Re: GNOME Window Manager

On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 04:45:20AM +0200, Matthias Warkus wrote:
> +++ Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:44:15PM -0400 +++
> > You really don't have much experience with the average user, do you?
> Oh, I do. My father is pretty average. On my last summer job I worked
> a tech support line from time to time, too. I had someone complaining
> his computer had crashed when all that had happened was that he had
> pulled the plug, trying to find an outlet to plug his desk lamp in.

Ya.  I've dealt with that stuff for last year now, and it's amazing
how sometimes people that I know are intelligent make the dumbest mistakes.
People are afraid of computers, or just don't like them, for whatever
reason.  It's a big problem.

> > Most people that use computers don't care a crap about how they
> > work, why they work, only that they *do* work.  Workplaces have
> > training seminars on the basics of Microsoft Word for crying out
> > loud.
> > 
> > If a user has to, for any reason, mess with any internal workings of
> > the desktop environment, they're usually screwed.  People are often
> > intelligent and resourceful when it comes to their jobs, but most of
> > them are frigging useless morons when it comes to computers.
> Please spare me that sermon. Having to read this every week on
> comp.os.linux.advocacy didn't make it any more right than your
> rehashing does.

The thing is that it *is* right.  If not, tell me why that is what every
inexperienced user will tell you, what all these large surveys and tests
performed by a number of firms say, etc.

> > But, seriously, let's go back to the key bindings, one my biggest
> > annoyances about GNOME.  The WM *does* need to handle things like
> > closing Windows, etc.  GNOME (panel, whatever) needs to handle
> > menu-open requests.  The desktop-manager needs to handle the
> > selecting/manipulating of desktop icons.  So we have, what, 3
> > programs to configure key bindings for?  Well, GNOME+Nautilus
> > handles two of them, hopefully a common configuration system can be
> > thought up for that.  But what about the WM?  How in the Nine Hells
> > are you supposed to merge the configuration controls for GNOME and
> > WindowMaker, or AfterStep, or even Sawfish?  Well, you **aren't**
> > supposed to merge them.
> There should be a central table of keybindings and a way for
> applications to negotiate them. No big deal, it just needs
> implementing. O_x

Try it.  We'd need a whole new interface for WM's to follow, or at least
GNOME-compliant WM's.  That'd set back the Open Desktop initiative a bit.
Not to mention a good number of WM's don't want to implement this stuff.
We'd be stuck with whichever WM decided to do this, which would heopfully
be Sawfish.  ~,^

> > Besides, a true GNOME-only WM would offer a lot of benefits besides
> > configuration.  Common look and feel, for example.  Every WM I've
> > seen, Sawfish included, doesn't fit in with GNOME so far as its
> > dialogs (which a basic WM shouldn't be using that often, but still)
> > are concerned.  And every WM offers functionality that duplicates
> > some of the GNOME desktops, in even slight ways.
> Does this justify writing Yet Another Window Manager?

One could always take an existing WM and trim out the unneeded crap, and
add in a few extra GNOME-ish features.  There is rarely a good reason to
re-invent the wheel, especially when free software fully allows forking
of code bases.

> [schnibble]
> So if you know exactly what needs to get done, go ahead! Stop
> complaining and get coding.

Unfortunately, my GUI programming talents still lack.  Given the lack of
a truly powerful and decent GUI, I've never really gotten into them.  I
still prefer command line.  ~,^

> > ... My Gods, that was a long rant.  ^,^
> Yes. The lack of line wrapping makes it seem even longer.

Ack.  Sorry.  I forgot I had word-wrap in VIM turned off.  Fixed now.

> > Seriously, there is *nothing* wrong with any of the WM's out there.
> > They just shouldn't be an integral part of GNOME. 
> You leave me puzzled. If that is not what you and Lion want, what is
> it?

What did I just say I didn't want?  What you quoted was simply me saying
that although the current WM's are very fine and whatnot as far as WM's go,
none of them are designed to be a part of desktop environment.  They're
stand-alone WM's, most with just compatibility for desktop environments
that wish to sit on top of them.

> mawa
> -- 
> Go forth, be fruitful and fork()!
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]