On Tue, 15 May 2018, Alexandru Băluț wrote:
On 15 May 2018 at 18:51, Len Ovens <l...@ovenwerks.net> wrote:
I will say kde does try to make as many things possible as can be
imaginable. gnome tends to tell you "this is whats good for you eat
it."
GNOME is responsible for the products it makes—When one option works and your
resources are limited, it's simply wasteful to implement two options. It's not
fair to interpret this as "this is what's good for you eat it." That's called
good management.
Gnome3 from the outset would not run on my resource constrained computer
that every other DE would run on (even unity). So not good management,
not great use of resources. The above in my opinion is just not true.
The team discussed and chose a path and everybody interested at the time had the
option to take part. Now the direction is set, and their exceptional focus can
be
seen in how efficient, clean and elegant GNOME looks.
And low possibility of getting any wark done. I fail to see how that can
be "elegant" unless I am using my computer for a door stop. I suppose if
removing things that help one do work is clean that at least is true.
I'm sorry, but I find gnome session next to useless unless I do lots of
mods, look for extra modules that do things that any desktop should have
built in... even openbox with no DE does a better job at least for getting
work done. Now for using a browser and a mail editor gnome is fine...
maybe even wonderful.
You always have the option to use whatever works for you, if you really need
Motif window decorations or whatever.
You need to reread what I wrote apparently. I did not suggest we should
use motif decorations so much as that some DEs (gnome among them) could
learn something from them.
When someone works on particular code it is easy to get focused on what
that code does. In the case of DE code, it is easy to spend so much effort
on making the desktop look nice that the use for the desktop in the first
place gets forgotten. That is as a place to run applications and it is the
applications that matter. It is true that gnome is fine for the average
person that uses their computer for entertainment where they use firefox
or chrome and nothing else. To be fair this may even be what most computer
users do. However, for content creation where a number of tools are being
used to create one product all at the same time Gnome is painful. Studio
is not catering to browser users, but content creators. My first
impression of gnome session was when is this thing going to load, followed
by the realization it was already loaded and the tools I needed had been
removed. From what I have seen the way gnome has been fixed from that time
is by adding functionallity back in that should have never left.
My desktop does not need to be an elegant looking picture that is merely
nice to look at. I am not sure what happened to "the user is right" in
gnome's mind, but it sure gone.
Sorry for ranting, but elegant? Good for limited resources? Ah, no.
In the end, I think personal POV has a lot to do with what is nice and
what is not nice. The key to these things is configurability. Any DE we
have set aside has been set aside for that reason, it is hard to configure
to some use other than the DE author's idea of the world.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
--
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
