Tango is a project to create a new icon theme for all f.d.o-compatible DEs, using a standard style guide. Regarding the BetterDesktop, there are over 200 usability test videos in ogg and mpeg format.
Tango-Project and BetterDesktop Announced
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Just what the OSS world needs
KDE’s icons just look too ridiculous, and Gnome’s look too dull.
I have a lot of hope for this
Yeah, these are both very encouraging projects. I’m really looking forward to watching them grow and mature. Tango has some great talent involved (the Novell design team, Steven Garrity of Firefox icon/Silverorange fame). Really great stuff. And these usability testing videos are invaluable.
Many people share your oppinion, but thats the beauty of the open source community. Becuase they don’t the default look and feel of both desktops (which is designed to appeal to a multitude of people – so your bound to offend someone) artist have created a multitude of alternative icon sets and themes. Why keep the pissing contest of bashing the default looks of Gnome and Kde, when we all know very well that the entire look and feel can be modified to suit your taste in three mouse clicks. This project is interesting, but ultimately, it will be copied to both desktops by Icon and theme porters, and rendered marginally useless.
Many people share your oppinion, but thats the beauty of the open source community. Becuase they don’t like the default look and feel of both desktops (which is designed to appeal to a multitude of people – so your bound to offend someone) artist have created a multitude of alternative icon sets and themes. Why keep the pissing contest going that bashes the default looks of Gnome and Kde, when we all know very well that the entire look and feel of both desktops can be modified to suit your taste in three mouse clicks. This project is interesting, but ultimately, it will be copied to both desktops by Icon and theme porters, and rendered marginally useless.
What is also cool is that this is pushing forward the shared icon names spec. This will make it much easier for everyone. People who like dull of ridiculous icons will have a much easier time changing themes across both gnome and kde.
Direct link to the icons: http://tango-project.org/Tango_Icon_Gallery
I like ’em!
About KDE, though: There’s a new default icon set for KDE4 called “Oxygen” in the works that will be a lot more consistent, subdued and elegant than Crystal.
Good! I’m glad someone is taking the initiative to do this in the *nix community.
Coders and designers simply do not think the same way as end users. What makes sense to them does not neccesarily make sense to an average user.
Good luck to Novell on this project (BetterDesktop).
Good! I’m glad someone is taking the initiative to do this in the *nix community.
Coders and designers simply do not think the same way as end users. What makes sense to them does not neccesarily make sense to an average user.
Good luck to Novell on this project (BetterDesktop).
The color of green used in the icons looks a bit sickly, but on the whole they don’t look so bad… it’s like a cross between the Gnome, KDE, and Firefox-on-Mac icon styles
I have to mock the individuals who say Linux is not ready for the desktop. If you haven’t watched the usability videos, please do so. Very interesting stuff. And for all those who says GNOME folks are wasting their time on usability, simplicity and ease of use, well, the videos will prove you wrong. One lady couldn’t figure out how to change the desktop on KDE. Now that’s sad. All in all the videos are revealing and they seperate the myths from reality.
I’m glad because whenever the “Linux is not ready for desktop” articles and trolls appear on osnews, I have a repository of videos at my disposal to baptize their ignorance.
I think all the usability tests were done using gnome, if I’m not mistaken. Are you talking about the one mac lady who tried clicking on a picture of the control panel?
-bytecoder
There are a few done using KDE, I can’t remember which link it is. I think it is in the changing the wallpaper section.
There is a huge difference between “Linux is ready for the desktop” and “GNOME/KDE are ready for the desktop”. The usability videos do not show Linux being used; they show GNOME and KDE.
>I have to mock the individuals who say Linux is not ready for the desktop.
OK, let’s see a configuration I had to do: I have a QWERTY keyboard and I want to use the right Win key as a ‘compose key’ to make French accent, how do I do?
Answer: I spent two who days on the net trying to find correct documentation, doesn’t find anything remotely understandable and everything in English of course, I finaly gave up and used the AltGr key instead.
When I used KDE to change it, sometimes the keyboard configuration didn’t change as expected, so finally I added a line directly XF86Config and restarted X.
Quite often, the icons disappear (about one time per month), sometimes the process which lock my station has a problem and I have to kill it otherwise only the commandline works to lock the station, the GUI does not.
This is with a fully patched RHE3.
Is-it usable as a desktop? Yes, I’m using it.
Is-it a good desktop? No!
Frankly having a process as simple as the lock which is buggy..
Is-it stable?
Not really: the Java plugin crash the PC sometimes (and yes I need it for my work, stupid Java web interfaces), granted this is Sun’s fault not Linux’s fault, but nonetheless this is *very* annoying.
I checked the 3 largest files in the wallpaper section (because I assume the person who failed would play around longer than those who didn’t) and all of them are Gnome. So I call bullshit on your claim until you provide us with a link
http://betterdesktop.ximian.com/video/changedesktopbackground/Subje…
There are more. If only you’d actually download and watch them.
I’ve got better things to do with my time than downloading hundreds of megs and watching people change the background on their desktops. I still think that watching the three largest is enough when it is really your job to support your arguments.
That said. I watched that video (no audio, very suspicious, see below) and because there is no audio I don’t really see the problem of that woman. She reached the desktop background settings via the context menu which shows some kind of sophistication, then used the dropdown to switch to another wallpaper (and then she was finished,… no wait), which she apparently didn’t like, then she opened the file selection dialog (which Novell configured to open in the home directory (I think, better video quality would’ve been nice) and without the preview pane, great thinking boys, that helps…) which due to the reasons in parenthesis didn’t help her either and then she went off to do,… something I don’t understand.
So I d/led another video of her, the one where she should change the time. And if that doesn’t convince you that that woman is functionally retarded I don’t know what does. She seems to have a compulsive disorder that forces her to find the solution and then to wander off or give up before actually implementing the solution to solve her problem.
Now I don’t say this to defend KDE, because imho the clock configuration dialog is the worst KDE has to offer. So when I read the task I actually felt some sympathy but by god that woman is stupid.
I would have understood if it took her some tries to find the correct menu entry. Even though it says what it does (“Adjust Date&Time”) most people’s first instinct is to choose “Configure Clock” due to its position and because that’s what you’re used to from other apps and she did that. Now that was understandable but she tried every fscking entry in the menu, some even twice, before she tried Adjust Date&Time, then she got the root pw prompt (apparently a problem in GNOME too, at least that’s what the summary said). Now if my Computer prompts me for a pw I at least read what it wants and why it wants it – that seems to be the exception.
Ok, she logged out, logged in as root, in Gnome got to the yast menu (no confusing root pw prompt here and the context menu is better, ais I hate the KDE one), were once again she managed to look at every single option before she tried the button confusingly named “Change” in the “Date&Time” section. Then she got the screen were you can change the time…and she closed the window without doing so and gave up. WTF?!
I think the reason her clips got no audio is either
a) She doesn’t know English. They sat her in front of a Computer with an interface in a language she doesn’t speak and looked how she struggled
b) The person conducting the survey was changing the goals every time she came close to solving the old one
c) The person conducting the survey was deliberatly misleading her to advance the cause of his dark master.
Well at least I’m not bullshitting. You can find all the excuses in world for her confusion, and as you claim, “stupidity.” But the reality remains that the interface is broken and needs to be fixed. They are other issues, but I’m not in the mood to haunt for videos, or argue about the retardness of other people.
How can you say that the interface is broken, if it was offered broken to her on purpose by those who made the tests, but are known to be GNOME fanboys ? The default behavior of KDE was changed on purpose only to irritate those who wanted to accomplish the tasks.
Will this thread ever die? I don’t see any changes in the interface. I’ve used both KDE and GNOME. The interface seem to be exactly what is in KDE last time I checked. Novell seems to have even cleaned up some of the KDE mess. Anyway, it’s time for this thread to die.
> I don’t see any changes in the interface.
What interface, the code technical one, or the interface to a printer, or the serial port, or the interface to some hardware or are you refering to the graphical user interface ?
> I’ve used both KDE and GNOME.
Used in terms or truly using it ? Or in terms of have installed both for 5 mins but then sticked back to GNOME ?
> The interface seem to be exactly what is in KDE last time I checked.
That’s why it’s called KDE, because it offers a consistent clean, intuitive and responsive graphical user interface.
> Novell seems to have even cleaned up some of the KDE mess.
Novell hasn’t cleaned up anything, but I think you are refering to the handful of people who’s resources has been made available to work on some fixes. SUSE otoh is still an own institution working autharc even if they are bought up by Novell. It’s known that SUSE still works and still are committed to KDE. Some of KDE’s most brilliant developers are under direct contract of SUSE and probably the key horse behind KDE to push it forwards and dimensions ahead of GNOME.
What interface, the code technical one, or the interface to a printer, or the serial port, or the interface to some hardware or are you refering to the graphical user interface ?
You said some GNOME fanboys, me I guess, intentionally broke KDE’s
interface for the subject in the usability test/video. Hence, the
lady could not figure out how to change a wallpaper on KDE because
GNOME fanboys broke the interface. I thought you were joking at
first, it took a while for it to sink in. But I do remember when I
used KDE, KControl was a disaster then as it is now. I also looked
at the video to see what changes the GNOME fanboys made. I
couldn’t find any.
Are you implying KDE’s interface is broken because of GNOME
fanboys? Or are you just calling me a GNOME fanboy? If you are
calling me a GNOME fanboy, that’s fine. But if you are saying KDE
is broken because of GNOME, you need help.
Used in terms or truly using it ? Or in terms of have installed both for 5 mins but then sticked back to GNOME ?
My first desktop environment on Linux was KDE. I used it
exclusively for several years, up until the 3.1 series. My
girlfriend, a Windows user, was the person who actually made me
switch to GNOME. One day I was trying out GNOME and she saw the
desktop. Her response was, “this new setup is way better than
your old one (meaning KDE). It’s simpler and cleaner and less
annoying.” This was coming from someone who doesn’t even know
what Linux is. My intention was to just test GNOME for a few
minutes before switching back to KDE. But after a few days, I
was hooked. Ever since, I have not been able to use KDE for more
than 30 minutes. Heck, I can’t even use Windows for that long
too. But, I know KDE inside out. I was a KDE fan and power user
for the most of my early Linux usage. I even had plans to write
KDE apps and all that. So, I know the strengths and
weaknesses of either desktops very well. Do not mistake me for a
naive user. Every now and again, I install a KDE liveCD to see
what’s happening on the other end. Nothing has convinced me to
switch back yet. And I doubt anything will. Not until KDE
starts focusing on what’s most important to users, USABILITY.
Novell hasn’t cleaned up anything, but I think you are refering to the handful of people who’s resources has been made available to work on some fixes. SUSE otoh is still an own institution working autharc even if they are bought up by Novell. It’s known that SUSE still works and still are committed to KDE. Some of KDE’s most brilliant developers are under direct contract of SUSE and probably the key horse behind KDE to push it forwards and dimensions ahead of GNOME.
KDE and GNOME both have brilliant developers. However, both
developers have different philosophies. GNOME developers seem to
focus on users while KDE developers seem to want to focus and
show off technology. That’s why KDE apps are filled with so
much fluff that 90% of users will never use. I’m growing older,
and I’m beginning to appreciate simplicity. Hence, my preference
for GNOME. For me GNOME is better, for you it isn’t. This is not
to say KDE sucks. It doesn’t. Many people prefer one over
the other. You have no right to go around harassing them for
their choice like you are notorious for doing. You like KDE
because of its technology and framework. I could care less
about those. But I don’t go around harassing you or others for liking
KDE. I don’t call you a zealot or fanboy. I don’t insult the
KDE developers or community. I don’t turn KDE threads into
troll pissing contests. I respect your decision to love KDE,
respect mine and others to love GNOME.
Mystilleef are you whining ? At least your comment was written so fullheartly with emotions that I conclude that you are close to getting tears in your eyes. Anyways another prof (if seen from a different perspective) is that the girl had less issues changing the bg (or not, I don’t really know) because GNOME has a shitload less to offer than KDE maybe ? But this less stuff it offers don’t work properly enough to be ready for production use. The girl probably has no knowledge howto use a computer and thus she probably don’t really know what she wants to do with it anyways. Maybe writing a document, maybe a few emails and some webbrowsing.
But how about people who needs to do other tasks such as professional science stuff such as drawing UML diagrams (maybe a term you never heard before) or need to do professional project management (and a project easily costs 500.000 euros and much more). You require reliable and professional applications for this, applications that can compete with counterparts usually found on Microsoft Windows. That’s the thing, the astonishing and great KDE framework allows rapid application development due to exactly this.
I tried Planner for GNOME (since I primarily come from the GNOME camp and did contribute to it) and Planner from the looks, from the feel and from the use – feels more like a slammed together application rather than a professional business tool. Look over to taskjuggler
http://www.taskjuggler.org/
To see the main difference. Alone viewing at the examples and screenshots there convinces you that it’s much more mature than MS-Project.
Also look to Kivio and Umbrello they give a much more polished impression than DIA (which never worked reliable enough for me (look my comments about DIA above)).
It’s not just about GNOME as desktop or KDE as desktop. It’s also about the architecture beneath the desktop and here KDE easily wins. The developers can focus on writing cool apps in a short time with big effeciency due to OOP design.
GNOME could be way better if it doesn’t leave the impression and feeling of having most of the stuff slammed together in a hurry only to compete with something. Way to much politics and blah blah in the GNOME camp than true code. I don’t really get why we continue this debatte but GNOME claims itself to be a
CORPORATE DESKTOP
And corporates usually have a different use for the desktop and the tools offered than some braindead girl who had issues changing a background picture. Changing a background picture usually is not the tasks that corporate people are doing.
As an IT-Professional and someone who went to university doing Computer & Economics Science I can tell you that from a corporate perspective the tasks are quite differently. People want powerful applications on a powerful architecture and no slammed together stuff – which GNOME usually means.
GNOME can be there one day, once it get rids of it’s children problems and stupid politics but then why do people bother, they want to use the technology now and KDE is what they want.
KDE is GNOME done right – as simple as that.
You are a very weird individual. If a girl can’t change a simple
wallpaper, how do you expect her to use UML application? I took a
look at Taskjuggler and I don’t see anything remarkable about it.
I’ve had to use Dia on several occasion and it does its job fine.
I’ve played with both KDE and GNOME architectures, and I don’t see
anything KDE has that GNOME doesn’t. In fact, like others pointed out GNOME has a better multimedia architecture and from the looks of a better IPC mechanism. In addition, GNOME’s xml (libxml) technology is at the front on Linux. How about SVG(librsvg)? GNOME shines better on these fronts. Font handling has always been done better and gracefully on GNOME. Where is the Gconf for KDE? Please don’t mention Kconf. I can go on and on. In fact apart from Qt, nothing impresses me about KDE from
a developer’s perspective.
