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

Re: system-* tools' ui independence



On 28/02/2008, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub rusinek gmail com> wrote:
> Kelly Miller pisze:

>  > You're joking, right?

> No, I'm not. From users point, YaST-GTK is more readable and better
>  organized.

>  >  I mean, two minutes with YaST-GTK and I'd
>  > already gotten sick of the fact that it acts like just about
>  > everything else in Gnome anymore; that the user should only be able to
>  > reach the minimum of options and anything else should be buried.

> You use KDE, right?

As do I. You have a problem with KDE, right? It's bad? It offers
options and you think that people don't want options => must not allow
configuration?

>  > And it's a fact that the GTK installer is utterly brain-dead.

> Don't be rude... Most of people do not require LOAD of options, but they
>  expect simple "just works", without hassle.

I find it rude that you're suggesting that having options => doesn't
"just work". You could have the same behaviour as "default" but let
people change it; having sane defaults is not the same as refusing to
accept people won't always like *your* defaults. This *is* fairly
common with GTk / GNOME based applications (and it seems to be a trend
throughout that particular stack / framework / whatever you want to
call it). It's extremely frustrating.


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