It's not for me, except that it is getting rammed down my throat.
Yes, funny how that ends up frustrating a person.
And to rub it in, it appears that Gnome has a problem with many people's worthless opinions adding up to something significant enough where they have to beg "disillusioned" users to come back.
Well, if you want to concentrate on it fine: that "piss-weak" argument *is* actually enough to consign Gnome to the dustbin of inflexible, unusable software for my usage. In the end, my metric is simple: A feature needed for "Work Utility" outweighs one for "Fluffy Chrome" any day of the week.
Gnome 2 let me set things up the way I want, New Gnome tells me that I don't know what I am doing! Screw work -- real computer users need a spiffy integration with their Google Profile.
The Gnome Project's true value is as a cautionary tale about knowing your user base. The Gnome foundation badly misjudged who would use their stuff and were so sure that they'd tap into millions of normal users that they didn't mind being really insulting to the users they lost in the process.
Today's articles seem to admit they are not reaching "normal users doing things normal users do" and since they need some sort of user base back, they must appeal to the ones they drove away. Really, it's right there in the titles: "How GNOME 3.14 is winning back disillusioned Linux users" and "Open Source GNOME 3 Desktop Environment Wins Back Fans."
I decided to post just to point out that the "features" that are supposed to win their users back are superficial at best and they do even get close to the core of their problems.
Reading tip 101: Typically the last thing in a list occupies that position because it is generally not as important to the main argument as what came before.
Nice to see the primary article admit that the launch was immature I guess.
Once again, the media around Gnome seems to display tone-deafness. The third article gave not a single specific other than Linus uses it though he still has problems. The first article lists all the "improvements" that are supposed to lure me back into the fold. Let's see how they stack up.
FTFA:
1) Classic mode offers "enough familiarity" -- at this point XFCE does what I need it to do. I don't need to use Gnome's idea of how the "old folks" used to work. I heard enough times that "classic" was going to die anyway -- too much risk in switching to something with no clear future.
2) "Weather app" -- okay. Yeah that increases my productivity!
3) Evince has less interface -- great. You guys do realize it was the LACK OF CONTROLS on your apps that drove me away, right?
4) Multitouch support -- worthless to me, no touch interfaces, don't want them.
5) Photo app gained support for Google accounts -- so it reached feature parity with my smartphone. Yay!
6) "Captive portal handling" -- this was an actual problem? I don't recall every failing in that task.
Are you kidding me? That adds up to a lot of shined poo.
Neither article answered a single question I actually would have:
Can I configure it simply without third party plugins? Can I kill the hot corners? In fact, the whole "Fisher Price Activities" screen? Can I set unchangable defaults on the launcher instead of it deciding incorrectly what I think is important. Can I change the terminal and screen layout so my 30" monitor is not trying to make one huge xterm all the time? Can I get a "heads up display" of my multiple desktops that I don't have to cycle through buttons or move the mouse to see? Does the terminal launcher continue to assume I need just one terminal and unhelpfully bring up the last instance when I actually wanted a new one? Does the file browser do something sane finally? Do I still have to have a global menu? Can I have focus follows the fricking mouse please? I have a huge legacy program that won't work if this doesn't and I am not rewriting it.
Nope. I don't see a lot of evidence from the articles that it is worth my time to come back. Gnome's new design was for intro users who wanted lots of pizzaz. They were VERY clear about how my problems were because I knew nothing about how I should use the computer. The problem is, I know what jobs I am trying to do, and Gnome just didn't work.
The guy has a point about his wallet. I "lost" a $10 watch (really nice looking, but a cheap birthday gift from my daughter, bought with her allowance money) on their belt. When I complained, everyone claimed ignorance and with the clock ticking and the line stopped I became aware of one interesting social feature in the security line system design: With the level of inconvencience already high, the impatience of your fellow travellers is a very effective cudgel that the TSA uses as a resource.
As I tried to plead my case I noticed the uninvolved TSA folks were playing to the crowd with how they talked and their body language -- "look guys, it's THIS guy who is gumming up the works and making you late." And I could certainly feel the love...