There a few things KDE does better but there also many things GNOME does better. But again, I don’t really care for all these.
From a technology perspective, I have to disagree with your opinion. I don’t know why you get worked up over things like this.
No offense, but if you don’t have anything better to say, I’d have
to ignore your comments henceforth.
First of all, please stop writing braindead bullshit!
> If a girl can’t change a simple wallpaper, how do you
> expect her to use UML application?
I didn’t said that, I said that the target test user was wrong chosen to test a corporate desktop like GNOME. I said that GNOME claims from itself to be a corporate desktop and thus corporate people do have other tasks to acomplish than changing a background.
> I took a look at Taskjuggler and I don’t see anything
> remarkable about it.
That’s because you don’t know howto manage large projects in a corporate to acomplish tasks that costs a shitload of money. With other words, you don’t belong to the corporate people that GNOME claims to support.
> I’ve had to use Dia on several occasion and it does
> its job fine.
I had to use DIA on several occasions myself (at least I tried) and it ended up in corrupt save files, in permanent crashes during use for some hours, huge instability, ugly images and many more. You can read more details about how f–ked up DIA is here.
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=12174&comment_id=42498
> I’ve played with both KDE and GNOME architectures,
> and I don’t see anything KDE has that GNOME doesn’t.
That’s the problem! If YOU don’t see it then it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It’s only your limited skills and knowledge that prevents you from seeing and understanding it. The comon problem why people hype GNOME – because they don’t understand much of the matter.
> In fact, like others pointed out GNOME has a better
> multimedia architecture and from the looks of a
> better IPC mechanism.
First of all, GNOME doesn’t have a better multimedia architecture. GStreamer is claimed to be architecture independant. But then GStreamer isn’t perfect either. It’s started around 1999 and has passed a development timeframe of 6 years and still isn’t nowhere good enough that even GNOME apps default to it. Most GNOME applications still avoid using it and default to Xine as option (at least it was so for Rhythmbox and Totem two key apps coming with GNOME).
The better IPC mechanism I do criticise too because you talk about stuff you don’t know anything about. The good IPC mechanism in GNOME wasn’t that good at all otherwise the people wouldn’t have created DBUS which was created on the specification made by KDE people. DBUS is also architecture neutral but it’s hard convincing die hard KDE developers to adopt it since DCOP has been proven to work perfectly for all the years. GNOME has re-written the IPC stuff quite a few times and it’s still not good enough – so far for the great architecture of GNOME.
> How about SVG(librsvg)? GNOME shines better on these fronts.
You would be right! Unfortunatley you have no brains which explains why you keep ignoring KSVG and KSVG2. which has been there for ages.
> Font handling has always been done better and
> gracefully on GNOME.
Another bullshit writing of yours and I wonder why you keep writing this crap and embarrassing yourself even more in the public ? Both KDE and GNOME use the same font rendering mechanisms provided. Both use fontconfig as well as freetype2 to do all this stuff.
> Where is the Gconf for KDE? Please don’t mention
> Kconf.
No, but I mention KConfXT for KDE which has been there for some years too (and you claim yourself to have tested KDE …. maybe in your dreams). GConf unfortunately is not the ultimative solution, but it was the best GNOME had to offer but the same author who wrote GConf is now highly involved into conversations about Uniconf and DConf and some other alternatives to get rid of the limitations that GConf offers. Not to mention that GConf still has the touch of ‘Windows Registry’ tied to it which it hardly gets rid off. And you should consider throwing an eye on KConfXT which – like GConf is schemas based and ready for Kiosk features. But the main backend is still keypair and *.ini like (which can have a different backend too).
> I can go on and on. In fact apart from Qt, nothing
> impresses me about KDE from a developer’s
> perspective.
That’s because you are no developer. Only someone who shouts out without using the ball above his neck to think before writing.
> From a technology perspective, I have to disagree
> with your opinion.
It’s your right to disagree with my opinion. But then from your reply I understand why you disagree. Because you don’t know much about what you wrote.
Greetings!
1) Because you had problems with Dia doesn’t mean everyone else does.
2) Dbus is written by GNOME folks. Agree it is architecture independent but GNOME usually design stuff to be architecture independent. See most of the projects on freedesktop.org for instance. Or even most of the technology in GNOME
3) Gstreamer is written by GNOME folks. See above for issues on arch independence.
4) KSVG is/was never as mature as librsvg. Maybe things have changed now.
5) Totem and Rbox use Gstreamer by default. So, once again, you are wrong.
6) The author of Gconf doesn’t agree with the directiong Dconf is going.
7) I have really used these technologies. I’d appreciate it if you stopped insulting me by calling me a liar and braindead. Can you be anymore repugnant?
> 1) Because you had problems with Dia doesn’t mean everyone else does.
Let me prove you wrong if you read the comments given by other people at the bottom after my reply.
http://software.newsforge.com/comments.pl?sid=48199&cid=116548
> 2) Dbus is written by GNOME folks.
The specification for DBUS was created by KDE and due copoeration with GNOME they agreed and a RedHat employee wrote it.
> 3) Gstreamer is written by GNOME folks.
Indeed, but it doesn’t make it better.
> 4) KSVG is/was never as mature as librsvg. Maybe things have changed now.
Exactly, why don’t you investigate and reply again ?
> 5) Totem and Rbox use Gstreamer by default. So, once again, you are wrong.
I am not wrong, because I mentioned that it USED to USE Xine as default because they avoided it due to heavy instability. So from the semantics my explaination was definately correct.
> 6) The author of Gconf doesn’t agree with the directiong Dconf is going.
Yeah and how’s that related to KDE ? They use KConfXT and if the author of GConf disagrees (please write GConf correctly) then it doesn’t mean much specially if the goal is to share resources.
> 7) I have really used these technologies.
No you haven’t. You probably googled to get matching answers because I dropped your smelly pants in my last reply. Where I made you look like an idiot.
> I’d appreciate it if you stopped insulting me by
> calling me a liar and braindead. Can you be anymore
> repugnant?
You are an idiot still.
You are ignorant and childish. One can’t have a civilized conversation with you. Don’t you have anything better to do than to go around picking fights. Thanks for wasting my time. I hereby place you on my ignore list.
> One can’t have a civilized conversation with you.
You can have a very civilized conversation with me, anyone can. But then I also expect people to respect my opinion – no matter how much it differs to yours or anyone elses. This is also a sign of good manners and respecting others to respect his opinions.
Unfortunately people here in this thread don’t seem to understand the basics of good respectful conversations and thus all my replies regardless how the contents was got moderated down on purpose. Those who did, didn’t care what was written rather than who wrote it and thus reacted.
So, if you expect me to have a civilized conversation then please make sure that you know what you write towards me. Your recent replies were all wrong, tied up with wrong facts, bullshit and huge gaps of how the things are set correctly. With other words it would come close to the definition that others would name a “Troll”.
Greetings.
Are you kidding me? You go about calling me an idiot, a liar,
braindead and a troll. Then you have the nerve to talk about
respect? Oh, and when earlier I said you should respect the
choice of other people you said I was crying. Who do you think
you are? You won’t go far in life with your manners.
A new tactics of yours ?
You couldn’t reply with arguments,
You couldn’t even come up with technical details,
You felt personally attacked for Software that I was criticising,
and now you have the nerves personally attacking me ? Calling you an idiot was suited because that’s what you are – and I tell you why I call you one, because I figured in the first couple of replies of yours what your real intentions were.
You brought up no arguments.
You brought up no technical details.
You continue to insult me.
You obscure the facts for shameless goals.
You continue to contradict yourself.
You have no manners.
You can’t hold a civilized conversation.
You have a track record of trolling an misconveying information.
You have a track record of exagerrating facts.
You have a track record of fighting and irrationality.
Readers can judge for themselves. The whole thread is filled with you
insulting and disrespecting other people including free software developers
and GNOME users. Even in our supposed discussion were I brought up credible
facts, to cover your ignorance you respond with personal attacks. You are
nothing short of an animal.
You call me an idiot for pointing a video that clearly shows a problem with KDE. At first, you said I was lying about the video.
Or as you put bullshiting. You just go on and on like a raving lunatic. What exactly is the matter with you? Everywhere you go you bring nothing but destruction, negative energy, bickering and anger.
You are not ready to have a technical discussion. You are not capable of having one. You just want to troll and waste people’s time. “GNOME sucks, GNOME sucks, GNOME sucks, GNOME sucks.” Is that what you call facts?
> You … <all the yous>
Please excuse me but what the hell are you talking about ? I contradict myself, where ?, I speak out untrue things, where ?, I didn’t gave technical feedback, where ? Even the comment after you by the anonymous person is teaching you wrong and so did others.
All I gave was an object of personal experience with GNOME. An solid experience that I build up for the past 6 years. I talked about the things that were not working and even pointed those who asked for it to the corresponding bugreports (you probably recall, the stuff you probably moderated down on your own because you disliked the context). I keep insulting GNOME users ? What the hell are you talking about ? Since I am a GNOME user and even developer myself (I probably would have insulted myself now). Yes I am not short sighted, even If I am using GNOME and developing for it – I am still having the right to criticise GNOME for being immature compared to KDE and that’s all I did.
> Readers can judge for themselves. The whole thread is
> filled with you insulting and disrespecting other
> people including free software developers and GNOME users.
The whole thread is filled up with true facts around GNOME. Facts that you have big issues with and where you personally feel insulted for no reason.
> Even in our supposed discussion were I brought up
> credible facts, to cover your ignorance you respond
> with personal attacks.
You didn’t brought up any facts, all you did was trying to discredit me in the public. Your so claimed facts were false, filled with big gaps and full of lies.
> You are not ready to have a technical discussion. You
> are not capable of having one. You just want to troll
> and waste people’s time. “GNOME sucks, GNOME sucks,
> GNOME sucks, GNOME sucks.” Is that what you call facts?
I recall a few replies earlier that you wrote something like “I don’t want to talk to you anymore and put you on my ignore list”. Not just that you are an idiot, your word doesn’t have value either. You are not the person I would trust in the public or private life since your word is worth nothing.
– You keep on shouting stuff that you don’t know about.
– You have been proven wrong many times as well as other readers have been proven wrong.
– Those who asked got pretty much one bugreport shown for all the problems that I reported.
– My solid knowledge about the broken and horrible unstable GNOME architecture speaks lectures, that’s why I base my opinion on.
– Free Software is also about free speach and you are trying to discredit or stop my free opinion in the public by calling me a liar, someone who keeps contradicting himself and other things.
Now listen, GNOME was always full of f–king shit, not just people like you who want to manifest a lie as truth, but also ignorants like you who by all means play the so called “GNOME task force” showing up on all sites only to discredit people. To turn a true good conversation into a big mess and then starting to attack people. I know your kinds and dealt with people like you for years. I smell people like you miles ahead. That’s why I have chosen the terminology “Idiot” for you since you are one – and everyone seems to have realized by now.
In the past few replies you have been trying to turn away from a normal GNOME conversation by getting personal, you just filled up the past 10 comments with nonsense only to make the stuff written before to get lost in the middle of this childish behavior of yours and only to have the good comments disappear from the readers. That’s the thing why you keep replying by drifting away from the real problems.
As I initially told you, you can have a very good conversation with me but this conversation is not existing because this is not what you want. All you want is to discredit long years contributor to GNOME by callimg him a liar. You call yourself “skilled enough” to talk about the architecture of GNOME as well as KDE but all you came up with was wrong stuff only showing huge gaps about everything.
So far, do you have anything constructive to add or do you want to continue embarrass yourself in the public with your bad tactics discrediting crediable people ?
haha! Ali still on this thread. What contributions have you made to GNOME? You mean your lame ass scripts and buggy browser that you and your twin uses. Is that your contributions? And your ramblings and whining. You are an arrogant and bashful asshole.
Freak!
I repeat: I don’t think the interface was the problem in this case. Watch it again, watch the date&time video. In the background picture video she was in the correct dialog after a few seconds, she used the dropdown to change the wallpaper all she had to do was click apply just like in Windows (and she must have had ample Windows experience because she reached the config dialog via the context menu) but instead she went off on an Odyssey.
In the date&time video she actually failed in Gnome after logging in as root (?) and again finding the correct dialog.
So as I don’t want to indulge in conspiration theories like the other reply I have to say that without audio, which would answer some of the more obvious questions about what they told her and what she said about her reasons for doing what she did, I don’t see how you can use her video to draw any conclusions about the usability of KDE (and once again: I specifically d/led the “change the system time” video *because* I think that the KDE way of doing this is horrible)
@Anonymous (IP: 82.135.78.—)
I don’t think you can convince Mystilleef in any ways, regardless what you write. All he did in the past 10-15 replies was discrediting people, the reason why I started to call him an Idiot. He seems to be on some sort of own crusade because he can’t accept the truth (somehow it hurts). He doesn’t even have the skill to talk about the things he is criticising or the things he call good because some of the replies he gave have shown this. Lack of fundamental knowledge about both architectures doesn’t make a good conversation partner but then, he most likely trolls anyways. What a poor GNOME drone.
sounds like a nice project, but i have to say I dont really like the look of the icons much. <http://tango-project.org/Tango_Icon_Gallery>
Maybe its more for a corporate settings then for my tastes but they look too overly realistic. I like the way everything gnomeish (i know this isnt exclusively) this week is focusing on speed and usability. Gnome 2.14 (and KDE 4) are looking very promising already.
I really like this idea! I hope that at least the icon set doesn’t just focus on Gnome and KDE. It would be wonderful if Rox and XFCE support the new icon spec as well.
I could see myself using these in Rox. They look good.
The mouse icon looks rather like a Microsoft Intellimouse, doesn’t it? I wonder why they didn’t base it on a Logitech mouse instead…:)
Looking at what they have so far, I’m not impressed at all. Too many different colors and too many small details. Just look at address-book-new and multimedia volume-control, for example.
When designing icons, you should always keep in mind what you’ll get at a small size – and if there are too many colors and details, you’re gonna get a mess. Firefox icons can be a great source of inspiration here and an example how icons should look.
What do you base this on? Research? Real world examples?
Personally, I think that using the same colors for every icon makes it difficult to distinguish them. Especially at small sizes, you’ll want an icon with great significance to stand out. And what’s a better way to do that than using colors?
Personally, I think that using the same colors for every icon makes it difficult to distinguish them. Especially at small sizes, you’ll want an icon with great significance to stand out. And what’s a better way to do that than using colors?
