Re: Communicating to users what GNOME 3.0 is

[Dave Neary <dneary gnome org>]

Hi,

Andre Klapper wrote:
> As with every change, there's a lot of confusion and sometimes wrong
> press about it (after reading some comments on articles in online tech
> magazines on GNOME 3).

Around the time that Firefox was ripping big chunks out of the Mozilla
user interface (back when it was still called whatever it was called
before Firebird), one of the developers came up with the stages of grief
to show how users greet changes in applications they use:

1. Denial: "No, he can't have taken away (feature X, application Y,
option Z), I just am not looking in the right place

2. Anger: "What do you mean you took away (feature X, application Y,
option Z)? Put it back, I need it! You'll alientate big swarths of users!

3. Bargaining: "How about if we made it an option?"

4. Acceptance: "OK, it's gone for good, I might as well get used to
living without it"

> It cannot hurt at all to clarify things here by communicating better and
> more often what GNOME 3 means and especially what it won't force users
> to do to reduce FUD.

All change forces users to do something (or to stick with what they
already have - no rule says you have to upgrade to the latest greatest
version of GNOME). Fighting against this is a losing battle. Better in
my opinion to be very straightforward about what's going & what's coming
and rather than trying to placate people, stick to "the party line" -
the new stuff is better than the old, nicer user interface, better
design, better for all users (including you) - I understand you don't
particularly want change, and you're free to keep using the old stuff,
but we think the new stuff's better".

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
Dave Neary
GNOME Foundation member
dneary gnome org