Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Richard Pieri wrote: > *WHICH* GNOME 2 were you comfortable with? Red Hat's version? Debian's > Version? Ubuntu's version? It seems like a silly question, but really, > if you put the three side-by-side you can see just how different they > are despite being the same thing. I'm not doubting this is the case, but can you give a few examples? Are the differences largely superficial? > This is simply terrible for getting non-technical users to accept > Linux on the desktop. Sure, it would be nice if the top 2 or 3 desktop Linux distributions had consistent UIs, but really is this something that has a practical impact on usability, if the largest percentage of new users being exposed to Linux are only having to deal with one distribution, and with a substantial probability that it will be Ubuntu? Something that people seem to gloss over is the distinction between new computer users and those who are just new to Linux. Take for example this article: http://www.thevarguy.com/2011/11/01/gnome-2-absent-from-latest-version-of-ubuntu-open-source-os/ I recently came to a stark realization after upgrading my desktop to Ubuntu 11.10: GNOME 2 is gone. It's retired, deprecated, done. Like it or not, Unity and GNOME Shell are the way of the future. And that would be fine, if only I could keep from wondering: Are these new desktop environments really ready for the masses? ...Unity and GNOME Shell, having now matured quite thoroughly, both work well. They're fast, aesthetically pleasing and allow users to be very productive once they learn how to use the environments. But therein lies the catch: There's a lot of learning to be done to become familiar with Unity and GNOME Shell, and I'm not so sure non-geeks are up to the task. and that blog posting on Cinnamon: http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1910 ...In this vision, the computer works for you and makes it easy for you to be productive. Things aren't hidden away but easy to access. With easy to use interfaces, a familiar layout, advanced technologies and principles you've already got to to use in Linux Mint, you'll quickly find yourself at home. In both of these documents the author is equating the Microsoft Windows-popularized UI model as easier to use, with less "learning to be done", and "a familiar layout." But what if you aren't a Windows user? (Or GNOME 2 user?) We're now at a point in history where it is quite likely that the only prior computer exposure a user will have had will be with a mobile OS, like Android or iOS. Plus, desktop creators shouldn't be shackled by the past conventions when crafting the next generation of desktop UIs for brand new computer users. The mobile environment gave Apple and Microsoft the freedom to do this, and we're now seeing them port those "clean slate" creations back to their desktop UIs. Unity supposedly is this same sort of a clean slate design, incorporating lessons learned from netbooks, tablets, and other non-desktop platforms. The marketing for unity is in stark contrast to the two articles above, which claim it is less friendly, but of you read between the lines the articles are talking about established Windows and GNOME 2 users. I haven't used Unity enough to judge it on its merits for new computer users, because everything I've read suggests it is not aimed at me - a user with decades of learned UI conventions, and power user needs. But if Unity doesn't offer a better experience for brand new computer users (or doesn't within the next few revisions), then its a failed experiment. The point of complaint for me is: where is the UI aimed at me? This is something Canonical either overlooked, was arrogant enough to think it was unnecessary, or took a calculated risk to lose users such as myself to achieve its broader goals. (Which is why I asked an Ubuntu employee (who is also a BLU member) whether Canonical is adequately self sufficient with its own developers, and is prepared for a decline in community participation.) Perhaps they'll roll out a Cinnamon option as a 2nd tier, but still officially supported, desktop option in order to keep us. -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |