tor 2002-12-26 klockan 21.38 skrev Derek Martin:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 02:39:05PM -0500, Beartooth wrote:
> >
> > It used to be -- in RH 7.2, anyway -- when something got
> > hung up, that you could right-click on its little spot on the
> > panel, whatever that's called, and along with choices like
> > Maximize, Minimize, etc., you got one for Kill App. Very useful for
> > us subtechnoids, who don't have command line kills at our finger
> > tips. I hope very much that this is some kind of oversight, or
> > well-meaning paternalistic wrongness ("protect the poor little user
> > from herself"),
>
> I think the latter is the problem here. The design philosophy of
> GNOME 2 seems to be that users are incapable of thinking for
> themselves, or said another way, simplicity at the cost of
> flexibility. With Metacity, Red Hat is taking this a step beyond even
> what the GNOME project itself has done.
>
> I sincerely hope Red Hat is getting the message: One size DOES NOT fit
> all, and people don't like GNOME2/Metacity. It's too inflexible, too
> dumbed-down. And not just for experienced users... Even newbies
> complain about not being able to do things that make sense, or do them
> in a similar manner to how other Unix systems behave (whether or not they
> realize that other systems can behave the way in which they are asking)...
>
> Sure, some people will like it just fine, and don't care that a wide
> variety of functionality which is available elsewhere is missing. But
> many of us DO care. And there is no obvious/easy way provided to
> continue to use GNOME without using Metacity. This is unfortunate.
>
> Bad Robot.
>
I like the design of RH8.0 (even though it misses alot, like more
redhat-config*). Becaus it "just workes".
I think that those who want to be able to work more flexible (though i
think i am pretty flexible and have no clue what it means for you) are
also those who know how to change from Metacity to sawfish or what ever
they like. For those who want to kill a program who is not responding i
have found that those program who do not respond at least with RH8.0 in
time gives me a dialog window with the choice of killing it. I may be
dreaming, but this is the procedure i get with RH8.0.
I think this is a good way to handle this problem.
And i also think that not that much focus should be drawn to a for me
unknown fact that newbies complain about not being able to do things
that make sense.
It may be that i am foolishly dumb or what ever, but the thing that
makes sense for me is there. I can change things if i want to, so can
you. So can the user who wants to kill his application with xkill or
what ever. For this specific question (killing applications) i do not
think the newbie should be introduced to xkill or what ever from the
desktop. What to do with buggy application that does not respond should
be something the user reads about in manuals, or what ever. Designing a
desktop for killing buggy application seems wrong.
And, the window SHOULD respond, everything else is not a
design-question, its a bug.
I liked using windowmaker and even blackbox some time ago. But after
using redhat8.0/Metacity/gnome2 a time now, i have really gotten used to
things "just working". If i wanted to be able to be flexible, killing
application with xkill or from a terminal, and at the same time changing
windowmanager i could do that. But i do not want to.
I can not say i know how the average newbie think when put behind a new
redhat distribution, but I do not think that the first question is, how
do i kill this bloody window thats not responding? I may be wrong, but i
do not even think he starts thinking of changing windowmanager. And,
even the most flexibel user needs to read documentation to know about
what windowmanagers is and how to change them, and those who can read,
can manage to change it.
The sum it all: To design for people who think for
them selves does not have to mean that it has to confront the user with
an option of changing hundreds of things in the windowmanager and things
like that, even if it makes "sense" for some people. This is just me
thinking, but i can use xkill or the "kill" command from a terminal if i
wanted to, and i can change windowmanager if i wanted to be the most
flexibel of them all! Foolish me, i do not want to. If the system needs
to be designed for people who think for them selves , i would say that
these people do not relay think for them selves. I cant speak for you
but even though i do not know it all, the things i know about
Linux/gnome..blabla, those things are not things i was introduced to, it
was not designed for. I read about it. Flexible as i am I even did some
trial and error to learn more.
--
Att bli medveten om sin historia är att bli medveten om sin egenart,
det är tankepausen som vi behöver innan vi övergår i handling.
/Octavio Paz
Kent Nyberg.
ICQ: 145375073
--
Psyche-list mailing list
Psyche-list@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
