Re: new file selector dialog?

On Mon, 2002-03-11 at 14:24, Pawel Salek wrote:
> On 2002.03.10 19:00 Sean Middleditch wrote:
> > 
> > Ximian knows what it's doing - the Ximian GNOME packages have some
> > nice UI tweaks that make the whole desktop much more user friendly.  
> > Stock GNOME is horrible,
> Dear Mr Sean Middleditch,
> You repeatedly confuse your opinions with facts. Stock GNOME is not 
> horrible. You, *you* think stock GNOME is horrible.

Oh, forgive me.  I did not explicitly state "this is my opinion."  I
suppose all the other replies in this thread backing up my "opinion"
must also be totally false - in fact, they are all just me faking to be
other people to make my useless, pointless, and irrelevant opinions have
more weight.

> > and I tend to get really frustrated with it at times when I come home 
> > and have to use it (Debian Sid, no Ximian for me).
> > We
> > something as simple as their file selector can't be rolled back into
> > GNOME baffles the hell out of me.
> Now, you confuse GNOME with GTK+. I would appreciate if you got to know 
> GNOME better before publically expressing your opinions about it. BTW, 
> I actually do not consider Ximian changes to GtkFileSelector as an
> improvement (I happened to find some bugs in these apparently simple 
> modications[1], with my full respect to Ximian people - it happens to 
> everyone). I guess that fears of introducing more bugs to more or less 
> stable code might cause the GTK+'s maintainer reluctance (but that's 
> just guessing).

I'm sorry, what does you opinion matter whatsoever?  Your idea of how
the Ximian file selector isn't as good is completely irrelevant, because
it is not cold hard fact.  Please get to know the facts before you post
to this list.

And yes, that was a joke.  But you get my point, right?  Almost
everything is an opinion.  Saying that my opinion doesn't matter just
because it's not your opinion, or because it's not agreed upon by the
GNOME populace unanimously, is a little harsh, isn't it?  ^,^

And I was unaware of the bug.  I'm sure it could be fixed - even if the
Ximian patches aren't incorporated into GNOME verbatim, at least
something as simple as remembering the file name when selecting a
directory could be added... that should've been fixed the release after
it was first noticed.

And, so far as the difference between GNOME and GTK+, I quite well
understand them.  Forgive me for putting GNOME where GTK+ would have
been more appropriate.  I'm sure that since I happened to misuse one of
the names I am totally unaware of the structure what so ever of GNOME,
GTK+, Glib, or any other software whose name starts with "G".

> > Maybe, with GNOME 2.0 (or, more likely, 2.2+) plus Ximian's
> > intelligence, GNOME will be a contendor for the corporate desktop.  I
> > just hope more installation of Linux/UNIX come with Ximian GNOME than
> > stock GNOME in the future, so people don't get that bad "first look"
> > at GNOME.
> Call me selfish, but I could not care less about corporate desktop. I 
> want GNOME usable (which IMO it is; of course, one can always do 
> better) not adapted to corporate desktops. If improvements in the GNOME 
> usability make it more useful on corporate desktop - that's fine. If 
> the changes are limited to "dumbing down" and making GNOME more similar 
> to MSWindows just for the sake of it, such modifications will not get 
> my vote (not to mention my coding or debugging time).

Please, explain to me where any of the suggestions I made would impede
the usefulness or GNOME, or make it worse for you in any way?  I have
not once asked for functionality to be removed or hidden from GNOME.  I
do not want that.  I simply want some of the things to be easier, or
more powerful, or more efficient.  That sounds like an improvement
whether you're a computer newbie or an expert.

I do not want GNOME similar to Windows.  I don't like Windows.  I am,
however, asking that GNOME doesn't do things just to be different from
Windows.  Saying, "Windows has a file selector that has nifty feature
XYZ, so we shouldn't have that features, because MicroSoft invented it,
so its evil."  (Not that you said that - but it seems to be a tendency
among UNIX/Linux developers.)

Again, I haven't asked to dumb down GNOME.  I'm asking for it to not be
so dumb.  ~,^

> -pawel
> [1]

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]