Re: Gnome 2 summary 05/06/2002
<quote who="Sean Middleditch">
> Yes, everyone I've gotten to try G2 says the lack of configurability makes
> it horrible.
I've been demonstrating a Free Software desktop solution for eventual
rollout to 500 (disinterested, not highly technical) users. Were it not for
the GNOME 2.0 Desktop, we would have lost the sale in an instant. (Fully
Debian based, too, btw.)
> The reason to remove those options is very sane - to make it
> easy for newbies.
Both GNOME 1.4 and KDE 3.0.1 suffer from an abundance of preferences,
options, 'busyness', and hard to fathom user interface elements. Not only is
this a critical issue for user acceptance, it is *absolutely paramount* for
administrator and managerial acceptance.
Support and help desk staff will not want to work with systems bursting at
the seams with knobs and switches. Users will find themselves with an odd
behaviour on their desktop, and call for help. Working out which of the
thousands of tweaks disrupting that user's productivity would be hell.
Managers will not want to shell out for the training, time, pain and anguish
of funding the support staff, basic set up costs, etc.
G2D is straight-forward, has (for the most part) the most efficient and
sensible default behaviours, and is not overwhelming for users or
administrators.
> The GNOME guys just don't seem to want to accept tho that KDE is much more
> popular with newbies, and GNOME is the power-user's desktop... Ah well.
If this is at all true, it will rapidly change with G2D's wider adoption.
That said, you should definitely submit regressions to GNOME's bugzilla!
- Jeff
--
"PHP, when it first came out, didn't really have any merits, and many
claim it still doesn't, but it filled a void where a simple tool to
perform a simple task was needed." - Rasmus Lerdorf
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: