Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Aug 2012 21:04 UTC, submitted by suka
Gnome In a recent interview with the Austrian newssite, 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 531687
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Plan?
by Hiev on Tue 21st Aug 2012 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Plan?"
Member since:

No, you fail to put your self in the developers shoes, their philosophy is to keep the application simple, not only the UI, but also the code, a side pane is just good to move/copy files by dragging them, it may looks easy, but for a developer it means to write more code and mantain that code just for a task that can be already be reashed with another simple medium, in this case to instances of the application side by side, if you put in the balance the number of user that use an extra pane with the code that needs to be changed and mantainined just to reach goal that is already acomplished with the minimun effort then you will undertand the essense of that desition.

Now, for the touch friendly part, of course, if it is part of their goal to make it touch friendly and that means get rid of some other no so touch friendly options is ok as long there is still a way to do the task, and btw, GNOME Shell is not only touch friendly, it is also keyboard friendly so you can use your keyboard in the case you are in a desktop computer or a laptop, I use it daily and I use the kb a lot, specially the win key.

Edited 2012-08-21 21:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Plan?
by satsujinka on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 04:54 in reply to "RE[7]: Plan?"
satsujinka Member since:

Simple? Nautilus is >90kloc. of just C code and >140kloc altogether. I've written a simple file browser before, it does not take more than 10kloc of C to do so. Mind you, menus/dialogs took up most of that code and Nautilus has significantly more menus and dialogs than I used (along with it being scriptable, which is not a property that a "simple" file browser should have.)

nautilus-3.5.90]$ cloc .
defined(@array) is deprecated at /usr/bin/cloc line 1054.
(Maybe you should just omit the defined()?)
defined(@array) is deprecated at /usr/bin/cloc line 1056.
(Maybe you should just omit the defined()?)
defined(@array) is deprecated at /usr/bin/cloc line 1379.
(Maybe you should just omit the defined()?)
defined(@array) is deprecated at /usr/bin/cloc line 1510.
(Maybe you should just omit the defined()?)
550 text files.
540 unique files.
201 files ignored. v 1.56 T=4.0 s (88.5 files/s, 47395.5 lines/s)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
Language files blank comment code
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
C 146 22471 10110 94719
Bourne Shell 11 3925 4039 25629
m4 8 1084 138 9648
C/C++ Header 146 2439 3871 6251
HTML 17 92 3 3360
make 15 148 31 903
XML 10 16 30 409
CSS 1 18 31 217
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
SUM: 354 30193 18253 141136
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Plan?
by Hiev on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 05:18 in reply to "RE[8]: Plan?"
Hiev Member since:

Simple is not the oposite to extensive.

Reply Parent Score: 1