Originally posted by Azpegath
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
GNOME Ended 2013 With 46k Open Bug Reports
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by gamerk2 View PostQuestion: Isn't the entire POINT of a GUI to not have to bother with a command prompt or keyboard shortcuts for basic system operations? If you are required to do so, then the GUI has failed in its most basic purpose.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GEO1 View PostCalling KDE SOFTWARE "unusable" is not the right expression, just because of the lack of consistency. (BTW, you just called an community unusable again ...) .
So you call KDE community working without leadership, which is right, but still they try to work as good a possible together. Who would be the leadership of GNOME?
As far as I know the only project having strict guidelines and a leadership is Unity and the core applications.
Does it make a project unusable, just because its community is very open?
Unfortunately, design can't be made out of the bazaar's model. It's a cathedral type of discipline. It requires a focused small team with strong leadership and professionally trained people focusing on the different areas of the project. There's no such thing as "open design" except for the part when the team exposes its work and leaves it to coders to implement it openly (actually this is not accurate; coders should be very close to the design team in order to accomplish the best possible implementation, but I'm trying to keep things simple here). A design team can be open to suggestions, and even show all the process' progress like in a permanent "open doors day", but can't be driven democratically or meritocratically. A project developed by a large community with focus away from design has a very tiny chance of being usable.
Of course, you might say lots of people use KDE so KDE is usable. So is the terminal, but I hope to agree that we're talking ordinary people here, not geeks who can use anything you throw at them.
Apart from that, you will never be able to use 100% consistent software, because if you want that you would have to ditch all other applications not explicitly designed for that environment, because it may differ in its design.
For example Gnome client side window decoration may look beautiful with applications that support it, but all other application with no support for it differ which is again not consistency.
And I have to disagree with "UI design first, then implementation", as Plasma Workspaces for example try to move to QML, where application logic and design implementation can be separated very well. Furthermore the trend is going to having one application with multiple interfaces for different from factors. Starting with the UI design first does not make that much sense to me.
With "people need to separate" I did not mean the people of the KDE community, but people here judging KDE software, as they do not separate between different applications, workspaces (DEs) and UX elements (icons, theme, etc.).
I hope the KDE usability project reaches more developers and will therefore succeed. There will always be individual developers that refuse to accept guidelines, but that will exist in every open community and guidelines are guidelines not rules.
In terms of themes KDE software comes with pretty great consistency: The oxygen theme looks pretty good for KDE/QT/GTK applications.
There are of course exceptions like firefox or libre office that use strange toolkits and therefore do not support gradients used by the oxygen theme.
Here one can again see one fundamental problem with "design vs. consistency": The oxygen gradients are beautiful imho, but not all toolkits support it. So from a design point of view it is nice, but it will add a bit of inconsitency. Same goes for the aforementioned Gnome client side decorations.
Comment
-
this little survey shows that Gnome 3 is more popular than KDE
source http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/commen...ey_about_dewm/
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aleve Sicofante View PostDo you think these hacks will still be there with Unity 8? Where they there with the old "Unity 2D"? I bet it all has to do with the peculiar idea of implementing a DE as a plugin to a window manager, Compiz, but then I'm no developer.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Nille_kungen View PostThat would be KDE SC (KDE Software Compilation), but i have to agree that most use KDE instead of KDE SC.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vim_User View PostThere is no problem at all to configure Vim to behave like you want it. Of course the learning curve of nano is much lower, but you can't adapt it to your needs as good as Vim. That is the same thing as with Gnome, to use nano you have to adapt to nano, but I can adapt Vim to my likings.
Comment
-
Originally posted by prodigy_ View PostThey brought it on themselves when they discontinued Gnome 2 to release this abomination. And as for "given enough eyeballs", I seriously doubt that anyone in their right mind uses Gnome 3, much less people who could actually fix bugs in it. Much like Unity it's a total train wreck of a DE that has nothing to offer except "shiny" (read: monstrously ugly) UI, zero productivity and near zero configurability.
Comment
Comment