
Originally Posted by
mr_bombastic
This video left me seriously disappointed. I thought "oh, someone from Gnome, at a conference. This will probably be enlightening". Turns out I was wrong. He went on to say Gnome 2 was ok, but that is was "old" and the community wanted to do something new, so keep improving or making incremental changes to 2 was out of the question. That's it. I've heard better reasoning for Gnome 3 reading /. flame wars. Really. He asks the audience if they thought Gnome 3.0 was ready for users. When pretty much everyone disagrees, he says "well, it's a matter of point of view, and I thought it was ready, so there. Myth debunked. Next.". Really, I don't dislike Gnome 3 with passion or anything, but this whole video was so uninformative it's actually amazing. The part about removing features (edit: about 8 minutes in the video) is jaw-dropping. He says it's a myth that they keep removing features because they decide a certain way is best and so they take configurability away from the UI. That's what removing features is, how can he say it's a myth? He's affirming what he's supposedly denying!