Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 3.0 May Not Come Until September 2010

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by val-gaav View Post
    Nope it's because KDE is underminded by Gnome the same way Linux is by Microsoft and Windows. Using Linux changes people into trolls that bash Windows and using KDE makes them hate Gnome for various simliar reasons...
    Makes sense.

    Here we go into opinions and statistics... But seriously default KDE is a lot prettier then default gnome... Oxygen is by far the first default linux desktop environment theme that doesn't suck. Both gnome and kde3 deafaults imho were quite bad. Also I tested this on few windows users and showing them default kde4 and gnome the pretty one answer was kde and gnome looked to them like some old windows ...
    Let's just agree to disagree here

    This blog post summarizes my thoughts pretty well:

    And then you open a window:



    It is.. gray. There is no glass. There are no gradients. There is no depth. There is no elegance. There is just gray. It says: "I am kicking Windows 95's ass! Barely!"

    I just don't get it. How can half of your desktop (let's call it "Plasma") be so beautiful, while the other half (let's call it "the stuff that is always going to be covering up Plasma") be so ugly and uninspired?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by val-gaav View Post
      Nope it's because KDE is underminded by Gnome the same way Linux is by Microsoft and Windows. Using Linux changes people into trolls that bash Windows and using KDE makes them hate Gnome for various simliar reasons...
      It's not a rule. There are many Gnome and Windows trolls, maybe even more at least when comes to Windows.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
        It is.. gray. There is no glass. There are no gradients. There is no depth. There is no elegance. There is just gray. It says: "I am kicking Windows 95's ass! Barely!"

        I just don't get it. How can half of your desktop (let's call it "Plasma") be so beautiful, while the other half (let's call it "the stuff that is always going to be covering up Plasma") be so ugly and uninspired?
        In my opinion Dolphin is quite elegant. Who the hell wants gradients and glass in a simple file manager? :P Btw. what other file manager (or the stuff that is always going to be covering up desktop) looks better using defaults? Gnome not, xfce not, e17 not, so? :>

        More from this blog:

        Yes, there are some problems with it. The buttons do not highlight in any way on hover. There are no tooltips, so I don't even know what the top two buttons do. From what I can tell, they do absolutely nothing. But it really lives up to KDE's reputation of eye candy.
        Maybe few year old child would have problems to realize what mentioned buttons do (or it would be just obvious and yes, they do...) - resize, rotate and preferences, so why someone is lying?
        Last edited by kraftman; 11-04-2009, 07:39 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
          This blog post summarizes my thoughts pretty well:
          I've been thinking about this as well - e.g. plain "complete window transparency" just doesn't cut it*, we'd need some API like Aero for Linux to improve the window decorations, which apart from round window corners really didn't see much innovation in the past few years.

          * what I mean with this: it's not the whole window which should be transparent, but only it's menus and borders and stuff.

          Comment


          • #20
            iight kde fanboys. show me a very sexy windows 98. come on.

            Comment


            • #21
              Well as far as the Gnome vs KDE war goes, I do believe the Gnome crew started that war long ago when QT was used and wasn't the "purists" definition of free.

              As far as the blog comment "It is.. gray. There is no glass. There are no gradients. There is no depth. There is no elegance. There is just gray." I find it funny they bitch about something that is easily enough customizable with the settings options. No glass, heh, since when did compiz become part of Gnome?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by val-gaav View Post
                Nope it's because KDE is underminded by Gnome the same way Linux is by Microsoft and Windows. Using Linux changes people into trolls that bash Windows and using KDE makes them hate Gnome for various simliar reasons...
                Well the biggest and most trolls I've seen, even in this specific forums, are the ones who are married with windows. Probably because they are much more in number than the Linux users.
                In the desktop environments happens something similar. KDE users tend to be quite more, so there is big chance, the trolling to come mainly from them. Simple mathematics.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  i cant believe i had to do this. I mean, seriously.


