On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 11:11:10AM -0600, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
Just on a side note: I question intelligence of an attitude that something (that works for some people) has to be destroyed to make room for something else one thinks to be more appropriate.
Let me start by saying I'm also not a fan of Gnome3, and prefer MATE. However, I believe the new interface provided by Gnome3 is both well thought out and based on the results of research on Human-Computer interactions. Gnome has published their GNOME Human Interface Guidelines here:
https://developer.gnome.org/hig-book/3.2/
https://developer.gnome.org/hig/stable/
The idea is to have a uniform and consistent interface that is intuitive to all potential users. You'll probably agree with me that UNIX/Linux interfaces tend to be extremely inconsistent between programs, and even between elements of a display interface. Most of us who have been using UNIX for decades are familiar with many of the quirks and have long since adapted. I don't fault Gnome for trying to actually provide some guidelines for design. Apple has been praised for many years over its easy-to-use interface, largely because they have very strict control over their interfaces and a walled garden approach to apps. It would be very difficult to duplicate the ease of use from Apple while maintaining the free/open spirit in FOSS, so Gnome has a difficult path to tread.