Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 23rd May 2014 21:51 UTC
Gnome Remember back when GNOME and KDE dominated Linux desktops? Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it? Yet it was only three years ago, in April 2011, that GNOME 3 was released. Its radically redesigned interface shook up everyone. Some eagerly adopted it. Others left GNOME.

In this brief review I take a fresh look at GNOME today, as it's currently distributed in several popular Linux distributions.
Thread beginning with comment 589508
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Qt Apps
by ddc_ on Sat 24th May 2014 19:02 UTC in reply to "Qt Apps"
Member since:

I strongly disagree with both setiments of yours.

all applications should run and integrate with your desktop whatever that desktop is.

It would lead to the OSX-like desktop where you can't configure much. If that is what you want, quit whinning and go to OSX. Really.

I should be able to run a years old desktop, yet still run my choice of apps, not worrying about the desktop, much less about the toolkit.

This requires a lot of effort, limits developers in many ways and screws the ability to implement new features within reasonable timeframes. And all of these just in order to satisfy one's baby ducksyndrome? Huh...

Edited 2014-05-24 19:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Qt Apps
by Lobotomik on Sun 25th May 2014 10:05 in reply to "RE: Qt Apps"
Lobotomik Member since:

Why should I go Mac? I have a perfectly serviceable PC that cost me a fraction of the money. And I hate iTunes and iDependency in general. Though Garage Band and iMovies are spectacularly good. And Linux Desktop is good, if not perfect: I just want it to be more perfect!

Development would be more agile with more developers, more users and a more appropriate development kit. Cantonization helps none of this. This is not fragmentation, it is disintegration along a myriad fracture lines, by distro, by release, by desktop, by toolkit... All this variety and inconvenience for a relatively small pool of development resources.

Look at Android to see how a Linux "desktop" can progress and evolve while maintaining compatibility, and how it gains thousands of contributors with its nice development kits and detailed, easy to find documentation. To acquire any sort of critical mass, unification is key.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Qt Apps
by torp on Sun 25th May 2014 15:44 in reply to "RE[2]: Qt Apps"
torp Member since:

Hmm. Why would any sane man run iTunes? And I ask that as someone who uses OS X daily. It's perfectly functional without ever going near iTunes.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Qt Apps
by ddc_ on Tue 27th May 2014 14:53 in reply to "RE[2]: Qt Apps"
ddc_ Member since:

You are being egoistic: what you see as improvement is damaging many other people, and you don't want to deal with it. The "cantonization" you are talking about is the only reason why people who are willing to trade some of their time for future effectiveness can end up using consistent desktop that would behave as they want.

GNOME, KDE, XFCE, suckless and many other projects build software pieces that are consistent with each other and inconsistent with everything else not because all these people are lazy and ignorant, but because they follow different (sometimes even opposite) values. Implementing your suggestion would deprive people sharing these values of enjoying software that matches their preferences.

Edited 2014-05-27 14:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2