GNOME's Need To Broaden Its Audience For Greater Impact & Funding

[nado]

This has nothing to do with me liking Gnome or not. Don't know where your rant is coming from in this context (and I will stop there as your message is full of simple naive assumptions). Plus Gnome has actually been quite bearable when handled through touchpad gestures (since Gnome 40).

This is about someone trolling with platitudes out of a limited list and repeating ad nauseam the same commonplaces.

If you check the user's profile you will clearly see this isn't a bot and he hasn't been picking words from some limited list from what I can tell. I would be surprised if you didn't know this already though.

Consider that English isn't everyone's native tongue and their grasp of it is also varying.... I find the assumption you made to be rather insulting and degrading. A foreign saying/phrase translated directly to English may not be conceived the same way as it would be in its native language. I interpreted the post as sarcasm, though that may also be incorrect.

Forgive my rant... If it were only from this thread then I wouldn't react, but no. Please point out my naive assumptions if there are any.

Could we either way just try and stick to constructive criticism? If the changes that are desired from GNOME have been asked for since GNOME 3 haven't been implemented... then it is clear to say they most likely won't be implemented in the future either. From where I'm sitting, someone has already forked GNOME 3 and that's what became Cinnamon.

[nado]

No amount of funding in the world will make Gnome be the most modern or usable DE out of the box. It is based on a much older (Windows 3.1) paradigm than Gnome 2. Even with Javascript hacks (I think you call them plugins, even though they have no stable API) the usability is suspect on anything but ancient or fantasy tablet devices that represent less than 0.001% of Linux's desktop userbase.

I will admit that GNOME has taken its time to reach its current state, and it hasn't been very performant until recent years.... however, this isn't exactly Windows 3.1 considering there's a dash/dock, a taskbar with a tray, workspaces, window snapping, responsive apps(libhandy) that work on both mobile and desktop... I could probably continue, but I don't see the point. The fact that it would work on a different form factors is a plus for users and developers alike.

As far as extensions, I don't know if these have ever been endorsed by GNOME devs, and they are by no means intended/required for GNOME to be a fully functional desktop. The UX experience allows you to focus on the applications and get rid of the extra cruft/chrome such as the dock/window list... There are plenty of users who this appeals to, or they wouldn't continue development. I didn't like it to begin with either and used to have a handful or so extensions to make the desktop conform to what I was used to... then I decided one day to try and instead use it as intended, give it a chance.... After a while I got used to it and think it's a very fluid/comfortable experience. This is nothing against those who want a dock, but this also adds a bigger load to core GNOME maintainers... For those who want something traditional they also provide GNOME Classic..

[Mez']

If you check the user's profile you will clearly see this isn't a bot and he hasn't been picking words from some limited list from what I can tell. I would be surprised if you didn't know this already though.

I'm not talking about him. The one you refer to is one of the most pragmatic users here, and his arguments are always well thought out and expanded.

The user I'm referring to (just above this reply), I very well know he's not a bot. His synapses were just half burned during lobotomy (a successful one) and everything he does ever since seems robotized.

And he just did it again. Many a time, AI and robots reply with something completely out of place and totally unrelated. Still a bit difficult to pick the right pre-selection out of the narrow list. Kind of funny actually.

I apologize for the digression and the ref call, but everybody who's read him for a while understand what I mean. It comes a bit as funny, and I am far from the only one to have pointed it out.

Anyway, cheers.

[alcalde]

Fundamental, yet painfully not stressed enough most of the time. So sad to see people in charge of major Libre projects not use the proper terminology.

The rest of the world doesn't use or speak Stallmanology like "Libre projects" and obsess over proper terminology.

[chocolate]

The rest of the world doesn't use or speak Stallmanology like "Libre projects" and obsess over proper terminology.

You are the one to quote me and I'm the obsessed? If it's not important and the world doesn't care at all, why respond? There is no such thing as having to affiliate with Stallman in order to defend the nature of Libre software through every little thing, such as your choice of words.
It's about underlining the importance of the ethical side of software, not the technical one ("open source" is meaningless outside of the OSI, while "Libre" means something on its own).
Can people say "open source" colloquially, even when referring to Libre software? Sure, of course! But certainly not representatives of GNOME when making a public statement: if not antithetical, it's at the very least a missed opportunity.

Besides, your sentence is entirely pointless: the world either already cares, or it needs to; otherwise, no reason for GNOME to adopt the GPL.

[alcalde]

There is no such thing as having to affiliate with Stallman in order to defend the nature of Libre software through every little thing, such as your choice of words.
It's about underlining the importance of the ethical side of software, not the technical one ("open source" is meaningless outside of the OSI, while "Libre" means something on its own).
Can people say "open source" colloquially, even when referring to Libre software? Sure, of course! But certainly not representatives of GNOME when making a public statement: if not antithetical, it's at the very least a missed opportunity.

Besides, your sentence is entirely pointless: the world either already cares, or it needs to; otherwise, no reason for GNOME to adopt the GPL.

1. There is no "ethical side" to open software. Speaking of terminology, Stallman misuses the word "ethics" in advocating his positions. Software is offered with various licensing terms and conditions; people are free to enter into those agreements by using the software or not.

2. Stallman is the only one to use the term "libre software" while "open source" is a universally accepted term. Far from being "meaningless outside of the OSI", you can verify that "open source" is defined at dictionary.com while "libre software" is not. Use the term "libre software" with someone who doesn't regularly read Phoronix and not 1 in 100 will have any idea what you're talking about.

3. The GNOME folks are not part of Stallman's Quixotic terminology quest; their mission is to create a desktop environment. Hence, no missed opportunity for them to advance Stallman's unique vocabulary. A quick check of their website didn't turn up any "GNU/Linux" references either.