In the end, regardless of the sentimental value it was just a $10 watch. I think the entire affair lasted a bit under a minute and a half, but I knuckled under and the TSA thief won. I sometimes wonder how much of this was anticipated by the thief -- that at some set rate you can just snag an item of not much consequence and let the time pressure work for you...
Just remember, while you arguably benefit from their services, these people are not actually on your side here (you *are* the suspect after all) and it's not like their uniform implies any particular level of integrity.
I guess I've missed that slick glossy ad campaign for Gnome3 that have surely been placed to catch all those new users. Who brings in all those hypothetical new users right now? As one of those "diehards from the 1990." I started dozens of people over the last 20 years on Linux but stopped trying when Gnome3 came out. I suddenly found my workflow disrupted and the usual open source philosophy of customization is gone -- at this point I'm not sure *I* am a good match for Linux anymore. So, since Gnome3 came out I've been watching my friends, associates and family buy Macs. If things go as Gnome3 is planned, I will be switching away from Fedora (after starting with RedHat 4.2) and to something else in the next year. Yes, I could do spins but when the trends are moving away from your usage model in the default OS it's just a matter of time till something critical will break for you. Best to transition before it becomes a crisis.
Thanks for the additional warning.
on
GNOME 3.4 Preview
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
As far as clones, my local Cult of Apple members spent a lot of time teasing me by placing the Gnome 3 "System Settings" panel side by side with the OS X "System Preferences" panel. I certainly could not defend against the assertion that that feature at least was a wholesale ripoff. Perhaps you could have done better. The categories are the same, the icons look the same, only difference in the end is that the OS X panel seems to offer more options for customization. If you're keeping score I wouldn't count that as a win for Gnome either....
It does reinforce my initial impression after reading about Gnome 3.4 that after trying to adapt to 3.2 has resulted in nothing more than a massive waste of time I could have otherwise spent being productive had I jumped ship immediately upon the first performance hits. The "one task at a time" idea makes me feel like I am performing surgery with ski-gloves on when doing image processing where you are constantly flipping between an image window and menus/terminals which manipulate it. On a 30" monitor I have been fighting how silly it seems that a terminal dragged too far up becomes a 30" wide terminal. It feels unnatural to have to check the motion of the terminal and drop it several tenths of an inch from the top bar, wasting as much space as I was supposed to be saving. I guess maybe it's supposed to be fun -- goof it up and it's just like the guy's nose buzzing in Operation. I used to be able to balance my thoughts using the desktop as a way to keep an overview of my various tasks in minimized windows or iconified desktop switchers (which to me functioned kind of like a heads-up-display) but in the new Gnome, out of sight is out of mind without hands on the keyboard. I tried, with an open mind, to get with the program on the advice of Gnome advocates and out of a loyalty to Fedora which I've used since RedHat 4. But after seven months it still doesn't feel right --it's awkward and keeps me from getting things done.
Now the user experience demands that applications start placing the menu on the top bar? I guess if you run one application at a time that's a strength but I don't nor can I. I see people worried about how sloppy focus pays a penalty for this happening and I believe you've just told me that this concern is a price you're willing to pay for a user experience. In essence this is a big warning that I will end up rewriting code if I wanted to stay with gnome. I was paid to write the code, I am most certainly not going to be paid to rewrite it. I am currently paid to produce with it.
YMMV obviously, but it's a warning I cannot ignore about what Gnome's future will mean for my work...
Let's rename Gnome -- how bout GnOSXme?
on
GNOME 3.4 Preview
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Actually, it appears to be the final nail in the coffin as far as my love-hate relationship with Gnome goes. Yup, I tried it like everyone said and after heavy configuration 3.2 kind of works so-so for me if I hold my nose. I was hoping it would get better with a few more extensions or through cinnamon. Now this. I use sloppy mouse focus as a work-related feature in my image processing work. To lose a valuable work related feature just to get a serial-number filed off OS X clone desktop gets me off this train for good.
It now raises two other questions:
Is gnome software going to work outside of gnome if it looks for this top bar to place a menu all the time? If not, too bad for open source in general.
