I like their goals.
Phoronix: GNOME 3.0 Art / User-Interface Roadmap
With GNOME 2.24 having been released this week, attention will soon turn to developing the 2.26 series followed by GNOME 2.28. Following that, at some point in early 2010 we should see the release of GNOME 3.0 (what otherwise would have been known as GNOME 2.30)...
I like their goals.
it seems that gnome 3 should just be called gnome 2.30. if that's their goals, then kde 4 should be kalled kde future edition.
They should brake the ABI/API in GTK for the 3th version, the same with Gnome 3. But that is so much work... why not collaborate with Qt/KDE?
Gnome is and was mostly about evolution than revolution. Get over it, please.
What they will produce is what a bunch of monkey coders slapping together some "art" on whatever it is they put together that day, without any coherent thought.
Gnome is about having a solid, usable DE that incrementally improves over time. They're not going to do a huge slew of fancy new stuff, even for a full version increment, because it would compromise the stability of the system.
Also, it's pointless to complain about preliminary plans that won't be finilized for over a year. Things will change, expect it.
You are right, Gnome is more like a stable DE, but it is not functional neither customizable.
A stable, functional and customizable DE is KDE 3.5.
Even the LHC uses KDE
to be honest, they actually can't do nothing of really new until they won't seriously rework GTK. it's not because they want a stable DE. KDE3 is stable and no one killed it but they are now working on KDE4 for the future. this means that in any critical environment they will use kde3 and not kde4.
so gnome just must say: we don't have the man power to do what's kde doing and maybe never will.
about the guy "personne" that talks art as something that has nothing to do with software, you seem to not know how things and human beings work. Microsoft spends a lot of money on artist and psicologist when creating their GUI. This is a vital and important thing for a user. If you notice, Windows always has a GUI that does not disturb anyone, and it's acceptable for 99% users in the world. and this is not coincidence. it's the result of study, research and creation.
gnome by default is the ugliest thing I've ever seen in the world, and also kde3 isn't the best thing to look at. and I must say that windows(xp/vista) continues to still be the most neutral GUI design that is suitable for all users. microsoft doesn't really know how to do operating systems, but they do know how to do other things like neutral art GUIs, simplicity in most cases and some other stuff.
so to conclude, art in software is very important because it transmits "feelings" to a user. and when a user works on the computer 8 hours a day, art becomes possibly the most important thing after a stable application.
ps: to make it clear, I'm personally annoyed from Windows neutral art, but it's like that because it must fit for 99% of people around the world, from home users to offices.
Last edited by bulletxt; 09-25-2008 at 06:55 PM.
[quote=bulletxt;47148If you notice, Windows always has a GUI that does not disturb anyone[/quote]
That disorganized mess of a start menu disturbs me enough, lets just by default have no organization what so ever and slap a apps entry in the root menu. Grrrrr. KDE on the other hand does it right. Organized off the bat in logical categories.
... and then they miss the obvious such as every other media player out there defaults the space bar to pause play, EXCEPT that abortion called WMP.it's the result of study, research and creation.
No argument there.gnome by default is the ugliest thing I've ever seen in the world,
But it is polished enough that it looks @ home in a professional environment.and also kde3 isn't the best thing to look at.
One thing that disturbs me about gnome is the "kiddie computer" look it has. KDE 4 started doing that "bloated" look and feel as well but at least one can minimize that with it custom settings.