Linked by Rahul on Thu 9th Apr 2009 21:15 UTC
GTK+ The Gtk+ team is working on a roadmap to structure the development process of the Gtk+ 3.0 release and to open up the involved decision making progress. The first draft has been sent to the devel mailing list, and is now open for debate. Coincidentally, the draft roadmap also provides a nice overview of the features and changes planned for Gtk+ 3.0.
Thread beginning with comment 357886
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
How about
by OSGuy on Thu 9th Apr 2009 23:30 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

For GNOME and GTK: How about rather than spending your time on useless animation effects, you work on your *cough* tasPkbAaNrEL and rather then creating icon spaces manually when you re-arrange icons, the space for the icon being dragged is automagically equally created and the rest of the icons are automagically moved ending up with an equal amount of space between each icon...you know, just like Windows ;) This will make your panel look rather organized. Little things like this do make a difference.


You may also want to pay attention of the amount of space you use in dialog boxes and toolbars. Rather than occupying a quarter of the screen for a simple dialog with a few controls in it, make your controls somehow appear "more neat" and professional and smaller.

Toolbars: Simply compare the toolbars of Word 97 or even Word 95 with GTK's latest and greatest "AbiWord" and GNumeric.

Edited 2009-04-09 23:41 UTC

Reply Score: 9

RE: How about
by J. M. on Fri 10th Apr 2009 04:47 in reply to "How about"
J. M. Member since:
2005-07-24

GTK+ GUIs look professional exactly because they use white space. Windows 95 and Word 97 come from the old era when monitors were small, so every pixel on the screen was precious. But in the 3rd millenium, crammed GUIs with no spaces from the 90's era are just awkward and amateurish. Every professional designer knows that you have to add white space to make the elements stand out more and make the UI more comfortable to use. And good-looking, of course.

Besides, this has nothing to do with GTK+. GTK+ by default does not add any white space around its elements (containers, buttons, frames etc.) The white space is added by the application developers and GUI designers, usually following the GNOME HIG, which describes exactly how much white space you should add to dialogs etc. This makes GNOME GUIs look very clean and consistent. The button size is also dictated by its contents (text, icons), plus its packing properties. Again, this has nothing to do with GTK+, which allows you to make windows, buttons etc. as small and ugly as you want. But fortunately, the GNOME developers follow GUI principles designed by UI experts.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: How about
by OSGuy on Fri 10th Apr 2009 06:27 in reply to "RE: How about"
OSGuy Member since:
2006-01-01

I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. You see I think the exact opposite of everything you said. You say using white is professional? May be but everything has limits. Have you ever seen Microsoft and Apple using white space the way GNOME/GTK use it?

But it's not all about white space. Controls/Widgets in GTK applications have no ecstasy. They look like they are just thrown there without any thought. This is especially relevant to toolbars. When I refer to GNOME over here, I refer to all apps belonging to GNOME and these include AbiWord and GNumeric and all of the developers developing with the GTK. It is *not* all about spaces. It is also about the way the combo boxes, toolbars, buttons etc look. Compare a Windows 95/Windows 7 style combo box with one of GTK’s? The GTK one would be almost twice the size in width and height comparing to the Windows one regardless what theme you use. I have not seen *one* descent theme for GTK. (Actually I’d be lying. The Redmond 95 is more descent but again needs more work).

You believe AbiWord’s look is professional and MS Word is not? I hope you are joking. No offense to you or the GTK developers but if the majority of GTK developers think like what you have said in your post, I have one message for all of you. Good luck to your desktop aspirations.

I feel a bit sorry for Canonical. Ubuntu is such a solid distribution, everything is automated for you, automatic codec download, settings, drivers etc but unfortunately suffers from my “self-proclaimed issues”.

If GNOME looked and behaved anything like what MS and Apple and even eComStation have done, Ubuntu will take down Windows without a doubt! But the problem is it just does not.

The GNOME panel is not even comparable to the Win 98 taskbar and there is like 10/11 years difference between now and then.

Edited 2009-04-10 06:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: How about
by boblowski on Fri 10th Apr 2009 06:59 in reply to "RE: How about"
boblowski Member since:
2007-07-23

GTK+ GUIs look professional exactly because they use white space. Windows 95 and Word 97 come from the old era when monitors were small, so every pixel on the screen was precious.


Sorry, but monitors are still small. Even my 24" is f*cking small for most of the work I have to do. I hate any waste of screen real estate -- silly big fancy buttons, big fluffy Macintosh fonts, MS ribons (especially those), and yes, inefficient toolbars/panels as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: How about
by Temcat on Sun 12th Apr 2009 19:07 in reply to "How about"
Temcat Member since:
2005-10-18

I had been annoyed with the same thing in Gnome panel. Fortunately, I found the solution: the quicklounge panel applet (aka "Launchers List"). It behaves exactly as the Quick Launch panel in Windows. Launchers automatically reposition themselves when you add or remove them, you can rearrange them using left drag-n-drop, and you can even drag-and-drop launchers onto this applet from Gnome Menu (again, with the left mouse button). Highly recommended!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: How about
by OSGuy on Tue 14th Apr 2009 08:46 in reply to "RE: How about"
OSGuy Member since:
2006-01-01

Hey thanks for that, I will check it out.

Reply Parent Score: 2