Re: sawfish identity, gnome, etc.

Am Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:51:27 +0900 (JST)
schrieb Teika Kazura <teika lavabit com>:

> On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:23:12 -0700, Daniel Fetchinson wrote:
> > Well, I actually have been using sawfish standalone without gnome or
> > kde since it appeared in redhat.
> I'm using Sawfish standalone, too.
> >> Common things noobs think about sawfish (not a joke):
> >>
> >> - Too many functions, which no one needs (the argument that you
> >> just don't know them and therefore can't say if you would need
> >> them is not of interest)
> >> - Bad Usability (well this is that sawfish-ui is shit therefore
> >>   sawfish is also shit thingy)
> >> - It's not part of most Distros - can't be good
> >>
> >> Of course this is only a group of users and not all.
> >>
> >> This may sound pesimistic, but: I absolutely don't care how many
> >> users are using Sawfish, for me it's the Ultimate Windowmanager,
> >> regardless of anyone else, so you don't have to fear to get rid of
> >> me :p
> > 
> > I think what would attract the right kinds of users is a clear
> > message about the intended audience. It should be clear from the
> > project page who are expected to use sawfish and for whom probably
> > it's not a good choice. If this policy is clear then the effort can
> > go into convincing the right kinds of users and no effort will be
> > wasted on preaching to people who will not care anyway. For example
> > it might be the case that gnome 3 is not compatible with sawfish
> > anymore, but is this a problem? I don't think so. I don't know how
> > many gnome users use sawfish but I'd think much more are using
> > sawfish standalone.
> > 
> > Similarly, the main effort I think should go into making sawfish as
> > good as possible for standalone mode because these users are the
> > natural audience who are really committed to sawfish.
> Only a few develop today, and each do what they want to do. So we
> don't have to care = can't care of the "intended audience".
> Though I don't use desktop environments, DE's are important. Proof:
> many need it. (As I said I believe in popularity.) One more proof is
> that Chris switched from gnome to kde; he needs a DE despite of G2K
> transition labor. 

I don't need it, I want it :) It's much more comfortable. Of course
Sawfish needs to be a good standalone WM, too.

> But Gnome's WM-phobia can't be helped by us. Let's
> hope non-metacity gnome users grumble surge.

Well, you can use GNOME3 with Sawfish, but then you can't use the
GNOME-Shell, but that would be like using KDE4 without Plasma.

> But yes,
> >> - Bad Usability (well this is that sawfish-ui is shit therefore
> >>   sawfish is also shit thingy)
> can be a common reaction. Sawfish currently is not for such people.

Well, this differs from where you're from, eg. KDE Users tend to not
behave like this, while GNOME Users do, atleast in Germany it's like
that, for German GNOME Users everything with more than 6 Options is
unusable and userunfriendly (Sawfish, KDE, Scribus' Printdialog)


... Somehow I remember that this ä-ö-ü-ß issue did not appear in
1.3.1s sawfish-ui, perhaps it's a regression in rep-gtk? I'll check
this now.

> Teika (Teika kazura)

In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

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