dennis at triple-media.com
Sun Aug 8 17:21:36 EEST 2004
Now you got me upright. Why the article is based on wrong facts if it is based on published screenshots. And, the article is explaining something very general about GNOME apps and the console, not just about the volume manager. There are several "real" examples.
HAL does not have anything to do with my article. And, if the dialog reaches release quality will it still provide text fields for commandline input? That's what the article is about. Will it provide only GNOME apps or only registered apps? And, still the "run command" dialog is not affected by this, for example. I could not find any GNOME or FreeDesktop proposal to this problem (console/desktop-integrity).
My critique on the GNOME heads is based on 6 years of watching the development process, reading the community discussions and articles like "Unix is dead" and "Advantages of the OO desktop", etc. Much of that is just illusion, other stuff may come up in years. Still, the complexity is not ripped off but just hidden. Users, dialogs and apps will stumple over it over and over. And, what about the meantime. This is what my article focuses on, the situation as it is today and seems to still be in the near future.
If you call my writing nonsense and my article being fully based on wrong facts I can expect a better explanation than "the dialog is in experimental stage".
However, better discussing this at freshmeat.
>>>Lars Hallberg <spam at micropp.se> writes:
>> >>Nautilus showing only the directory name in the window titlebar is
>> >>another example. It's bad even when working with the gui. You don't
>> >>know witch of all doc folders Your watching. You have to guess it from
>> >>the content, not always easy as the filnames don't always reavel it,
>> >>You have to go to file content!
>>>I fully agree with your comments. What's even worse than the nautilus
>>>problem you mention above is the fact that in GtkFileChooser you can
>>>add multiple bookmarks with the same name since the name is taken from
>>>the folder and can't even be edited. Nothing will tell you which "doc"
>>>folder you are going to end up in if you click on one of the "doc"
>>>bookmarks. But this probably belongs into Bugzilla, product gtk+ ...
>Dennis Heuer <dennis at triple-media.com> writes:
>> I think the point here is that hiding is good but ripping off is
>> bad. Some believe that spatial view is really a "solution". It can't
>> solve the problem of complexity but only render an easily
>> understandable entrance. However, some day the user will have to
>> know more about his system. I see spatial view more as an entry
>> level into the organizational model.
>> It would be quite enough if the title bar was displaying the full
>> path when the mouse moves over it, for example. The only thing
>> disturbing me, and that's the reason for my article, is that some
>> GNOMEists, mainly the leading heads, try to deny the system. The
>> GNOME Volume Manager instead shows that there is no way around the
>> system if not GNOME has a solution for every problem at hand. This
>> will quite shurely never be the case.
Am 08.08.2004 15:19:59 schrieb(en) Sven Neumann:
>Hmm, you probably meant to send this nonsense to the list not to me
>You should note that GNOME Volume Manager is just a first draft and by
>no means final. It's nothing but a testbed for HAL and how to
>integrate it with the desktop. Your article is full of wrong facts and
>misunderstandings and thus certainly not very helpful.
More information about the xdg