Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Web Applications Come To GNOME 3.2

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    south east
    Posts
    342

    Default Native Code

    A script language is nice but this is a bridge too far. .-_Squirrl

    WindowMaker hasn't had an update in years. Feature Complete

    Implementing drag and drop from within gnome requires so much latency my old computer can barely move an icon from 3,9 to 15,18.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squirrl View Post
    A script language is nice but this is a bridge too far. .-_Squirrl

    WindowMaker hasn't had an update in years. Feature Complete

    Implementing drag and drop from within gnome requires so much latency my old computer can barely move an icon from 3,9 to 15,18.
    They've said this is really not for "old" computers. They wanted to assume modern hardware so they could elevate the experience. That said, the "goal" was, IIRC, 3-5 years old hardware.
    As for comparing WindowMaker, that really isn't a fair comparison. For one thing I don't think it is even ICCCM compliant let alone EWMH (Mutter is only mostly compliant with the later, missing a couple of hints). Second, scriptable. Third, vastly flexible (not necessarily tied to previous). Fourth, modern (built with a modern scene graph ogl library).
    If you want to compare WindowMaker something like rat poison or fluxbox, or perhaps openbox is a better fit since it also has the docks.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 0xCAFE View Post
    The options were removed by purpose, so why should they be put back? Also, configuration options are really evil from an interaction design perspective. (Power) users think they want them, but in reality options make software worse.
    well, there's me told good and proper. i'm so glad there's smart people like you around who know what i want and need far better than i do.

    that's a relief. now that i don't have to worry my pretty little head about complicated stuff like options i'll have time for the important things. i think i'll learn how to paint my nails.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6

    Default

    This can already be done with chromium. Just create a shortcut and and launch "chromium --app=http://twitter.com".

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dyna View Post
    Almost no ability to customize + not working basic features + no real hope that will change in short time = time to move on. Now only if i knew to what...
    Move on to that Gnome 2 fork, or go with the flow and install XFCE 4.8 with all the GTK stuff?

    Seems like Gnome, but with some sane thinking behind it.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dyna View Post
    Are new features really the most important thing right now? How about getting some (a lot) configuration options back, or getting some basic stuff to work like seperate x screens in fallback mode.

    I was really amazed how unusable gnome 3 is for me. Didn't even get to trying seperate x screens in shell, as i had already seen enough. And i'm pretty used to bugged filled alpha's and this is the first time i actually reversed something, although i thought about doing it a lot more often. And this was actually the whole weekend last week, not when gnome 3 was still alpha.

    Almost no ability to customize + not working basic features + no real hope that will change in short time = time to move on. Now only if i knew to what...
    Gnome 3 is very customizable. All the basic missing options are provided with gnome-tweak-tool. Stuff like font settings, themes icons ect..

    The shell is extremely customizable via extensions because it is written in javascript and CSS. People saying gnome 3 "isn't customizable" are just plain wrong. I am running arch linux with gnome shell and absolutely love it. Most of the hate it gets is uninformed bashing from people who only gave it an extremely short try.
    Last edited by bwat47; 09-04-2011 at 12:53 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    Gnome 3 is very customizable. All the basic missing options are provided with gnome-tweak-tool. Stuff like font settings, themes icons ect..

    The shell is extremely customizable via extensions because it is written in javascript and CSS. People saying gnome 3 "isn't customizable" are just plain wrong. I am running arch linux with gnome shell and absolutely love it. Most of the hate it gets is uninformed bashing from people who only gave it an extremely short try.
    This just in:
    Gnome fans argue that Gnome is perfect, because if it doesn't work, you can program it to do what you'd like Gnome to be able to do!

    It's usability tested by the people who program Gnome. One developper was quoted as saying "I develop all the time. If I can do it, your grandmother can, too!".

    That about wraps it up for today. Thanks for reading! Flame you next time

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    This just in:
    Gnome fans argue that Gnome is perfect, because if it doesn't work, you can program it to do what you'd like Gnome to be able to do!

    It's usability tested by the people who program Gnome. One developper was quoted as saying "I develop all the time. If I can do it, your grandmother can, too!".

    That about wraps it up for today. Thanks for reading! Flame you next time
    I didn't say it was perfect, I was disagreeing with people saying that "it's not customizable".
    Last edited by bwat47; 09-04-2011 at 04:49 PM.

Posting Permissions

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