Linked by David Adams on Tue 28th Sep 2010 21:58 UTC
Fedora Core The Fedora 14 Beta was released today, but as a Network World article points out, it "will be the first Red Hat supported distribution to let users choose MeeGo as their desktop." This new release will also include the Sugar interface, intended for netbooks, and "will also be the first version to fully incorporate Red Hat's VDI (virtual desktop infrastructure), called SPICE, or Simple Protocol for Independent Computing Environments. SPICE will allow Fedora to host virtual desktops that can be accessed over a network."
Thread beginning with comment 443093
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Radio
by Neolander on Wed 29th Sep 2010 06:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Radio"
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

That's true.
UI of most opensource tools sucks.

Just look at Gimp, they have accepted to change the UI only later. (And everybody is still waiting for the next version with 1 window)

If you're trying to find elements of photoshop's workflow in an UI that's not photoshop's, that UI surely sucks ;)

What I mean is that this judgement of GIMP's UI is highly subjective. When you're experimented with it and get the basic workflow, you understand how powerful it is. Flexibility, discoverability, readability, quick access to a lot of functionality, pen tablet friendly widgets, much better curve editing... These are all good sides of the GIMP UI.

I think that like most people who unilaterally hate gimp's UI, you do it for the same reason as I hate Photoshop's : not being used to it.

Edited 2010-09-29 06:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by No it isnt on Wed 29th Sep 2010 09:49 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Correct. People whining about Gimp not being MDI, etc., really should whine about their own inability to learn. It's a much more serious problem.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by Radio on Wed 29th Sep 2010 10:40 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

The question is not to imitate photoshop or not. Quit that line of thinking. Design & ergonomy are NOT completely subjective: these are fields that have been under heavy research for decades. Clutter is bad, wasting space is bad, etc. Have a look at this blog post:
http://humanized.com/weblog/2007/10/05/make_oss_humane/

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Radio
by Neolander on Wed 29th Sep 2010 11:45 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Radio"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

The question is not to imitate photoshop or not. Quit that line of thinking. Design & ergonomy are NOT completely subjective: these are fields that have been under heavy research for decades.

I know that very well, as I've been studying them for some times. BUT it takes some time to fully grasp the good and bad sides of an UI. Spontaneously, when you see an alien UI that does not respect the conventions you're used to, you have, as a human being, a natural tendency to notice what is absent rather than what is present.

E.g. when I see photoshop's UI, my first thought is "uuuugh why do I have to open silly menus when I want to access my tools ? And why are those buttons so tiny ? I can't click them with a pen tablet ! And who had that crappy idea of putting everything behind non-discoverable modifier keys and context menus ?". I suppose that if I took the time to learn it, I'd end up discovering some advantages in most of their UI choices.

Not all UIs are equal. But contrary to popular belief, you cannot measure the quality of an UI at first sight without in-depth knowledge of usability rules and the targeted user, or in-depth use... In books about ergonomy, you discover why who your user is matters more than generic rules supposed to apply to all human beings.

Your original point was that GIMP's UI is universally bad ("sucks" in your own words). My point is that this is wrong. GIMP has its issues, but it's quite good when you're used to working with it ;)

Clutter is bad, wasting space is bad, etc.

Clutter and wasting space are opposite extremes ;) PS tries to put lots of tiny widgets in few room while Gimp takes more space.

But consider that most computers have wide screens nowadays. As much as they're crap for actual work (I can develop this point), they have a single advantage : more width for tools. The GIMP tools are good for tablet use, at the expense of that extra width of widescreens that you don't need anyway. It's not about wasting space, it's about using it properly !


It's large (and old, too). Extract the part of it which you want to use in your argumentation.

Edited 2010-09-29 12:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by boulabiar on Wed 29th Sep 2010 11:27 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
boulabiar Member since:
2009-04-18

As a person who uses Gimp to do my basic image manipulations, I get messed many times with losing the focus of the tool window.
If it is a single window, I never got this problem.

Do you have any scientific studies approving that gimp UI (or similar) is better than photoshop one ?
(Adobe has many research centers, so I don't think they like providing their users crappy UIs)

Look at Inkscape, it has a very very usable UI. You can't lose focus on what you are doing anytime.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Radio
by Neolander on Wed 29th Sep 2010 12:12 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Radio"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

As a person who uses Gimp to do my basic image manipulations, I get messed many times with losing the focus of the tool window.
If it is a single window, I never got this problem.

Since gimp 2.6, tool windows are used. They don't loose focus, don't appear in the taskbar, and you can hide them with TAB. Still think that the problem is using multiple windows ?

Do you have any scientific studies approving that gimp UI (or similar) is better than photoshop one ?

And you ? Do you have scientific studies proving that photoshop's UI is better than that of gimp ? ;)

My point is not arguing that GIMP is better. It's that although different, it is very capable, too

(Adobe has many research centers, so I don't think they like providing their users crappy UIs)

Adobe can sell whatever they want, people who need the software for work will buy it anyway. It's called a monopoly. Photoshop CS2-CS3 is a good example of that : no major evolution except that of hardware resource usage.

Look at Inkscape, it has a very very usable UI. You can't lose focus on what you are doing anytime.

Funny, I hate inkscape's UI too ;) First becaus I think it's a waste of space, second because I heavily dislike having to move my mouse on kilometric distances before I can finally click my target. They should have learned about the second part of the Fitts law (that about distance). And don't get me started about those horrible incomprehensible toolbars on the top.

This shows best the importance of being used to an interface, IMO.

Edited 2010-09-29 12:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by WereCatf on Wed 29th Sep 2010 14:30 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I think that like most people who unilaterally hate gimp's UI, you do it for the same reason as I hate Photoshop's : not being used to it.

Just to stick a note here, I am one of those people who are used to GIMP's UI, not having used Photoshop ever, yet I still absolutely hate how GIMP looks and behaves. It just is a horrible mess.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Radio
by Neolander on Wed 29th Sep 2010 17:35 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Radio"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Just to stick a note here, I am one of those people who are used to GIMP's UI, not having used Photoshop ever, yet I still absolutely hate how GIMP looks and behaves. It just is a horrible mess.

That's why I said "most" ^^

Reply Parent Score: 2