Re: Gome 2 questions
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 10:39:12AM -0400, stan wrote:
> However, I must say that my first impressions of Gnome 2 are that it is much
> more limited that Gnome 1. For instance I've got a nice analog style clock on
> my panel in Gnome 1, and the only choice in Gnome 2 seems to be this huge
> digital thing that uses 10% of the panel space. Also the CD player seems to
> take up much more space. Some other things re the moving of the icon for
> the man menu to the upper left from the lower left.
>
> Am I missing something important here, or are there less choices in how I
> set up Gnome 2 than Gnome 1? If this is correct, is it because the Gnome 2
> code is not as mature as Gnome 1 or???
No, you're not missing anything, 2 really is less configurable. And no,
I don't think it's because GNOME 2 isn't mature - I think it's an
intentional design decision, and a bad one. I think 2.0/2.2 is a huge
steps backwards in usability from 1.4, and even 1.4 was a step backwards
from 1.0.
metacity is particularly offensive, its description is a "lightweight"
window manager - too bad it's lightweight on functionality and usability
instead of resource consumption.
--
Michael Heironimus
Reply to: