[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Look and Feel
Look and Feel
Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:44:37 +0100
On Monday 14 February 2005 14:47, you wrote:
> I understand your reasons, but to be quite honest if GNUstep direction is
> to be another "me too!" desktop that mimics good and bad decisions from the
> other desktops (and GNOME, KDE and Windows are basically the same flavour
> with a different colour) just to save the masses from having to deal with
> something a bit less usual, then the effort that has been put in creating
> something not only tecnically superior but with a string empashis on
> usability and distinctiveness (even if that distinctiveness is NeXT like)
> would have been in vain.
I don't think GNUstep should clone GNOME, KDE, Windows or MacOSX. Not at all.
But I don't see a point in doing everything different just for the sake of
distinctiveness. I think it should be easy for GNOME/KDE/Windows users to use
GNUstep. There are a lot of people who have to use Windows at work. For thier
computers at home they probably prefer an interface that is not too different
from Windows. Do you think GNUstep, as it is, is a good choice for these
And usability really is a two-edged sword. The GNOME people changed the
button order from OK-Cancel to Cancel-OK because of usability. Now all the
people that are used to Windows have problems using GNOME dialogs because for
these people the button order is just unnatural. Personally I really don't
care about the button order in dialogs, I don't think that OK-Cancel is
better then Cancel-OK or vice versa. Given that Windows and KDE both use
OK-Cancel, I wished they would just have sticked with this, because now
everytime I use a GNOME program, I feel uncomfortable with the button order.
And probably many other users that also use KDE or Windows do too.
The same goes for the file dialog. The KDE and Windows file dialogs are, at
least from my point of view, quite o.k. When GNOME introduced a new file
dialog, they could have designed a KDE/Windows-like file dialog, but they
didn't. Maybe some people like the new GNOME file dialog, personnally I think
it is totally unusable. I much preferred the old one. Maybe this is just
because I am familiar with KDE/Windows like file dialogs, but maybe it just
does not make sense to reinvent the wheel if there are already good
solutions. Would a KDE/Windows like file dialog not have been better for
The reality is, that at least 95% of computer users are using
Windows/MacOSX/GNOME/KDE and that not everything in these UIs is bad. That is
why I think GNUstep should not be too distinctive with these environements.
And there is also another quite important reason why GNUstep should not be
too different from these UIs: Many very good OSS applications today are
either written using gtk/gnomelibs or qt/kdelibs, e.g. GIMP, Inkscape,
Firefox, k3b, quanta, scribus and so on. Right now it would probably be quite
unconfortable with running these apps on an (potential) GNUstep desktop
because they follow completely different UI paradigms. You don't want to run
one app that has scrollbars on the left, one that has scrollbars on the
right, one that has a menu on top of the window, another one that has a
floating menu and so. And it will be a long time until all these apps are
ported to GNUstep, if ever.
> it it becomes the peak of usability? People are *not* used to an horizontal
> app menu, only the 5% of Mac users are.
Windows and KDE/GNOME also have horizontal menubars, they are just not at the
top of the screen. But I think for those it will be easier to use a
horizontal menubar, then a floating one. (Actually I think the horizontal
menubar on top of the screen is also more useable because it follows Fitts
> Macintosh previous to OSX was, well, Macintoy. To start copying the baggage
> that OSX had to carry just to please the users of a Photoshop appliance is
> problematic, and even more so because the technology underneath Cocoa and
> GNUstep is the same. Copying Apple in their current UI is not - even
> legally - a great idea. If Apple doesn't like Aqua like themes, imagine a
> GNUstep look alike that allows direct porting of apps. It is my opinion
> that, even with a modern look in mind, we do best in taking all that we can
> from NeXT *feel* than from Apple's. Not only much more distinctive but
> actually based on sound principles and avoids being put in the same bag.
I don't think GNUstep should clone Aqua, not at all. But GNUstep could follow
some of the ideas of the MacOS UI (not the style, ideas related to
usability). Or GNUstep could follow some ideas from GNOME or KDE. Reinventing
everything doesn't always make sense and the current Nextstep UI is also not
perfect and can certainly be enhanced.
> I'm saying this because I'm begining to fear that the idea is to make
> GNUstep look like GNOME/KDE/WIndows/MacOSX. I've already seen what not
> having the guts to innovate gives to desktops, one ends up using
> Windows,but with another name, badly named apps and an anime background.
IHMO the GUI is not the big problem of Windows.
Re: Look and Feel, Alex Perez, 2005/02/14
Look and Feel,
Michael Thaler <=
Look and Feel, Michael Thaler, 2005/02/14
Re: Look and Feel, MJ Ray, 2005/02/14
Re: Look and Feel, MJ Ray, 2005/02/15
Re: Re: Look and Feel, jhclouse, 2005/02/16