Is cinnamon going to be able to work around this? Obviously their alternate top menu bar will have some problems.
Due to the Gnome 3 development team I got to "try" your style. It sucked. Really. Badly.
For me that is.
I'm sure you do fine by it. If Gnome had any pretentions of being a REAL UI instead of just another low-rent apple knockoff, we'd both be able to do what we wanted.
I'll disagree A LOT. I have 10 windows open because I am working on 3-4 projects at a time. I have ~20 more minimized but their status available at a glance. I leave things going because my uptimes are 300 days+ and I work on months lnog projects collaboratively. My workspaces each have a purpose -- I don't need the software deciding when I don't need one anymore so that I waste time having to figure out what the hell it decided to do THIS time because if anything it is inconsistent.
When I return to a project, I don't want to have to move the mouse HARD LEFT AND UP then wait for the graphics do-dads to calm down the move the mouse HARD RIGHT and have to hunt for the workspace where my stuff was sitting cause it AIN'T going to be where it was last time and then wait for the graphics do-dads to twinkle again before I actually get work done.
In my obsolete desktop, I move the mouse to the desired workspace which are in FULL VIEW (with ALL my windows shown iconically ) and click once. My desktop returns, set up perfectly. My build window sits there in the corner, my coding window on one side, my testing window is ready with my reference browser is next to them and my other applications are all available. All is well and I am immediately returned to a productive state on that project -- in ONE move and ONE click.
No "revolutionary paradigm" can get that done faster. Sorry.
See, I like setting up my various tasks so that they mirror my thoughts and responsibilities and projects -- I work by SEEING my minimized windows iconified and SEEING my desktops without having to ask through some extended magic mouse-shake each and every time. At that point my desktop is an extension of my mind and thoughts. Gnome 3 is the extension of nothing. An out-of-sight, out-of-mind electronic form of ADD. ]
I just kept envisioning the corporate memo that must have led to the creation of this episode. The Proud Family is easily the worst of the shows on the channel, so I can see why the producers kissed whatever they had to in order to survive! I laughed all the way through!:)
I spot Name-Calling, Glittering Generalities, Transfer, Plain Folks appeals (if the Plain Folks are geeks), Bandwagon and a bit of the old Unwarranted Extrapolation.
I can stretch and call Testimonial and Fear as well. There are few solid conclusions to be had but I can argue for Bad Logic in a couple spots.
I don't spot Euphemisms, but then again there are no negatives presented about Jon's point of view so I'm not surprised.
I had to listen to over a decade's worth of SDSS telling the entire rest of astronomy to pack up and go home, since they were gonna do it all. Nice to see they're finally doing something.
What burns me is that sessions devoted many hours to all the CS PhD theory talks during *astronomy* sessions about all the details of how the data would be stored and made available. Looks like when push came to shove they had to make a quick deal with Microsoft.
SDSS is not the first sky survey that is made available online, nor will they really ever be the pioneer, except through revisionist history. I note that one of their press releases links to a preprint from a week ago. They fit a spheroid model to the halo and come up with a flattening parameter. Cool, I published my fit six years ago with the APS at Minnesota. Got the same number. Actually, my statistics were better. Did I get the professional courtesy of a reference? No. At least I credited those who determined this parameter before me.
The groundbreaking work in sky surveys was done by the APM in Cambridge, and others doing this kind of work include SuperCosmos in Edinburgh, the APS in Minnesota, DPoss at Caltech, and the digital sky survey at Space Telescope. Most have had their data online for ten years and have papers on their results.
The more expensive a project, the higher the incentive to do science by press release. I guess I just get pissed off when I see Sloan and Hubble take credit for something that has been known for years merely by adding a pretty picture.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not for me, except that it is getting rammed down my throat.
Yes, funny how that ends up frustrating a person.
And to rub it in, it appears that Gnome has a problem with many people's worthless opinions adding up to something significant enough where they have to beg "disillusioned" users to come back.
Well, if you want to concentrate on it fine: that "piss-weak" argument *is* actually enough to consign Gnome to the dustbin of inflexible, unusable software for my usage. In the end, my metric is simple: A feature needed for "Work Utility" outweighs one for "Fluffy Chrome" any day of the week.