Having distinct silhouettes. Using colors is next to useless for low-vision and color-blind users. And that’s a significant percentage of your potential users.
This isn’t to say that colors can’t be used as an effective additional cue, but it should never be relied upon as the sole means of distinguishing things.
Notice that one of the frequent mistakes on the bottom of the Tango style guidelines is a difficult to distinguish silhouette. http://tango-project.org/Tango_Icon_Theme_Guidelines
What do you base this on? Research? Real world examples?
Personally, I think that using the same colors for every icon makes it difficult to distinguish them. Especially at small sizes, you’ll want an icon with great significance to stand out. And what’s a better way to do that than using colors?
Common sense and my own experience. Do look at the examples I provided.
You’re right in that all icons shouldn’t be of the same color, because they would be hard to distinguish then. Instead, a palette of a few colors (three, maybe?) is chosen and all icons in the set (or at least in a subset containing functionally related items?) are made using that palette. That way you can have a coherent look that doesn’t distract you. Moreover, color should have a certain meaning – for example, red means you should pay special attention to the operation this item performs. This is used in Gnome default theme (as dull and sometimes ugly as it is, it does serve its purpose well). Tango uses colors pretty randomly as far as I can judge.
Many details can render an icon incomprehensible at small sizes (especially if these details are defferently colored – this way the icon becomes just a motley spot).
Did you even look at the Tango site? They have a very clearly defined color palette.
As an OSX user, its the small details on everything that make things so great.
Gnome is so “blah” and KDE is a big punch in the eye.
I think these icons look VERY nice.
As a icon theme Tango does not look too interesting really. Even if some may like the look of them, personally I thought lots of them had bad usability. It was hard to make out their meaning, specally the small ones. And the need to have different versions for svgs and the smaller sized icons are problems already discussed on artist mailinglists.
Making a Icon Naming Specification sounds good, but I haven’t seen much discussion and colabration from the different desktops on the issue on mailinglist and such. Hopfully it’s not another case of someone declaring something a fd.o “standard”, whitout actually involving other relevant projects.
As for BetterDesktop it’s a classic NIH. Rather than joining the Open Usability initiative, start your own. Sad really.
Will the Appeal project merge with Better Desktop ? I think they should do.
1.) Usability I’ve looked at some of the lower rated user experiences on the usability testing, and still thought that KDE/GNOME looked very good. They are good examples of how easy they’ve become. Currently I would rather teach a new desktop user GNOME than MS Windows. Its logical layout and strong adherence to its HIG make it very easy to teach, and I waste infinitely less time cleaning up various forms of malware. The next hurdle for F/OSS is an easy package installer for newbies. Apt-get, yum, synaptic, drakconf, etc., is easy if you know what programs you’re looking for but we need something more like Linspire’s CNR.
2.) Tango Icons I realize that this may be a taste issue, but the Tango Icons are really terrible looking. They look even worse than the default GNOME icons which were never good, but now look very deprecated when compared to many of the other icon sets out there. I do like the idea of creating a unified format for the icons amongst KDE and GNOME (hopefully Xfce will agree to do the same). Over all a good idea, but please do not let Tango be the default (it may make many newbies say blehhh on first boot). We need to do like Aaron Seigo has suggested and create a visually breathtaking desktop (eye candy counts, especially to new users).
In my view, the most important thing here is the standard, not the theme. I don’t even think Gnome nor KDE wants to have the same default theme as the other one has. The ability for the end user to download a theme and use it in all his applications is what will make life on the desktop better. Sure, the icons need tons of improvement (the small scale icons inherit too much details from their big brothers, many people don’t like the overall look of the theme), but that will come with time.
I actually like the tango icons so far – they’re not too dull (a common generic gnome complaint), they’re not too shiny and blue (a common generic kde complaint), and they’re “next gen” enough to have the wow factor. I am very impressed by the talented artists we have in the OSS world generating these sorts of things.
As far as the desktop testing site – I’m glad the videos have finally been posted. I just hope that people can somehow put together usability labs of their own and further contribute. There’s nothing better than actually being able to see users’ reactions to software whilst trying to perform specific use cases.
As someone mentioned above, a lot of the Gnome camp appear to be focusing on refinement (and I’m sure this is true of KDE too) which is a really good thing in the move towards a top-notch ‘End Product’. I think we’ll be seeing some very polished UI’s and user experiences before the “next generation” x.0 DEs come along.
On your first comment, an Ubuntu community member has created an application similar to CnR called EasyUbunutu:
http://placelibre.ath.cx/keyes/index.php/2005/09/29/45-easy-ubuntu-…
Thanks for the link, but it’s not quite what I’m looking for. CnR has a nice web-style layout with easy to navigate categories, download rankings, screenshots, short and long descriptions and thousands of apps. I realize that veteran Linux users (including myself) would rather run sudo apt-get install foo, but this is not the solution to what ESR calls the Aunt Tillie test. Granted Aunt Tillie probably has issues with MS Windows as well, but we shouldn’t be short sighted and only look upon Redmond for usability.
Ever heard of the internet? If you want features like that, you might as well just move to the easier to use, and more powerful, no-install application approach and use the internet as your repository.
-bytecoder
Ever heard of the internet? If you want features like that, you might as well just move to the easier to use, and more powerful, no-install application approach and use the internet as your repository.
-bytecoder
The idea of a CnR-esque front end for Apt-get is what I’m suggesting. If you leverage Mozilla’s XUL interface it essentially would be very similar to using the internet like a repository. I’m not stating that is the only way to go, but CnR is very easy and nonintimidating to newbies and nontechnical end users. Just because of responsiveness and availability when you are offline, your tools should be installable.
I think that the new ubuntu (5.10 breezy badger) has something pretty similar to what you’re talking about. It’s called the “Add application” program.
You can browse through a bunch of categories and there are descriptions of what the programs do and you can just install them from there. It’s like Synaptic for new users, which (although I haven’t used cnr) is what your talking about.
Thanks,
It’s not quite advanced to the level that CNR is at, but it is absolutely a step in the right direction. I will recommend this app to all my new installations from now on. Between ‘Add Application’, my own repository, and a customized ‘Easy Ubuntu’, I think application installation (and deinstallation) is becoming very newbie friendly.
cheers
This is a big step forward for Desktop OSS.
I personally like the icons. You want something that looks professional for a default theme. The current gnome icons are dull and KDE is too busy IMO.
Of course, some people like that but they can change the theme anyway.
Well… I like them!
(What else could I say? well… seriously, they’re very well designed and look nice enough to almost everyone. It’s perfect for a “default” theme! Keep the good work! =] )
It’s always eye-opening to see how some users interact with their computer. Things that seem intuitive to those brought up with various OS habits are often quite non-intuitive to new or unfamiliar users.
Watching these videos shows just how far we can go on improving some tasks.
Yes, as always this is GNOME stuff!
Yeah I know, KDE icons are a punch in the eyes and GNOME icons are dull but these are really GNOME icons with a different palette.
Well, here and there you do see signs of that Apple/KDE-ish gloss
Does that mean that with tango all applicaitons, irrespective of libraries (i.e qt or gtk) use the same icons. For example will Kontact with Tango look similar to Evolution ?
What they have at the moment is pretty boring. I find the icons i use quite good “nuoveXT”.
that the icon set seems reasonable.
Only negative is the small icons. They inherit too many details from the larger sizes.
Perhaps I would also prefer 128*128 as the large size with 48*48 as medium, but this means very little when using vectors. So it’s a non issue.
1. To find out which parts of a given design work well for our target audience and which parts don’t. For example, we ran general tests on the F-Spot photo organizer because we wanted to gain an overall understanding of what its interface did well, and what it did poorly.
If they want a better desktop, maybe they should consider digikam instead of F-spot?
Dunno if you can change the mess found in the GNOME architecture by using new ICONS ?
Eyecandy can be done by everyone and there are tons of nice Icon- and Theme sets on various Theme sites.
But fixing the broken framework of GNOME should be the primary thing to do imo. Fixing all the broken components and applications should be a primary thing as well. Nothing really works inside GNOME, even core applications are not following the HIG v2.0 (Toolbar of Gnumeric doesn’t follow the Toolbar & Menus capplet), Evolution is broken because it crashes during startup and trashes all syncfiles for local mailboxes, Nautilus still not usable, copying files using Nautilus is still broken, DIA is not usable, Abiwords toolbar is by far 5 pixels bigger than the rest of GNOME’s toolbars, Evince is permanently crashing and quite unusable because of this. It also shows empty white pages and printing will result in printouts getting different fonts (reported bug), Rhythmbox crashes with GStreamer, Rhythmbox is quite immature compared to KDE’s amaroK. There is no proper business tools for doing stuff like UML, charts, project management, computer related diagrams, electronic circuit design. The tools don’t really integrate and look awful. MONO will split the entire GNOME community, not to mention that MONO is not portable to any other architecture such as PowerPC, SPARC and so on, so most MONO apps are quite useless.
So howto solve this ? Paint a few new icons… how pathetic…. Btw: The icons are butt ugly…
Dunno if you can change the mess found in the GNOME architecture by using new Icons ?
Eyecandy can be done by everyone and there are tons of nice Icon- and Theme sets on various Theme sites.
But fixing the broken framework of GNOME should be the primary thing to do imo. Fixing all the broken components and applications should be a primary thing as well.
Nothing really works inside GNOME, even core applications are not following the HIG v2.0 (Toolbar of Gnumeric doesn’t follow the Toolbar & Menus capplet), Evolution is broken because it crashes during startup and trashes all syncfiles for local mailboxes, Nautilus still not usable, copying files using Nautilus is still broken, DIA is not usable, Abiwords toolbar is by far 5 pixels bigger than the rest of GNOME’s toolbars, Evince is permanently crashing and quite unusable because of this.
It also shows empty white pages and printing will result in printouts getting different fonts (reported bug), Rhythmbox crashes with GStreamer, Rhythmbox is quite immature compared to KDE’s amaroK.
There are no proper business tools for doing stuff like UML, charts, project management, computer related diagrams, electronic circuit design. The tools don’t really integrate and look awful.
MONO will split the entire GNOME community, not to mention that MONO is not portable to any other architecture such as PowerPC, SPARC and so on, so most MONO apps are quite useless.
So howto solve this ? Paint a few new icons… how pathetic…. Btw: The icons are butt ugly…
You again!
Dunno if you can change the mess found in the GNOME architecture by using new Icons ?
The GNOME framework is not broken. If it was, there will be no GNOME desktop environment or GNOME applications. Do you know what the meaning of “broken” is?
Nothing really works inside GNOME, even core applications are not following the HIG v2.0 (Toolbar of Gnumeric doesn’t follow the Toolbar & Menus capplet), Evolution is broken because it crashes during startup and trashes all syncfiles for local mailboxes, Nautilus still not usable, copying files using Nautilus is still broken, DIA is not usable, Abiwords toolbar is by far 5 pixels bigger than the rest of GNOME’s toolbars, Evince is permanently crashing and quite unusable because of this.
The GNOME HIG is set of guidelines. The guidelines are not laws or rules that developers are obliged to follow. Developers should know when and when not to follow the HIG. Sometimes the HIG could be blatantly wrong with regards to the design of a particular behavior in my application.
Regarding the issues you are having with those applications, can you point me to the bug reports you filed? I’d have to call you a troll if you can’t.
It also shows empty white pages and printing will result in printouts getting different fonts (reported bug), Rhythmbox crashes with GStreamer, Rhythmbox is quite immature compared to KDE’s amaroK.
Yes, and monkeys have wings.
MONO will split the entire GNOME community, not to mention that MONO is not portable to any other architecture such as PowerPC, SPARC and so on, so most MONO apps are quite useless.
Mono is not as popular as Python among GNOME and free software developers. The only people mildly interested in Mono are windows developers interested in developing cross platform .NET applications. They are a niche. The future of GNOME is Python, period.
So howto solve this ? Paint a few new icons… how pathetic…. Btw: The icons are butt ugly…
You solve this by whinning less and contributing more. You can begin by showing us your less ugly icon set.
> The GNOME framework is not broken. If it was, there
> will be no GNOME desktop environment or GNOME
> applications. Do you know what the meaning of
> “broken” is?
Yeah, the meaning of broken is meant for things that don’t really work – like most of the stuff that comes shipped with GNOME or which makes the GNOME plattform. I gave plenty of examples of what I see as broken. If applications are not working properly (crash during startup like Evolution) or f–king up the index files for mbox data then it’s broken. If you can’t use Nautilus to do basic stuff such as copying large chunks of data from FTP to somewhere else without getting 0 byte files for files that usually are > 0 bytes then it’s considered to be broken. If applications are not behaving to global preferences changes such as ‘Show my Toolbar in ICONS only’ then I consider this as broken too. If the provided applications for GNOME are weak hacks and not really improveable if you don’t re-write them from scratch over and over again then it’s a broken framework that causes this. If the default audio and multimedia framework provided for GNOME doesn’t do what it was claimed for and instead of seamles integrated into GNOME only hacked the way so it operates halfway then it’s broken.
> The GNOME HIG is set of guidelines. The guidelines
> are not laws or rules that developers are obliged
> to follow. Developers should know when and when not
> to follow the HIG. Sometimes the HIG could be
> blatantly wrong with regards to the design of a
> particular behavior in my application.
Now what ? Today it’s just a guideline and another day it’s the key selling thing you tell other people. Just as you wish it or ? Either HIG is part of GNOME and should be considered as some sort of rule so application developers follow it so the apps don’t look like ass or as you correctly say it’s just a guideline – but then please stop making a marketing gimmick out of it.
> Regarding the issues you are having with those
> applications, can you point me to the bug reports
> you filed? I’d have to call you a troll if you
> can’t.
Look inside bgo simply enter the correct search criteria for the stuff I mentioned and you will be directed to my bugreport including my name, the date of the reports and many more.
> Yes, and monkeys have wings.
GNOME was never about monkey you moron. It was primarily about dwarfs, elfs, trolls .. and the full Tolkien charakter sets. Some small messican company started with bonobos (sexual addicted dwarf chimps).
> Mono is not as popular as Python among GNOME and
> free software developers. The only people mildly
> interested in Mono are windows developers
> interested in developing cross platform .NET
> applications. They are a niche. The future of GNOME
> is Python, period.
Reading planet.gnome.org gives me a different impression.
> You solve this by whinning less and contributing
> more. You can begin by showing us your less ugly
> icon set.
