Craig Daymon | 6 Aug 22:09 2011
Picon
Picon

Very disappointed in Gnome 3

What happened to my desktop icons?  Why can't I right click to get
desktop options?  Or any options for that matter?  Why can't I move the
application bar to the bottom of the screen WHERE I LIKE IT?  I thought
Linux was about choice?  Why can't I set the bar to auto-hide?  Again,
NO RIGHT CLICK!  Everything I had set up under the previous incarnation
of Gnome is lost!  This was a horrible release!  It looks like it was
made for a grade schooler's toy.  If someone wants to configure it that
way for a specific use, great, but as the default configuration it is
crap.  Have you people learned NOTHING from 30+ years of user interface
design?
Magnus Therning | 10 Aug 08:56 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 22:09, Craig Daymon <craigdaymon <at> att.net> wrote:
> What happened to my desktop icons?  Why can't I right click to get
> desktop options?  Or any options for that matter?  Why can't I move the
> application bar to the bottom of the screen WHERE I LIKE IT?  I thought
> Linux was about choice?  Why can't I set the bar to auto-hide?  Again,
> NO RIGHT CLICK!  Everything I had set up under the previous incarnation
> of Gnome is lost!  This was a horrible release!  It looks like it was
> made for a grade schooler's toy.  If someone wants to configure it that
> way for a specific use, great, but as the default configuration it is
> crap.  Have you people learned NOTHING from 30+ years of user interface
> design?

There's a fallback mode (I think that's what it's called) that makes
Gnome3 behave and look more like Gnome2. Have you already tried it?

On another note I don't think that emails like yours will be very well
received among the Gnome developers. I fully understand your
frustration and irritation after finding that Gnome3 is a disruptive
and fundamental change to Gnome. The Gnome community does however have
a vision for the desktop, and as with all things not everyone will be
happy with it. Linux still offers a lot of choice, but maybe not at
all levels; in other words, you can always choose not to run Gnome3 if
you aren't happy with it. Despite your first impression I hope you
take the time to REALLY try Gnome3. For me it took a good 2 months of
daily use to get used to it, and still I'm not quite sure whether I
like it or not. As has been pointed out before there is a very real
loss of configurability that is easy to access, but hopefully that'll
be addressed in the near future. My current feeling about Gnome3 is
that maybe we are moving in different directions; I'm becoming more
experienced and more sophisticated in my use of Linux, and Gnome is
(Continue reading)

1920119 | 11 Aug 02:51 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

You say 'beginner friendly', but the reality is that the vast majority
of new users will be migrating from Windows, be relatively confident
with computers, and will probably just want to get on with doing
things without having to adapt to a completely different and IMO less
efficient environment. WIth Gnome Panel there were differences, but
the underlying rational, minimistically simple ethos was the same.

How is having applications launched from three seperate places more
simple or beginner friendly? Surely it is simpler just to think, 'this
the list of (GUI) apps that are available', relying on the
'non-computer' menu metaphor rather than the search engine analogy.

My main gripe with Gnome/Unity, however, is the attitude that things
need to be made SO 'beginner friendly'. Actually it's disempowering to
beginners because they will learn to rely on an interface that is
geared towards a lack of understanding at the expense of logic, in an
attempt to obscure fundamental and unavoidable complexities.

On 10/08/2011, Magnus Therning <magnus <at> therning.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 22:09, Craig Daymon <craigdaymon <at> att.net> wrote:
>> What happened to my desktop icons?  Why can't I right click to get
>> desktop options?  Or any options for that matter?  Why can't I move the
>> application bar to the bottom of the screen WHERE I LIKE IT?  I thought
>> Linux was about choice?  Why can't I set the bar to auto-hide?  Again,
>> NO RIGHT CLICK!  Everything I had set up under the previous incarnation
>> of Gnome is lost!  This was a horrible release!  It looks like it was
>> made for a grade schooler's toy.  If someone wants to configure it that
>> way for a specific use, great, but as the default configuration it is
>> crap.  Have you people learned NOTHING from 30+ years of user interface
>> design?
(Continue reading)

Magnus Therning | 11 Aug 08:49 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 02:51,  <1920119 <at> googlemail.com> wrote:
> You say 'beginner friendly', but the reality is that the vast majority
> of new users will be migrating from Windows, be relatively confident
> with computers, and will probably just want to get on with doing
> things without having to adapt to a completely different and IMO less
> efficient environment. WIth Gnome Panel there were differences, but
> the underlying rational, minimistically simple ethos was the same.

You may be right, that "the vast majority" of new users come from
Windows, I simply don't know.  In any case I personally don't think
that the step from the limited Windows workspace to the limited Gnome3
workspace is a step backwards, even if requires a bit of re-learning.

> My main gripe with Gnome/Unity, however, is the attitude that things
> need to be made SO 'beginner friendly'. Actually it's disempowering to
> beginners because they will learn to rely on an interface that is
> geared towards a lack of understanding at the expense of logic, in an
> attempt to obscure fundamental and unavoidable complexities.

I simply don't know how the Gnome developers think regarding this.
I'm not a (proper) Gnome developer, or a UI expert so I don't think my
opinion here is worth that much.  What I have come to realise though,
is that with Gnome3 I'm probably not part of the target audience any
more. Still, I've decided to stick with it for a while longer, to see
what happens.

/M

--

-- 
Magnus Therning                      OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
(Continue reading)

Sergio de Almeida Lenzi | 11 Aug 21:26 2011
Picon

It is not only me that have problems with gnome3

Ok I know that gnome3 will be the stunning desktop user
for all, but for now, seems that the change from gnome2 is too
fast for the users... and forgot about the old gnome panel...
that does  not work in "compatible" mode, the same way it used
to do.  For me, I installed new users with Xfce..

and that is not only me
Please look...
http://www.osnews.com/story/25022/Linus_Torvalds_Not_a_Fan_of_Gnome_3
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Olav Vitters | 12 Aug 20:06 2011
Picon

Re: It is not only me that have problems with gnome3

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 04:26:52PM -0300, Sergio de Almeida Lenzi wrote:
> Ok I know that gnome3 will be the stunning desktop user
> for all, but for now, seems that the change from gnome2 is too
> fast for the users... and forgot about the old gnome panel...
> that does  not work in "compatible" mode, the same way it used
> to do.  For me, I installed new users with Xfce.. 

Fallback mode works fine, though some small changes have been made. In
GNOME 3.2 there will also have various applets ported to gtk+3.

> and that is not only me 
> Please look...
> http://www.osnews.com/story/25022/Linus_Torvalds_Not_a_Fan_of_Gnome_3

That has already been discussed. In short: if kernel hackers love GNOME
3, that would be great, but major focus is not on kernel hackers.
Furthermore, there only has been one GNOME 3 release up to now.

--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
1920119 | 11 Aug 18:01 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

"the step from the limited Windows workspace to the limited Gnome3
workspace is[n't] a step backwards, even if requires a bit of
re-learning."

Except that in Windows, clicking something does ONE THING, with no
side-effects, rather than changing the entire screen layout, and
everything appears only once, always in the same place, and you can
see where everything is. Much easier to learn and less intimidating.
It is intended for beginners, isn't it? As you say,

"What I have come to realise though, is that with Gnome3 I'm probably
not part of the target audience any more"

And you seem to be misrepresenting my argument. My point was that it's
not truly friendly to beginners either, because it makes it difficult
to develop efficient habits and to understand what's actually going
on. Even if it is argued that is that it will draw them in initially,
it ultimately does them a disservice. Still, I suppose that is the
kind of tactic that results from commercial influence.

On 11/08/2011, Magnus Therning <magnus <at> therning.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 02:51,  <1920119 <at> googlemail.com> wrote:
>> You say 'beginner friendly', but the reality is that the vast majority
>> of new users will be migrating from Windows, be relatively confident
>> with computers, and will probably just want to get on with doing
>> things without having to adapt to a completely different and IMO less
>> efficient environment. WIth Gnome Panel there were differences, but
>> the underlying rational, minimistically simple ethos was the same.
>
> You may be right, that "the vast majority" of new users come from
> Windows, I simply don't know.  In any case I personally don't think
> that the step from the limited Windows workspace to the limited Gnome3
> workspace is a step backwards, even if requires a bit of re-learning.
>
>> My main gripe with Gnome/Unity, however, is the attitude that things
>> need to be made SO 'beginner friendly'. Actually it's disempowering to
>> beginners because they will learn to rely on an interface that is
>> geared towards a lack of understanding at the expense of logic, in an
>> attempt to obscure fundamental and unavoidable complexities.
>
> I simply don't know how the Gnome developers think regarding this.
> I'm not a (proper) Gnome developer, or a UI expert so I don't think my
> opinion here is worth that much.  What I have come to realise though,
> is that with Gnome3 I'm probably not part of the target audience any
> more. Still, I've decided to stick with it for a while longer, to see
> what happens.
>
> /M
>
> --
> Magnus Therning                      OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
> email: magnus <at> therning.org   jabber: magnus <at> therning.org
> twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list <at> gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
>
Magnus Therning | 11 Aug 20:22 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 05:01:39PM +0100, 1920119 <at> googlemail.com wrote:
> "the step from the limited Windows workspace to the limited Gnome3
> workspace is[n't] a step backwards, even if requires a bit of
> re-learning."
> 
> Except that in Windows, clicking something does ONE THING, with no
> side-effects, rather than changing the entire screen layout, and
> everything appears only once, always in the same place, and you can
> see where everything is. Much easier to learn and less intimidating.
> It is intended for beginners, isn't it? As you say,

I'm not sure whether you are referring to Windows or Gnome3 in that
paragraph, since all you say is about as true for both systems.

