On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 10:04 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 19:33:18 +0900 > 夜神 岩男 <supergiantpotato@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Considering the frequent calls of "Gnome 3 has failed at its task" or > > the "GUI has failed if the user must ____" makes me wonder: Where is > > the task definition or specification against which the implementation > > has failed? > > > > "Doesn't live up to my expectation" is very different from "Doesn't > > comply with spec" and both are different from "Is a bad design". > > How about a spec then of what Gnome3 was trying to achiece, and how > about those who like it telling us how Gnome3 achieved those things? And this is precisely my point. At the moment criticism and defense both seem a bit aimless because we aren't seeing any references to the interface research someone said happened, interface specifications or even a concept discussion/summary about what gnome-shell was supposed to achieve. It was a serious undertaking, so I'm certain they had goals which were at least clear to someone at some point. So far I haven't been able to locate whatever dialogue was had withing the GNOME dev team about the new interface design; I've looked, just obviously not hard enough or in the wrong places. I'll find it eventually when I have time, this issue will someday deeply affect my customers, so this is important to me. As far as smoothly integrated introductory first-run interface tutorials or whatever, I strongly suspect that the angst had to this point over the limited discoverability problems some perceive will prompt a pleasant adjustment in the nearish future -- but I've been wrong about these things before. -Iwao -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
