On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:16:02 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ Kier ] on Wednesday 26 April 2006 08:59 \__
>> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 03:55:56 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> __/ [ Geico Caveman ] on Wednesday 26 April 2006 03:43 \__
>>>> Ok, I take it back. I thought KDE looked much better than Gnome, at par
>>>> with OS X. I tried out the latest Gnome packages with Debian testing last
>>>> night. Well, there is no nice way of putting it - it looks positively
>>>> hideous. Even windows has never looked this bad. What has happened to
>>>> people developing Gnome ?? 2-3 years ago, it was a serviceable product,
>>>> feature equal of KDE. However, Gnome has actually gone backwards over the
>>>> last 2 years.
>>> Different strokes for different folks. Don't rely on default themes and
>>> first impressions too much.
>> Where can those handsome icons be obtained? Is it from www.gnome-look.org
>> itself, or elsewhere? I tend to run a Mac-like theme, but not with
>> Mac-like icons, myself.
> Also see:
>>>> I understand it if Gnome cannot keep up with KDE or OS X, but to be
>>>> worse off than it was 2 years ago is pathetic. Almost makes me think
>>>> that Gnome development and its widescale acceptance by most big
>>>> vendors/distros (Redhat, Novell, Ubuntu, etc.) is a Microsoft
>>>> conspiracy :) Of all the desktops currently available for Linux,
>>>> barring twm, icewm, and the like (no even fvwm looks and feels better),
>>>> Gnome is absolutely the worst desktop available. I mean, are these
>>>> people on meth or something. Forget looks, how about usability ?
>>>> Settings are hidden away in the most unintuitive corners possible (or
>>>> maybe my imagination is limited and things could be worse still).
>>> GNOME is not as flexible. Linus Torvalds has criticised such choices,
>>> which had been arrogantly made in interests of simplicity. For that
>>> reason, I presonally favour KDE, but I use GNOME sometimes and I
>>> respect it for its merits, simplicity and intuitiveness being at the
>> I think Linus, while perfectly entitled to express his opinion, might have
>> phrased it a little better :-) After all, the many users of Gnome, which
>> includes myself, are likely to feel just a bit miffed at being categorised
>> in such a fashion.
> Yes, "Interface Nazis" (was that the phrase? My memory tells me so) is no
> flattering stereotype.
Certainly not. The thing is, such pronouncements are just as likely to
make people stick more stubbornly to Gnome, rather than move away from it.
such is the nature of Mankind (no doubt Womankind also). In the
rather rough and ready parlance of my factory, the answer would probably
go something like: 'Fuck you, too, Linus!' :-)
>>> Novell chose GNOME as the default desktop environment for some products.
>>> This must have had a reason. As for abolishment of old WM's, bear in
>>> mind that developers migrated from the old projects to GNOME or KDE. You
>>> can still get reliability and lightweight consumption from the
>>> old-yet-highly-stable WM's. Whether you wish to boost system performance
>>> or make use of legacy hardware, modularity saves the day.
>> The great thing about Gnome, and indeed any wm, really, is that poor
>> design decisions will usually be corrected, if they're unpopular enough.
>> The Gnome developers presumably want their product to be used, and if
>> enough people switch to something else because of their design mistakes,
>> they'll probably get the message eventually (not that I'm suggesting they
>> *are* necessarily mistakes; personally, I've no particular problem with
> There are some features in GNOME that I wish we had in KDE. For example, some
> time ago I posted a proposal for maximised window snapping. Other than
> approval, I could only be advised to post a wishlist item in Bugzilla.
I suppose part of the problem (and this isn't limited to Gnome, I'm sure),
is that not everyone's wishes can be catered for. If enough people make an
effort to ask for a certain feature, the chances are it may be included
eventually, but perhaps only if it fits in with the oveall design
framework. It's to be hoped the developers do listen to the users, though,
as ultimately they are the ones who the work is being developed for.
Some sort of voting system for the inclusion or exclusion of
desired/undesired features would be a help.