Linked by David Adams on Wed 17th Aug 2011 17:48 UTC, submitted by suka
Gnome In an extensive interview with the Austrian tech site derStandard.at/web GNOME3 designer Jon McCann talks about the future of GNOME3 - and why it's all about the apps - why he is convinced that KDE and Ubuntu are actually different operating systems and also reacts to the outspoken criticism against GNOME 3 which has been making the rounds lately.
Thread beginning with comment 485787
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Gnome 3 is better
by fast_rizwaan on Thu 18th Aug 2011 17:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Gnome 3 is better"
fast_rizwaan
Member since:
2010-09-01

>Again, you have no idea about how much effort I had made to work with gnome 3. The more I try, the more pains I get. I even hated KDE developers for them making KDE 4 so resource consuming and Xfce developers for them making Xfce so primitive. But finally, I have to move.

Ok, I understand that you are very much used to your way of working; and simply cannot move on to a new desktop with a new behavior. Your resistance to new behavior is really making you frustrated. It's understandable.

>I still wish that gnome can change so that I can use it again, in fact that is why I am still concerned with news about gnome.

I don't think such big decisions will ever change for the default behavior; but there are always users and developers which will allow previous look and feel with extensions/fallback mode, etc.; fore example see this:

Gnome3 extenstions that provide Gnome2 look and feel:

http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/extensions/index.html

http://www.webupd8.org/2011/05/new-gnome-shell-extensions-that-prov...

http://www.micahcarrick.com/gnome3-shell-taskbar-dock.html

So, there you go, you can have your Gnome3 desktop like you've been loving, using extensions:

But I as a KDE use since 1.1, simply can't have windows key working in it; because the KDE devs hate 1 key for 2 tasks. Even though it was there working fine; they removed it citing 'bad code' reason. And there are too many 10+ year old bugs and feature requests rotting in http://bugs.kde.org; and they don't give a damn about them.

I have been thinking why KDE guys simply do not make proper applications, fix issues which are bothering so many users; and make the fancy vaporware into reality, and how come the interface remains so buggy; well, we can see this: Microsoft + Nokia

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12427680

Yes, I suspect that QT and KDE developers are pawns at the hands of microsoft to not to make the Linux Desktop work as a good desktop and let the bugs be not addressed as they might have sold their soul to Microsoft.

After shaking hands with Nokia, why do you think microsoft says, Linux is no more a threat on desktop?

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/73074.html

Obviously, it is QT and KDE4 which is helping the enemy.

KDE4.0 to 4.7, so many years, and still buggy and inconsistent!?

Gnome 3.0? no bugs! from day 1, Not too many features, yes, but never crashed!!!

I'm pleasantly surprised and astonished!

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[5]: Gnome 3 is better
by sdeber on Fri 19th Aug 2011 07:34 in reply to "RE[4]: Gnome 3 is better"
sdeber Member since:
2005-07-06



Ok, I understand that you are very much used to your way of working; and simply cannot move on to a new desktop with a new behavior. Your resistance to new behavior is really making you frustrated. It's understandable.


"Way of working", you got it. My point is designers should implement necessary tools for users to implement their own work flow. Those tools have to be versatile or general enough so that most users can use them to get the job done in their own ways. However, Gnome 3 defines a work flow and forces users to stick to it. That is the problem. In fact, I am the kind of person who always ignores the details. So things like consistency of UI, positions of buttons, etc will be ignored. But most people cannot ignore the big things. In my case, the big thing is my work flow.

Reply Parent Score: 1