Re: Are these "troubles" due to RedHat 8 or Gnome 2 ?

[Geoffrey <esoteric 3times25 net>]

iain wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 15:54, Geoffrey wrote:
>
> > That is absolute crap.  Windows users change there desktop appearance 
> > all the time. 
>
>
> How often do they change window managers?
>
> Not very often. 
>
> Once you find one you like
> you generally stick with it.

How often do you configure your network?  There's a gui for that. 
Sorry, frequency of the operation is not a valid explanation as to why 
it's been removed from the software.  Further, I'd say that an 
infrequent operation, should be more readily available, since such an 
operation will be forgotten, since you don't do it that often.  There's 
plenty of other examples that make your statement invalid.

gdm, background, font, keyboard keyboard shortcuts, menus and toolbars, 
mouse, network proxy, sound, theme, window focus.

How many of these do you change on a regular basis??


> A new user will accept the default, 
> because they don't know any better
> (which is why the default has to be the best for them)
> And by the time they're savvy enough to know what a 
> window manager is, 
> they're savvy enough to know what gconf-editor is too.
>
> Changing "there(sic) desktop appearance" is not the same as changing
> their window manager. A user should never need to know what a window
> manager is.

I didn't say they needed to know what it was, but they should have the 
options that were previously provided in the earlier version of gnome to 
change the 'look and feel' of the desktop which would include changing 
window managers.

For that matter why let them change themes?  Why let them modify the menus?

> > My personal take on gnome 2 is, yes it's definitely less.  Works with 
> > fewer other wm, apparently by intention. 
>
>
> Intention of following a window manager specification, 
> which is freely available, anyone can discuss it and free to implement.
> Get your window manager to follow the same standard and it'll work fine.

Sure, but they still have removed the ability from the gui to select a 
window manager.  That's either by intention (IE is installed on ALL 
windows OSs) or it's an indication they let Gnome 2 out before it's 
ready.  I suspect it's the latter.

> > Fewer applets, applets have 
> > less options.
>
>
> Point to some specific missing (and essential) options
> Instead of vague hand waving please.

Check out the functionality (or rather the lack of) in the windows list 
applet in gnome 2.0 verses gnome 1.2.

You want specifics?  Just for you here's a listing:

gnome 1.4 applet menu:

amusements: 7
monitors: 7
multimedia: 7
network: 8
utility: 13
clock

gnome 2.0 applet menu:

amusements: 2
accessories: 4
internet: 2
utility: 9


Let's see that's a total of 43 applets for gnome 1.2 and 17 for gnome 2.0
> > I'm an Enlightenment user and with gnome2, there's no longer 
> > compatibility, 
>
>
> Thats a problem with Enlightenment.

So be it, as I've noted, it's the missing functionality that's more a 
concern.  Not the fact that e and gnome don't play together well, but 
the fact that functionality from gnome 1.2 to 2.0 has been reduced.

> > thus I'll be looking at dumping Gnome, rather then 
> > accepting the reduction in functionality.
>
>
> I don't personally care what you do,
> but if you're going to criticise, 
> please be constructive about it.


Constructive criticism:  Don't remove functionality, it's a simple as that.

> iain

--
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric 3times25 net

I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?