> "What I have come to realise though, is that with Gnome3 I'm probably
> not part of the target audience any more"
> 
> And you seem to be misrepresenting my argument. My point was that it's
> not truly friendly to beginners either, because it makes it difficult
> to develop efficient habits and to understand what's actually going
> on. Even if it is argued that is that it will draw them in initially,
> it ultimately does them a disservice. Still, I suppose that is the
> kind of tactic that results from commercial influence.

I am not a UI expert so I can't say anything for certain about
Gnome3's friendliness to beginners.  So far your comments have given
me the impression that you aren't a UI expert either, I'm sorry if I'm
mistaken in that assumption.

What in Gnome3 inherently prevents development of efficient habits?
What in Gnome3 inherently makes it difficult to understand what is
actually going on?

I sure hasn't found anything that falls into any of those categories.

I've said I *suspect* Gnome3 is beginner friendly, but I *don't know*
if it is.  What I'm almost completely sure of is that it isn't expert
friendly!  This is what I've been trying to say, perhaps a bit
clumsily, but I don't agree that I'm misrepresenting your argument at
all.

/M

--

-- 
Magnus Therning                      OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 
email: magnus <at> therning.org   jabber: magnus <at> therning.org
twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus

Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then
being a real problem in the longer term.
     -- Alan Kay
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Mikus Grinbergs | 12 Aug 22:06 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

> What in Gnome3 inherently prevents development of efficient habits?

In Gnome 2 many things can be set up so as to require a SINGLE click (in 
the screen that the user is already looking at) to activate.  For 
example, the launching of a second instance of a Terminal window.  For 
another example, switching the screen to display another workspace.

As it currently comes out of the box, Gnome 3 requires multiple clicks 
(with additional cursor movement) to perform such actions.

> What in Gnome3 inherently makes it difficult to understand what is
> actually going on?

Your point - Gnome 3 as it currently comes out of the box is not 
"difficult to understand".  But it can be "difficult to use".  And what 
good is it to understand what happened, when the user ends up still not 
liking what happened.

As an example, some applications have controls at the upper left of 
their window.  Many many times in Gnome 3, when moving the cursor to the 
upper left of an application's window, I have overshot and ended up 
looking at Gnome's launch screen -- now I have to click to get back to 
where i was.  I understand what happened -- but that is NOT what I 
wanted to happen.  [I myself am waiting for somebody to publish a Gnome 
3 extension that de-activates that "hot corner".]

The same requirement for careful cursor control appears when moving a 
window near the Gnome 3 top bar -- suddenly that window gets enlarged -- 
that is NOT what I wanted to happen  (and I have to click to get it back 
to its former size).  I understand that Gnome 3 has made "enlarging" a 
window easier - that is an action I myself rarely want.  What I do want 
(much more often) is to move windows around on the screen.  The current 
Gnome 3 requires me to "pay close attention" to how far my hand pushes 
the cursor (Gnome 2 did not act on sloppiness).

Bah!   mikus
Dennis J Perkins | 14 Aug 22:08 2011
Picon
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 15:06 -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> What in Gnome3 inherently prevents development of efficient habits?

What in Gnome 3 promotes the development of efficient habits?
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Olav Vitters | 15 Aug 02:00 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 02:08:30PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 15:06 -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> > > What in Gnome3 inherently prevents development of efficient habits?
> 
> What in Gnome 3 promotes the development of efficient habits?

Is this going to be a yes/no/yes/no discussion? Note that I won't allow
that. If you dislike GNOME 3.0, fine. Discussion is fine too, but
replying to a question with another question is not what I consider
constructive.

That said, I think if you used GNOME 3 for a while you'll get to see the
way of working it promotes. To me it is much nicer than working in GNOME
2... though it takes a while to notice it because change is annoying.
--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
Mikus Grinbergs | 15 Aug 08:04 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

> I think if you used GNOME 3 for a while you'll get to see the way of
> working it promotes. To me it is much nicer than working in GNOME 2

Would you please list some of the "ways of working" that you find nicer 
on Gnome 3 ?

On my system I've installed third-party extensions that restore some of 
the Gnome 2 functionality that vanilla Gnome 3.0 no longer provides.  In 
particular, I've permanently set up a workspace switcher along the 
bottom of the screen.

I myself do not use alt-tab switching -- instead I populate seven 
permanently allocated workspaces with my customary apps -- my "way of 
working" is to switch (with a single click) to a different workspace 
whenever there is a change in the context (of what I am doing).

[By the way, I have at least five different Terminal windows active all 
the time - to access/modify various resources within my system.  Also 
several Browsers and PDF Readers, to let me look up reference data.]

mikus

p.s.  It's been written that with Gnome 3 it is the keyboard that offers 
efficient shortcuts.  But I've gotten into the habit of using the cursor 
to control system facilities, and using the keyboard only for text 
entry.  I do NOT consider it a good "way of working" if I have to resort 
to the keyboard because the GUI now resists customization.
Sergio de Almeida Lenzi | 11 Aug 13:08 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

Em Qua, 2011-08-10 às 08:56 +0200, Magnus Therning escreveu:
For me it took a good 2 months of
daily use to get used to it, and still I'm not quite sure whether I
like it or not. As has been pointed out before there is a very real
loss of configurability that is easy to access, but hopefully that'll
be addressed in the near future. My current feeling about Gnome3 is
that maybe we are moving in different directions; I'm becoming more
experienced and more sophisticated in my use of Linux, and Gnome is
becoming more beginner-friendly.
TWO MONTHS??? 
What about a company with 60 users that uses gnome2 every day with lots of
icons in the desktop and lots of applications in the gnome panel?

They are all "end users" that only knows how to move and click the mouse...
they use libreoffice, some applications in the epiphany, and print a lot of documents...

Gnome3 for them is a disaster.. the cost of training for the new desktop is
not accept. They cannot stop the company for training..  besides, the
computers does not have 3D video boards,   I am considering XFCE4.8...

Well... I will wait for a year or two...

Sergio
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Magnus Therning | 11 Aug 13:37 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 13:08, Sergio de Almeida Lenzi
<lenzi.sergio <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Em Qua, 2011-08-10 às 08:56 +0200, Magnus Therning escreveu:
>
> For me it took a good 2 months of
> daily use to get used to it, and still I'm not quite sure whether I
> like it or not. As has been pointed out before there is a very real
> loss of configurability that is easy to access, but hopefully that'll
> be addressed in the near future. My current feeling about Gnome3 is
> that maybe we are moving in different directions; I'm becoming more
> experienced and more sophisticated in my use of Linux, and Gnome is
> becoming more beginner-friendly.
>
> TWO MONTHS???
> What about a company with 60 users that uses gnome2 every day with lots of
> icons in the desktop and lots of applications in the gnome panel?
>
> They are all "end users" that only knows how to move and click the mouse...
> they use libreoffice, some applications in the epiphany, and print a lot of
> documents...

I would think that Gnome3 would be perfectly suitable for this kind of
users.  It took me two months because I had Gnome2 with another window
manager (Gnome3 doesn't allow running another WM unless you're in
fallback mode).

> Gnome3 for them is a disaster.. the cost of training for the new desktop is
> not accept. They cannot stop the company for training..  besides, the
> computers does not have 3D video boards,   I am considering XFCE4.8...

What is and isn't acceptable varies from company to company.  There is
no need to "stop the company", but training is likely to speed the
uptake.

> Well... I will wait for a year or two...

If you support yourself through the existence of Gnome, then I'd
suggest you don't only wait but get involved. If you are actively
involved in the development of Gnome you will at least have some way
of influencing the project to not make further changes that are
equally disastrous to you.

/M

--

-- 
Magnus Therning                      OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus <at> therning.org   jabber: magnus <at> therning.org
twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
enaut | 10 Aug 09:13 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On 06.08.2011 22:09, Craig Daymon wrote:
> What happened to my desktop icons?  Why can't I right click to get
> desktop options?  Or any options for that matter?  Why can't I move the
> application bar to the bottom of the screen WHERE I LIKE IT?  I thought
> Linux was about choice?  Why can't I set the bar to auto-hide?  Again,
> NO RIGHT CLICK!  Everything I had set up under the previous incarnation
> of Gnome is lost!  This was a horrible release!  It looks like it was
> made for a grade schooler's toy.  If someone wants to configure it that
> way for a specific use, great, but as the default configuration it is
> crap.  Have you people learned NOTHING from 30+ years of user interface
> design?
>
Well I'm using Gnome3 and it actually works quite good. I think if you
stop hating it because its different you could accept it as alternative
userinterface if not even love it!
(I'm neither developer nor "grade schooler")

Regarding the fredom you mentioned: It's not at all a freedom to dictate
the developers its a freedom to install what you want and where you want
it! And a freedom to change everything (in code not in settings)! If you
are not happy just modify it or install a different DE.

If you look up some of your Problems with internet search engines you
will find a lot of sollutions:
http://justinstories.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/get-your-bottom-panel-functionality-back-in-gnome-shell/
http://www.webupd8.org/2011/06/get-classic-gnome-desktop-with-these.html

so just have fun with the new Gnome!
Mikus Grinbergs | 10 Aug 13:30 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

> I'm using Gnome3 and it actually works quite good.

A disconcerting aspect of Gnome 3 is that it appears to NOT have been 
designed for persons who have already been using Linux for a while.

For instance -- to launch a not-yet-in-use program the user needs to 
click on an 'Applications' button located on the LEFT side.  This (for 
somebody with lots of programs installed) brings up a screen cluttered 
with icons.  Gnome 3 provides a menu-list to filter those icons down to 
a more manageable number.  But that menu-list is on the RIGHT side.

A tablet user might want such an arrangement -- he could use his left 
thumb to touch the 'Applications' button and immediately use his right 
thumb to select within the list of filters.  But a Linux user with a 
substantial-sized screen is forced to TRAVERSE that screen from the one 
side to the other.  Why not support the applications filter-list to be 
configurable to the SAME side as the applications display button ?

mikus
Frederic Muller | 11 Aug 03:31 2011
Picon

Re: Very happy in Gnome 3

On 08/10/2011 07:30 PM, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
>> I'm using Gnome3 and it actually works quite good.
> 
> A disconcerting aspect of Gnome 3 is that it appears to NOT have been
> designed for persons who have already been using Linux for a while.
> 
> For instance -- to launch a not-yet-in-use program the user needs to
> click on an 'Applications' button located on the LEFT side.  This (for
> somebody with lots of programs installed) brings up a screen cluttered
> with icons.  Gnome 3 provides a menu-list to filter those icons down to
> a more manageable number.  But that menu-list is on the RIGHT side.
> 
> A tablet user might want such an arrangement -- he could use his left
> thumb to touch the 'Applications' button and immediately use his right
> thumb to select within the list of filters.  But a Linux user with a
> substantial-sized screen is forced to TRAVERSE that screen from the one
> side to the other.  Why not support the applications filter-list to be
> configurable to the SAME side as the applications display button ?
> 
> mikus

A Linux user such as myself has been using GNOME-DO since the early days
(of GNOME-DO) and just types the application name or description. GNOME
3 will then give you a list of apps that match those letters. In no time
without moving your mouse you have your application ready to be
launched. So efficient and I didn't event need to install a 3rd party
library and an extra app.

The glass is always half empty or half full, it's really a matter of
perspective.

Now I do agree that there is a lot of 'traversing' the screen in
general, looking for the 'right' workspace is also one of those cases
(especially since they self destruct when empty).

So I think what's everybody is forgetting and GNOME 3.0 is that it is a
DOT ZERO release, some stuff were not finished and 'we' knew it
(theming, file history, etc), and some stuff needed to be used by a
wider audience. Now now one was forced to run the .0 . Fedora users can
still be running F14 which is supported until a few more months, others
the same.

3.2 will come with a lot of improvement and maybe people who don't like
change or the latest and the greatest might like it better?

I for one, see a FOSS project innovating and trying new things and
overall with great success. Sure there is some fine tuning needed, but
it's coming.

Fred
Dennis J Perkins | 11 Aug 05:49 2011
Picon
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 16:09 -0400, Craig Daymon wrote:
What happened to my desktop icons? Why can't I right click to get desktop options? Or any options for that matter? Why can't I move the application bar to the bottom of the screen WHERE I LIKE IT? I thought Linux was about choice? Why can't I set the bar to auto-hide? Again, NO RIGHT CLICK! Everything I had set up under the previous incarnation of Gnome is lost! This was a horrible release! It looks like it was made for a grade schooler's toy. If someone wants to configure it that way for a specific use, great, but as the default configuration it is crap. Have you people learned NOTHING from 30+ years of user interface design? _______________________________________________ gnome-list mailing list gnome-list <at> gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list

I agree.  Too many things are missing.  And why require accelerated graphics?  GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are the future and desktops and laptops are passe.  I've used GNOME since the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Olav Vitters | 12 Aug 20:10 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:49:49PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> I agree.  Too many things are missing.  And why require accelerated
> graphics?  GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are
> the future and desktops and laptops are passe.  I've used GNOME since
> the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.

