Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #172840

Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/10/13 1:58 PM, in article 20130410223718.838@usenet.drumscum.be, "TomB"
<tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2013-04-09, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
> 
> 8<
>  
>>> It affects how well programs of your Mate/Gnome2 desktop integrate
>>> in your Cinnamon/Gnome3 desktop.
>> 
>> In ways other than described, above?
> 
> Why do the "ways" suddenly matter.

What makes you think it is sudden? While chrome is not to be ignored, I have
talked to you repeatedly about why it is not as significant as many other
areas of consistency (namely those that directly affect how things are
used). In fact, the chrome of a program can give context and help you to
tell one program from another or one type of program from another... which
is not to imply that this is what is happening in the example you give where
it is, from a user perspective (as opposed to a technical one) pretty much
arbitrary. So, sure, the chrome inconsistencies are not good, but there is
no reason to think they are anywhere close to the level of concern as the
differences I speak of in terms of menu names and placements, hot keys, file
dialogs, print dialogs, etc.

> It's simple: a mate desktop program doesn't fit in on a Gnome3 desktop. Menus,
> widgets, icon sets... Completely different.

I would like to see examples of menu naming and placement differences.

> Because people can do and will do whatever they like, no matter how
> many of us want UI standardization on the "Linux desktop".

Is anyone suggesting people should not use what they like? Not sure what you
are arguing against here.

What I have noted is that people know they want better productivity,
efficiency, and error reduction but *most* do not know what it takes to get
that (and even people such as myself who focus on that certainly can
disagree with each other in many areas and the answer is not always so
simple - but there are general principles which are pretty clear cut).

On a well designed system there are experts who *do* get what it takes to
make a tool work well. This is true of almost all tools - especially fairly
complex ones but even many fairly simple ones. I have given examples dealing
with cars, stairs, door knobs, traffic signals, hand rails, and much more.
Does not mean that all of these things are or should be exactly the same
(would be silly to dictate that everyone have the same type door knobs, from
one house to another or even in the same house!). But there are studies and
research and known variables which affect usability. I certainly am not that
familiar with most of this research and most of these standards but I
benefit from them many, many times during the day. So do you. What a mess it
would be if every developers of such tools had to re-invent the wheel (or
the whole car!) every time they went to make a new one. Does not mean
developers cannot or should not push new idea and try them out, but they
should also learn from the past.

With computers we *know* a great deal about GUI design in what makes then
work well... does not mean the average user does. A computer that follows
these guidelines, though, will be advantageous to users. It is my belief
that the open source community is fully capable of making such systems. I do
not think that having systems being made better and better in any way
reduces freedom or choice - to the contrary it improves both. And it does
not mean that people doing what they like will lead to the open source
ecosystem failing at making systems better and better, which seems to be
what you are pushing.
> 
> 8<
> 
>>> As such my spin-offs example definitely isn't what you called a
>>> good example of the progress you're talking about.
>>> 
>>> To cut a long story short: when you give people the freedom to do
>>> something totally different, they *will* do something totally
>>> different.  And yes, that's my optimism talking here.
>> 
>> Nobody is saying people should all do things the same way...
>> remember, my point is about doing things to allow *greater* choice
>> and diversity... not less.
> 
> I'm sorry, but you cannot have it both ways. Or people are allowed to
> do whatever they feel like, or someone steps in to put them in a
> straight line.

I never said I want it both ways. I think people *want* better systems (as I
describe above)... and unlike you I do not think the open source ecosystem
is incapable of producing such systems. In fact, as we have seen, systems
today are *much* better in these areas than they were even just a few years
ago (at least some distros - not saying all).

...
>>> And there is a reason for that: there are too much practical,
>>> political and technical limitations to get the kind of flexibility
>>> you envision.
>> 
>> I have said all along it will not be easy or quick or perfect... but
>> Kubuntu and PCLOS show that my basic views *are* coming true.
> 
> The "evidence" you present for this, is *at best* anecdotal.

No: I have given many, many specific examples... and did so *before* the
changes took place, showing the problems and making predictions that such
problems would be reduced over time. And my predictions, by and large, have
come true (even though many of the COLA "advocates" argued very, very
strongly against me, called me names, insisted I was ignorant about the open
source ecosystem, said the problems I described were not important, etc.)

