Apple was a niche player with Macintosh, but along comes iPod and then iOS, and it's the king of the world. Now, each release of the Mac OS is another step in the transition to iOS. Why improve that ridiculous "Finder" with a dual pane view for organizing your files when you can go the other way and eliminate access to files and folders altogether, like iOS? You never did understand "folders" anyway, did you? Soon, you won't have to. Just point at the pretty pictures and buy something from our store, and you'll feel better.
Microsoft now wants to be a toymaker, too, like Apple. Computers are soooo last century. Computers are for people who are literate; the future is about serving the "if you see what you want, poke it with your finger" market.
What I'd like to suggest is that all Linux platform developers seriously consider going the opposite way and providing real "computers" to those holdouts, like me, who still need to get real work done and know how to navigate a real file system and even [gasp] a command line.
I'm not saying that no Linux device should compete with iOS, just that, if the mainstream makers are going to run away from power users, desktop Linux has a huge opportunity to become the "computer for the rest of us, version 2" by going the opposite direction and intentionally focusing on being a power tool for smart people with work to do.
There is near-universal hatred for everything about GNOME 3. We aren't talking about nitpicking, either. People outright hate everything about GNOME 3.
Existing GNOME users are fleeing to Xfce, KDE and other environments like never before. GNOME 3 surely isn't bringing in that many new users, if it has even brought in any.
It's clear that the GNOME project is tearing itself apart. Most long-time users have given up hope of things getting better. We can't blame them, considering that each GNOME-related announcement brings bad news (even if the GNOME developers mistakenly consider it to be good news).
This announcement just reinforces the feeling that bad ideas rule at the GNOME project these days.
I'm not sure what you're saying is true. I, personally, am a huge fan of GNOME 3 and everything the project has done and plans on doing. Most of my friends (Linux users) are also satisfied, and have no major problems with it. But we usually don't talk about it on Hacker News or other message boards, because we're happy with what we have.
People who are unhappy are much more likely to speak out than those who are content. Clearly, GNOME 3 has annoyed a lot of people, judging by how many people are angry. But I think that generalizing and saying there's "near universal hatred for everything about GNOME 3" is a bit unfair.
The main reason I don't buy what you're saying is that no other widely-liked open source software project suffers from this sort of silence from "satisfied" users.
I often hear and see people advocating the use of KDE and Xfce, for example, even in discussion that isn't directly related to them. It isn't isolated to desktop environments, either. People who are happy with Linux Mint, for instance, are very willing to express their like in public.
In general, highly satisfied users will openly say good things about the application, project, distribution or system that they enjoy using.
But we don't see that spontaneous expression of enjoyment when it comes to GNOME 3. In fact, the only time I ever see people claim to like it is when somebody says or posts something about how GNOME 3 is generally disliked by most. There are always two or three people who'll say that they like it. However, their number always pales in comparison to the far greater number of people in the same discussion who express dislike or outright disgust for GNOME 3.
I think the fact is that GNOME 3 is widely hated. That doesn't mean that there aren't a few token users who do enjoy it. But given the significant backlash toward it, the high degree of negativity whenever it's discussed, and the lack of traction it has gained so far, I think it's pretty safe to say that it isn't seen in a good light.
Agreed. People should use what they want to use. I personally hate KDE. I find that particular UI to be the most insane and ugly mess I've ever used. That doesn't mean I go to KDE related thread and talk about how the KDE people don't get it and don't listen to their users.
What annoys me are these comments by people claiming to represent "Gnome's users". No, they represent some of Gnome's users - a group that does not include me.
You do realize that many of the people who speak out against GNOME 3 the loudest are long-time GNOME users who suddenly found their productive and usable desktop environment had been torn apart and replaced with an inefficient, tablet-oriented mess, correct?
I think that they do represent GNOME's users extremely well. The fact that the GNOME project is currently trying to reach out to less-technical users shows that they don't make up an important part of the GNOME user base.
Driving away the most advanced GNOME powerusers, especially those who have the abilities necessary to contribute to its continuing development, is one of the worst things the GNOME project is doing these days.
What I'd like to suggest is that all Linux platform developers seriously consider going the opposite way and providing real "computers" to those holdouts, like me, who still need to get real work done and know how to navigate a real file system and even [gasp] a command line.
I hope a gnome dev reads this.
Some of the gnome developers came and visited us onsite earlier this year. They did it to "study real users" and get feedback on the gnome3 UI.
Some background: we were representing ~500+ Real Paying Gnome Users, not some nebulous fantasy persona that gnome hopes to get as a user in the future. We are the real customers. We are high-end computer graphics researchers, software developers, and some of the most talented CG artists in the world.
We are content creators, not content consumers.
My gut feeling after the meeting was that they were so stuck in their decisions that they really didn't care about the feedback we had for them. They spent their time defending their positions with platitudes like, "well, you have to try it first. Maybe it's not that bad".
No one liked the magic hot-corner activities window. That's not how we work. The gnome3 philosophy seems to be centered around single applications that consume the entire window, and no configuration. Our workflow is having lots of separate terminals, windows, and a mix of applications running at once. Our world views are drastically different.
My simple question, "if you move the menu bar to the top, and we all use sloppy-focus, doesn't that mean that if there's a window in-between the active window and the top of the screen that we'll lose focus as we try to move the mouse up to the top menubar?", was met with, "well, we didn't think that through. Yes, there might be problems with sloppy focus. <silence>". Uggh.
It's gotten to the point where we are afraid of what's going to happen when RHEL7 comes around and gnome3 is the default. We are paying customers and we don't want gnome3.
I love everything redhat does for the community, but I can't help but get a sense that they are cannibalizing their current users in hope of gaining some nebulous lowest-common-denominator user in exchange.
I really don't know what's going to happen, but XFCE looks like a serious alternative now. What if redhat won't support us if we use XFCE on the desktop? Well, we might have to search for a competitor. Who's the competition? Who's target customer is the high-end Linux desktop user? If that's you, I'd like to talk to you.
Has your group taken a serious look at KDE 4? It has reached or exceeded feature parity with KDE 3.5 across the board, it's a lot more stable now than any previous release of KDE ever has been, and it's well supported by RHEL (and SUSE, for that matter). Even though part of the KDE team is putting a lot of work into the tablet interface etc, the system is modular enough that the desktop doesn't suffer for it.
A lot of people tried early version in the 4.x series, and up until about 4.6 or so it was a crashy disaster, but it's really shaped up in the last year or two.
I'll preface this by mentioning that I am not the level of power-user you are (I don't rely on my OS for my job) therefore your specific needs are far different than mine.
Linux Mint has surprised me with v14 and Cinnamon. I used MATE in v13 and never thought I'd try the forsaken GNOME3 again. However with the new update I figured I'd give it a shot.
It's actually better, for my use case, than MATE. The workspace switching is very nice, the hotcorner for workspace quick view is great on my laptop, but it's configurable and shortcuts still work fine.
Everything runs like it did in Gnome 2/MATE but it feels more modern.
All the while Mint is making Linux (well, Debian/Ubuntu) even more user friendly and cohesive.
I never want to have iOS or Microsoft's equivalent to be my primary OS. Leave that for my pocket. But I also don't want to roll my own distro (I tried Arch over the summer and ran into too many roadblocks with my laptop). Mint isn't finding a middle ground. It's just what I want.
> What I'd like to suggest is that all Linux platform developers seriously consider going the opposite way and providing real "computers" to those holdouts, like me, who still need to get real work done and know how to navigate a real file system and even [gasp] a command line.
For what it's worth, that's exactly what we're trying to do with KDE. We'll reorganize a UI to make it less confusing for routine tasks but for the most part we're about trying to make it possible to do complex work. Much like the Perl motto, we want easy things to be easy, and hard things to be possible.
Help is always welcomed though, we don't exactly have multiple distros feeding development time and resources directly into the project like some other desktop environments, and we don't really want to be force-fed by those means anyways as it makes it difficult to move in a direction not in accordance with what the company wants. One has only to look at Nokia's Qt to see what happens with that -- lots of progress on things important for mobile (specifically what's nice for Nokia, obviously), relative stagnation on other areas.
While I disagree that tablets and smartphones are mere toys, I do agree Desktop Linux devs seem to miss who the target user is.
I feel like the Linux platform is one of a small group of technologies where I, a developer and computer nerd, are the target user. They should embrace that, not try to push me away.
It sounds like you're saying that Gnome 3 is now targeting non-nerds and that nerds should use something else. Fair enough I suppose.
The thing that's incredibly frustrating from my perspective is that Gnome 2, for me at least, was perfect. It wasn't pretty but it let me launch applications, switch workspaces and use ALT-TAB the way that I wanted to and then pretty much got out of my way and let me get my work done. It was targeted at nerds and it's extremely frustrating that it appears to have been deprecated in favour of something that isn't.
