Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Apr 2011 17:50 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Gnome The day is finally here, the day that the GNOME team releases GNOME 3.0, the first major revision of the GNOME project since 2002. Little of GNOME 2.x is left in GNOME 3.0, and as such, you could call it GNOME's KDE4. We're living in fortunate times, what, with two wildly divergent open source desktops.
Thread beginning with comment 469489
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Sigh...
by Icaria on Thu 7th Apr 2011 11:50 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Sigh..."
Icaria
Member since:
2010-06-19

When was the last time you use Win 95? Explorer not only looked completely different but behaved differently as well (spatial file management). The Control panel was a) a quarter of the size b) had no categorisation and c) launched external dialogue windows, as opposed to the ad hoc UIs that now replace the control panel about 1/2 the time. The start menu was recognisable as a menu, rather than being a multi-paned fixed-sized window w/ tree view abuse. With 7, even the taskbar is no longer recognisable, being about twice the size, having no text labels and little clear delineation of functionality. Ever since 95, every iteration has gotten more verbose, with more and more (supposedly) helpful text everywhere; you can't even replace a file any more w/o being presented with 3 paragraphs of text and links, links, hidden therein, which you need to find and click to progress. The once clearly defined titlebars, menubars, toolbars and statusbars have all been thrown in a blender and poured over your screen in an unpredictable manner, while Win 7 and 8 progressively depreciate them in favour of that monstrosity formally known as 'the ribbon'. Then you've got the NT gap, with whole concepts that didn't exist in Win 95, like permissions.

Windows 95 is worlds away from the current Windows desktop. And sadly, not always for the better.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Sigh...
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Apr 2011 11:57 in reply to "RE[9]: Sigh..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Things evolve and change over time ... get used to it.

Just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it is wrong or bad.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Sigh...
by Icaria on Thu 7th Apr 2011 12:18 in reply to "RE[10]: Sigh..."
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Your reading comprehension gets a 0. Congratulations on wading into a conversation when you clearly have no idea what it's about.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Sigh...
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Fri 8th Apr 2011 00:12 in reply to "RE[9]: Sigh..."
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

When was the last time you use Win 95?

Yesterday. Its not radically different.

Gnome 3 is radical because there isn't a psuedo start menu, and the maximize and minimize buttons are gone. Thats what radical means in this context. Windows tweaks existing ways of working over time, such that users feel comfortable in the new environment. Keep in mind that comparing win 95 to seven is 17 years of incremental change. Gnome 2 to 3 is really just one day.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Sigh...
by Icaria on Fri 8th Apr 2011 05:16 in reply to "RE[10]: Sigh..."
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Activities is as much a 'pseudo start menu' as the old Gnome menubar was. It lays it's launchers out in a matrix, big deal, Vista moved to a tree view; both no longer have the pretence of being a menu. They both added search. The only major difference is Gnome decided to move workspace management from the panel, to the menu. As compiz has been the defacto WM for Gnome for years, this behaviour is a surprise to very few, since it's very close to the expo and scale behaviour enabled by default.

As for mix/max, if that's our criteria, then Ubuntu 10.04 would constitute a radical change, which I hope you would agree is a prima facie absurd statement. There has to be more than just this and the Activities menu.

And yes, I'm aware of the disparity between time frames (I wasn't the framer of this argument) but it's also disingenuous to say that Gnome's changes come over 'just one day' and that Windows' doesn't. Incremental Gnome point releases aren't directly comparable to an OS that does a huge code update once every 3-5 years. Gnome has been largely static for a similar timeframe, even if the version numbers have been steadily creeping forward. Someone using a 5yo version of Gnome is going to be similarly confronted by Gnome 3, as someone using the last 2.x point release. In that sense, comparisons to the XP-Vista jump are fair.

Reply Parent Score: 1