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. -- Jonathan Billings <billings at negate.org>