Originally posted by markus40
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
GNOME Human Interface Guidelines Being Updated For GTK4, Other Modern Features
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by jacob View Post
The problem with this kind of option is that in practice it simply boils down to replacing proper desktop software with inferior mobile apps that are also less uaer friendly, period. This whole idea of "convergence" has always been dead on arrival. Apple isn't doing it, Google isn't doing it, MS tried and had to eat the humble pie for the first time in its history, Canonical tried and nearly went bankrupt for it. Yet GNOME developers still believe that this is somehow the way to go.
Even Bill Gates admits that he screwed up Windows mobile, and developers have been burned so badly they are sticking to traditional Windows APIs instead of trying to develop applications using the new ones.
Canonical didn't just dip out of convergence, they also stopped working on their own desktop. It's really sad because Linux would be far and away the leader here if Canonical was driving the direction of development, instead we'll just have to admire Apple's implementation for a few years before we get it right. Everyone is going in this direction though, and for a perfectly logical reason. Why the hell would you want to develop two distinct code bases, one for mobile and another for desktop (or three for a tablet, or four for in-car entertainment) when you could just make one code base that adapts depending on what environment it is running under? It's just common sense.
Not all applications are usable in mobile, but for those that are, tell me why you would want to write them two or three times?
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by cynical View Post
Google does not have a desktop operating system, but they still do convergence. Their applications adapt from the phone to tablet form factors. You are completely wrong about Apple. They will probably be the first to succeed with convergence. Every year they lessen the differences between iOS and Mac OS. Now that they are both running on ARM it is inevitable. If you think they aren't doing convergence, then what is this? In reality developers are dragging their feet on porting because the emulation layer works so well, but eventually it will happen. Give it a few years and you will see "Mac" apps that just work on iOS or Mac OS and adapt their UI to the proper form factor seamlessly.
Dammit. Shit. Why do I have to notice these things? I don't think it's been 24 hours but, well, macOS has a Jim Crow Header Bar. Window stuff goes in it's place, typing stuff goes in it's own place, app stuff goes in it's own place. It even promotes gentrification. As more App Stuff gets added it starts to gentrify the Typing Stuff area into an App Stuff area.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by cynical View PostGoogle does not have a desktop operating system
Originally posted by cynical View Postbut they still do convergence. Their applications adapt from the phone to tablet form factors.
Originally posted by cynical View PostYou are completely wrong about Apple. They will probably be the first to succeed with convergence. Every year they lessen the differences between iOS and Mac OS. Now that they are both running on ARM it is inevitable. If you think they aren't doing convergence, then what is this?
Originally posted by cynical View PostIn reality developers are dragging their feet on porting because the emulation layer works so well, but eventually it will happen. Give it a few years and you will see "Mac" apps that just work on iOS or Mac OS and adapt their UI to the proper form factor seamlessly.
Originally posted by cynical View PostGive it a few years and you will see "Mac" apps that just work on iOS or Mac OS and adapt their UI to the proper form factor seamlessly.
Originally posted by cynical View PostEven Bill Gates admits that he screwed up Windows mobile, and developers have been burned so badly they are sticking to traditional Windows APIs instead of trying to develop applications using the new ones.
Originally posted by cynical View PostCanonical didn't just dip out of convergence, they also stopped working on their own desktop. It's really sad because Linux would be far and away the leader here if Canonical was driving the direction of development
Originally posted by cynical View Postinstead we'll just have to admire Apple's implementation for a few years before we get it right. Everyone is going in this direction though, and for a perfectly logical reason.
Originally posted by cynical View PostWhy the hell would you want to develop two distinct code bases, one for mobile and another for desktop (or three for a tablet, or four for in-car entertainment) when you could just make one code base that adapts depending on what environment it is running under? It's just common sense.
Originally posted by cynical View PostNot all applications are usable in mobile, but for those that are, tell me why you would want to write them two or three times?
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by jacob View Post
Those systemd rants were priceless among other reasons because it was all about that notion of Init Freedom(tm). Then they were prophesying a mass migration to BSD because on BSD you, like, totally have Init Freedom, right?
