Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Aug 2012 21:04 UTC, submitted by suka
Gnome In a recent interview with the Austrian newssite derStandard.at, GNOME designer Jon McCann talks about GNOME OS, the consequences of Canonical leaving GNOME behind, the purported removal of features and the future role of Linux distributions. "I think there was a time when GNOME had kind of a crisis, we didn't know where we wanted to go, we were lacking goals and vision - that was the end of the GNOME2 cycle. So we pulled together and formed a vision where we want to go - and actually did something about it. And now we have been marching on that plan for quite some time."
Thread beginning with comment 531571
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Sodki
by Sodki on Mon 20th Aug 2012 21:51 UTC
Sodki
Member since:
2005-11-10

Disclaimer: I am a GNOME lover, either GNOME 1, GNOME 2 or GNOME 3. Recently I've forced myself to use GNOME 3, first with lots of extensions, but then without any extensions. At work I have to use GNOME 2 due to Ubuntu's previous LTS, but I hope I can upgrade soon to get back to GNOME 3 for most of my day. Having said this...


I think there was a time when GNOME had kind of a crisis, we didn't know where we wanted to go, we were lacking goals and vision - that was the end of the GNOME2 cycle.


Oh no, don't give us that. GNOME might not have had a "vision", but it had a goal: being a damn fine desktop environment. It was the desktop of choice for most GNU/Linux users, it was well respected, it was well backed up by corporations and it was very good.


So we pulled together and formed a vision where we want to go - and actually did something about it.


Yes, and you also lost the majority of your users and corporate support. Ubuntu didn't came up with Unity out of thin air, it was a clear response to GNOME's new "vision". Ubuntu knew it couldn't count on GNOME 3 because it was too radical: to an outsider it felt like developers were having "visions" while completely ignoring the bad feedback received from users. The transition from GNOME 2 to GNOME 3 wasn't good at all.

And why do you think Fedora 18 will have the MATE desktop (a GNOME 2 fork) on the official repositories? Hint: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 will be based on Fedora 18.


And now we have been marching on that plan for quite some time.


GNOME 3 technology is vastly superior to GNOME 2 technology. There is a huge potential there, but that potential has to be exploited, otherwise only the abyss awaits. People need to know they have that kind of flexibility with GNOME 3.

I see a lot of talk about "vision" and "design", but you must know your target audience. I'm glad you have tablets in mind, but you are forgetting about your real users, people who use the desktop right now. A prime example was the removal/hiding of the "power off" button. Not everyone has a laptop that goes to sleep well. Not everyone is interested in wasting power during the night. I, for example, shut down the power socket completely during the night to save power.

This is not a failure of GNOME 3 technology, it's a failure of "vision" and "design". Another prime example is usability. I've done usability tests, both as a user and as a developer. I know they're hard. I hear GNOME 3 developers talking about usability all the time, but I doubt they've either done usability tests or look at the results properly.

It's not that GNOME 3's "vision" is completely wrong. I mean, I was a huge critic of GNOME 3, but I've learned to love it. But the "vision" has to have some connection with reality and with users, otherwise it will definitely fail and leave us all poorer.

Reply Score: 17

RE: Comment by Sodki
by thebluesgnr on Mon 20th Aug 2012 23:38 in reply to "Comment by Sodki"
thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14


Yes, and you also lost the majority of your users and corporate support. Ubuntu didn't came up with Unity out of thin air, it was a clear response to GNOME's new "vision". Ubuntu knew it couldn't count on GNOME 3 because it was too radical: to an outsider it felt like developers were having "visions" while completely ignoring the bad feedback received from users. The transition from GNOME 2 to GNOME 3 wasn't good at all.

And why do you think Fedora 18 will have the MATE desktop (a GNOME 2 fork) on the official repositories? Hint: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 will be based on Fedora 18.


Unity is part of Ubuntu's vision to differentiate themselves from the rest of the Linux desktop. That split came before GNOME 3, and Canonical was never a major contributor to upstream GNOME in any case.

Also MATE is going to be in Fedora for the same reason the other 20+ window managers and toolkits are there: a group of independent developers wanted it there and packaged and then submitted it. Red Hat has their entire desktop team working on GNOME 3 and related technologies, using something else for RHEL makes absolutely no goddamn sense.

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[2]: Comment by Sodki
by cdude on Tue 21st Aug 2012 07:10 in reply to "RE: Comment by Sodki"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21


Unity is part of Ubuntu's vision to differentiate themselves from the rest of the Linux desktop.


"The Linux desktop"? You mean like GNOME is there to differentiate themselves from "the Linux desktop" (may it be XFCE, KDE or $your_favorite_linux_desktop.

I have news for you: Unity is a linux desktop and I found it to be closer to traditional desktop concepts then GNOME Shell.


That split came before GNOME 3


It came when development on GNOME 3 started. There where critics from the beginning the direction GNOME 3 was going to. Ubuntu's try to sort that out failed, Unity was born. FLOSS on work.


Canonical was never a major contributor to upstream GNOME in any case.


They contributed a GNOME 2 centric distribution focused on the desktop (unlike RH), became popular and increased the GNOME 2 user-base significantly. New developers joined, documentation was written, translation and bugreports came in and so on.

Now only Red Hat is left and they have no focus on the desktop. You can turn around like crazy but it does not change the fact that GNOME lost one (or two if you add Mint, threr if you add debian, ...) of its most valuable distributions.


Also MATE is going to be in Fedora for the same reason the other 20+ window managers and toolkits are there:


MATE is a Fedora 18 FEATURE and is as auch in the same role, position the GNOME Shell is. No difference.

Reply Parent Score: 6