Re: End of the past... things to come...

[Tom Gilbert <gilbertt tomgilbert freeserve co uk>]

On 2 Jun 1999, Elliot Lee wrote:

->On 1 Jun 1999 18:04:32 -0400, Tom Gilbert
-><gilbertt@tomgilbert.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
->
->>I'll tell you another thing too. They'd sell enough copies to take over
->>the world. Companies want ease of setup and use, and RH are thinking like
->>a sensible commercial company when they steer towards setups involving
->>*less* configuration options.
->
->I hate to continue threads like this,

Why? I thought the idea was to _discuss_ Gnome-related stuff here. That
often means continuing a thread as necessary...

->especially when they arise out of
->misunderstandings rather than hard facts.

que?

->
->However, allow me to rant slightly:
->
->It's funny how people can think that "Red Hat wants simpler, less
->configuration options, etc." when the development of the GNOME control center
->(architecture and interface for accessing configuration settings) was paid
->for by RH (jrb@redhat.com is the author of gnomecc and many of the capplets,
->and yours truly even managed to write one :-)

You misunderstand me. I apologise for not making myself more clear. (A
common failing of mine). I am well aware of the GNOME control centre,
LinuxConf et al. I was talking about the _amount_ of things that can be
configured. The GNOME control centre did not *add* any new configuration
options into GNU/Linux, it brought a great big scattering of setup files
together into one interface, and I'm glad as hell that _someone_ did it.
Your comments *support* what I was saying, as Red Hat are moving the
distribution towards being *easier* to configure, concentrating on
bringing options together into one interface, rather than adding more
options as in the way e is developing.
Bringing config options together is how you make them available and
understandable to the masses. This is what Red Hat (and others) are doing.
Adding new features to customise and twiddle is more the philosophy of
projects such as enlightenment. *This* is the point I was trying to make.
The two are not mutually exclusive necessarily, I never said that.

I was trying to say that the GNU/Linux/Gnome (whatever combination) that
finally wows the public, will be very different from the one we use now. A
lot of the complexity will *have* to go. As I said, I hope the power and
configurability don't go too, but I stand by my previous statement. Just
remember that joe public doesn't necessarily want to spend 3 weeks
customising his word processor before he types his first letter. That's
the kind of thing *I* would be happy to do (I'd probably love it). I was
trying to distinguish between the requirements of Joe Public and the needs
of the nerds. (I include myself in the latter, and it is not meant
offensively).

->
->A goal of GNOME is definitely to make things simpler for new users. It was
->that way before RH even started to help out with GNOME development, and that
->goal will continue to be one of the primary foci of the project. If the GNOME
->desktop does not meet the needs of computer neophytes who want a simple
->desktop, it will fail.

I agree! Its already doing a fantastic job after a very short development
time too!

->Another goal of GNOME is complete configurability. It was that way before RH
->even started to help out with GNOME development, and that goal will continue
->to be one of the primary foci of the project. If the GNOME desktop does not
->meet the needs of advanced computer users who want total control, it will
->fail.

->The two goals are not contradictory.

I agree, I was simply trying to remind people to *distinguish* between the
too. Too many programmers/hackers think Joe Public wants what they want.

->GNOME hackers, talented as they may be, are not mind readers. That's why you
->have to bring up any missing configuration items. Are there any specific
->configuration options that you want and need help writing? gnome-devel-list
->is there for that purpose.

I never made any such point. This is not what I was talking about, and I
never mentioned it. As I said, I am very happy with Gnome, and am starting
to write my own patches, which I *will* contribute when I am happy with
them. I know Gnome hackers are talented, I applauded their effort in my
previous message. "I'm amazed at the speed with which it rushes to meet
its goals" is what I remember writing.

->As far as Red Hat including E in the distribution, it's a window manager that
->many people like and find useful, so there is no reason it would get any less
->consideration than other wm's for inclusion in the distribution. Just because
->it is more configurable doesn't make it less desirable.

Good. 'cos I love it.

->Hope this helps,
->-- Elliot
->No, this is not Red Hat speaking to you. Please let me speak for myself only.

Thanks for reading my rantings. I'll shut up now.

-- 
     /---------------------------------------------------------------\
     | Tom Gilbert, England                   pingu@linuxfreak.com   |
     |---------------------------------------------------------------|
     | Sites to Visit:             |    .~.                          |
     |    www.freshmeat.net        |    /V\        L  I  N  U  X     |
     |    www.gnome.org            |   // \   >Beware the Penguin<  |
     |    www.enlightenment.org    |  /(   )\                        |
     |    themes.org               |   ^^-^^      www.linux.com      |
     \---------------------------------------------------------------/