All graphics card sold over the last 3 years only have a 3D engine. 2D
is emulated, nothing more. GNOME 3 should work with any graphics card
released in the last 5 years. At the time of GNOME 3.2 also good enough
software rendering should be available.

The designers stated btw that tablets are not the focus, bad input
devices is.
--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
Mikus Grinbergs | 12 Aug 22:47 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

> GNOME 3 should work with any graphics card
> released in the last 5 years.

My only experience is with Gnome 3 on Fedora 15.  My graphics card is a 
Radeon 4670.  When I first installed Fedora 15, it was random whether 
the Gnome 3 screen would come up readable, or as an unreadable jumble of 
colors.  [If the latter, I would log out and log back in again. 
Eventually a readable Gnome 3 screen would be presented.]

I tried installing the proprietary ATI drivers -- the result with Gnome 
3 was a multi-stripe top bar.  Plus the icon thumbnails within the Gnome 
3 launch screen got shown as a jumble of colors.

So I un-installed the proprietary drivers.  And behold - Gnome 3 is now 
being rendered correctly.  There is no xorg.conf file;  System info 
shows the driver as Gallium 0.4

My point :  I had to run around in circles to get Gnome 3 to work 
"correctly" in my system.

mikus
Olav Vitters | 12 Aug 22:42 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 03:47:25PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> My point :  I had to run around in circles to get Gnome 3 to work
> "correctly" in my system.

I also mentioned software rendering would be available in GNOME 3.2.
Furthermore, during the course of GNOME 3 I expect all the drivers to
improve drastically.

I am not saying that driver issues are not a problem, but I suggest if
you have problems, wait a bit until the kernel has improved. It is only
software bits, not the graphics card. Further, should be able to do
software rendering as well soon.
--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
Dennis J Perkins | 14 Aug 22:09 2011
Picon
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 22:42 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 03:47:25PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: > My point : I had to run around in circles to get Gnome 3 to work > "correctly" in my system. I also mentioned software rendering would be available in GNOME 3.2. Furthermore, during the course of GNOME 3 I expect all the drivers to improve drastically.

So you are saying that people need to wait until next spring.  Wasn't this part of the problem with KDE4?  Things weren't ready and functionality was lost?
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Olav Vitters | 15 Aug 01:52 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 02:09:57PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 22:42 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 03:47:25PM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> > > My point :  I had to run around in circles to get Gnome 3 to work
> > > "correctly" in my system.
> > 
> > I also mentioned software rendering would be available in GNOME 3.2.
> > Furthermore, during the course of GNOME 3 I expect all the drivers to
> > improve drastically.
> 
> So you are saying that people need to wait until next spring.  Wasn't

No, that is not what I said.

Note that I if with spring you meant my GNOME 3.2 reference, it is due
in September (see https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointOne).

> this part of the problem with KDE4?  Things weren't ready and
> functionality was lost?

I'm not sure what you're after here, I not in a position to comment on
KDE. I am happy with the state of GNOME 3.0 though.

GNOME 3.0 is just the first version. It might not be the end-all for
everyone yet, but that is why there is a fallback option in 3.0 and a
3.2 in September, followed by 3.4 and so on.
--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
John Jason Jordan | 15 Aug 06:32 2011
Picon
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 01:52:26 +0200
Olav Vitters <olav <at> vitters.nl> dijo:

>GNOME 3.0 is just the first version. It might not be the end-all for
>everyone yet, but that is why there is a fallback option in 3.0 and a
>3.2 in September, followed by 3.4 and so on.

I use Gnome 2.32.0 on Fedora 14, x86_64. I have deliberately not
upgraded to Fedora 15 because of all the comments about Gnome 3.0. But
I will have to upgrade in a few months, as Fedora will not support 14
once Fedora 16 is out.

I am very fussy about what my desktop looks like, and for a reason. I
have a mental problem with distractions. Therefore, my desktop is
utterly blank - a solid light color with no icons anywhere, not even
wallpaper. I use only the panel on the top. Over years of using
computers I have come to dislike icons.

I did try a live CD of Fedora 15, and found it impossible to
concentrate on any tasks because of the constant background clutter.
Unfortunately, being a live CD it was impossible to change the
appearance of the desktop - evidently changes must be written to disk
and you can't do that with a live CD.

So I am very interested in whether it is possible to configure Gnome 3
to have no icons on the desktop, not even for launching applications,
and a solid light color wallpaper. 