> For instance, the dialog button swapping that "got fixed" was actually on of
> those transitional things where GTK2/Gnome programs went from one way to the
> other, and not all programs were updated yet. Stuff like that happens *all the
> time*, and is in no way an indication of this "progress" you're talking about.

Look at PCLOS, the distro I used as an example at the time (based on the
suggestion of, I believe, RonB - though I could be wrong about that). My
predictions have come true. How many of the problems I show - and predicted
would be fixed - are still around?

    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.pdf>
    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS2.mov>
    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.pdf>
    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS.mov>
    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS-menu.pdf>
    <http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/PCLOS-drag.mov>

Now this does not mean my predictions were perfect. As I admitted to Roy
Schestowitz after my time on his Skype show, I underestimated the speed at
which these things would be corrected. I do not mind speaking of when I am
wrong. Sadly, he and RonB and most of the COLA "advocates" do not do the
same thing and acknowledge when they are wrong. I wish they would.

> There simply is no "progress" in that direction; Gnome and KDE are just as
> different as they were 15 years ago, and there still are a multitude of other,
> smaller environments and UI toolkits in use, just like 15 years ago.

Look at PCLOS and you show where I was wrong about those things being
corrected. Or show where new things I predicted would not end up breaking
have done so.

Now, to be fair, if you show a few things I have the "out" that I have
repeatedly said the progress would not be perfect. So for the few areas
where the problems have not been corrected or where new problems have crept
up I am not proved wrong. But I think it would be a very hard case to make
to say things have not improved a *lot* on PCLOS. A whole lot. Really night
and day.

And as you pointed me to, on Kubuntu things seem to be even better. Clearly
much of what I predicted *is* happening.

>> And, remember, the same arguments you are using now have been tossed
>> at me for years... but we are seeing proof that what I predicted
>> *is* coming true.
> 
> Again, I wouldn't mind if KDE and Gnome agreed on a framework to allow
> for better integration of each other's programs, while still allowing
> great flexibility. I wouldn't even mind if all others joined in as
> well. But it simply isn't a realistic expectation.

It is still early to expect this. They need to get their own houses in
order... and they need users to push them. Look at OS X users - they are
used to a system with a better UI, so when FireFox and GIMP first came to OS
X and failed to live up to the higher expectations of the users the teams
were pushed to make things better.

As things continue to improve on desktop Linux, users will demand things
*continue* to improve. Sure, there may be two steps forward and one step
back (there is even on OS X) but overall the progress will be to making open
source systems better and better.

To be clear with the above, I am *not* saying open source systems should be
like OS X. OS X does *not* allow for the type of flexibility and choice that
open source systems do... and it may very well be that such will limit open
source systems from ever catching up to OS X (in this area!). But I do not
think there is anything that can stop the open source system from improving
over time - not your skepticism or my lack of having specific ideas on how
the programmers can accomplish such things (and I admit that is the case!)

> Look at it this way: both environments have been around for 15+ year,
> and all that time people have uttered ideas like yours. But it simply
> never happened. Why would it happen now?

As open source systems improve, people will want improvements to "the next
step". What exists at any given time will never be "enough" - at least I
hope not! I strongly believe in the open source ecosystem and those who use
open source products in that they will always want things to be better.

Looking at the above PCLOS screenshots (and what PCLOS offers today) we can
see things have gotten a lot better in just a few years. My question to you
is what do you think is going to stop this progress? When will users and
developers decide enough is enough - we have gotten our systems as usable as
we want and should just stop moving forward?


-- 
"But I have never, ever even run a Linux server and I don't even want
to; it's not what I'm interested in. I'm more of a desktop guy."
-- Linus Torvalds

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 16:56 +0000
  Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-08 10:39 -0700
    Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-09 20:12 +0200
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2013-04-09 16:19 -0400
      Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-09 13:56 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-09 14:01 -0700
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2013-04-09 14:18 -0700
        Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-10 20:58 +0000
          Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-10 14:42 -0700
            Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-11 18:29 +0000
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-11 12:50 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> - 2013-04-12 15:55 +0000
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-12 09:56 -0700
              Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-04-11 15:09 -0500
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-11 13:44 -0700
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2013-04-12 10:40 +0100
                Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2013-04-12 06:34 -0700
  Re: Snit posts decent article on Linux Advocates Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2013-04-08 15:31 -0700

csiph-web