu system within KDE and Gnome are far superior to the current system in Windows.

I will call this a troll, since both KDE and Gnome have menu editors and I have only once edited a .desktop file and that was between 2.16 and 2.18 of Gnome.

For the record, I also think the whole idea of a 'control panel' sucks. It's much easier to read an alphabetically organized administration or preferences menu, than it is to read a big window full of icons. Even if those icons are alphabetical. It also helps if they are named appropriately. Everyone was so used to Add / Remove Programs under win9x to winxp, that when they changed it to Programs and Features under Vista, it thoroughly annoyed me. Changing, just for the sake of change is retarded.

I still haven't found a standard OK / Cancel order within KDE dialogs. It always seems that it's opposite of what I'm used to, but then again, maybe that's because it IS opposite, because I use Gnome.

I had high hopes for KDE4, but it annoys me so far even more than KDE3. I try every version, usually even the x.x.+1 versions just to see if they've fixed enough things to make me want to try it.... I get as far as changing the clock to 12h format, and then realize that not only has KDE4 made it even more obscure where the setting is, but that they still make it over complicated.

And I'm still confused at what the purpose is of being able to rotate your desktop icons in one big tab....

Not to degrade what great work has gone into KDE over the years, but I've always had this feeling that they were trying to be too Windows-like, and that's the reason I switched over to Linux in the first place, because I hated the UI of Windows. Yes, I made the switch long before viruses were such a huge issue, and spyware hadn't even been heard of.

Reply Parent Score: 0

MacMan Member since:
2006-11-19

If you use applications ONLY from synaptic, then you do not have to edit .desktop files, but try to use an app that is NOT on synaptic, such as eclipse 3.4 (yes I know eclipse 3.2 is on synaptic, but I need 3.4).

And yes, I had to edit .desktop files just to get a menu item. On the Mac, I just drag it to the dock, thats it.

I think Linux in general really needs a some standard way of dealing with applications, I think it is nuts for someone to write an app, then have to wait for the package maintainers to create a package for distro 'x'.


And no, this is NOT a troll, I like Linux, I just point out some flaws that annoy me. This I think is the other fundamental problem with Linux in general, if everyone does not agree with some comment 100%, then they are trolls. This attitude has to go. Face it people, nothing is perfect, not MacOS, and not even Linux believe it or not.

Reply Parent Score: 0

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

If you use applications ONLY from synaptic, then you do not have to edit .desktop files, but try to use an app that is NOT on synaptic, such as eclipse 3.4 (yes I know eclipse 3.2 is on synaptic, but I need 3.4).

As long as third parties insist upon using installation methods outside of the normal mechanism for the OS, in this case the Debian family, it won't integrate well with the OS. If Eclipse is not using debs and rpms it should.

Unzip an archive into a directory in Windows and then look for the program in the start menu. Doesn't work. Obviously Microsoft needs a better way to install apps before it can go mainstream, right?

It's 2008 and dumping a tar ball onto an ftp server should not be considered a proper "release" for OSes which are supposedly supported. It would be preferable if they put the release into a standard or 3rd party repo, so that security updates could be automated. But if they choose not to, a deb would do just fine. But they cannot operate completely outside of the distro's application management framework and expect seemless operation. Duh?

Application providers need to use what is freaking out there for them to use and has been for years and years.

Edited 2008-09-15 13:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4