K
Kadaitcha Man
Flightless Bird
"Snit", thou laughable honeyseed rogue. On my knee I give heaven thanks
that I am not like to thee. Ye hawked:
> What is going on with the new Gnome shell? Have the Gnome developers
> gone mad? Have they been reading my posts and decided that my "absurd"
> ideas can be used as a prank on all those nay sayers in COLA?
>
> <http
/www.gnome.org/~mccann/shell/design/GNOME_Shell-20091114.pdf>
> -----
> For more guidance on principles for good design please refer to some
> of the sources in the gnome-shell Reference List. -----
> Good design?! That is important? What... sounds like me!
>
> -----
> Principle of Least Astonishment - or "uniformity in command
> interface"
> -----
> Uniformity? What? Are they pushing "one true way"? Insisting that
> choice should be limited? Don't they understand the OSS model at all?
>
> -----
> Design a self-teaching interface for beginners, and an efficient
> interface for advanced users, but optimize for intermediates
> -----
> Again, when I have talked about the value of, say, the OS X media
> browser and how it fulfills that goal well, I am told it is a silly
> idea... but here the Gnome developers are acting like it is a good idea.
> Is it April 1st?
>
> -----
> Less is More - Reduce Visual, Memory, Intellectual, and Motor work
> (and complexity)
> -----
> Less is more? But I say that a UI should not be made to be more complex
> than it needs to be... and I am told this constrains users. Why did the
> Gnome developers listen to me? What is wrong with them?
>
> -----
> ? Better default experience, more consistency, more fun! ?
> Coherence leads to comfort
> ? Incoherence - inconsistency - confusion -
> discomfort > judgements of incompetence
> -----
> Consistency is important? It leads to greater enjoyment (fun)? It
> offers a better expeirience? Have these folks gone insane?
>
> -----
> The Shell should offer a number of standard or reserved keyboard
> shortcuts in order to enhance the efficiency of expert users...
> CTRL+Q: Quit
> -----
> OK, this just tops it off - it must be a joke... *consistent* hot keys!
> And they use just one term for program termination... the one I have
> even said makes more sense given the most common hot key.
>
> The document also talks about having consistent behaviors on clicking on
> applications with one, two or more windows open (and right clicking,
> etc), what should be in an "Application" window for all programs
> (consistency!), consistency of how applications are seen in the app
> switcher, and more.
>
> Heck, almost from top to bottom it echos ideas I have expressed in COLA.
> And been told this makes me an anti-Linux troll.
>
> At what point will the "advocates" realize they are arguing against not
> just me but the future of desktop Linux?
Normally I would snip, Snit, but there is a vital point to be drawn out
from all your incessant bitching.
About this bit:
> Less is More - Reduce Visual, Memory, Intellectual, and Motor work
> (and complexity)
That one statement alone answers this question:
> Why did the
> Gnome developers listen to me?
Given your propensity to:
> ? Incoherence - inconsistency - confusion -
> discomfort > judgements of incompetence
In your case, judgement is not necessary when the proof is prima facie
true. Given your obvious motor neurone issues and the attendant inability
to move, speak, breathe, swallow and keep your anus tightly clenched so
as not to embarrass yourself in public, as is exemplified in all your
usenet posts, it is rather surprising you didn't include mention of your
incontinence.
Perhaps, unlike myself, the Gnome developers took pity on you.
that I am not like to thee. Ye hawked:
> What is going on with the new Gnome shell? Have the Gnome developers
> gone mad? Have they been reading my posts and decided that my "absurd"
> ideas can be used as a prank on all those nay sayers in COLA?
>
> <http
/www.gnome.org/~mccann/shell/design/GNOME_Shell-20091114.pdf>> -----
> For more guidance on principles for good design please refer to some
> of the sources in the gnome-shell Reference List. -----
> Good design?! That is important? What... sounds like me!
>
> -----
> Principle of Least Astonishment - or "uniformity in command
> interface"
> -----
> Uniformity? What? Are they pushing "one true way"? Insisting that
> choice should be limited? Don't they understand the OSS model at all?
>
> -----
> Design a self-teaching interface for beginners, and an efficient
> interface for advanced users, but optimize for intermediates
> -----
> Again, when I have talked about the value of, say, the OS X media
> browser and how it fulfills that goal well, I am told it is a silly
> idea... but here the Gnome developers are acting like it is a good idea.
> Is it April 1st?
>
> -----
> Less is More - Reduce Visual, Memory, Intellectual, and Motor work
> (and complexity)
> -----
> Less is more? But I say that a UI should not be made to be more complex
> than it needs to be... and I am told this constrains users. Why did the
> Gnome developers listen to me? What is wrong with them?
>
> -----
> ? Better default experience, more consistency, more fun! ?
> Coherence leads to comfort
> ? Incoherence - inconsistency - confusion -
> discomfort > judgements of incompetence
> -----
> Consistency is important? It leads to greater enjoyment (fun)? It
> offers a better expeirience? Have these folks gone insane?
>
> -----
> The Shell should offer a number of standard or reserved keyboard
> shortcuts in order to enhance the efficiency of expert users...
> CTRL+Q: Quit
> -----
> OK, this just tops it off - it must be a joke... *consistent* hot keys!
> And they use just one term for program termination... the one I have
> even said makes more sense given the most common hot key.
>
> The document also talks about having consistent behaviors on clicking on
> applications with one, two or more windows open (and right clicking,
> etc), what should be in an "Application" window for all programs
> (consistency!), consistency of how applications are seen in the app
> switcher, and more.
>
> Heck, almost from top to bottom it echos ideas I have expressed in COLA.
> And been told this makes me an anti-Linux troll.
>
> At what point will the "advocates" realize they are arguing against not
> just me but the future of desktop Linux?
Normally I would snip, Snit, but there is a vital point to be drawn out
from all your incessant bitching.
About this bit:
> Less is More - Reduce Visual, Memory, Intellectual, and Motor work
> (and complexity)
That one statement alone answers this question:
> Why did the
> Gnome developers listen to me?
Given your propensity to:
> ? Incoherence - inconsistency - confusion -
> discomfort > judgements of incompetence
In your case, judgement is not necessary when the proof is prima facie
true. Given your obvious motor neurone issues and the attendant inability
to move, speak, breathe, swallow and keep your anus tightly clenched so
as not to embarrass yourself in public, as is exemplified in all your
usenet posts, it is rather surprising you didn't include mention of your
incontinence.
Perhaps, unlike myself, the Gnome developers took pity on you.