Gnome 2 let me set things up the way I want, New Gnome tells me that I don't know what I am doing! Screw work -- real computer users need a spiffy integration with their Google Profile.
Forgive me for being less than impressed....
The Gnome Project's true value is as a cautionary tale about knowing your user base. The Gnome foundation badly misjudged who would use their stuff and were so sure that they'd tap into millions of normal users that they didn't mind being really insulting to the users they lost in the process.
Today's articles seem to admit they are not reaching "normal users doing things normal users do" and since they need some sort of user base back, they must appeal to the ones they drove away. Really, it's right there in the titles: "How GNOME 3.14 is winning back disillusioned Linux users" and "Open Source GNOME 3 Desktop Environment Wins Back Fans."
I decided to post just to point out that the "features" that are supposed to win their users back are superficial at best and they do even get close to the core of their problems.
Reading tip 101: Typically the last thing in a list occupies that position because it is generally not as important to the main argument as what came before.
Nice to see the primary article admit that the launch was immature I guess.
Once again, the media around Gnome seems to display tone-deafness. The third article gave not a single specific other than Linus uses it though he still has problems. The first article lists all the "improvements" that are supposed to lure me back into the fold. Let's see how they stack up.
FTFA:
1) Classic mode offers "enough familiarity" -- at this point XFCE does what I need it to do. I don't need to use Gnome's idea of how the "old folks" used to work. I heard enough times that "classic" was going to die anyway -- too much risk in switching to something with no clear future.
2) "Weather app" -- okay. Yeah that increases my productivity!
3) Evince has less interface -- great. You guys do realize it was the LACK OF CONTROLS on your apps that drove me away, right?
4) Multitouch support -- worthless to me, no touch interfaces, don't want them.
5) Photo app gained support for Google accounts -- so it reached feature parity with my smartphone. Yay!
6) "Captive portal handling" -- this was an actual problem? I don't recall every failing in that task.
Are you kidding me? That adds up to a lot of shined poo.
Neither article answered a single question I actually would have:
Can I configure it simply without third party plugins?
Can I kill the hot corners? In fact, the whole "Fisher Price Activities" screen?
Can I set unchangable defaults on the launcher instead of it deciding incorrectly what I think is important.
Can I change the terminal and screen layout so my 30" monitor is not trying to make one huge xterm all the time?
Can I get a "heads up display" of my multiple desktops that I don't have to cycle through buttons or move the mouse to see?
Does the terminal launcher continue to assume I need just one terminal and unhelpfully bring up the last instance when I actually wanted a new one?
Does the file browser do something sane finally?
Do I still have to have a global menu?
Can I have focus follows the fricking mouse please? I have a huge legacy program that won't work if this doesn't and I am not rewriting it.
Nope. I don't see a lot of evidence from the articles that it is worth my time to come back. Gnome's new design was for intro users who wanted lots of pizzaz. They were VERY clear about how my problems were because I knew nothing about how I should use the computer. The problem is, I know what jobs I am trying to do, and Gnome just didn't work.
As opposed to where the OP wants the blame placed.
The guy has a point about his wallet. I "lost" a $10 watch (really nice looking, but a cheap birthday gift from my daughter, bought with her allowance money) on their belt. When I complained, everyone claimed ignorance and with the clock ticking and the line stopped I became aware of one interesting social feature in the security line system design: With the level of inconvencience already high, the impatience of your fellow travellers is a very effective cudgel that the TSA uses as a resource.
As I tried to plead my case I noticed the uninvolved TSA folks were playing to the crowd with how they talked and their body language -- "look guys, it's THIS guy who is gumming up the works and making you late." And I could certainly feel the love...
In the end, regardless of the sentimental value it was just a $10 watch. I think the entire affair lasted a bit under a minute and a half, but I knuckled under and the TSA thief won. I sometimes wonder how much of this was anticipated by the thief -- that at some set rate you can just snag an item of not much consequence and let the time pressure work for you...
Just remember, while you arguably benefit from their services, these people are not actually on your side here (you *are* the suspect after all) and it's not like their uniform implies any particular level of integrity.
There are only so many ways to ask "Where can I find the ANY key?" so don't be too sure you were the source of it... ;)
Total Recall had a decent plot. I guess the twist in Total Recall 2012 is going to be it really is a dream this time?
I guess I've missed that slick glossy ad campaign for Gnome3 that have surely been placed to catch all those new users. Who brings in all those hypothetical new users right now? As one of those "diehards from the 1990." I started dozens of people over the last 20 years on Linux but stopped trying when Gnome3 came out. I suddenly found my workflow disrupted and the usual open source philosophy of customization is gone -- at this point I'm not sure *I* am a good match for Linux anymore. So, since Gnome3 came out I've been watching my friends, associates and family buy Macs. If things go as Gnome3 is planned, I will be switching away from Fedora (after starting with RedHat 4.2) and to something else in the next year. Yes, I could do spins but when the trends are moving away from your usage model in the default OS it's just a matter of time till something critical will break for you. Best to transition before it becomes a crisis.
As far as clones, my local Cult of Apple members spent a lot of time teasing me by placing the Gnome 3 "System Settings" panel side by side with the OS X "System Preferences" panel. I certainly could not defend against the assertion that that feature at least was a wholesale ripoff. Perhaps you could have done better. The categories are the same, the icons look the same, only difference in the end is that the OS X panel seems to offer more options for customization. If you're keeping score I wouldn't count that as a win for Gnome either....
It does reinforce my initial impression after reading about Gnome 3.4 that after trying to adapt to 3.2 has resulted in nothing more than a massive waste of time I could have otherwise spent being productive had I jumped ship immediately upon the first performance hits. The "one task at a time" idea makes me feel like I am performing surgery with ski-gloves on when doing image processing where you are constantly flipping between an image window and menus/terminals which manipulate it. On a 30" monitor I have been fighting how silly it seems that a terminal dragged too far up becomes a 30" wide terminal. It feels unnatural to have to check the motion of the terminal and drop it several tenths of an inch from the top bar, wasting as much space as I was supposed to be saving. I guess maybe it's supposed to be fun -- goof it up and it's just like the guy's nose buzzing in Operation. I used to be able to balance my thoughts using the desktop as a way to keep an overview of my various tasks in minimized windows or iconified desktop switchers (which to me functioned kind of like a heads-up-display) but in the new Gnome, out of sight is out of mind without hands on the keyboard. I tried, with an open mind, to get with the program on the advice of Gnome advocates and out of a loyalty to Fedora which I've used since RedHat 4. But after seven months it still doesn't feel right --it's awkward and keeps me from getting things done.
Now the user experience demands that applications start placing the menu on the top bar? I guess if you run one application at a time that's a strength but I don't nor can I. I see people worried about how sloppy focus pays a penalty for this happening and I believe you've just told me that this concern is a price you're willing to pay for a user experience. In essence this is a big warning that I will end up rewriting code if I wanted to stay with gnome. I was paid to write the code, I am most certainly not going to be paid to rewrite it. I am currently paid to produce with it.
YMMV obviously, but it's a warning I cannot ignore about what Gnome's future will mean for my work...
Actually, it appears to be the final nail in the coffin as far as my love-hate relationship with Gnome goes. Yup, I tried it like everyone said and after heavy configuration 3.2 kind of works so-so for me if I hold my nose. I was hoping it would get better with a few more extensions or through cinnamon. Now this. I use sloppy mouse focus as a work-related feature in my image processing work. To lose a valuable work related feature just to get a serial-number filed off OS X clone desktop gets me off this train for good.
It now raises two other questions:
Is gnome software going to work outside of gnome if it looks for this top bar to place a menu all the time? If not, too bad for open source in general.
Is cinnamon going to be able to work around this? Obviously their alternate top menu bar will have some problems.
Due to the Gnome 3 development team I got to "try" your style. It sucked. Really. Badly.
For me that is.
I'm sure you do fine by it. If Gnome had any pretentions of being a REAL UI instead of just another low-rent apple knockoff, we'd both be able to do what we wanted.