Failing that I would like to know about the "fallback option" quoted
above. What exactly is the "fallback option"? Would it allow me the
same configuration in Gnome 3 that I have with 2.32.0?
Frederic Muller | 15 Aug 12:07 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3


On 08/15/2011 12:32 PM, John Jason Jordan wrote:
> So I am very interested in whether it is possible to configure Gnome 3
> to have no icons on the desktop, not even for launching applications,
> and a solid light color wallpaper. 

That's one of the so-called 'controversial' changes in GNOME 3: by
default no icon on the desktop AT ALL. And yes you can change the wallpaper.

Fred
Olav Vitters | 15 Aug 12:11 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:32:56PM -0700, John Jason Jordan wrote:
> So I am very interested in whether it is possible to configure Gnome 3
> to have no icons on the desktop, not even for launching applications,
> and a solid light color wallpaper. 

Depends on what you define as desktop. The background behind all windows
does not have any icons. You can configure the background to have just a
color, nothing more.

However, in overview mode (what appears after you press the 'Windows'
key) you will see icons when you want to launch a new application.
Though you can also use ALT-F2 to launch something.

The idea behind 3.0 is to focus on the current application, and give
anything else less visibility. You can even hide those notification
messages if you're really busy and don't want such distractions.

But if you're into tweaking, loads of things can be tweaked using
gnome-tweak-tool and furthermore GNOME shell has extensions. Currently
you do need to know about the extensions (the ones available), but
hopefully for 3.2 we'll have a website listing that. Not totally sure
if 3.2 timeframe is realistic for this because we're nearing UI freeze
and I haven't seen this being committed yet.

> Failing that I would like to know about the "fallback option" quoted
> above. What exactly is the "fallback option"? Would it allow me the
> same configuration in Gnome 3 that I have with 2.32.0?

Basically a GNOME panel ported to Gtk+3 and a few changes (basically:
hold down alt to make changes + applets align only left/right/center) .
In GNOME 3.2 you'll have various applets back.

You can force that fallback mode with 'System settings'. It should allow
for pretty much the same experience though, aside from a few changes.
--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
Enaut Waldmeier | 15 Aug 19:03 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3


> Failing that I would like to know about the "fallback option" quoted
> above. What exactly is the "fallback option"? Would it allow me the
> same configuration in Gnome 3 that I have with 2.32.0?

Basically a GNOME panel ported to Gtk+3 and a few changes (basically:
hold down alt to make changes + applets align only left/right/center) .
In GNOME 3.2 you'll have various applets back.

You can force that fallback mode with 'System settings'. It should allow
for pretty much the same experience though, aside from a few changes.
I think what he saw was the fallback mode due to lack of graphic drivers.
To look at gnome shell watch some videos!  This is what it looks like for me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwfRrlTUcsU&feature=related

_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Mike Williams | 12 Aug 20:20 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Olav Vitters <olav <at> vitters.nl> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:49:49PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> I agree.  Too many things are missing.  And why require accelerated
> graphics?  GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are
> the future and desktops and laptops are passe.  I've used GNOME since
> the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.

The designers stated btw that tablets are not the focus, bad input
devices is.

What do you mean? Bad input devices are the focus?  What about a mouse and a large screen because that is a problematic configuration with gnome3 due to having to move all the way from one side to the other.?

Mike

_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Olav Vitters | 12 Aug 22:46 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 02:20:23PM -0400, Mike Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Olav Vitters <olav <at> vitters.nl> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:49:49PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> > > I agree.  Too many things are missing.  And why require accelerated
> > > graphics?  GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are
> > > the future and desktops and laptops are passe.  I've used GNOME since
> > > the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.
> >
> > The designers stated btw that tablets are not the focus, bad input
> > devices is.
> >
> 
> What do you mean? Bad input devices are the focus?  What about a mouse and a
> large screen because that is a problematic configuration with gnome3 due to
> having to move all the way from one side to the other.?

I did not mean what you said. I meant that a lot of touchpads on laptops
are very bad to use (inaccurate and so on). GNOME 3 was meant to make it
easier to work with them.

Suggest if you focus on doing things quickly to use the keyboard. You
can more quickly start applications and so on than before.
--

-- 
Regards,
Olav
Sergio de Almeida Lenzi | 13 Aug 13:50 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

Em Sex, 2011-08-12 às 14:20 -0400, Mike Williams escreveu:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Olav Vitters <olav <at> vitters.nl> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:49:49PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> I agree.  Too many things are missing.  And why require accelerated
> graphics?  GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are
> the future and desktops and laptops are passe.  I've used GNOME since
> the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.


The designers stated btw that tablets are not the focus, bad input
devices is.

What do you mean? Bad input devices are the focus?  What about a mouse and a large screen because that is a problematic configuration with gnome3 due to having to move all the way from one side to the other.?

Mike
BAD input devices ?? you mean the keyboard???

For what I see, gnome3 works very good with the keyboard (alt this, alt that, control alt this, shift control alt that...)
Well, have we return the the wordperfect times??  (in the 70's)??
Even if with mouse is not "so fast", but it is more intuitive...

Indeed Ana, 3yo can operate gnome2 but not gnome3..

_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
alexander.wilms | 14 Aug 19:10 2011

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3

 Finally some of problems are mentioned on the mailing list. I even switched to KDE, even though I don't really like it but at least I am treated like a mature user.
As I am using (K)ubuntu/Fedora I also tried Unity and I must say both projects (Gnome Shell and Unity) have aspects I really like. For example the activities view and the fact that I can open I very fast by just moving the cursor to the hot corner. Additionally it feels a lot more snappier than Unity. But I dislike the lack of options which are available by default (e.g. Theming, changing Icon sizes of the activities view) and the fact that for some strange reason I have to press alt to shutdown my PC. Regarding Unity I am unsure whether I really need the Launcher, but I'd like to be able to place it wherever I want and let it stay visible even when I'm not in the activities/dash view. But the biggest advantage of Unity over Gnome Shell are the appindicators. I prefer to have a single area where I get an overview about quite everything to the way Gnome Shell splits this principle using two areas, one at the top and one at the bottom. I don't know what others think but I'd like to see both developer teams putting their differences aside and merging the projects for the sake of providing a single good Gnome DE to the user and saving developer resources. And regarding issues design decisions which appear to be based on everything but the user bases preferences I'd like to see some surveys like the one the LibreOffice team did (http://survey.usability-methods.com/survey/943138fd9025419a9a34e7b23e4c6c21/) in order to find out what the average user actually expects. Someone on this mailing list mentioned that Linus ditched Gnome for XFCE and the response was that Gnome wasn't designed to be the DE for a Kernel hacker. But apparently he didn't have any issues with the previous release of Gnome, so I am wondering why this release doesn't target both newbies and experienced users. I've read quite often that Gnome Shell feels quite dumbed down, so why not just provide user friendly defaults (i.e. no key pressing needed for simply shutting down the computer), a reasonable amount of 'advanced' settings which need to be confirmed each time and a big button 'RESET TO DEFAULTS'.

I hope my criticism is helpful so that at some point I and probably many others can revert to Gnome.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I don't want to offend anyone, hopefully you understand my point of view

Alex



---- On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 13:50:23 +0200 Sergio de Almeida Lenzi <lenzi.sergio <at> gmail.com> wrote ----

Em Sex, 2011-08-12 às 14:20 -0400, Mike Williams escreveu:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Olav Vitters <olav <at> vitters.nl> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:49:49PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> I agree.  Too many things are missing.  And why require accelerated
> graphics?  GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are
> the future and desktops and laptops are passe.  I've used GNOME since
> the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.


The designers stated btw that tablets are not the focus, bad input
devices is.

What do you mean? Bad input devices are the focus?  What about a mouse and a large screen because that is a problematic configuration with gnome3 due to having to move all the way from one side to the other.?

Mike
BAD input devices ?? you mean the keyboard???

For what I see, gnome3 works very good with the keyboard (alt this, alt that, control alt this, shift control alt that...)
Well, have we return the the wordperfect times??  (in the 70's)??
Even if with mouse is not "so fast", but it is more intuitive...

Indeed Ana, 3yo can operate gnome2 but not gnome3..

_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list

ned on the mailing list!
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
Calum Benson | 15 Aug 11:54 2011
Picon

Re: Very disappointed in Gnome 3


On 14 Aug 2011, at 18:10, alexander.wilms wrote:

> Someone on this mailing list mentioned that Linus ditched Gnome for XFCE and the response was that Gnome
wasn't designed to be the DE for a Kernel hacker. But apparently he didn't have any issues with the previous
release of Gnome, so I am wondering why this release doesn't target both newbies and experienced users.

Au contraire, Linus frequently complained about GNOME 2 as well. If he really liked GNOME 2 that much,
there's no reason he couldn't still be using it, along with the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of
others of current GNOME 2 users whose distros won't be updating to GNOME 3 anytime soon. But of course he's
more than welcome to use XFCE instead -- such is the freedom of choice afforded to all of us in the world of
free software.

Cheeri,
Calum.

--

-- 
CALUM BENSON, Interaction Designer     Oracle Corporation Ireland Ltd.
mailto:calum.benson <at> oracle.com         Solaris Desktop Team
http://blogs.sun.com/calum             +353 1 819 9771

Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Oracle Corp.

Gmane