Comment
-
Originally posted by jacob View Post
One can blane RedHat for many things but the reality is is that they aren't the default in the Linux ecosystem because they have power, they have the power because they are the default. There is simply no other player in the market atm with the same developer support and the same involvement in so many essential open source projects. It's regrettable but so far that's what it is. On the subject of desktops, KDE botched its launch because Qt was then non-free, which meant that distros decided they didn't want it. Even today the open source future of Qt seems to be perpetually in question. Then the likes if XFCE&co. aren't really comparable to GNOME. They are OK-ish strictly as desktop user interfaces, but what is really needed is not just a UI, but also a consistent environment for develooers to build apps on. And only GNOME (and KDE) provide that.
There's one DE that's quite promising: Englightenment. It's blazing fast, have minimal memory footprint. Quite lack in feature department 'cause not enough man-power I think. But comparable or maybe more than XFCE feature-wise. I find that it's one of the earlier DE that try to have a convergence layout before everyone else. But the popularity is not that good. And IMO, the layout should have major overhaul (sorry, raster).Last edited by t.s.; 24 May 2021, 01:07 AM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by delta_v View Post
Oh, you got me here with this phrase enough to go pay my traffic lights dues to Google and register. I do know about SteamOS, indeed.
SteamOS was not targeting Gnome. SteamOS targets Steam client's Big Picture mode as a DE. Yes. Seriously. ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by jacob View Post
So what would good convergence actually look like? Why "is" it the future and why should we be all for it?
Bottom line: desktop and mobile have entirely different use cases and require radically different UI designs.
I agree that desktop and mobile have different use cases. But in the future, when we have good enough mobile phone, why not using it for desktop too? Heck, our high end phone SoC is more powerfull than pentium/i3. Why not using it for desktop use.Last edited by t.s.; 24 May 2021, 01:09 AM.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by markus40 View Post
If I had to rant about every quirk I encountered in my life with desktops, I would never stop. You all got too much hung up on what you don't have instead of what you have.
Originally posted by markus40 View Post
I really don't care for the ranting, please continue. I just like to poke a little into those stupid frustration I see. Mostly I find it entertaining and funny. The best rants were the systemd rants and the mass migration to BSD and Slack. The whole 22 years of Gnome rants and the constant moving of goal posts is also quite entertaining. Please continue, I don't care. I'm not hung up on Gnome, I really like the 'not the typical' desktop thing and I have fun using it. That is why I use it as my desktop at home. For me, that means something because I used, and by that, I mean worked and developed on, many desktops professionally. So, no matter what you or whoever else say. For me, it is a really great product that I prefer above all that came before and have to use today. Except my Amiga 500 and later 4000. I mourned when I had to buy a Win95 desktop in 1997 when my 4000 died. I didn't care for using computers at home for a year. Luckily, then I discovered Linux, wiped Windows and installed Red Hat 7 with Gnome on it. I could develop on my desktop for the workstations at my workplace. That time was magical, and the fun was back and it never stopped.
2) Me and the other here didn't rants about systemd, did we?
3) If you read the "rants", it's not 22 years of GNOME rants. It start at GNOME v3.
4. ..We're out of topic. Now the focus is about you, not GNOME.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by t.s. View Post4. ..We're out of topic. Now the focus is about you, not GNOME.
For you. The focus is on Gnome v3. Also fine. For me, it is a continuation of 22 years of, let me put it in other words, frustration of Gnome.
That's fine, really. But nothing chances in my stance and opinion. I'm glad there is a desktop who tries to take another path.
Building a desktop is hard. I experienced a lot of them and most of them. Even the ones with loads of cash behind them, were frustratingly bad. But I had to use them and I adapted. Maybe that makes me appreciate what we have with Gnome in another way then you.
Maybe, I'm wrong and XFCE is how the 'real' Linux desktop was meant to be, but I'm glad that this is not the case. That paradigm belongs, in my opinion, to the past.
Even on my work T41 with Win10 the taskbar, full of icons started by tasks my employer wants to have running, has become a meaningless tool, where I don't see the tree in the forest.
I never go to the windows menu and search in the application tree. I type what I want. All those things Gnome 2 was great at, are, again in my opinion, obsoleted. Sue me...
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment