Re: A Violent Realisation [Was: Preferences]

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Dick Porter">

> >   There needs to be a violent realisation that empowerment through
> >   usability far exceeds the possibility of empowerment through
> >   gimmickry. [1]
> 
> Calling someone else's preferred settings "gimmicks" really doesnt help.

Did I? [1]

> Unlike commercial projects where $$$ buy developers, and committees can
> decide where to pitch the UI, a free software project such as GNOME relies
> on getting the hackers interested otherwise development wont happen.  And
> hackers are in general the type of people that like to fiddle with things.

And there are ample settings and options to fiddle with - in appropriate
places for "the type of people that like to fiddle with things". Already
discussed to death.

> It's not just catering for hackers though; it's recognising that there is
> more than one way to "get real work done", and that there is a place for
> nifty customisation options.

Established already, in code and in email. Do we need to reiterate over and
over that this is the case?

> By all means make GNOME usable for the newbies, but please dont make it
> alienate the more experienced Unix users and other hackers.

I'm unaware of a general GNOME 2.0 quest to alienate "more experienced Unix
users and other hackers". But then, they put flouride in the water, too, so
I could be wrong.

Productive questioning:

  What sorts of things (preferably specifics) make you feel that GNOME is
  moving towards a non-hackeror-advanced-user-friendly desktop?

  We need more people to (ugh-marketroid-speak) buy in to a strong usability
  vision for GNOME; what's in the way? Is it a lack of expressed leadership?
  Lack of something to buy in to? [2]

- Jeff

[1] No, just to stave off any confusion.

[2] usability.gnome.org says, "The Usability Project strives to make the
GNOME experience as pleasant and efficient as possible" which, whilst
succinct to the point of blandness, does not exclude hackerly pursuits.

-- 
                           No clue is good clue.