McCann: "Optimistic about GNOME"
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."
E-mail Print r 2   48 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/ka9
Thread beginning with comment 531642
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Integrated Linux like OS X
by _txf_ on Tue 21st Aug 2012 13:15 UTC in reply to "Integrated Linux like OS X"
_txf_
Member since:
2008-03-17

I for one would really like to see one fully integrated linux-based OS where everything is done to serve the user. Like Apple has managed with their OS X where the UI manages to hide the underlying unix so well that you have to open up a terminal to see its existance.


I would argue that for linux users, that is precisely the opposite of serving the user.

You have to look at your userbase before deciding what features are serving them. This is exactly what Gnome is NOT doing ( in fact they're doing the exact opposite).

Edited 2012-08-21 13:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

"I for one would really like to see one fully integrated linux-based OS where everything is done to serve the user. Like Apple has managed with their OS X where the UI manages to hide the underlying unix so well that you have to open up a terminal to see its existance.


I would argue that for linux users, that is precisely the opposite of serving the user. "
It might be the opposite of serving the current users, but if any Linux distribution expects to break through on to a large portion of the average user's desktop, they'll need to do something like an integrated OS X design. News flash: Most users these days don't like to see plain text. It's sad, but it's true. For example, when a kernel update breaks X.org (which needs to be flushed completely before Linux on the desktop has any great chance), dropping the user to a text login prompt isn't acceptable. In fact, updates breaking the system is not acceptable in the first place, and I think we'll only solve such problems with a tightly integrated os designed by a dedicated, paid, team. As it stands now, even among one distribution, there are too many people pulling in too many directions not to mention upstream going off on their own, and the system feels more like a slap dash attempt at a cohesive environment than a true operating system.

Reply Parent Score: 2

wigry Member since:
2008-10-09

Currently perhaps one of the few distros complying with above requirements is Slackware as it is basically one man show (actually a very small team of dedicated and knowledgeable people) and the new version will come out only if thoroughly tested and retested. Slackware has usually about 1.5 years release cycle and packages are upgraded with extreme care. If new version breaks something and old version still is OK, then package is not upgraded for the stable branch. It has always been a very solid distro. However the philosophy requires quite a lot of hands-on tinkering and certain attitude so it is not a distro for the masses or even for average linux user. The quality is there however the way it should be everywhere.

Edited 2012-08-21 14:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2