As I am using (K)ubuntu/Fedora I also tried Unity and I must say both projects (Gnome Shell and Unity) have aspects I really like. For example the activities view and the fact that I can open I very fast by just moving the cursor to the hot corner. Additionally it feels a lot more snappier than Unity. But I dislike the lack of options which are available by default (e.g. Theming, changing Icon sizes of the activities view) and the fact that for some strange reason I have to press alt to shutdown my PC. Regarding Unity I am unsure whether I really need the Launcher, but I'd like to be able to place it wherever I want and let it stay visible even when I'm not in the activities/dash view. But the biggest advantage of Unity over Gnome Shell are the appindicators. I prefer to have a single area where I get an overview about quite everything to the way Gnome Shell splits this principle using two areas, one at the top and one at the bottom. I don't know what others think but I'd like to see both developer teams putting their differences aside and merging the projects for the sake of providing a single good Gnome DE to the user and saving developer resources. And regarding issues design decisions which appear to be based on everything but the user bases preferences I'd like to see some surveys like the one the LibreOffice team did (http://survey.usability-methods.com/survey/943138fd9025419a9a34e7b23e4c6c21/) in order to find out what the average user actually expects. Someone on this mailing list mentioned that Linus ditched Gnome for XFCE and the response was that Gnome wasn't designed to be the DE for a Kernel hacker. But apparently he didn't have any issues with the previous release of Gnome, so I am wondering why this release doesn't target both newbies and experienced users. I've read quite often that Gnome Shell feels quite dumbed down, so why not just provide user friendly defaults (i.e. no key pressing needed for simply shutting down the computer), a reasonable amount of 'advanced' settings which need to be confirmed each time and a big button 'RESET TO DEFAULTS'.
I hope my criticism is helpful so that at some point I and probably many others can revert to Gnome.
Thanks for taking the time to read this. I don't want to offend anyone, hopefully you understand my point of view
Alex
Em Sex, 2011-08-12 às 14:20 -0400, Mike Williams escreveu:On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Olav Vitters <olav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:49:49PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> I agree. Too many things are missing. And why require accelerated
> graphics? GNOME 3 seems to suffer from the attitude that tablets are
> the future and desktops and laptops are passe. I've used GNOME since
> the 90's but I'm trying alternatives to find which I like best.
The designers stated btw that tablets are not the focus, bad input
devices is.BAD input devices ?? you mean the keyboard???
What do you mean? Bad input devices are the focus? What about a mouse and a large screen because that is a problematic configuration with gnome3 due to having to move all the way from one side to the other.?
Mike
For what I see, gnome3 works very good with the keyboard (alt this, alt that, control alt this, shift control alt that...)
Well, have we return the the wordperfect times?? (in the 70's)??
Even if with mouse is not "so fast", but it is more intuitive...
Indeed Ana, 3yo can operate gnome2 but not gnome3..
_______________________________________________
gnome-list mailing list
gnome-list@xxxxxxxxx
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
ned on the mailing list!
_______________________________________________ gnome-list mailing list gnome-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