You don’t solve this by contributing. I contributed enough to GNOME and all I got as return was inflamatory craptalk from the key developers. You are usually stuck in hours of debatting how much GNOME’s framework sucks, how it should be improved, including patches and all you get back is inflamatory shit, namecalling and other crappy thing. Everyone who wanted to contribute to GNOME figured out already or will figure out one day. Just a matter of time. Now stop defending GNOME if your brain’s not able to handle the key problems.
First of all, I shouldn’t have called you a moron as I did in my last reply. But I felt a bit annoyed to give the same answers over and over again.
> You solve this by whinning less and contributing more.
The problem is not the contributions. The problem is getting those contributions accepted by the maintainers.
Over the years I realized that the request of contributions is just a poor excuse to avoid conversations with the developers or users who want something to get changed.
Some stuff in gnome-vfs for example was so utterly broken that it wasn’t touched for a really long time. There wasn’t even a maintainer for it (only a guy who kept putting some stuff in there whenever it was needed). Now some other people seem to have taken over the maintainance of it and the process continues.
But within the GNOME development team I found out (due to own experience) that it’s quite difficult if not highly impossible to get some ideas through or to convince a developer that a different approach would have been wiser or better. Not to say save a lot of time. But people kept using the broken components for years.
Even now not everything inside GNOME is sane or reliable and a lot of stuff seem to be reinvented over and over again. See DBUS for example or basic things like “specifications” as found on freedesktop.org. GNOME makes freedesktop.org sound like it’s a place for developers from GNOME and KDE to met and declare specifications but this is not always true since KDE had solved most of the necessary things that GNOME still urgently needs years before and their specifications and solutions are often by far better thought through and much more mature – and over the years proven that it also works practically and not just as concept.
For example you can compile KDE with a static prefix in say /opt/kde3 and later on you can move this entire directory to /usr/local/kde3 without the need to recompile anything. On GNOME we sill have the issue that every path is hardcoded inside the binaries so you can’t move the entire location if necessary. One of the bad concepts of GNOME.
Another bad thing about GNOME is that the developers do have nice ideas at time but they lack the power or durability to make the changes or visions they have complete. GStreamer for example is indeed a nice technology and it somehow made it’s path inside GNOME but still it doesn’t feel like it’s truly part of GNOME since some apps use it, others avoid using it and stick to xine. Now if these apps stick to xine then chances that GStreamer gets fixed and a whole part of GNOME is low.
Another thing is that plenty of the developers seem to have rotating focus on stuff. Today they work on this one, then tomorrow they focus on hacking on Mozilla or hack on ‘dead ideas’ they have that no one really takes serious so all the resources of working and fixing GNOME get’s lost with playground stuff.
We all know that GNOME was meant to be a corporate desktop. But then a corporate desktop needs different resources and a different approach. Serious project leading is required, strict guidelines are required, and people with brains to enable them.
It can not be (now that the HIG as guideline exists for some years) that applications developer still ignore it. I don’t care for third party stuff. But I do care for the important and key elements of GNOME software that should be a good example and follow these guidelines.
GIMP, DIA, Evolution, Abiword, Gnumeric only to name a few are in no way HIG conform. Some are, but others not. I filled in a bug for Gnumeric not long ago pointing the developer to the HIG v2.0 where it says that the Toolbar should obey the rules of Toolbar & Menus capplet (which is a core part of GNOME) unfortunately the bug was closed as not a bug and no further comments have been given to it.
Also printing is a necessary importand thing in GNOME imo and it can’t be that I load up GThumb to print a *.gif file and it ends up in printing a totally black picture on a white sheet of paper, wasting nearly 1/3 of my black ink cartridge.
It’s also inacceptable for a corporate desktop to have a document reader and viewer like Evince that prints a whole document correctly with correct fonts but as soon as I start printing one page out of it messes the fonts totally up (looks like monotype fonts when printed).
It’s the release team to take care of what they include inside GNOME, if the stuff is still immature or not working properly then it should by all means be avoided for inclusion since it doesn’t help anyone. GNOME is often claimed to be the desktop to get work done. But I often find myself to do more work in fixing stuff around GNOME rather than getting work done. Printing job applications usually ends the way that I switch into console and print over ghostscript using cups rather than trusting gnome-print or evince (which fault this is I don’t know but a confirmed bugreport exists).
As a corporate desktop I urgently require reliable tools and I require these tools today and not – one day. Look DIA, Nautilus, Evolution and many other tools exists for years now and DIA is nowhere to be usable and I often tried giving them a helping hand which I got ugly repsonses from the maintainers.
This does help the corporate idea how ? In no ways does this help anything. I do find the “Tango Project” and “Better Desktop” to be a nice thing but I somehow got the feeling that it’s just a reaction towards the plasma project that KDE offers.
Unfortunately in my opinion the KDE people do make a better figure with what they announce because most of the stuff they do works. Sure, not perfectly and sometimes you have quirks and other issues inside KDE as well but the tools exists to get work done. You don’t need to think about does it print correctly. It simply does. You don’t need to worry about Kivio or Umbrella not working correctly they simply do make a better shape than DIA for example.
KDE may look overwhelming complex and overloaded in the eyes of inexperienced people but in other peoples minds it looks just right and offers all the stuff one really needs without worrying.
I don’t say that these things won’t show up for GNOME one day but I can tell you from personal experiences that developing for GNOME is a nightmare.
As initially said you can easily move a final compiled KDE binary system from one dir to another and have the stuff work perfectly and perfectly find the datafiles. GNOME doesn’t offer that.
KDE has objects for Toolbars. That is, if you put that Toolbar object in your window then you have all the aditional features for it as well such as editing Toolbars, such as the same height, same objects and same icons inside. GNOME unfortunately doesn’t offer that, every application looks differently, look at VMWare for example which is using GTK+ now. Look at the Menu it has a draghandle, now look in what GNOME or GTK+ apps exists that have a draghandle there ? It uses GTK+ – yes but it feels differently.
The HIG for GNOME sounds like a joke and if you point people with the finger on the HIG and say ‘hey would you please adopt these things’ then you get a response telling you that the HIG is incomplete or lacks thought in these areas and so they can not apply the HIG to their app – which imo is a bad excuse. The HIG is meant so people follow guides, but not meant that people do change the HIG so it fits the applications (developers) bad excuses.
The computer is a toy that you should use but not have the computer use you (to explain the HIG situation a bit differently).
Now if you count all the stuff together that I mentioned (RB, GStreamer, Evolution, Nautilus, broken gnome-vfs, Toolbar issues, and many more (and I bet you found tons of annyances on your own and again others do so too)) then all these annoyances summed up results in the conclusion that GNOME is not well thought through and way behind it’s competition.
Good marketing surely helps and a site such as OSNews.com who regularey promote GNOME and ignore KDE (on purpose) may help GNOME too (and money stuffed in the throaths of those news sites help too) but in reality this is all masquerading and not really helpful. If people want to live behind lies and accept these to be ok then be it like this but it’s not my way of thinking.
Sure this is all about open source and everyone can do whatever he want’s but we talk about a corporate desktop here.
Your reply was way too long. As usual you are just whining. Readers hate to read whiners. And I am no different. I enjoy constructive criticisms. I can’t stand whiners. They are no good. They are ungrateful, and they contribute almost nothing to any cause. They are usually armchair critics who see faults in everything, and have as much faults themselves.
No user I know of ever complains about the looks of the toolbar. You are intentionally being pedantic and you are annoying in the process. “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of a limited mind.” It is foolish to limit the creativity of developer to superficial qualities in a specification such as the look of a toolbar. The brightest minds and developers are creative. And they will never let something as superficial as the GNOME HIG limited their creativity.
The HIG clearly states it is a guideline. If you had read the HIG, you’d have realized this. No one advertises the HIG. If there are opposing views on how the implement a particular behavior, the HIG can serve as a reference and a standard for implementing said behavior. If you do not know how to word a tool tip, the HIG can come to your rescue. If you want to place a non-standard item in a menu, and you do not know where, look into the HIG. That’s the purpose of the HIG. I have applications that intentionally disobey some guidelines set forth in the HIG because it just doesn’t fit the design goals of the app. I’m I wrong? Nope. Is the HIG useless? Nope. The HIG serves its purpose as a reference material and guide. If you want to design good applications read books on interface design, watch users use applications, and test your applications. Whether or not the toolbar has text is largely irrelevant in the real world.
All large projects have problems and GNOME is not without exception. However, I disagree with your assessment of GNOME problems. Not only are your assessments intentionally inaccurate, they are fueled by seeds of hatred, bias and disgust. How do you expect me or anybody to take you seriously. Your reputation for trolling GNOME threads doesn’t help. And your GONEME failures have shown you are as incompetent as the GNOME developers with regards to broken ideas and vision. So before you call GNOME developers names, look into the mirror. GNOME today is a successful project. You tried to fork it and failed. Yet you have the nerve to school us about successful and broken projects. Who do you think you are?
If you really loved GNOME, you’d be doing all you can to make it look and work better. In every comment you have written, you’ve done all you can to destroy the image of the GNOME community and contributors. I have never read you say, GNOME does something right. It’s always insults, negative retorts, ceaseless whining, childish rebuttals, outright lies, mindless name calling and so on. Why do you act like you know the solution to all the problems when you records have clearly shown, you do not possess that quality?
I like the visual style of the icons; slightly cartoonish, but clean and simple. And a big PLUS-PLUS on the comments in their style guides about glossy icons:
“Use glossy reflection only on objects that have a reflective surface in real life (plastic, glass, some metal, et cetera). A paper sheet certainly doesn’t have such attribute.”
When looking through the icon gallery itself though, IMO some of the icons are a bit too stylized and I couldn’t tell what they were supposed to be without reading the description. I also prefer the perspective on icons to be from a 45 degree angle (a la the BeOS icons) – I find it makes the icons look less flat, but that’s just my personal aesthetic preference.
About KDE’s complexity again. It’s complex because they offer complex stuff.
For example a certificate manager, IDE, Webdevelopment, Games, Education stuff (with useful things inside like maths, vocabulary and so on), UML, Fax Software, Printing Software, Reader, Internet Download Manager, Browser, Newsreader, Mail client, Instant Messenger, Remote Desktop connection, amarok, k3b, koffice (kivio, krita, kword, kspread, kpresenter and so on), task juggler and many many more apps. The majority of the things I mentioned above is already part of KDE. You most likely don’t need these things but another one will and if you don’t need these things today then you might do one day and then you will be thankful for these tools to exists and be there.
And I don’t doubt that if GNOME would have these things then they would all bundle it as ‘The GNOME’ if they can. This probably also explains the huge success of Ubuntu which ships all of that. People don’t necessarily need them today but they probably will one day.
But with KDE I get these things and most of these tools are far more advanced and far better implemented using a solid ground architecture. The toolbars are all similar using the same technology, the printing dialogs are all the same, they all smoothly build up on the same good solid architecture that KDE offers.
I don’t say that the majority of applications found for GNOME are bad, no way. But I believe due to the architecture that GNOME offers these applications are not mature enough or not thought through well enough. These applications could have been better and more coherent if the gound architecture of GNOME wouldn’t allow half a dozen of Toolbar types for example (and this from libraries that hopefully will be considered non existing soon).
The problem of GNOME’s bad framework causes that all the GNOME applications that exists do look differently, behave differently, react differently on global preferences changes. Also stuff like proper clipboard support for GNOME is lacking (maybe these things are included in a distribution) but then huge work went inside the distro to achieve this goal. But I am refering here to the GNOME that exists on CVS or which get released through tarballs.
GNOME would suck less if the ground architecture would simply work. That basic things like windows, toolbars, menus would be done in ONE WAY rather than 20 different ways, that tools like Glade should be re-invented properly and not this poor thing that people keep designing their dialogs with and where properties inside the *.glade files are set inproperly and wrong. GNOME would also suck less if it had a global plugins system such as Kioslave or KParts. Bonobo is so what complex that no real documents exists. So instead writing plugins or snapins so other apps inside GNOME can use it. People keep writing new libraries and make all the apps depend on these libraries because its the easier solution for them to solve this task. A plugins pool where apps could grab a working object and register it with their programs would have been a better choice imo.
What annoys the hell out of me are the basic tasks that GNOME can not really acomplish, it fails with simple things. Things that you usually shouldn’t think about because you expect the stuff to simply work and to get your work done. That’s the area where GNOME lacks and even small things such as a clipboard manager is announced on OSNews.com like its the biggest invention in century while other competition desktops such as KDE offer these things for years as it’s natural thing to have. People and even developers in the GNOME camp keep pridefully arguing how much KDE’s implementations do suck. But hey, they at least have these things.
GNOME is a never ending pit, where you keep working on fixing even trivial things and this is a never ending story, you keep ranting and flaming about these things for years and now years have passed and those things still make slow progress. And still the same people have nerves declaring GNOME as the standard default corporate desktop. While it lacks in so many areas.
Now that even trivial tasks can be a nightmare inside GNOME how does it look if you deal with huge complex stuff. Ever thought about that.
In case someone asks me when I last used GNOME then be sure that I do use the latest GNOME there is and that I know it good enough to be serious of what I write.
As usual your retorts are all baseless and mindless. Why the heck should I use bonobo in my app if it doesn’t need it? Just because I can? That’s stupid.
If my application needs to communicate with another application then I can worry about that. But if it doesn’t why should I? And even if it does, the correct way to go about it is to use GTK+ plugs and sockets with Dbus. If you understand bonobo, then go ahead and use it. But using Bonobo and Kparts just for the heck of it premature and poor design. It is no wonder KDE apps look bloated and constipated.
GNOME architecture is solid. Very powerful applications are written everyday using GNOME. I have used it myself and it impresses me beyond words. In fact, my only complaints is better documentations, examples and tutorials. But that has nothing to do with a broken architecture. In fact the general consensus among most users in the GNOME is the easiest free software desktop. The usability videos I watched yesterday also prove that.
In the real world nobody gives a flying f–k about toolbar consistency. All they care about is getting their job done. Abiword, GNUMERIC, Evolution, Epiphany, to mention a few allow people to get their work done. We leave people like you to waste their time looking for consistency in toolbars. If your application is useful and easy to use, people will flock to it anyway.
Anonymous, you never posted any links to your bug reports, but rather offered some vague suggestion to “search for keywords”.
Anyways, let’s start looking at these bugs. First, we have the bug that was closed “as not a bug and no further comments have been given to it”:
http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=311349
It would seem to me that there was lots of discussion about it.
Now let’s take a look at the other bugs you filed… Search for your email…
http://bugs.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&sh…
It would appear you didn’t file too many bugs, especially for those programs you were just previously complaining about.
One for gnome-terminal was reopened. An old GRecord bug was fixed. You filed a Dia bug, not sure if that was fixed (it’s 2 years old, I’m sure the fonts got better). A bug against gnumeric (which I think is a valid bug), which resulted in another bug to get rid the “Menus & Toolbars” capplet (which I think is an invalid bug), both of these were closed as invalid. And finally, a bug for nautilus which was fixed in 2 days.
Hmm…..
> Your reply was way too long. As usual you are just whining.
Again it’s the fault of the user isn’t it ? It’s easy for you and your likes to give make the user responsible for the misconcepts of GNOME and the ignorance of GNOME developers. This is the usual approach to get rid of people like me. I consider my writings to be my very own opinion. People can read them or they can go wherever they want and read whatever they think is right. If they prefer being lied then it’s also ok with me. But do me a favor and stop blaming the users for the mistakes of developers.
> No user I know of ever complains about the looks of the toolbar.
The toolbar is just one example of many examples that I could mention. The problem I see here is that you don’t understand what I was trying to explain and I think you should solve this issue quickly in case you are a developer you should by now have realized the problems behind it. The different toolbars are usually inherited by different approaches of giving applications a mainwindow. There are still dozens of people outside using deprecated stuff (since in my opinion the deprecation process is going on too slow) and thus results in applications behaving differently. But then maybe it’s not the fault of the third party application writers, maybe its the fault of the GNOME developers who implemented those things in the ‘lick my butt’ way.
> The HIG clearly states it is a guideline. If you
> had read the HIG, you’d have realized this. No one
> advertises the HIG.
You are wrong, well not entirely, you might be right that it’s a guideline but then what intention does a guideline have if no one gives a flying damn for it ? I think you wouldn’t require a HIG if the bottom architecture of GNOME wouldn’t allow developers to nail together trash applications that looks like it’s done by a 7 weeks hobbiest hacker.
> All large projects have problems and GNOME is not without exception.
Of course all large projects have problems, but the amount of problems found inside GNOME is overwhelming big and complex and not solvable.
> And your GONEME failures have shown you are as
> incompetent as the GNOME developers with regards to
> broken ideas and vision. So before you call GNOME
> developers names, look into the mirror.
Before calling me to be inaccurate and incompetent please look in your own mirror first. Project GoneME was in no means a fork. It was announced as such on OSNews.com due to bad investigations and bad research of the former chief editor. Project GoneME started as a set of patches and was meant to be just a set of patches. We had the luck that the acceptance and needs for Project GoneME was so big and the reaction of the folks outside was so overwhelming that the project got it’s own legs and moved forward. People saw it as a fork (thanks to the bad research of the chief editor). But at the end I must thank all of you from the #gnome and #gnome-hackers channel to join the #goneme channel on freenode.net and harrass the hell out of the people by querying them (I have proven logs that shows this) and scareing them away. So much from Project GoneME – it has basicly been talked to death. But it was fun as long as it lasted. I saw a lot of GNOME people going nuts and mad walking up and down in their rooms and had sleepless nights. The best payback for the years of hate and shit that I received.
> GNOME today is a successful project.
Yes of course it’s – successful. Depends how much money has been wasted for false marketing, false public relations and all the bullshit and TRUE LIES that got spread.
> In every comment you have written, you’ve done all
> you can to destroy the image of the GNOME community
> and contributors.
I doubt a single person can destroy the image of the GNOME community. That’s something you people perfectly have done on your own. The only minor contribution that came from my side in this area is to remind people of the real face of GNOME.
> I have never read you say, GNOME does something right.
They don’t thats the problem. But maybe it’s the american way of handle things (as they handled the war in afghanistan and iraq) with pride, with selfish overassessment of the situation and by simply ignoring the competition or trying to talk them to death.
> It’s always insults, negative retorts, ceaseless
> whining, childish rebuttals, outright lies,
> mindless name calling and so on. Why do you act
> like you know the solution to all the problems when
> you records have clearly shown, you do not possess
> that quality?
Yes yes yes, the one who is not guilty should pick up the first stone and throw it to my head. See, that’s the things I always said about GNOME.
a) the architecture is broken.
b) the community is just wrong,
c) at the end it’s always the users fault,
d) good members has been scared outside and declared enemies or trolls.
How often did you people attack various individuals, how many times did you offend and insult users, how many times did you ignore their requests. It happened countless of times.
Here I primarly wrote about the bad architecture as you can read above and all the other articles that I commented because I think it’s correct to point people to the flaws and issues around GNOME. I also pointed out some internal issues inside the community without diving into it much deeper and I definately didn’t called anyones by names. Just said how much GNOME as architecture sucks and that people can’t expect anything serious out of it.
You need to live with the fact that as long as I spent time with open source that I do all my best to convince people that GNOME is going nowhere and till now most people who I was able to talk with understood the issues. But face to face talk is usually better and more serious than writing or having a conversation over Internet because it’s not so easy to explain the things I’d like to explain. Maybe everything isn’t that bad as you and probably some other morons want to make it look like. Not to mention that I receive by far too much shit by clueless morons to what I actually write or want to say.
Besides this, I bet that even you agree that most of my points are valid, I do understand that you don’t want to confirm them in public.
All your points are invalid and rebuked. When you fail to understand the purpose of a human interface guide, how can you understand the purpose of a development architecture or framework?
You claim GNOME is broken because developers don’t follow the HIG. Well, let me spell it out for you. Developers do not have to follow the HIG. It’s a f–king guideline.
You claim GNOME is broken because different applications use different widgets. No shit! I didn’t know all applications were supposed to use the same widget. The goal is to design good applications that simple and easy to use. The goal is not to pointlessly masturbate of toolbar widgets and intentionally broken HIG suggestions.
If an application does not need a toolbar, why should HIG instruct a the developer to add one? If application does not need a menu, why should I even read the menu section in the HIG? I can sight more examples, but I’m wasting my time.
You clearly do not understand the wisdom behind developing good applications. It has nothing to do with the HIG or toolbars, or different widget sets. It has everything do with the problem the user is trying solve and how the user can most effectively interact with the application. I’m sorry, but contrary to your misconception, a nice HIG, and an unbroken framework doesn’t automatically buy that.
Wisdom, creativity and talent buy you that. And I strongly believe the GNOME community has all these resources and more. In other words, the framework doesn’t matter, the HIG doesn’t matter, only contributors matter. There is a reason Balmer was jumping all over the stage chanting “developers… developers…developers…” If you have nothing to contribute, please step aside.
If you have nothing better to say, just shut up!
The email address you have used to search for things is dead for many years now. But thanks for confirming that these bugreports do exist.
Try this one (doesn’t include all of the search possibilites)
http://bugs.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&sh…
If you sort for the bugs that are still open then you find reports to all the bugs that I was complaining here.
This at the end confirms that basic tasks don’t work as expected.
Now that everything has been proven to be truth, what else would you add ?
> Why the heck should I use bonobo in my app if it
> doesn’t need it? Just because I can?
No, you don’t and I didn’t said you must. Please don’t turn my words in a way as I haven’t said it.
But I believe that a good plugins system is necessary because it’s easier to share stuff with other applications. Don’t you think ? People in the GNOME camp write new libraries and requires those who wants that feature to use the libs instead of providing plugins that might have solve the things easier. Wasn’t that the aim of Bonobo in the past. I recall a document and big announcements with bells and whistles some years back
“Bonobo, write objects in any language you want and have your app use them”
Or something like that. The idea was good and even came from the GNOME camp. It’s called:
GNU Network Object Model Environment
On purpose!
> GNOME architecture is solid. Very powerful
> applications are written everyday using GNOME.
Such as Nautilus for example or the great Filechooser that still annoys most of the users who still use GNOME ? But fun asides.
> The usability videos I watched yesterday also prove that.
If you are refering to the Novell videos then please allow me to ask where the KDE tests are ? I’ve only seen GNOME stuff there but their site refers to KDE and GNOME and yet I haven’t seen one single KDE app or the KDE desktop getting the same attention. For me as user and someone who’s watching the show from a sidepath it looks like there are some weak attempts trying to talk KDE to death because there is no other way for GNOME to survive rather than killing it off that way.
> All they care about is getting their job done.
Same here, all I care is getting my work done. But I’d like to get them done without getting pissed off and without the need to fix stuff that I consider basic tasks under GNOME.
Getting my work done like:
– Permanently having desynced mbox index files with Evolution that starts up with Annoying dialogs,
– Permanently having my emails being popped even if I don’t want it,
– Getting black paper printouts from GThumb while all I wanted was to print a few copies of my dead grandpa’s pictures for my family,
– Trying to copy stuff from FTP using Nautilus, which ends up in random lockups and 0 byte files,
– Trying to print out some documents using Evince which ends up in fonts looking differently,
– Trying to listen to some music with a bad music player.
– Trying to make some UML diagrams in DIA ends up in corrupt saved data or permanent crashes.
… comeone, what kind of work is this that I should be getting done … The toolbar issue was just one example of how much GNOME’s architecture sucks and yes it’s a valid one because if the toolbar is not obeying to GNOME’s general settings then it’s considered to be broken. End! It’s a key jerkyness inside GNOME.
But I believe that a good plugins system is necessary because it’s easier to share stuff with other applications. Don’t you think ?
No, I don’t. In fact, I think it is overrated and misguided. It’s only useful if you need it. 99% of apps don’t. So trying to find excuses for you app to use a library is silly. And that’s why KDE apps look like they are designed with no purpose.
People in the GNOME camp write new libraries and requires those who wants that feature to use the libs instead of providing plugins that might have solve the things easier. Wasn’t that the aim of Bonobo in the past. I recall a document and big announcements with bells and whistles some years back
“Bonobo, write objects in any language you want and have your app use them”
Many GNOME developers realize bonobo for what it was and stayed away from it. It was a good idea at the time, I believe. But now developers are waking up to the reality that application do not always need to be embedded in each other or interact with each other. So trying to have all GNOME apps use Bonobo without reason is shortsighted. It is a damn stupid idea. I’d rather applications interact with each other via the desktop than via some stupid MS inspired convoluted mechanism. I’m not saying IPCs are bad. I’m saying they should only be used when it makes sense to use them.
Such as Nautilus for example or the great Filechooser that still annoys most of the users who still use GNOME ? But fun asides.
Nautilus is a fine piece of work. The filechooser is a lot more usable than the hideousness on KDE or Windows.
If you are refering to the Novell videos then please allow me to ask where the KDE tests are ? I’ve only seen GNOME stuff there but their site refers to KDE and GNOME and yet I haven’t seen one single KDE app or the KDE desktop getting the same attention. For me as user and someone who’s watching the show from a sidepath it looks like there are some weak attempts trying to talk KDE to death because there is no other way for GNOME to survive rather than killing it off that way.
The KDE tests are there, if you actually took the time to watch them. You should the look on the users face when the KDE filechooser is launched. Oh, I didn’t see any apps crashing, or exhibiting any of the behaviors you mentioned. How come you are the only person Evolution, Nautilus, and all of GNOME crashes on?
… comeone, what kind of work is this that I should be getting done … The toolbar issue was just one example of how much GNOME’s architecture sucks and yes it’s a valid one because if the toolbar is not obeying to GNOME’s general settings then it’s considered to be broken. End! It’s a key jerkyness inside GNOME.
The toolbar issue is invalid and repugnant. See my previous comment above. And why do you think your printing issue is a problem with GNOME and not with your drivers? GNOME has nothing to do with printing. Cups and your drivers has everything to do with your printing eating your documents or wasting paper. Again, you are ever looking for an excuse to expose your ignorance and insult the efforts GNOME contributors, for problems that don’t even exist to begin with.
Toolbars! Give me a f–king break!
You don’t get it eh ? You really don’t get it eh ? On purpose or because you seriously don’t get it ?
> You claim GNOME is broken because developers don’t follow the HIG.
No! I claim GNOME to be broken because it is broken. If you would actually read what I write and if you would please stop behaving like an idiot then you would actually understand what I write.
One part of what I complain about:
– Permanently having desynced mbox index files with Evolution that starts up with Annoying dialogs,
– Permanently having my emails being popped even if I don’t want it,
– Getting black paper printouts from GThumb while all I wanted was to print a few copies of my dead grandpa’s pictures for my family,
– Trying to copy stuff from FTP using Nautilus, which ends up in random lockups and 0 byte files,
– Trying to print out some documents using Evince which ends up in fonts looking differently,
– Trying to listen to some music with a bad music player.
– Trying to make some UML diagrams in DIA ends up in corrupt saved data or permanent crashes.
Everyone would call this BROKEN!
The other thing I complain about is that the bad architecture that GNOME offers is the cause that so many applications misbehave and that GNOME doesn’t offer applications that could do competition with KDE’s aequivalents. Say amaroK for example (this is one example in case you don’t get it) is by far more mature than Rhythmbox because of the fact that KDE’s architecture is better than the one from GNOME. It’s easier to program working applications. Something that even Novell (former Ximian) has realized otherwise there wouldn’t be a need to invent MONO for RAD.
Now stop braging about the toolbar thing, since it’s just one part (it was one exaple in case you don’t get it) of many issues. The HIG is just another example. But you keep riding on these things as if it’s the main stuff that I complain about which is not the case. Why don’t you use your brains and keep reading what I actually write before replying and showing yourself clueless in the public ?
No! I claim GNOME to be broken because it is broken. If you would actually read what I write and if you would please stop behaving like an idiot then you would actually understand what I write.
It sucks because it sucks. That’s called tautology.
– Permanently having desynced mbox index files with Evolution that starts up with Annoying dialogs,
How do I reproduce this problem?
– Permanently having my emails being popped even if I don’t want it,
Where is the bug report for this?
– Getting black paper printouts from GThumb while all I wanted was to print a few copies of my dead grandpa’s pictures for my family,
And this is GNOME’s fault? What about cups and your driver?
– Trying to copy stuff from FTP using Nautilus, which ends up in random lockups and 0 byte files,
I do that all the time here. Is there a particular site that gives you problems?-
Trying to print out some documents using Evince which ends up in fonts looking differently,
You really have printing issues.
Trying to listen to some music with a bad music player.
WTF? What’s that supposed to mean?
– Trying to make some UML diagrams in DIA ends up in corrupt saved data or permanent crashes.
I’m have DIA installed, how do I reproduce this problem?
Everyone would call this BROKEN!
No, only retards and psychologically challenged people would. These, if at all, they are problems are extremely minor. And hardly broken. And they having nothing to do with toolbars, HIG or frameworks.
And you are a clown. Do you know Amarok uses gstreamer? And do you know gstreamer was originally a GNOME technology. I thought GNOME’s architecture is broken? If Amarok rocks, you can thank the GNOME and Gstreamer folks. Wake me up when KDE have something like gstreamer. And if you don’t like Rythmbox, use the million and one music players available for GNOME sheesh.
> Nautilus is a fine piece of work.
I recall having other opinions of real life users in mind. Not to mention the spatial mode that scared away many people but ok I don’t want to dive deeper into Nautilus here. Personally I avoid using Nautilus because I don’t trust it by any means.
> The filechooser is a lot more usable than the
> hideousness on KDE or Windows.
Personally I have big issues using the GTK+ filechooser because the first few clicks I usually do are clicks into nirvana before I realize that I wanted to find some files on my directory. The filechooser is unintuitive and confusing. The KDE one I consider far better, easier to get used to and straight forward. I am used to the up, left, right refresh buttons and that’s what I preferabely click. Symbols are usually by far more intuitive than Text. It’s easier for human beings to identify stuff by looking at small pictures than reading text. Symbols can even be pressed by iliterate people who can not read (as example).
> The toolbar issue is invalid and repugnant.
It’s not. I think the Toolbar issue is quite correct and valid.
Example: Evince and Epiphany offers a self itched Toolbar editor, other GNOME apps don’t have one and if someone wants to edit the Toolbar in Nautilus for example he or she get’s confused why this is not possible. And having Toolbars with drag handle and other Toolbars without a drag handle is confusing and irritating, as well as having Toolbars with different heights. It feels unnatural and unaesthetical. What you replied only proves that you have no sense of quality assurance – just slam together the app so it works how it works. Now lets view this aspect from a different side. We wouldn’t be flaming ahead about this topic if there wasn’t 20 different ways of developing these things. If there was one Toolbar widget that embedds a Toolbar editor and all the things required ready to go then we would see more apps using it.
This also doesn’t mean that every application should have a Toolbar or Bonobo as you said but then I believe explaining this to you is pointless because you don’t understand the problem anyways. It’s not the fact to support Toolbars or Bonobos in every application – no, it means that if (in case you need) to supply support for it – that you don’t slam together you own junk of code or use deprecated or broken ways to provide one.
And in case you do understand what I write but don’t really care then you just confirm why I believe that GNOME is broken – because everyone is cooking it’s own soup without the picture as a whole in mind. The results is what we are seeing here.
> See my previous comment above. And why do you think
> your printing issue is a problem with GNOME and not
> with your drivers? GNOME has nothing to do with
> printing.
Because it has been confirmed to be a GNOME bug by three people now ?
http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312757
> – Permanently having desynced mbox index files with
> Evolution that starts up with Annoying dialogs,
>
> How do I reproduce this problem?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=315531
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213072
Confirmed bug!
> – Permanently having my emails being popped even if
> I don’t want it,
>
> Where is the bug report for this?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312106
Confirmed issue!
> – Getting black paper printouts from GThumb while
> all I wanted was to print a few copies of my dead
> grandpa’s pictures for my family,
>
> And this is GNOME’s fault? What about cups and your
> driver?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316011
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316018
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312757
Confirmed bug!
> Trying to print out some documents using Evince
> which ends up in fonts looking differently,
>
> You really have printing issues.
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312757
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=317957
Confirmed bug!
And GNOME is broken because of these minor bugs? Many of them which have been fixed or resolved.
I guess KDE is broken too! Haha!
http://bugs.kde.org/simple_search.cgi?id=printing+problems&openonly…
Personally I have big issues using the GTK+ filechooser because the first few clicks I usually do are clicks into nirvana before I realize that I wanted to find some files on my directory. The filechooser is unintuitive and confusing. The KDE one I consider far better, easier to get used to and straight forward. I am used to the up, left, right refresh buttons and that’s what I preferabely click. Symbols are usually by far more intuitive than Text. It’s easier for human beings to identify stuff by looking at small pictures than reading text. Symbols can even be pressed by iliterate people who can not read (as example).
So much for a usability pedant. From an accessibility and usability point of view the GTK filechooser is a lot more superior and might I add better laid out than the junk on KDE. You don’t even need to click on stuff to get to a deeply nested folder. Just start typing! And if you want to save some clicks, bookmark the folders you use regularly. Sheesh
Example: Evince and Epiphany offers a self itched Toolbar editor, other GNOME apps don’t have one and if someone wants to edit the Toolbar in Nautilus for example he or she get’s confused why this is not possible. And having Toolbars with drag handle and other Toolbars without a drag handle is confusing and irritating, as well as having Toolbars with different heights. It feels unnatural and unaesthetical. What you replied only proves that you have no sense of quality assurance – just slam together the app so it works how it works. Now lets view this aspect from a different side. We wouldn’t be flaming ahead about this topic if there wasn’t 20 different ways of developing these things. If there was one Toolbar widget that embedds a Toolbar editor and all the things required ready to go then we would see more apps using it.
This is bordering on stupidity! Did it every occur to you that some developer might not want users to configure the toolbar for a million and one reasons. I have an app, and I really don’t want the user to configure, move or drag and drop the toolbar. And I have very good reasons for that. Because other GNOME apps are doing that does not mean I should mindlessly follow them. I want twenty ways of doing things, because in the world on programming there is no one way of solving a problem.
It’s the same in all other freaking OS, Window/Mac. Some apps let you configure things that will be dangerous to configure in other apps. What’s so hard to grasp about this?
> Did it every occur to you that some developer might
> not want users to configure the toolbar for a
> million and one reasons.
That’s the problem! Developers usually don’t know what users want. But then would it have been so difficult providing this feature even if people don’t use it ? There might be the other 50% of people who want to do so.
That’s a myth. In reality users don’t know what they want. Developers have a better grasps of the problem users are trying to solve, and have often thought about it longer and deeper than users have the patient for. As a developer, it is my job to make all the hard and crucial decisions for the user. It is the users job to focus on their tasks.
> And GNOME is broken because of these minor bugs?
> Many of them which have been fixed or resolved.
The bugs above looks quite ‘still not fixed’ to me. And they are not minor, they are major at least for my personal tasks. You know the stuff I am trying to get done – that I can’t because everything is broken.
> That’s a myth. In reality users don’t know what
> they want. Developers have a better grasps of the
> problem users are trying to solve, and have often
> thought about it longer and deeper than users have
> the patient for. As a developer, it is my job to
> make all the hard and crucial decisions for the
> user. It is the users job to focus on their tasks.
No shit Holmes…..
Quote from Nat Friedman.
“Novell is releasing primary desktop research, including over 200 videos and analysis of usability tests, at betterdesktop.openSUSE.org. Vice president of collaboration and desktop engineering for Novell, Nat Friedman: As a programmer, it’s sometimes difficult to know how ordinary people with no technical experience are reacting to your software. Linux people tend to know other Linux people. In these usability tests, we selected test subjects who were experienced with Windows, but who had never heard of Linux, and asked them to perform basic tasks using the Linux desktop.”
Reference:
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/11/146202&tid=223
Ah, now you know how to quote GNOME developers. A few minutes ago they were stupid and clueless eh?
Maybe you stop behaving childish and get the facts straight. Until now you and the other few here were provoking me all the time.
a) I have been writing some lenghtly comments about why I think that GNOME is broken.
b) I have provided the stuff that I consider broken.
c) On request I have published link to the bugreports of open bugs on these things.
d) I keep talking to some wannabe experts who claim that GNOME developers know better what users want while this articles Nat Friedman (This is ontopic now) said exactly to oposite of what you claim.
“As a programmer, it’s sometimes difficult to know how ordinary people with no technical experience are reacting to your software. Linux people tend to know other Linux people.”
Which means with easy words that a developer usually don’t know what a user wants.
I have shown and proven my credibility more than one time here. That GNOME is a broken desktop has been proven through the requested bugreports that I have given. Those reports have been confirmed to be true and even the part of where I say that GNOME developers (plural) usually don’t know what users want has been proven through this articles initiator from Novell. This is most valid in the GNOME area because everyone does some sort of patchwork and hack there and here without getting anything finished entirely.
So what’s wrong ? Why can’t you simply accept (and the others too) that I might be right with what I say ? Even after I have proven to be right (more than one time) you still try to make it look differently.
And how comes once (again) you people get proven to be clueless and wrong, you start acting strange and go the insulting path to diffamate people ? Is that necessary to show your coolness in the public or is this just another face of the GNOME world (which I also know it really is).
I mean we can continue, I bet there are still dozens if not hundrets attentive readers who keep reloading this thread only to see what’s written. Above there are also a few guys who keep moderating my replies up – which of course makes sense to me.
You are wrong, and you have always been wrong. GNOME is not broken because of your silly bugs. I bet KDE has similar bugs. Does that make KDE broken? Users don’t know much about software design or programming. Telling me a user knows what he wants out all the time is like telling me a I know more than a doctor about my anatomy. Very few users understand the complexity involved in designing good software. Very few appreciate the tedious tradeoffs in writing software that is without flaws. That’s why it is so easy to whine about GNOME been broken. But based on your flawed arguments, if GNOME is broken, then so is KDE, Windows, OS X and BeOS and many others. Have a look at the printing issues in KDE, is KDE broken because of that? Kopete crashes has crashed on me several times. Is KDE broken because that. Konq doesn’t render some sites well. Is KDE broken because of that. Kword won’t open Word documents well. Is KDE broken because of that. I can go on and on and on. Is KDE broken because a KDE or library has a few bugs?
Congratulations, you just passed the ‘I am an ignorant asshole’ test. Welcome in real life!
Anyone of you attentive readers want to spent your time with helping out GNOME if you need to deal with such ignorants?
GNOME has established itself as a project committed to creating an enjoyable user experience for all. It will and has attracted contributors, both small and big, on its on merits. Your attempts to disparage the GNOME community has been foiled and will continue to be. I will be on every GNOME thread to ensure this happens.
What are “ignorants,” stupid ants?
Of course KDE is not free of errors, nor is BeOS or OSX or anything else and we all know this.
But the problem of GNOME is it’s architecture that is broken – this said again for the 50’st time today.
Getting back to the old Toolbar issue.
If we had one Toolbar object with included Toolbar editor then we only need to fix that one in case it breaks. And if it breaks then it breaks for all applications equally and can equally be fixed by just focusing on this one Toolbar object.
This is now irrelevant if your app needs a Toolbar or not. It’s just the theoretical thing I try to explain to you.
If there was one Bookmark object for your applications then you only need to fix that one in case it breaks. Same stuff like the Toolbar object.
Now with KDE we have a box full of objects that we can grab and create applications with. We can take the KHTML object and we can browse pages, we can open a Fileselector object which inherits it’s network, samba, etc. objects so we can deal with files all over the world or locally on our drives.
Sounds pretty straight forward and logical to me and probably to you too.
On GNOME otoh the things look totally different. While there are a lot of libraries offering things like Fileselectors, Toolbars, Windows etc. GNOME still offers different approaches to achieve this task. The old legendary bonoboui, gnomeui and gtkui, through glade files and and and. There is no common nominator to achieve this task.
Now assuming we have 5 different applications that require a Toolbar and we now would chose one way of doing the Toolbar then we wouldn’t be sitting here discussing how unaesthetical GNOME apps are. If we had only that one choice doing a Toolbar then everything would look correctly, we would automatically inherit a Toolbar editor, we only need to define the symbols that we like to see in the Toolbar itself and attach a shitload of accelerators to it.
But here is still a problem, the creativity of developers who don’t follow any guidelines or styles start to mix around in things, some attach a draghandle to the Toolbar others make a bigger frame around a Toolbar (more padding) and even others do other nasty things to it. This is a big problem.
Same applies with GNOME’s filemanagement. Some get the file from GTK+’s filechooser and put the uri in a buffer as is, others use gnome_vfs to deal with the uri, others concatenate the strings to make the full filename out of it and others use the correct way of using glib’s file concatenation and dir concatenation functions and provide it to gnome_vfs afterwards.
This is a big problem if you want to port applications to other architectures such as Windows specially if you need to deal with slashes vs. backslashes for pathing.
Am I too technical ?
How about the cool KDE’s dynamic prefix object that exists. However they’ve done it, it’s great. You can compile and install KDE in /opt/kde3 and then move the entire thing to /usr/local/kde3 for example without keeping symlinks or recompiling things. The files don’t hardcode paths as GNOME does (which is weak and really unthought behavior).
Or how about the dozen ways of keeping bookmarks in GNOME, GThumb has its own, Nautilus, Epiphany, Galeon, <add your app here> everthing has its own bookmarks editor dealing with these things, own propritary bookmarks format and so on. KDE has a default bookmarks editor object and a default bookmarks object that you can easily embedd in your application.
Using 20 lines of code you can easily nail together a basic application under KDE that does some stuff, while you need ten times the lines of code (200) to achieve the same or similar things inside GNOME.
Now look over to KDE’s printing dialog compared to GNOME’s printing dialog. There are worlds between them. I can print as Fax, I can print as Email, I can print as PDF or PS and even more if I would add plugins.
Now look over to amaroK for example and compare it to Rhythmbox there are dimensions and worlds between them.
Now I tell you, what do the amaroK developers do differently than the Rhythmbox developers (giving one example here). They are both cooking with water, Rhythmbox is probably 2 years older and amaroK matured into a brilliant media player in a short time. How comes ? Better plattform, better architecture ? Of course.
For example look at this poorly designed crap tool called DIA for GTK+ and now compare it to things like Umbrello or Kivio. There are worlds between them, how comes the KDE derivates are more mature than the other one ?
For example look at Planner and compare it to TaskJuggler, how comes TaskJuggler is miles ahead of Planner, same applies for Ktechlab and other nice apps that no derivates for GNOME exists. Now assuming that GNOME is not broken, how comes there are no such applications existing with same quality and same functionality ?
GNOME is so weak in all areas, for example Security is an important thing, Certificates trusts and so on. How do I deal with certificates when using gnome-vfs ? Is this thing even handled ? What if I want to keep a pool of certificates for security related things KDE offers me all this ability.
Have you ever tried KDE in the past 1 year or so – do you seriously want to make me believe that KDE is so bad as you claim, that it’s overloaded, bloated etc. All these features are important parts and urgent requirements. Maybe not for you but for the corporate being it is.
Please understand that this is just a few examples so please don’t fix me on them, there are dozen of other parts that totally rock. The cool objects system that KDE offers, I can cut out a picture from a PDF file and have it embedded anywhere else, be it in Krita, KWrite, KSpread, Kolourpaint, I can cut out chunks of Texts in PDF files and have it pasted everywhere else, I can use my addressbook inside all my applications and and and.
But this is possible because of a clean design. Because there is one addressbook object that handles with all the stuff and applications can inherit that object in their apps and use it too to share with the same base, without the need to care hows it done, you simply pass attributes over to it.
That’s something you need to understand and I believe my technical explaination will be overwhelming complex to you. Reading a book how stuff should be done is one thing, own experience and healthy brainworks is better here. Many books are written with the primary intend to make money, not to give correct informations. A lot of books has copied informations that someone or the author has cut out of other books and so on and if you put a book over your own personal skills then you shouldn’t be working in the IT sector.
Sure not all in KDE is good (currently I am a bit upset about the bookmarks editor) but the overall desktop that KDE makes and the powerful applications it has (and still get) searches aequivalents on GNOMEs side. I really wonder what keeps GNOME developers developing on GNOME since it’s always in poor shape and not correctly working.
It’s not that the ideas behind GNOME are bad or people not being creative enough or that the intentions behind it are wrong or right. Sure I don’t agree with quite some stupid decisions GNOME developers made and that’s what I and most others need to deal with. But I am quite fed up seeing that someone set down a new dump somewhere and all the flies show up how great the ideas are and that it’s a must for GNOME to have and then two weeks later some halfassed solution has been slammed into GNOME and then left that way in hope some poor guy shows up fixing the leftovers of said developer.
Sorry to say that but I make the bad framework of GNOME responsible that the majority of GNOME apps remain in a weak and unusable shape. Maybe good enough for the hobbiest or zealots, but not good enough to stand commercial alternatives.
My experience differs. I find GNOME applications to be solid, well designed, clean and robust even when compared to KDE counterparts. Epiphany, Evince, Abiword, GNUMERIC, Nautilus, Inkscape, Beagle, ifolder, the Gimp to mention a few are unrivaled in the open source world. Not even KDE technology can produce anything close to them.
The GNOME infrastructure is very powerful. Even Amarok uses a GNOME technology, gstreamer because KDE multimedia libraries suck! GNOME’s focus has always been the user first. The technology is worthless if the user interface is polluted, like in KDE.
GNOME apps are years ahead of KDE, in terms of usability, design and productivity. It is no wonder GNOME is the corporate desktop of the free software world. More and more companies are beginning to realize this. The three biggest distros on Linux are GNOME oriented. GNOME is successful not only because its applications are robust and powerful, but also because it’s infrastructure is accessible and open.
KDE applications are bloated, poorly designed, crash prone and drowning in needless features and complexities. When a user can not figure out how to change the wallpaper on a KDE desktop, you know KDE has big problems.
GNOME is a wonderful technology bed and it only keeps getting better. It keeps getting better because GNOME contributors are visionaries and designers first, before they are geeks and technologists. What makes a great product isn’t technology. What makes a great product is people. When you begin to realize that, you’ll begin to understand why having 1000 different widget libraries is irrelevant.
Do you realize that you’ve posted as much to this thread as I’ve written all day? And I was transcribing today.
> GNOME has established itself as a project committed
> to creating an enjoyable user experience for all.
Are you sure about this ? Look back at Project GoneME times, ok it’s a dead horse now but I had the feeling that this was exactly the oposite. The #goneme channel had by far more visits and visitors than the #gnome-hackers channel which implies how wrong you might be. And the amount of feedback given by people all over the world (not alone on /. and some other sites) have proven that GNOME is not as enjoying as you might want to make it sound.
How comes that KDE wins every desktop aware year in year out in the past years on different sites who offers this kind of voting pools ?
> My experience differs.
This sounds more like a provocation rather than constructive opinion. What you wrote does in no way reflect the reality in any parts and I doubt you are doing any good with such kind of zynical reply. It only makes you sound more unserious and my stuff about GNOME being broken (and proven with links) to be more rock solid.
Oh, the broken KDE audio stuff you refer to ‘arts’ was primarily written by a GNOME guy for the intent to include inside GNOME (look in the code – for at least one time). So far, shot your own neck here.
You are the person living in dream land. GNOME works and works well. If you want to argue bugs, then I bring up a whole lot of embarrassing bugs in KDE.
GNOME is not obsessed over technology. GNOME is obsessed over users. And users appreciate that. Unfortunately, people like you who have nothing better to do other than to mock the hard work of the GNOME community do your best to expose your ignorance.
If KDE has nice frameworks, then why do they use GNOME frameworks like gstreamer? It most be because GNOME frameworks are well designed and powerful. Or because KDE just doesn’t have anything that can compare to it. I can go on and on.
> I bring up a whole lot of embarrassing bugs in KDE.
Of course you can, but you should take into consideration that KDE is about 5 times bigger than GNOME. This means, more applications, more complex applications, more complexity in general, a lot of different translations (which makes up more than 600mb on its own) more code and more stuff to care about. All this also carries double till three times as many users with it and thus makes reporting bugs become more noisy – while having less resources at hand to deal with all the bugreports. Of course KDE does have embarrassing bugs no doubt, but the overall impression, feel, integration, polish, consistency and framework simply rocks.
> If KDE has nice frameworks, then why do they use
> GNOME frameworks like gstreamer?
They don’t and that’s the thing. They still use that broken arts which was initially written by some GNOME guy for inclusion into GNOME years back and this can be considered an broken obstacle that followed KDE for years. It will be replaced by kdemm for KDE 4 which will use Xine, MAS or other stuff as backend (including GStreamer). amaroK is temporarely offering GStreamer as an option for playing music but it causes the developers a lot of problems and this is understandable since the integration of GStreamer into GNOME itself is quite poorly done. GStreamer was started around 1999 and till now 6 years passed and GStreamer is still nowhere good enough, not even good enough that GNOME related tools such as Totem or Rhythmbox default to it (at least it was so not long ago – may have changed to optionally take GStreamer).
Sure, there are gaps in KDE no doubt but you should investigate into KDE’s framework for quite a bit so you understand the big differences that GNOME and KDE have. It’s not just the multimedia architecture, there are many more things.
Look the ideas behind GNOME are not bad, a lot of intentions are good and the publications made by the GNOME developers (which I consider myself being part) are of course making sense. But the problem is that as soon as it comes to the implementation of these ideas the stuff starts to fail. The implementation of most things are usually half hearted, not really working, crashing etc. But KDE has an easier move here since their entire architecture is based upon OOP, they use C++ for rapid application development and the resulting applications are far more professional, far better thought through.
Now what benefits does a GNOME desktop give me if the applications are poorly written or lacking all the features needed. I don’t have any issues with poor and crappy tools. I do have issues if crap is being declared as corporate solutions which it clearly isn’t. I think GNOME should step back from this corporate nonsense and concentrate on fixing the issues around GNOME.
Polishing up GNOME by giving it new icons or counter react with this new desktop project just because KDE made such an announcment some weeks ago is going nowhere. GNOME is only setting peoples expectations higher, pushing the developers to limits and then once a new version of GNOME is dumped to the users all the pressure is being pulled back to them and at the end the users need to pay for bad promises and broken software.
I still haven’t found acceptable counterparts like amaroK, KStars, KPresenter, Umbrello, TaskJuggler, Kivio and many other cool applications for GNOME. This speaks for itself if we compare that GNOME was started one year later than KDE but KDE by now offers 5 times more software than GNOME. Sure not all software for KDE is good enough, there is a lot of nonsense that you find on http://kde-apps.org but there is also a huge amount of good quality software that you find nowhere else, not on GNOME and not on Windows.
GNOME is a well designed framework with smart and forward thinking people. Little wonder most of the technology of the future of the Linux desktop is designed by GNOME folks. Just have a look at the freedesktop.org.
Have a look at gnomefiles.org. You’ll see equivalents of all the KDE apps you mentioned and more. Might I add they are better, well designed and polished. KDE has a lot for learn from GNOME. KDE folks are just mad the GNOME gets the news because it is better.
Wake me up when KDE has something like Inkscape or the GIMP. Haha, so much for their supper technology they can’t even design a kickass multimedia framework that they have to borrow GNOME’s to do that.
> GNOME is a well designed framework with smart and
> forward thinking people.
Well unfortunately GNOME has no well designed framework and the people aren’t that smart as you want to make them look. They are making the same mistakes that others have done 20 years ago with similar approaches and it astonishes me all he time how people can re-invent the same mistakes that others have done over and over again.
> Have a look at gnomefiles.org. You’ll see
> equivalents of all the KDE apps you mentioned and
> more.
gnomefiles.org is full of applications, no doubt! But the majority of these apps are in no ways better or more useful than the KDE counterparts.
> Might I add they are better, well designed and
> polished.
How can you design an app better if the groundlaying technology behind it (GNOME) is broken ?
> KDE folks are just mad the GNOME gets the news
> because it is better.
This is also not entirely true. The news that GNOME gets is a two side coin. We all know that OSNews.com’s editors are GNOME drones and they usually report 5 GNOME articles to 1 other article and they keep skipping and ignoring good KDE related articles. That’s not because KDE is poor, no that’s because those drones fear that KDE would gain even more popularity than it already has.
> they can’t even design a kickass multimedia
> framework that they have to borrow GNOME’s to do
> that.
I think I have mentioned it quite a dozen of times now, even GNOME’s GStreamer isn’t that kickass since even GNOME apps avoid using it and default to Xine engine. So far for the kickass. 6 years of GStreamer hacking and it’s still useless and broken.
Besides this, how comes that – after I have proven the bugs of GNOME, all the problems I mentioned also proven, shown my credibility and seriousity – people like you start acting childish and give stupid comments. Your comment and the ones from the few others (after all my proves) sound so embarrassing wrong and artificial that it makes me (and probably hundrets of readers) wonder if you believe your own writing.
> Nautilus is a fine piece of work.
I recall having other opinions of real life users in mind. Not to mention the spatial mode that scared away many people but ok I don’t want to dive deeper into Nautilus here. Personally I avoid using Nautilus because I don’t trust it by any means.
> The filechooser is a lot more usable than the
> hideousness on KDE or Windows.
Personally I have big issues using the GTK+ filechooser because the first few clicks I usually do are clicks into nirvana before I realize that I wanted to find some files on my directory. The filechooser is unintuitive and confusing. The KDE one I consider far better, easier to get used to and straight forward. I am used to the up, left, right refresh buttons and that’s what I preferabely click. Symbols are usually by far more intuitive than Text. It’s easier for human beings to identify stuff by looking at small pictures than reading text. Symbols can even be pressed by iliterate people who can not read (as example).
> The toolbar issue is invalid and repugnant.
It’s not. I think the Toolbar issue is quite correct and valid.
Example: Evince and Epiphany offers a self itched Toolbar editor, other GNOME apps don’t have one and if someone wants to edit the Toolbar in Nautilus for example he or she get’s confused why this is not possible. And having Toolbars with drag handle and other Toolbars without a drag handle is confusing and irritating, as well as having Toolbars with different heights. It feels unnatural and unaesthetical. What you replied only proves that you have no sense of quality assurance – just slam together the app so it works how it works. Now lets view this aspect from a different side. We wouldn’t be flaming ahead about this topic if there wasn’t 20 different ways of developing these things. If there was one Toolbar widget that embedds a Toolbar editor and all the things required ready to go then we would see more apps using it.
This also doesn’t mean that every application should have a Toolbar or Bonobo as you said but then I believe explaining this to you is pointless because you don’t understand the problem anyways. It’s not the fact to support Toolbars or Bonobos in every application – no, it means that if (in case you need) to supply support for it – that you don’t slam together you own junk of code or use deprecated or broken ways to provide one.
And in case you do understand what I write but don’t really care then you just confirm why I believe that GNOME is broken – because everyone is cooking it’s own soup without the picture as a whole in mind. The results is what we are seeing here.
> See my previous comment above. And why do you think
> your printing issue is a problem with GNOME and not
> with your drivers? GNOME has nothing to do with
> printing.
Because it has been confirmed to be a GNOME bug by three people now ?
http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312757
>>> This is a repost because someone modded it down on purpose. Instead wasting my modpoints it’s easier that way. <<<
> – Permanently having desynced mbox index files with
> Evolution that starts up with Annoying dialogs,
>
> How do I reproduce this problem?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=315531
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213072
Confirmed bug!
> – Permanently having my emails being popped even if
> I don’t want it,
>
> Where is the bug report for this?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312106
Confirmed issue!
> – Getting black paper printouts from GThumb while
> all I wanted was to print a few copies of my dead
> grandpa’s pictures for my family,
>
> And this is GNOME’s fault? What about cups and your
> driver?
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316011
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316018
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312757
Confirmed bug!
> Trying to print out some documents using Evince
> which ends up in fonts looking differently,
>
> You really have printing issues.
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312757
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=317957
Confirmed bug!
>>> This is a repost because someone modded it down on purpose. Instead wasting my modpoints it’s easier that way. <<<
> You claim GNOME is broken because developers don’t follow the HIG.
No! I claim GNOME to be broken because it is broken. If you would actually read what I write and if you would please stop behaving like an idiot then you would actually understand what I write.
One part of what I complain about:
– Permanently having desynced mbox index files with Evolution that starts up with Annoying dialogs,
– Permanently having my emails being popped even if I don’t want it,
– Getting black paper printouts from GThumb while all I wanted was to print a few copies of my dead grandpa’s pictures for my family,
– Trying to copy stuff from FTP using Nautilus, which ends up in random lockups and 0 byte files,
– Trying to print out some documents using Evince which ends up in fonts looking differently,
– Trying to listen to some music with a bad music player.
– Trying to make some UML diagrams in DIA ends up in corrupt saved data or permanent crashes.
Everyone would call this BROKEN!
The other thing I complain about is that the bad architecture that GNOME offers is the cause that so many applications misbehave and that GNOME doesn’t offer applications that could do competition with KDE’s aequivalents. Say amaroK for example (this is one example in case you don’t get it) is by far more mature than Rhythmbox because of the fact that KDE’s architecture is better than the one from GNOME. It’s easier to program working applications. Something that even Novell (former Ximian) has realized otherwise there wouldn’t be a need to invent MONO for RAD.
Now stop braging about the toolbar thing, since it’s just one part (it was one exaple in case you don’t get it) of many issues. The HIG is just another example. But you keep riding on these things as if it’s the main stuff that I complain about which is not the case. Why don’t you use your brains and keep reading what I actually write before replying and showing yourself clueless in the public ?
>>> This is a repost because someone modded it down on purpose. Instead wasting my modpoints it’s easier that way. <<<
> Your reply was way too long. As usual you are just whining.
Again it’s the fault of the user isn’t it ? It’s easy for you and your likes to give make the user responsible for the misconcepts of GNOME and the ignorance of GNOME developers. This is the usual approach to get rid of people like me. I consider my writings to be my very own opinion. People can read them or they can go wherever they want and read whatever they think is right. If they prefer being lied then it’s also ok with me. But do me a favor and stop blaming the users for the mistakes of developers.
