Re: Gnome 3 desktop issues

[Another Sillyname <anothersname googlemail com>]

On 10 December 2011 01:36, Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 12:00:25AM +0000, Tim Murphy wrote:
>> Yes it's wrong because it is rude to assume that people have to agree
>> with you if they tried hard enough.   It's amazing that this isn't
>> obvious and that's why it comes up again and again. Some people
>> listen, others don't.
>
> This is not what is being suggested.
>
> Different way of working takes a lot of time. Getting used to GNOME 3
> can take at least a week. Suggesting to try it for at least a week is a
> common and sane suggestion.
>
> Suggestions that eventually you'll like it: that would conflict with the
> various suggestions where people already acknowledged that it isn't for
> everyone.
> --
> Regards,
> Olav
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-shell-list mailing list
> gnome-shell-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list

Sorry I disagree.

When G3 shipped I tried it for a month and it just didn't provide the
functionality I needed any more in a way that wasn't cumbersome to
use.

I have a fairly non standard environment in that I run numerous
desktops via VNC and 5 workspaces on most of those desktops, this
allows me to have some conformity of environ no matter which desktop
I'm on.  The desktops usually have multiple terminal sessions open and
they will also have applications set up in the same common workspace.

So simply (for example)......

Desktop 1 - Workspace 1 - Browser/Multi Tabbed + 2-3 Nautilus File Managers
Desktop 1 - Workspace 2 - Conky and 2-3 Terminal Sessions for local
requirements (the terminal sessions would be specifically titled)
Desktop 1 - Workspace 3 - 3-4 Nautilus File Managers for Connections
to specific servers
Desktop 1 - Workspace 4 - VNC Sessions to specific remote Machines
Desktop 1 - Workspace 5 - Specific Local Apps

Using scripts I wrote I could boot a machine and this environ would
'auto create', so when I came to use it a lot of the environ setup
work was already done. I also run Compiz because I like the eye candy.

Now why did I have multiple terminal sessions open?  Because that way
I could jump to a machine and get immediate visual feedback that meant
I knew which desktop I was on, what apps I was running at that time
and where those apps had got to.  I didn't matter which physical
machine i was sitting in front of as I could VNC to any other machine
and get visual feedback at a glance.  That's part of the reason the
workspaces working in a left to right paradigm made sense and being
able to choose which workspace to jump to by clicking the workspace on
the lower panel made life easy, also having each machine have it's own
system monitor on the lower panel allowed immediate and simple
feedback regarding the loading on that machine.

There were times I wouldn't have to revisit a specific machine for
perhaps 2-3 days and the methodology I had developed meant I could
pick up where I left off without having to skip a beat.

Simplistically Gnome 3 wouldn't allow me to create a workflow that I
could use, I tried for a month (this was about a year ago now I guess)
so I stayed on Fedora 14 and Gnome 2.

The technical reasons given to justify Gnome 3 I'm sure are valid and
justified, what rubbed me (and I suspect others) up the wrong way is
being told firstly we were dinosaurs who needed to change our working
methodology, that when shortcomings in the capability of Gnome 3 over
Gnome 2 were identified it was because we should focus on specific
single app workflow instead of lots of on screen clutter, then finally
the '....well it's provided for free get used to it.....' argument (a
position usually taken by people who know they screwed up but can't
justify their actions anymore in my honest opinion).

You're right of course that the software is provided for free and my
usage in my own environ provides revenue for no-one, however the
reason I run Linux at home is to learn about stuff, play with stuff
and break stuff before I talk to my clients who consult on my
knowledge base before deciding strategic decisions for the next 3-5
years, these clients are usually international banks, financial
institutions and other organisations that build trading floors.  After
trying to use G3 for a month and watching some of the comments on the
lists for a few months I stopped recommending Gnome altogether, the
people on the lists were not listening, they had decided what was best
and that was that.  So I stopped posting thoughts and feedback to the
list, the upshot of which is everyone loses.

Gnome loses because when it just keeps repeating it knows better then
the early adopters who actually advise clients where their strategic
thinking should be taking them it pushes them away and loses a
valuable resource of real world knowledge and experience.

Clients lose out because they won't get offered the option to use a
desktop environment that could have been so much more then it is
today.

I lose out because I have to compromise my own environ to use apps
that are now at least a year out of date.

So we all lost and there's enough blame to go round for all.

I won't engage in a discussion about this personal diatribe, maybe
someone somewhere will take note of some of the content, but I doubt
it.