Re: galeon

[nestor d v <nestordiaz misfotos de>]

Hello:
I have two pc in a cafe (free to use) with linux, and nobody ever
complained about Galeon, the web browser.
Well, in fact they did, and you know what they complain about?
They don't know where or how to download the files they want. I go crazy
explaining them that on the left of the gnome "file-selector" are
located the folders: "which folders? they are just names?" and on the
right the files. "Oh, I'm in the wrong folder how can I go back?""well,
you have to double-click the two little points in the "folder"
view""Uhm? the 50 year old user says, what two points" as his nose
strikes the display. Then goes the "go to /, then scroll down to /mnt,
no not so down, there!, no no so up, and then click on floppy. Now you
can press Accept, fiuuu.
I can tell you more stuff about this, like the folders users create at
$HOME with the name "a:" etc, but I guess all of you have taken my
intention.
As user (and somebody who works with other users), in a priority list,
Galeon 1.3.x or a gnome browser is not, by far in the top five
applications that needs anything to be changed.
The file-selector has gone a long way in this situation and soon users,
not me as I am a gnome fan, will start loosing interest in an enviroment
where the most used interface element is prehistoric. And, from what I
talked to other users or new users, most of them gave up gnome because
of that. At least with gtk 1.x we had the advanced file selector,
something I installed everywhere. But now we are helpless.
People don't understand about releases, If somebody tells me, hey help
me with linux or get me a copy, I just cannot tell him/her: "hey, you
know what's one of the best things about linux?: choice. but...., can
you please wait until the gnome 2.6.x release to test both main desktop
enviroments? and also evolution, galeon, gedit, abiword, sodipodi, gimp,
gnumeric, and hundreds of gtk or gtk/gnome applications that use the
gnome "file-selector".
You may believe me or not. As I am a "no importance" user. But if I had
any importance please, rethink everything about all this HIGification of
applications and not giving a proper codebase for users and developers,
at leat on this "file selector" issue.

Thanks to you all for your time (and sorry for the bad english):

Nestor Diaz
___________________
gnuva.hispalinux.es
augcyl.org
hispalinux.es
gimp.es.gnome.org

ps: I have no relation with Philip or anybody at the galeon team. Keep
up the good work.

El lun, 19 de 05 de 2003 a las 18:26, Philip Langdale escribió:
> Hi all,
> 
> Perhaps I write this at a time that is far too late, and perhaps nothing
> I say will resonate as I might hope, but I have been told that one
> should not go quietly into the night; so let the dance with futility
> begin.
> 
> And to anyone who would complain that this has been done to death,
> please bear in mind that this is the first time we've spoken up.
> 
> We (the galeon team) have had a minimal presence on ddl; the only
> significant item of note being ricardo's formal proposal of galeon
> for the 2.4 module list, and one can only imagine that such a low
> profile does not do wonders for one's position in a debate such as
> the one over adopting it or epiphany as GNOME's browser. I suppose
> that I use 'debate' somewhat loosely as it's been rather one-sided
> to say the least. That's also been why I've been disinclined to
> say anything up until this point; one does not easily turn a
> concensus. Nevertheless, I'm told that we're open minded people so
> perhaps what I say may be illuminating or useful in some way.
> 
> It has been disturbing how little is known about galeon by the
> people who discuss it here and will eventually be making the
> decision about adoption. I did ask havoc to actually take a look
> at the program which he apparently did, though he only summarised
> his findings. Details on what he didn't like or what could be
> improved would be very much appreciated; and that goes for everybody.
> We've recieved a lot of vague and non-constructive complaints in
> the past with regard to HIG compliance and the like. Things will
> not be quick to change without specific problem descriptions, and
> suggested solutions are always welcome.
> 
> There is certainly a perception amongst some that galeon 1.3.x is
> somehow galeon 1.2.x but simply ported to the gnome2 platform. This
> was not true when marco was running things (and we didn't hear it
> very much then) and it is no more true now. I'm not really sure where
> this one started, but it's frustrating to say the least. We are also
> sniped at by disaffected members of our existing user base complaining
> that we're taking a scyth to any and all useful features; It is not
> fun to be sitting in the middle of these sorts of ignorance powered
> condemnations.
> 
> My teammate Tommi Komulainen has asserted that there need not be a
> dichotomy between HIG compliance and providing power and flexibility
> to the user, though there are those that would gladly declare such
> a relationship whether in a positive or negative light. And it is based
> on this assertion that we have tried to proceed; and I believe that we
> have been decently successful in this regard. It seems horrifying to me
> that someone can seriously claim "we can't do that because we can't fit
> in a menu item for it in a compliant way". That seems to reveal a lack
> of imagination more than anything else.
> 
> I'm not going to go into the gory details of why marco left, as it's
> not really the point, but the rest of us felt that he had gone to far
> in stripping galeon down to the point where it ceased to be a program
> that we'd actually use ourselves; and then, what's the point anymore?
> 
> We've been focusing on getting functional parity with the old 1.2.x
> code base, and it's been slow going; both due to excessive external
> commitments on the part of the team members and in trying to be careful
> as to how these things are done. Nevertheless, those who've cared to
> pay attention and actually use the program are generally impressed.
> 
> I don't think it is particularly constructive to go through a probably
> mind-numbing feature list, but I'd encourge everyone to actually
> take a look at the program as it stands today and make an informed
> decision about it.
> 
> We have been, are, and will continue to be, open to, and happy to
> recieve, suggestions on usability improvements and accessibility,
> though hopefully not of the "take it out" kind... And at least we
> have a sane bookmark system. :-)
> 
> With respect to the issue of a11y which has been discussed here
> intensively, I'd echo the existing arguement that an a11y broken browser
> is better than no browser and that official status will provoke work
> (and hopefully extra hands!) to get things working.
> 
> Though we are more and more disillusioned these days, we do believe
> that we've produced something that can be a consistent part of the GNOME
> desktop and a useful tool for users. If nothing else, we'd like to see
> our work condemned from an informed position.
> 
> respectfully,
> 
> --phil
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list