> No user I know of ever complains about the looks of the toolbar.
The toolbar is just one example of many examples that I could mention. The problem I see here is that you don’t understand what I was trying to explain and I think you should solve this issue quickly in case you are a developer you should by now have realized the problems behind it. The different toolbars are usually inherited by different approaches of giving applications a mainwindow. There are still dozens of people outside using deprecated stuff (since in my opinion the deprecation process is going on too slow) and thus results in applications behaving differently. But then maybe it’s not the fault of the third party application writers, maybe its the fault of the GNOME developers who implemented those things in the ‘lick my butt’ way.
> The HIG clearly states it is a guideline. If you
> had read the HIG, you’d have realized this. No one
> advertises the HIG.
You are wrong, well not entirely, you might be right that it’s a guideline but then what intention does a guideline have if no one gives a flying damn for it ? I think you wouldn’t require a HIG if the bottom architecture of GNOME wouldn’t allow developers to nail together trash applications that looks like it’s done by a 7 weeks hobbiest hacker.
> All large projects have problems and GNOME is not without exception.
Of course all large projects have problems, but the amount of problems found inside GNOME is overwhelming big and complex and not solvable.
> And your GONEME failures have shown you are as
> incompetent as the GNOME developers with regards to
> broken ideas and vision. So before you call GNOME
> developers names, look into the mirror.
Before calling me to be inaccurate and incompetent please look in your own mirror first. Project GoneME was in no means a fork. It was announced as such on OSNews.com due to bad investigations and bad research of the former chief editor. Project GoneME started as a set of patches and was meant to be just a set of patches. We had the luck that the acceptance and needs for Project GoneME was so big and the reaction of the folks outside was so overwhelming that the project got it’s own legs and moved forward. People saw it as a fork (thanks to the bad research of the chief editor). But at the end I must thank all of you from the #gnome and #gnome-hackers channel to join the #goneme channel on freenode.net and harrass the hell out of the people by querying them (I have proven logs that shows this) and scareing them away. So much from Project GoneME – it has basicly been talked to death. But it was fun as long as it lasted. I saw a lot of GNOME people going nuts and mad walking up and down in their rooms and had sleepless nights. The best payback for the years of hate and shit that I received.
> GNOME today is a successful project.
Yes of course it’s – successful. Depends how much money has been wasted for false marketing, false public relations and all the bullshit and TRUE LIES that got spread.
> In every comment you have written, you’ve done all
> you can to destroy the image of the GNOME community
> and contributors.
I doubt a single person can destroy the image of the GNOME community. That’s something you people perfectly have done on your own. The only minor contribution that came from my side in this area is to remind people of the real face of GNOME.
> I have never read you say, GNOME does something right.
They don’t thats the problem. But maybe it’s the american way of handle things (as they handled the war in afghanistan and iraq) with pride, with selfish overassessment of the situation and by simply ignoring the competition or trying to talk them to death.
> It’s always insults, negative retorts, ceaseless
> whining, childish rebuttals, outright lies,
> mindless name calling and so on. Why do you act
> like you know the solution to all the problems when
> you records have clearly shown, you do not possess
> that quality?
Yes yes yes, the one who is not guilty should pick up the first stone and throw it to my head. See, that’s the things I always said about GNOME.
a) the architecture is broken.
b) the community is just wrong,
c) at the end it’s always the users fault,
d) good members has been scared outside and declared enemies or trolls.
How often did you people attack various individuals, how many times did you offend and insult users, how many times did you ignore their requests. It happened countless of times.
Here I primarly wrote about the bad architecture as you can read above and all the other articles that I commented because I think it’s correct to point people to the flaws and issues around GNOME. I also pointed out some internal issues inside the community without diving into it much deeper and I definately didn’t called anyones by names. Just said how much GNOME as architecture sucks and that people can’t expect anything serious out of it.
You need to live with the fact that as long as I spent time with open source that I do all my best to convince people that GNOME is going nowhere and till now most people who I was able to talk with understood the issues. But face to face talk is usually better and more serious than writing or having a conversation over Internet because it’s not so easy to explain the things I’d like to explain. Maybe everything isn’t that bad as you and probably some other morons want to make it look like. Not to mention that I receive by far too much shit by clueless morons to what I actually write or want to say.
Besides this, I bet that even you agree that most of my points are valid, I do understand that you don’t want to confirm them in public.
>>> This is a repost because someone modded it down on purpose. Instead wasting my modpoints it’s easier that way. <<<
> The GNOME framework is not broken. If it was, there
> will be no GNOME desktop environment or GNOME
> applications. Do you know what the meaning of
> “broken” is?
Yeah, the meaning of broken is meant for things that don’t really work – like most of the stuff that comes shipped with GNOME or which makes the GNOME plattform. I gave plenty of examples of what I see as broken. If applications are not working properly (crash during startup like Evolution) or f–king up the index files for mbox data then it’s broken. If you can’t use Nautilus to do basic stuff such as copying large chunks of data from FTP to somewhere else without getting 0 byte files for files that usually are > 0 bytes then it’s considered to be broken. If applications are not behaving to global preferences changes such as ‘Show my Toolbar in ICONS only’ then I consider this as broken too. If the provided applications for GNOME are weak hacks and not really improveable if you don’t re-write them from scratch over and over again then it’s a broken framework that causes this. If the default audio and multimedia framework provided for GNOME doesn’t do what it was claimed for and instead of seamles integrated into GNOME only hacked the way so it operates halfway then it’s broken.
> The GNOME HIG is set of guidelines. The guidelines
> are not laws or rules that developers are obliged
> to follow. Developers should know when and when not
> to follow the HIG. Sometimes the HIG could be
> blatantly wrong with regards to the design of a
> particular behavior in my application.
Now what ? Today it’s just a guideline and another day it’s the key selling thing you tell other people. Just as you wish it or ? Either HIG is part of GNOME and should be considered as some sort of rule so application developers follow it so the apps don’t look like ass or as you correctly say it’s just a guideline – but then please stop making a marketing gimmick out of it.
> Regarding the issues you are having with those
> applications, can you point me to the bug reports
> you filed? I’d have to call you a troll if you
> can’t.
Look inside bgo simply enter the correct search criteria for the stuff I mentioned and you will be directed to my bugreport including my name, the date of the reports and many more.
> Yes, and monkeys have wings.
GNOME was never about monkey you moron. It was primarily about dwarfs, elfs, trolls .. and the full Tolkien charakter sets. Some small messican company started with bonobos (sexual addicted dwarf chimps).
> Mono is not as popular as Python among GNOME and
> free software developers. The only people mildly
> interested in Mono are windows developers
> interested in developing cross platform .NET
> applications. They are a niche. The future of GNOME
> is Python, period.
Reading planet.gnome.org gives me a different impression.
> You solve this by whinning less and contributing
> more. You can begin by showing us your less ugly
> icon set.
You don’t solve this by contributing. I contributed enough to GNOME and all I got as return was inflamatory craptalk from the key developers. You are usually stuck in hours of debatting how much GNOME’s framework sucks, how it should be improved, including patches and all you get back is inflamatory shit, namecalling and other crappy thing. Everyone who wanted to contribute to GNOME figured out already or will figure out one day. Just a matter of time. Now stop defending GNOME if your brain’s not able to handle the key problems.
>>> This is a repost because someone modded it down on purpose. Instead wasting my modpoints it’s easier that way. <<<
Sorry for re-posting some of my initial writings, but here you see the perfect example that GNOME loons can’t really deal with constructive feedback and everything that hit’s them like a needle must either be modded down (by some clowns) or talked to death. I know re-posting them won’t change the facts that GNOME is horrible broken, but I do this anyways for the entertainment to show how childish the GNOME people behave by modding down very reasonable, valid, qualified and even bug-proven comments just because of their permanent hardheaded ignorance. Don’t worry there will be other GNOME related threads and articles all over the globe, you can’t be everywhere
The only ignorant person I see is you. You have no understanding of what makes a good software framework or product. Neither do you appreciate the complexities involved in managing them. If you did, you’d have realized how foolish you are to say something like “GNOME is broken.”
> The only ignorant person I see is you.
I doubt this to be the case. I am no ignorant since I am not moderating other people’s own opinion down for no reason. Strange that exactly my comments are victim of being moderated down. But not because I might be right or wrong, no because I mentioned earlier that most of these comments have had been moderated up to +2 and better and this was the reason for people to moderate them down because for the sake of it.
> You have no understanding of what makes a good
> software framework or product.
I think I have a very complex and good understanding of good software framework and software design since programming is what I do for my living (over 23 years now + probably a few years longer dunno). I gained my experience by having seen good programming solutions over these years as well as having seen a lot of crap produced by people too. My experience comes from seeing things, from long years practice, from using good human visdom, reading lectures too. The GNOME camp seem to base everything they do on some books they have been reading recently.
> Neither do you appreciate the complexities involved
> in managing them. If you did, you’d have realized
> how foolish you are to say something like “GNOME is
> broken.”
So how’s KDE less complex than GNOME if we use an example ? Somehow they get their homework done correctly, the code, data, translation and other stuff they need to maintain is by far 5 times more than what GNOME offers and still they made a powerful desktop environment and this is no secret at all. The part where I said that GNOME is utterly broken has been demonstrated with bugreports showing trivial tasks that can not be achieved correctly.
Maybe we simply do have a different understanding about proper software development but then diversity of opinions is a good thing.
Now GNOME and KDE somehow started close together (only a few months (till one year)) difference and now compare today, years after where KDE is and where GNOME is. What kind of applications KDE can offer and what exists for GNOME. Not that GNOME lacks a lot of really professional applications which can be considered ready for production, it also lacks basic functionality in what makes the whole desktop experience.
You might have a different opinion than I have but then I base my opinion on practical experiences and have demonstrated quite a dozen cases and scenarios of what my personal tasks where and where GNOME has shown to totally fail. You only need to read what I have written previously within this article’s comment section.
Your arrogance knows no bounds. Now you claim to be smarter than the GNOME developers and contributors. I’d like to see the software you have written that contains no bugs.
Someone already posted a long list of embarrassing KDE printing bugs. Following immature logic, I guess “KDE is broken” too.
My apologizes but I don’t have time to play with you atm. Need to buy new jogging shoes since my 13 years old military sport shoes start to suck for longer courses.
What you fail to understand is that software is about people. Not stupid APIs, HIGs, or frameworks. GNOME gets this, KDE and their proponents such as yourself don’t.
I’ve been trying to access the Tango site for at least 2 days. Has the address changed? I can’t find the server anywhere.
There have been some hosting issues that came up. Give it a day or so.
Now people, that’s the wonderful world of GNOME. Not that GNOME is an awfully broken architecture (which is one part of what I critizise) it also has a bad community of mainly slandering and evil people.
To understand GNOME, you need to split GNOME into two parts. First the part that makes the desktop (which we know good enough doesn’t work good enough to be ready for production) and the second part which (as I mentioned a dozen comments earlier) is full of really insulting people.
If you contribute to GNOME then you are a good person (while there are still people disrespecting your contributions where envy and nepothism is on the daily schedule).
I was told that if I dislike GNOME then I should file in bugreports (as proven above) and then I was told to talk with the developers about the stuff that doesn’t work. You can be sure that in all the years I have tried to do this thing but all I earned was the same ignorance that people have shown here.
a) They talk all the critics to death
b) Or they go the dead friendly way, so friendly that it’s not normal anymore. A wrong thing fo friendlyness in the replies which of course ends immediately after that which wasn’t meant to be serious reply at all only demonstrating that they are no jackasses while replying to you.
c) Critics are usually talked to death by giving dozens of replies to you without any offer for solutions or replies without much value.
d) Those who get elected from the foundation members into the board are usually abusing their powers to diffamate other contributors, who permanently violate the foundation charter’s rules.
e) A bunch of GNOME developers have scared away a lot of fine contributors to the GNOME architecture such as Star (long time artist for GNOME), Dr. Frickle (who initially maintained the old GNOME pages), Mr. Baulig (the guy who initially worked his ass off on libgnome/ui and other parts) and many others.
The GNOME crowd can’t live with critics, they can’t professionally deal with critics and not that they can’t deal with critics, they also need to totally kill off those who criticise. That’s why GNOME makes no real progress, that’s why the majority of stuff feels so broken. Because it’s impossible to set through changes inside GNOME, first of all changes of the foundation board, of the release team and other parts of GNOME because it’s always set by the same people. You can’t have anything changed and thus GNOME is full of stuff that is totally horrible – under control of companies like RedHat and Novell.
Not long ago a good friend of the german GNOME community team had the idea (together with his girlfriend) to open “Gnome Girls” the domain was bought the idea was brought up in the GNOME camp and he was pissed off for this because the GNOME people said that the idea sucked, that it was a bda idea and that something like this was not wanted.
A few months later a few girls who work for RedHat have shown up the scene (no one heard of them before) and they wanted to open (yes you guessed) “Gnome Girls” and something must have happened, it’s like a switch you must have turned in the heads of these people. In no time it was a great idea, the best idea that existsted and they got immediately support. Web space has been given, access to CVS has been given and all the other requirements within hours.
Same for the ordinary user, someone who asks for CVS access or for a mailinglist, webspace etc. will be placed on schedule or simply the request is ignored (as usually) but as soon as a new company joins the GNOME scene the resources are given instantly. The people who give all the resources are so what euphoric, they even blow more sugar in the ass of those companies who join that you need to ask yourself how they could hold all that sugar without getting a shock.
Some newcomer to GNOME asked in the channel, what he has to do to get his contributions accepted as part of GNOME. Now from my personal experience over the years I know that the answer must have been – No chance!. I queried him and told him that he probably had no chance that his contributions get accepted by GNOME. I told him a bit of my personal experiences over the years and how rude and egoistic GNOME developers are and that most of the stuff which makes GNOME today are nepothism software written by their own people. They keep ignoring other stuff even if it’s better software. That’s some sort of selfmarketing they do rather than creating a working desktop.
I am also a bit fedup about all the companies that have recently joined the GNOME foundation board. How comes that every company who shows interest in GNOME shows up as member of the GNOME foundation board ? Hell, every little small user who contributes to GNOME needs to pass the membership application, months passes, you get asked dozen of questions what you have done and then you might be lucky to get accepted (happened for me but I resigned from my foundation membership due to heavy abuse). But how comes all these new companies join in as if they were part of GNOME for the past 6 years or longer ?
GNOME, software only for the users ? Or GNOME, software for directmarketing and cash ? How illusionary!