Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47

Thread: GNOME 2.30 Released; Farewell To GNOME 2.xx

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RobbieAB View Post
    Not really. It took them until 2010 to realise that whatever about theoretical user-friendliness and the desktop/folder paradigm, User expectation trumps the theory. In theory spatial mode is easier for a new user, in practice it's not because they aren't "blank slates", they already have a conception of how it works. This is a case of sometimes what is wrong, is actually right.
    LOL!!!

    Have you actually used default Gnome, or are you just speaking in theory? Opening a new file manager window every time I click on a folder is far from user-friendly or convenient, and it has nothing to do with being a blank slate. Explain how having directories and drives listed to the left and having the ability to go backwards and forwards in the same window is a bad idea. Gnome has always had a history for being stubborn. They'd rather inconvenience the user for the sake of appearing "original". Hence them waiting until approx version 2.10 to add a menu editor because it "wasn't needed".

    Your theory is very true, but it doesn't apply in this case.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    @Joe Sixpack:

    Agreed they should have changed that default years ago ,,, then again most distros changed it for years for them.

    Actually that default scarred the crap out of me the first time I run Gnome on debian.

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Are there any plans of providing a way for Gtk apps to not look like ass on KDE? Like the native Gtk look of Qt apps when ran under Gnome?
    I suggest using this :
    http://kde-look.org/content/show.php...content=103741

    As for gtk+ devs plans :
    https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=573916

    It really doesn't seem they will do anything about it

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by val-gaav View Post
    That's crappy too. The colors are totally, completely wrong. It doesn't even attempt to use the Qt color settings.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    125

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    That's crappy too. The colors are totally, completely wrong. It doesn't even attempt to use the Qt color settings.
    Then tell System Settings to apply KDE theme colors to apps with other toolkits.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Sixpack View Post
    Lol. My favorite part of the release notes is actually what they said after that:
    Really? And it only took them until 2010 figure out that it's been the industry standard since 2002. Stubborn bastards...
    +1
    It actually begs the question if their devs (not all) are also stupid or paranoid or mentally ill cause I don't think one can be _that_ stubborn and use _that_ bad decisions for such a long time, literally years.

    They also didn't fix their (idiotic) DND in Nautilus and on panels, which only successfully competes with win95 interfaces. Yes, ignore this or say it's not true and call me a troll.

  6. #26

    Default

    "Nautilus features a number of user interface changes including a new split view mode and is now set to browser mode by default, replacing spatial mode.


    Isn't this an April fools joke?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KAMiKAZOW View Post
    Then tell System Settings to apply KDE theme colors to apps with other toolkits.
    Of course I have that option enabled. Oxygen Molecule does not obey it, however. It uses hardcoded colors, which is just stupid.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Maybe it's just me, but I find that everything that relates to GNU is half-assed, excluding their FLOSS Unix replacement cmd software. It just look and feels amaturistic.

    Maybe that's why I can't stand Gnome and its apps. That is also why I use KDE and Openbox as GUI's.

    Anyway, I hope that 2.32 or 3.0 is a realy big improvement for Gnome because it realy needed it.

    Just being serious without trolling: one can't realy expect Gnome to take on other OS as the face of desktop Linux, now can one?

    I mean it has to at least be on par with Aero and Aqua, not completely behind.

    Anyway it has the smell of unshowered practicall 60's bearded UNIX developpers all over it.

    You may now flame back, or take this critisism seriously and do something about it if you like...

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    Just being serious without trolling: one can't realy expect Gnome to take on other OS as the face of desktop Linux, now can one?
    It's interesting however that the "professional desktop" market prefers Gnome. I mean those folks that sometimes stiff use Motif because their personnel was trained to use that.

    I believe Gnome's success has a lot to do with its slow progress; it doesn't change much, so it succeeds much better in the commercial market than KDE. Sometimes seeing Gnome desktops besides ancient machines still running Motif apps (and for the same reasons!) just makes me wanna kill a bunny each time I hear that Gnome is the DE for the "modern Linux desktop."

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Thou Shalt Not Kill Bunnys

    Cats, kiddies, whatever... But I won't let you kill teh bunnies!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •