Re: [Usability] GNOME 2.6+ usability: points of critique

[Robert Fendt <rmfendt web de>]

And thus spake Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:20:12 +0100 (IST):

> If you can afford a Macintosh you can always run a lot of Gnome
> applications there too, or even run a Linux distribution.  I still use
> windows a lot myself, dual boot with Gnome.  I hear KDE is quite nice and
> I use it occassionaly (k3b, konqueror sometimes, kde-games has a much
> smarter reverisi than iagno) but I find the range of options overwhelming
> and cluttered at times.

Yes, KDE ist my fallback option at the moment. The problem with KDE really
is that it is quite bloated, though.

> I had that feeling during the change from 1.4 to 2.0 and I although I was
> overjoyed at the simplification and streamlining of Gnome I too was
> dismayed that much of the functionality and configurability was apparently
> gone too.  (And although many of these extras are available \somewhere\ it
> is not always easy to discover where they might be if at all.)  Gnome has
> its flaws but I like where we are going and the flawas are being worked
> on and on balance I like it.

Up to 2.2 (or even 2.4) I liked GNOME 2, do not get me wrong. I still like
it. The problem is just that for some time now with almost every new
version a feature I was used to (i.e., was using on a daily basis)
vanishes or becomes very well hidden. It really seems that I fall out of
GNOME's target group. And if that is really the case, if GNOME 2 is really
only about "everything as simple as possible", where even the screen saver
setting is considered a "complex" option then, alas, I fear GNOME 2
simply is no longer for me.

> As far as I remember you dont have to use gconf-editor, and you are just
> asking for trouble by calling it a "'regedit' rip-off".

Why? The gconf-editor clones the principle of the Windows registry editor
almost 1:1, albeit XML-based. I never liked the registry in Windows, why
should the concept become any better in GNOME?

> The extra warning in gconf-editor may be excessive and unnecessary but if
> you file a bug report and give more context it might be possible to make
> it less annoying but still give enough warning that users wont shoot
> themselves in the foot.

Or simply include an "advanced" button in the configuration windows and do
not make me use gconf at all. Or introduce a global "advanced user mode"
flag in GNOME.

> > 2) I am used to and can productively work with browse-mode file managers
> > like Nautilus used to be until GNOME 2.4. In GNOME 2.6 spatial mode was
> > added. Fair enough. But why does the upgrade simply change the default
> > behaviour without asking me, seemingly expecting me to re-learn before I
> > can get any work done? That is quite arrogant.
> 
> It would have been nice to have been able to upgrade cleanly without
> changing your existing setup and that is an unfortunate but it is too late
> to do anything about now.

That's right. Although I stick to my point: it is _not_ up to the GNOME
developers to decide with which metaphor the user is more comfortable. I
am an old stager and very comfortable with browse mode. Why semi-forcing
me to switch? And even for new users: there should be a wizard at first
start (like KDE does) asking a few simple questions about the user's
background and configure it accordingly.

> > 4) Simple details of themes, like the size of icons in applications
> > cannot be modified. The icon size and arrangement of most themes is
> > almost ridiculous. At least on a 1024x768 laptop screen. Simple
> > possibility to reduze size and space between icons? Not that I know of.
> 
> If I recall correctly you can choose to use a larger verison of a theme
> from the details section of theme manager.

Not in my version. Or I am blind, which of course is a valid possibility.
No kidding, sometimes I do not see the obvious.

> I try not to let annoyances fester for very long, best to treat them with
> a dose of bugzilla and messages to developers.

Hmm well perhaps I will have to adjust my internal definition of 'bug' a
bit and treat those things accordingly.

> glad that you haven't given up entirely on Gnome

Would not think of it! As I said, I like GNOME.

> > but when I extrapolate the
> > current development, I am not very confident.
> 
> I hope you understand that was not a very nice way of putting it, and not
> likely to encourage the kind of responses you really want to your message.
> I'm hoping others have kept their responses polite though, this list is
> usually very good about that kind of thing.

Yes you are right. Apparently I was not in a good mood when writing the
initial post. My apologies to everyone feeling insulted; it was not meant
that way. I meant was I wrote above: that I feel GNOME is shifting its
target group in a way that I am not included anymore. In that case of
course I cannot hope to for my problems with it to go away but to become
worse.

Regards,
Robert