An important thing to keep in mind is that GNOME 2 and earlier were developed first and foremost by programmers, from top to bottom. While there was some input from self-proclaimed "UI designers" and "usability experts", we generally saw experienced C programmers with a strong UNIX and X11 background calling the shots.
That changed with GNOME 3. The involvement of so-called "designers" was much more significant. They've been calling many of the shots. Changes aren't being made for pragmatic reasons, by the very same users who use GNOME to get serious work done. Rather, the changes are made purely for aesthetic or speculative reasons. In many cases, they appear to be direct rip-offs of OS X's approach.
Cinnamon and/or MATE are the real future for GNOME users. GNOME's mainline developers have their heads in the clouds, thinking if they make it shiny enough they'll be the next Steve Jobs, and that's not anything like reality.
Of course, it's fine to conduct experiments like gnome-shell. It's just too bad that they feel like they need to torpedo the whole platform and sink it all together, removing features others depend on (most recently: fallback mode goes away in next major release, 3.8) simply because they're irritated that someone is messing with their precious, beautiful design.
I almost think everyone is just going to switch to KDE and I think we might be better for it; Qt is definitely superior to GTK.
I'm not sure what they are suggesting here. I see five applications with a similar looking startup screen and a music and video player with very basic controls. What is Documents supposed to do ? Let you edit any kind of document (good luck with that) ? Is this a viewer ?
Having essential applications follow a set of UI guidelines is nice, but it's hardly revolutionary, and it sounds like the goal here is simplicity. Unfortunately, it's often the case that something too simple turns out in practice to be useless. In any case, it looks the target is people with a lot of screen real estate to waste.
No, Gnome apps(Documents, Music, and rest of crap) are not following siplistic philosophy, they are followitg easinest. There is huge difference between easy and simple.
Gnome alternative for KISS - KIED (keep it easy dumbass)
Content based user interface. Hasn't worked before and won't work this time. The Gnome people are taking something I'm not. Such a pity, I used to love Gnome and I still love Gnome 2.x.
A lot of what they're showing off (in terms of design) has been similarly implemented in OS X (through iTunes, iPhone, etc.) and it's been very successful.
How has it not worked in the past and why don't you think they can pull it off?
Does anyone have any data on the number of normal users vs power users that Gnome actually has? The worry has to be that, if Gnome stops targeting "people who tend to use Linux" then there's a strong chance that they'll fail to attract enough "normal computer users" to make it worthwhile.
Where's the revolution? Unless it's to take choice away from those of us that don't feel the urge to maximise every damn thing and use the PC like a tablet.
I don't want to downplay this, but rhythmbox shutters every single day while listening to a higher quality radio stream just because you can't adjust the buffer size.
From the comments on the Music application page on the wiki
"One of the problems we have in Banshee when using our gridview which is fairly similar is style to elements of the design is that albums for which we cannot acquire artwork (which tends to be a lot) make the Ui look and feel very inefficient and unfinished. It would be nice if the design had a definite fallback for generating album art in those cases."
The mock ups show a fascinating model of the Gnome project's 'imagined user'. Most real users will not I think reflect the choices shown. I'll be trying to 'live' in these applications when they become available.
(...) details matter: we have a nicer looking run dialog now. The most important feature of this is that it now has a close button, which means that people have an escape route if they accidentally open it.
i dont get it... why?
whats bad about a file browser?
and what if i got mixed things in a folder?
i got music a cover for the music album and the lyrics in a pdf. now i must open 3 apps and find the these things? instead of just click on them?
why not make the file browser better? get a good desktop search etc...
sry but i just dont get the gnome-shell desktop
you can call me stupid ;)
Please don't. You're already behind the times with touch and gesture support. Focus on that. Windows 8 may not have gotten it completely right, but they are at least on the right side of history.
Microsoft now wants to be a toymaker, too, like Apple. Computers are soooo last century. Computers are for people who are literate; the future is about serving the "if you see what you want, poke it with your finger" market.
What I'd like to suggest is that all Linux platform developers seriously consider going the opposite way and providing real "computers" to those holdouts, like me, who still need to get real work done and know how to navigate a real file system and even [gasp] a command line.
I'm not saying that no Linux device should compete with iOS, just that, if the mainstream makers are going to run away from power users, desktop Linux has a huge opportunity to become the "computer for the rest of us, version 2" by going the opposite direction and intentionally focusing on being a power tool for smart people with work to do.