                  Oh come on that's unfair...
                  I mean Gnome3 look so much better than win7 and it doesn't need 16GB

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                    As far as the blog comment "It is.. gray. There is no glass. There are no gradients. There is no depth. There is no elegance. There is just gray." I find it funny they bitch about something that is easily enough customizable with the settings options. No glass, heh, since when did compiz become part of Gnome?
                    He isn't comparing with Gnome, so your point is baseless. What the blog post said was that the nicer parts of KDE are seriously pretty - but unfortunately many parts are lagging behind or are just plain ugly (like the Dolphin screenshot from the previous page), which makes the difference all the more jarring.

                    The "gray, flat and ugly" comment is spot on. Many people consider KDE as the pinnacle of UI design in the OSS world, but great UI design must be consistent: you piece shiny Plasmoids and a flat gray Dolphin together and expect it to look pretty.

                    Edit:
                    Originally posted by Kraftman
                    Btw. what other file manager (or the stuff that is always going to be covering up desktop) looks better using defaults? Gnome not, xfce not, e17 not, so? :>
                    Personally, I consider Nautilus 2.28 to look much better than that Dolphin screenshot. I'll post a screenie when I get back home for comparison.

                    Maybe few year old child would have problems to realize what mentioned buttons do (or it would be just obvious and yes, they do...) - resize, rotate and preferences, so why someone is lying?
                    Consistency, man, the point is consistency. If I hover on a button, I expect it to shine. I expect a tooltip to unfold and explain its function. If neither happens, it's broken and should be fixed (at least in the Gnome world, but I doubt KDE views this differently).
                    Last edited by BlackStar; 11-04-2009, 10:25 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                      He isn't comparing with Gnome, so your point is baseless. What the blog post said was that the nicer parts of KDE are seriously pretty - but unfortunately many parts are lagging behind or are just plain ugly (like the Dolphin screenshot from the previous page), which makes the difference all the more jarring.
                      Sorry I was only responding to the items referred to in the quote.

                      The "gray, flat and ugly" comment is spot on. Many people consider KDE as the pinnacle of UI design in the OSS world, but great UI design must be consistent: you piece shiny Plasmoids and a flat gray Dolphin together and expect it to look pretty.
                      Actually funny you mentioned that. There are people in either boat. My company just did a minor cosmetic change to it's UI to make it look more modern with a gradient header. When that update hit about 1/2 our customer's loved it, the other half hated it, and some claimed they couldn't find where stuff was anymore even though the layout was identical.

                      Edit:
                      Personally, I consider Nautilus 2.28 to look much better than that Dolphin screenshot. I'll post a screenie when I get back home for comparison.
                      See and I find Nautilus an absolute PITA with it's default settings. My personal workflow does not jive with Nautilus at all. Different folks, different strokes.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                        Well as far as the Gnome vs KDE war goes, I do believe the Gnome crew started that war long ago when QT was used and wasn't the "purists" definition of free.
                        It's great to hear from someone who was actually around long enough to remember Every other post was either KDE was ugly, or KDE was bloated - very few users actually just used Gnome and STFU. They just had to show people why the smaller desktop environment was better.

                        What he also fails to realize is a large percentage of those KDE users bashing gnome are disgruntled, ex-Gnome users.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by AliBaba View Post
                          Go and search yourself, lazy. Gnome has evolved constantly in the last few years.
                          The problem I've always had with Gnome was they always told you something wasn't need - then added it later and tried to make a big deal about it when it should have been there from the beginning. Perfect example, alacarte menu editor.

                          No matter how much you love Gnome, you should have at least 2 undeniably major feature editions you can hang your hat on in a 7 year span. Try to be objective here.

                          Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                          See and I find Nautilus an absolute PITA with it's default settings. My personal workflow does not jive with Nautilus at all. Different folks, different strokes.
                          People mistake their favorite distro's Gnome with vanilla Gnome. That default theme and green leaf background is horrendous. And to add to what you said, Nautilus by default is a PITA. I forget the official term for it, but you click on a folder and another one keeps popping up - no side panel, no address bar, nothing. You have to manually go in and select "always use browser view". I mean seriously, in 2009 who the hell uses that interface anymore by default?

