On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 11:37 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: > > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]> > wrote: > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:08 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Denys Vlasenko > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > Is it a policy of Gnome Desktop to shoehorn users > into fixed > > UI style > > instead of offering them reasonable choice? What > next, > > hardwired window > > title color and size? > > > > There is no policy as such. As I said earlier, why not try > it first > > and see how it works before criticizing the design? > > > > I'm a systems administrator I have a ton of windows open, I > used to > > use the taskbar, and I don' and it's been okay for me. > While > > something was taken away, > > > Why something has to be taken away? I mean, unconditionally? > There is a better way: (a) make it configurable, (b) make it > "off" by default. If almost no one switches it back on, great, > it means practice proved that the replacement is better, > and it can be removed altogether. > If many people switch it back on, then perhaps it needs to > stay. > > > The default configuration is bare.. it's been like that even with > GNOME 2. Your distro puts a bunch of stuff in there to enhance the > experience. It's relatively the same with GNOME 3.
I *am* on my distro. Fedora 15 is this >< close to a final freeze. Not much, if anything, can be added to F15 at this time. What I describe in this thread is what is about to be experienced by many, many Fedora users. I am pretty sure even bare Gnome 2 has a panel at the top of the screen. It has no app icons by default, yes, but you can trivially add them by right-clicking app menu items. With Gnome 3, I have a black panel there which still takes up the same screen real estate but doesn't seem to support app icons. How is this an improvement? -- vda _______________________________________________ gnome-shell-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