I'll disagree A LOT. I have 10 windows open because I am working on 3-4 projects at a time. I have ~20 more minimized but their status available at a glance. I leave things going because my uptimes are 300 days+ and I work on months lnog projects collaboratively. My workspaces each have a purpose -- I don't need the software deciding when I don't need one anymore so that I waste time having to figure out what the hell it decided to do THIS time because if anything it is inconsistent.
When I return to a project, I don't want to have to move the mouse HARD LEFT AND UP then wait for the graphics do-dads to calm down the move the mouse HARD RIGHT and have to hunt for the workspace where my stuff was sitting cause it AIN'T going to be where it was last time and then wait for the graphics do-dads to twinkle again before I actually get work done.
In my obsolete desktop, I move the mouse to the desired workspace which are in FULL VIEW (with ALL my windows shown iconically ) and click once. My desktop returns, set up perfectly. My build window sits there in the corner, my coding window on one side, my testing window is ready with my reference browser is next to them and my other applications are all available. All is well and I am immediately returned to a productive state on that project -- in ONE move and ONE click.
No "revolutionary paradigm" can get that done faster. Sorry.
See, I like setting up my various tasks so that they mirror my thoughts and responsibilities and projects -- I work by SEEING my minimized windows iconified and SEEING my desktops without having to ask through some extended magic mouse-shake each and every time. At that point my desktop is an extension of my mind and thoughts. Gnome 3 is the extension of nothing. An out-of-sight, out-of-mind electronic form of ADD.
]
Let us repeat it for you.
but they are the ones building large new military forces at the moment and we are trapped in endless cost overruns and delays.
I just kept envisioning the corporate memo that must have led to the creation of this episode. The Proud Family is easily the worst of the shows on the channel, so I can see why the producers kissed whatever they had to in order to survive! I laughed all the way through! :)
Might be appropriate. I wrote the software that found it, and I worked completely under Linux! Jeffrey Larsen, Spacewatch
Oh for chrissakes, what is this tripe?
Oh yeah, I remember: it's called Propaganda!
I spot Name-Calling, Glittering Generalities, Transfer, Plain Folks appeals (if the Plain Folks are geeks), Bandwagon and a bit of the old Unwarranted Extrapolation.
I can stretch and call Testimonial and Fear as well. There are few solid conclusions to be had but I can argue for Bad Logic in a couple spots.
I don't spot Euphemisms, but then again there are no negatives presented about Jon's point of view so I'm not surprised.
Do we really *need* propaganda on Slashdot?
Why don't you move to America then? Thought so.
If not for BE, John T-revolting might have made
a movie that appealed to my wife and then I would
have to see it.
You leave a long list of suspects. I'd guess. Care to hint?
It's going great. Asteroids as much more fun than galactic structure anyway. Now who are you?
I had to listen to over a decade's worth of SDSS telling the entire rest of astronomy to pack up
and go home, since they were gonna do it all. Nice to see they're finally doing something.
What burns me is that sessions devoted many hours to all the CS PhD theory talks during *astronomy*
sessions about all the details of how the data would be stored and made available.
Looks like when push came to shove they had to make a quick deal with Microsoft.
SDSS is not the first sky survey that is made available online, nor will they really ever be the
pioneer, except through revisionist history. I note that one of their press releases links to
a preprint from a week ago. They fit a spheroid model to the halo and come up with a flattening
parameter. Cool, I published my fit six years ago with the APS at Minnesota. Got the same
number. Actually, my statistics were better. Did I get the professional courtesy of a reference? No.
At least I credited those who determined this parameter before me.
The groundbreaking work in sky surveys was done by the APM in Cambridge, and others doing this
kind of work include SuperCosmos in Edinburgh, the APS in Minnesota, DPoss at Caltech, and the
digital sky survey at Space Telescope. Most have had their data online for ten years and have
papers on their results.
The more expensive a project, the higher the incentive to do science by press release.
I guess I just get pissed off when I see Sloan and Hubble take credit for something that has been
known for years merely by adding a pretty picture.