                          Just like they accused KDE users of being Gnome trolls, you can make a strong argument about a lot of Gnome users being borderline brainwashed. I mean seriously, you're actually going argue with a straight face that Gnome's come a long way in the past 2 years, or Nautilus is better by default than Dolphin?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Hey guys... come on I was just joking Each DE has its advantage and disadvantages. There are a lot of areas where kde just rocks, but there are other "dark" spots where Gnome is better. I'm not sure when Windows DE is good

                            Again, I was just fooling around to make up a discussion and see what people think. It looked as a troll post I know, but what I wanted was a discussion. Discussion is always a good thing (but of course, my post wasn't a discussion. It was a crazy arrow to open one) :P

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Joe Sixpack View Post
                              I mean seriously, you're actually going argue with a straight face that Gnome's come a long way in the past 2 years, or Nautilus is better by default than Dolphin?
                              Gnome *has* come a long way in the last two years. Have you ever used Evolution? Nautilus? (tabbed browsing at last, dammit!) Totem can actually stream videos now (install a distro from two years ago - any distro - and try streaming rtsp or mms video). The bluetooth stack has been improved significantly (unlike, say, KDE's).

                              If you are not using Gnome you may have missed all this stuff due to the lack of a "big" release (here comes KDE 4.0 suckers!), but the improvements are visible and welcome. I, for one, would never go back to Gnome 2.16 or even 2.22 - these "little" changes make a world of difference in actual use.

                              Default Nautilus probably isn't better than default Dolphin (honestly, default Nautilus sucks, although I've never seen a default Dolphin to compare) - however Nautilus in mainstream distros definitely looks cleaner than the Dolphin 4.3 screenshot from the previous page.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                                Gnome *has* come a long way in the last two years. Have you ever used Evolution? Nautilus? (tabbed browsing at last, dammit!) Totem can actually stream videos now (install a distro from two years ago - any distro - and try streaming rtsp or mms video). The bluetooth stack has been improved significantly (unlike, say, KDE's).

                                If you are not using Gnome you may have missed all this stuff due to the lack of a "big" release (here comes KDE 4.0 suckers!), but the improvements are visible and welcome. I, for one, would never go back to Gnome 2.16 or even 2.22 - these "little" changes make a world of difference in actual use.

                                Default Nautilus probably isn't better than default Dolphin (honestly, default Nautilus sucks, although I've never seen a default Dolphin to compare) - however Nautilus in mainstream distros definitely looks cleaner than the Dolphin 4.3 screenshot from the previous page.
                                I respect what you are saying. Now, let me say a few things:

                                You also inadvertently proved my other point: Gnome adds features that should have been there from the beginning. Didn't Mplayer support streaming video 3 or 4 years ago with Live555 and mplayer plug-in? How long has Konqueror had tabbed browsing? These things have been in Linux, but some people have had their head in the Gnome sand for so long, they didn't know they existed until they were offered in the form of a Gnome app.

                                I haven't used bluetooh or Evolution for a while, so I can't comment. However, I have used Gnome a lot more than you think, and the day to day stuff has been, for the most part, stagnant. Minor tweaks have occurred, but the only major addition you've really name was bluetooth improvement - which I can't even debate because I don't use it. However, on the KDE 4.4 thread, users did mention that it has been greatly improved in trunk. Konqueror/Dolphin was the first to ask "Move, Copy, Link" when you dragged a folder to the desktop. K3B is still better than Gnome Baker. When burning an audio cd, Brassero normalizes the audio automatically. Amarok is better than Rhythmbox or Banshee. These things can hardly be argued. Klipper is rather handy, and Kwin has composition support built in. Several neutral sources say that KTorrent is the best BT client available for Linux.

                                I'm just saying... It wasn't like KDE had a major head start. Gnome 2 has been a 7 year platform, so they have no excuse for always lagging behind. By the time KDE 4.4 comes out, KDE would have completely rebuild and redesigned in only 2 years, with most of the bugs ironed out. Meanwhile, Gnome will either still be getting things stable, or lagging behind yet again.

                                (Edit: I should also note that I didn't start this discussion. While you made the comment about KDE users always trolling about Gnome, you neglect to mention that the conversation started when someone took a cheap shot at KDE4. I then responded by saying their progress justifies their decision and pointed out the contrast between KDE's momentum and that of Gnome.)
                                Last edited by Joe Sixpack; 11-04-2009, 04:21 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X