Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Contributors: GNOME equal to KDE

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

  • danielnez1
    replied
    Originally posted by a user View Post
    only because you see a lot of people complaining does not imply that they are the significant majority. usually people don't post in forums when they are happy with what they have.


    considering several statistics i saw (sorry that i cannot come up with a link) seem to talk a different truth than you seem to think. i may be wrong, but your argument is insufficient.
    I would be very interested to see such a link. At the end of the day, the students I see represent an a more independent viewpoint of the Linux world then what we do since we are more entrenched with it. Unfortunately that can make you blind to issues that are obvious to an outsider looking in.

    After two years on the trot of hearing opinions GNOME 3 from Students' who know little about GNOME or Linux as opposed to fanboys, apologists etc. I'm more inclined to take on board the criticism they give rather than hyperbole.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by a user View Post
    actually it seems that by far more people are happy about the new gnome shell than the old calssic mode (including me as i hate since over 15 years the widespread scheme of a task bar and start-menu-like stuff, widely used but very inefficient, while many better designs got lost due to people ignoring new ideas).
    There are tons of WMs with different design paradigms and a bunch of WMs that can be setup the way you want, so why being angry for 15 years instead of actually making a change (unless you are also someone ignoring ideas, which I doubt)?

    Leave a comment:


  • timothyja
    replied
    Originally posted by n3wu53r View Post
    Redhat traditionally supports Gnome and GTK+. SUSE generally supports KDE and Qt is supported by it's parent company. Red Hat also acutally does contribute a bit to kde. Thene there is this new Blue Systems company which has hired several KDE devs to work on KDE. Both projects are getting corporate support.
    Just to add to this SUSE also contributes to Gnome and GTK+.

    Leave a comment:


  • a user
    replied
    Originally posted by danielnez1 View Post
    While I agree that consumers are exposed to UIs these days, I don't believe that is relevant to my point since if the GNOME Shell was truly an advancement in usability etc. it wouldn't received as much criticism as it has.
    actually it seems that by far more people are happy about the new gnome shell than the old calssic mode (including me as i hate since over 15 years the widespread scheme of a task bar and start-menu-like stuff, widely used but very inefficient, while many better designs got lost due to people ignoring new ideas).

    only because you see a lot of people complaining does not imply that they are the significant majority. usually people don't post in forums when they are happy with what they have.

    considering several statistics i saw (sorry that i cannot come up with a link) seem to talk a different truth than you seem to think. i may be wrong, but your argument is insufficient.

    Leave a comment:


  • movieman
    replied
    Originally posted by Honton View Post
    So what are you suggesting? Adding the complexity to the Shell because no one cares to do the house keeping?
    Uh, no. Just build a sane GUI in the first place.

    The other problem with extensions, even if someone does maintain them, is that you have no idea whether they'll be installed on any random computer you use.

    The solution to that, also, is to build a sane GUI in the first place.

    Leave a comment:


  • n3wu53r
    replied
    Originally posted by Honton View Post
    Four letters followed by one number. RHEL7. You should be happy for a free desktop to get this kind of support. Sure it is not what you prefer. There is no reason to get angry with me. Im no more than a messenger. The contributors did the real work on Gnome.
    Redhat traditionally supports Gnome and GTK+. SUSE generally supports KDE and Qt is supported by it's parent company. Red Hat also acutally does contribute a bit to kde. Thene there is this new Blue Systems company which has hired several KDE devs to work on KDE. Both projects are getting corporate support.

    Now a lot of people are talking about KDE's code base bloating. This is a little misleading.
    http://www.ohloh.net/p/compare?proje...oject_1=GNOME#


    12 month stats kde gnome
    Lines Added 7,574,841 lines 3,010,670 lines
    Lines Removed 7,663,744 lines 2,358,901 lines

    30 day stats kde gnome
    Lines Added 363,214 lines 165,033 lines
    Lines Removed 1,043,151 lines 148,504 lines
    It seems gnome's LOC are going up, while KDE's are going slightly down.
    Also, KDE's LOC are super inflated from what they truly are. Look at code locations.
    Gnome: http://www.ohloh.net/p/gnome/enlistments
    KDE: http://www.ohloh.net/p/kde/enlistments

    KDE has a lot more applications using it's hosting infrastructure. For example KDE has Calligra Office Suite, which is 1.4 million lines of code! That is included in the KDE count while gnome has no office suite hosted on it's git repos. The same with applications like Digikam (400k lines), kdenlive (100k lines, pitivi not on gnome repos). KDE hosts tons of Software, many different music players (juk, amarok). Video players (Kaffeine, dragon, bangarang). 2 different browser (rekonq, konqueror). KDE repos also have a mirror of the Qt repository. This mirror ALONE ADDS MILLIONS of lines to the count. Taking this in to account the code base is not as big as it seems.

    Leave a comment:


  • danielnez1
    replied
    Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
    Great argument of those who don't have one.
    I don't think great arguments are Honton's forte sadly.

    Leave a comment:


  • danielnez1
    replied
    Originally posted by finalzone View Post
    At that time, there were very few alternative UI excluding OS/2 (Mac OS does not count because Apple ran on different architectures).
    Today, consumers are exposed to several different UI flavours than before, you cannot compare to what happened two decades ago.
    While I agree that consumers are exposed to UIs these days, I don't believe that is relevant to my point since if the GNOME Shell was truly an advancement in usability etc. it wouldn't received as much criticism as it has.


    Gnome Shell isnt that jarring, it sounds like you are very conservative in UI appearance much like enterprise audiences (Microsoft Windows NT series for enterprise still retains the old Win2000 UI interface at the request).
    RHEL7 is doing the same thing while still gradually incorporating the new Gnome 3 features.
    I demonstrate on a System Administration module at the University I'm at and the Linux machines have had the GNOME Shell for the past 2 years. Every year the students complain about how difficult and frustrating it is to use and by the end of the module a large proportion of them either ssh into the Virtual Machines the use from their own Laptops or use the Fallback mode. It is pretty embarrassing. This year KDE has been installed alongside GNOME so at least students will have a choice.

    I wouldn't consider my self a traditionalist, by all means the GNOME developers have every right to try out new things but their execution has been extremely poor with their "all or nothing" approach.

    Leave a comment:


  • finalzone
    replied
    Originally posted by danielnez1 View Post
    While they are two distinct markets, in the case of the Windows 95 UI there was quite a short transition from the Win 3.x UI of NT 3.5 to NT 4 with a short intermediate step with Windows NT 3.51. While the 95 UI had some shortcomings it was a significant move forward in UI design for the Windows platform that it was quickly accepted by both enterprise and consumer sectors.
    At that time, there were very few alternative UI excluding OS/2 (Mac OS does not count because Apple ran on different architectures).
    Today, consumers are exposed to several different UI flavours than before, you cannot compare to what happened two decades ago.

    If GNOME 3 was less jarring then I strongly believe that the Classic Mode would not have been needed or be offered as default for RHEL 7.
    Gnome Shell isnt that jarring, it sounds like you are very conservative in UI appearence much like enterprise audiences (Microsoft Windows NT series for enterprise still retains the old Win2000 UI interface at the request).
    RHEL7 is doing the same thing while still gradually incorporating the new Gnome 3 features.

    Leave a comment:


  • movieman
    replied
    Originally posted by Honton View Post
    Extensions ARE a part of Gnome. Thus making Gnome 3 more flexible than Gnome 2 ever was. Be happy.
    Extensions are a piss-poor alternative to having the features in the first place. They stop being supported or they get broken by new updates, so no-one can rely on them in the long term.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X