"I have seen the future, and it is GNOME 3"


Recommended Posts

.Neo

There are ways to keep an application and OS "clutter-free, usable and quickly" while having a refined interface, Mac OS X, while not being perfect by any means, does a pretty good job at this. The entire Linux experience reminds me of Windows 2000, only with bit better graphics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syanide

Well, that's why you have things like KDE4, and Gnome3, whilst still far away, is getting there. And don't get me wrong, I know a bad design/usability decision when I see one, it's your media player comment what annoyed me, I generally like majority of things UI-wise on Macs, and I think they're doing a great job at keeping it consistent and usable not only with the OS, but throughout the majority of apps on there as well, it's just that I wouldn't touch iTunes with a ten foot pole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

I didn't speak of media players specifically. Linux and its applications in general still feature interface layouts and elements that look extremely dated. The list of above media player isn't an exception. Until this changes I don't see Linux ever turning into something appealing for the general public, even if it's free.

I keep reading stuff like "I have seen the future, and it is GNOME 3" or some hype around this amazing new interface / theme the next Ubuntu will be featuring. So far it hasn't materialized into much special... I guess that's the problem of a platform that's largely dependent on enthusiasts when it comes to interface development rather than having your own team of professionals.

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
... I guess that's the problem of a platform that's largely dependent on enthusiasts when it comes to interface development rather than having your own team of professionals.

I guess there is a problem with perception if you think that there aren't a large number of professionally-paid and employed developers working on GNOME and other such projects. Novell, IBM, Red Hat. Maybe you have heard of them? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

Honestly, that makes it even more disappointing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syanide

You make it sound as if it is done by amateurs who don't know where to place which UI element and like there's no HIG at all. I honestly can't say Gnome apps are perfect (GTK is starting to look dated, even on Linux when compared to Qt), but it is perfectly usable. Maybe it's not as refined as OS X (which also includes some questionable UI/widget design choices), but it's good, and I'm sure in time, GTK will see more updates as well (less borders, please).

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

Windows 2000's Classic and Mac OS 9's Platinum are perfectly usable as well. That really doesn't say much...

I'm not arguing about Linux' interfaces from a usability point of view because quite frankly that's extremely hard to determine. Mac OS X' Aqua works best for me, but for someone other the same could be said about Windows or Linux. My issues with the OS are the level of refinement and progress being made which I still find extremely disappointing. Especially considering the bold statements being made over and over again (case in point: this thread title for example).

PS I already acknowledged on the last page that Mac OS X' Aqua is by no means perfect either. Biggest example one could give is the inconsistency between the OS and the matte iTunes / iLife interface elements, which bug the hell out of me ever since they were introduced. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syanide

I'd argue about the looks, I've made mine look like both Leopard and Windows 7 pretty much perfectly.

But in the end, yes, they should work harder at redesigning some elements and taking it to the next level, and it's safe to say they are, it'll just take a while to show.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Farstrider
....it'll just take a while to show.

Symod, you are quite correct, what most people who are not real Linux users (Enthusiasts if you like!) keep forgetting (Are they?) is that Ubuntu Linux is a work in progress! This version, 10.04, is an LTS Version but the goal leading up to 10.10 and beyond is to produce a product that will be comparable to anything that is on the market now or in the future.

In fairness to Linux products there are many times that Windows OS,s, past and present that have had/have aspects that users hate or think could be better! The same applies to (Ubuntu) Linux, one or two things that have been touted for the final release of 10.04 are crap and I hope that these things get changed, but my vision is not always the same as the people who create the final release of the product. The one big difference, I think, is that Ubuntu Linux is open source and what ever I really do not like I can change to suite my needs! To do this with MS Windows is so much harder or in most case not possible at all!

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

Symod, you are quite correct, what most people who are not real Linux users (Enthusiasts if you like!) keep forgetting (Are they?) is that Ubuntu Linux is a work in progress! This version, 10.04, is an LTS Version but the goal leading up to 10.10 and beyond is to produce a product that will be comparable to anything that is on the market now or in the future.

The thing is that Apple and Microsoft won't be sitting still either with the development of Mac OS X and Windows. It's not like they'll be waiting around for Ubuntu to catch up with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen

The thing is that Apple and Microsoft won't be sitting still either with the development of Mac OS X and Windows. It's not like they'll be waiting around for Ubuntu to catch up with them.

Agreed. Competition makes things better.

Although, looking historically, you see Linux has been moving from a position further back, and has come farther faster than the other two.

Microsoft: Working on the GUI since 1985* (release of Windows 1.0)

Apple: Working on the GUI since 1983* (Apple Lisa introduced)

Linux: Didn't exist before 1991. And at that time, it was a barely operating kernel that could not even compile itself.

I am going with the fastest horse in this race. ;)

* Yeah, they were working on it BEFORE that year, I am just using the release date.

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

Linux could just follow the example of Apple, Microsoft and others up until 1991 and they've been doing so ever since...

Link to post
Share on other sites
HawkMan

It's easy to catch up, but far harder to lead. ;)

especially when your developers are more interested in doign "cool" stuff, and add as many geeky features as possible. And don't even know the the words focus group, and average user mean.

Link to post
Share on other sites
amon91

especially when your developers are more interested in doign "cool" stuff, and add as many geeky features as possible. And don't even know the the words focus group, and average user mean.

That's what I like about KDE4, even though it's not the best thing out there, I love it because of the unfinished 'geeky' stuff. I think GNOME should have some of that, most of the Linux audience is 'geeky'. Then distros could customize it and make it more consumer-based.

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen

Ugh. I am tired of the circular logic.

"They are behind Apple and Microsoft."

They started much later, and are catching up quickly.

"But they are just following the others since 1991."

That's what you do when you are far behind and only created in 1991, but they are experimenting with a variety of Window Managers (not just Gnome).

"Easy to catch up, but hard to lead."

Ummm, yeah. I said they started behind and catching up already. And, as you all know, these days (just like in the early '80s when Apple and Microsoft
both
copied Xerox) Apple and Microsoft constantly "borrow" ideas from each other and others. It is common practice, you know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

And after almost twenty years they're still playing catch up. However the competition isn't sitting still either, so wether catching up will actually change into leading is something totally different.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ScottKin

Was this an April Fools joke?

Good god that looks awful. All the talk in the quoted post about it being "revolutionary" is hilarious in the context of a screenshot that looks like an uglified Start Menu.

Yep - Welcome to 1995, GNOME!

Beyond the "relational" stuff that appears to be some bastardized version of WinFS, the appearance looks alot like what many of us LiteStep themers were doing to LS 10 years ago.

If this truely is the future of GNOME, I'd like my ride in Doc Brown's DeLorean, please?

--ScottKin

Don't worry one of these days something so revolutionary will happen that will it cause Microsoft and Apple to immediately drop their pantaloons, open their butt cheeks and feel the wrath of Linux.

Yep - sickend stomachs due to the horrific UI design that cause such feeings of Deja`vu that...well, you get the idea.

--ScottKin

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

Don't worry one of these days something so revolutionary will happen that will it cause Microsoft and Apple to immediately drop their pantaloons, open their butt cheeks and feel the wrath of Linux.

It may happen but I've lost the faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gerowen

I think one of the barriers to Linux adoption on the desktop suffer's from too many choices.

That's why we, as Linux savvy admins, need to be experts in our respective OS of choice (Fedora, Red Hat, Mandriva, Arch, Ubuntu, whatever), suggest and implement those choices in a way that is efficient and maintainable to the companies we work for. I just wish more admins would elect to install Linux operating systems in businesses. I just built a Fedora 12 PC for a woman who's building a school for the def blind. She needed a computer, and she's really the definition of your computer "average jane". To minimize cost I picked a Linux OS(the one I use and am most familiar with), and I installed all of the software she wanted and put big icons on the desktop for her. She loves it. I think one of the reasons Windows is predominant is that it has so infiltrated every aspect of computing life that the average Joe never even thinks to try anything else. Their first thought isn't "What OS do I want?" it's, "What version of Windows do I want?". It's up to us to implement *nix solutions, train the end users, and provide support. If we just keep "going with the flow", things are never going to change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

Beyond the "relational" stuff that appears to be some bastardized version of WinFS, the appearance looks alot like what many of us LiteStep themers were doing to LS 10 years ago.

LiteStep was awesome back the day and way ahead of it's time. Not many window managers have gotten to that level of customization even today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kyentei

GNOME is an ugly looking interface, so it could do with a cosmetic upgrade.

But it still has those huge-looking fonts. I mean the size is ridiculous in that screen shot thing.

If you can do better, please do so.

Remember that GNOME is a Window Manager. Not some regular "Interface". It's still a set of combined tools. The way it looks really depends on the OS you are using and which theme you prefer.

GNOME aims for usability, like KDE used to a long, long time ago.

And apart from that, it's just a default font size. Not too hard to customize, is it now? ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Prt Scr

Nothing revolutionary i can see

Its not a paradigm shift when its just a simple reorganisation of the same system we currently have

Same old donkey

I suggest you look up paradigm in the dictionary before posting again :)

Gnome is and always has been one ugly frickin interface, im either into KDE or i go the other extreme to a very minimalist manager/shell

*yawn*

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo
Remember that GNOME is a Window Manager. Not some regular "Interface". It's still a set of combined tools. The way it looks really depends on the OS you are using and which theme you prefer.

Doesn't really matter what kind of theme you apply, it won't change the general look and feature set.

That's why we, as Linux savvy admins, need to be experts in our respective OS of choice (Fedora, Red Hat, Mandriva, Arch, Ubuntu, whatever), suggest and implement those choices in a way that is efficient and maintainable to the companies we work for. I just wish more admins would elect to install Linux operating systems in businesses. I just built a Fedora 12 PC for a woman who's building a school for the def blind. She needed a computer, and she's really the definition of your computer "average jane". To minimize cost I picked a Linux OS(the one I use and am most familiar with), and I installed all of the software she wanted and put big icons on the desktop for her. She loves it. I think one of the reasons Windows is predominant is that it has so infiltrated every aspect of computing life that the average Joe never even thinks to try anything else. Their first thought isn't "What OS do I want?" it's, "What version of Windows do I want?". It's up to us to implement *nix solutions, train the end users, and provide support. If we just keep "going with the flow", things are never going to change.

Obviously if you have someone to set up a computer for you A to Z for simple tasks no OS would be much of a problem, be it Mac OS X, Windows or Linux...

I'm by no means an idiot when it comes to computers. I thought myself Windows and Mac OS 9 / Mac OS X and went far beyond simply the basics. However, every single time I try to setup Linux it get stuck somewhere and face problems I don't have to face when it comes to the others.

For example: http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/877860-ubuntu-vmware-fusion-issues/page__gopid__592514388entry592514388

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.