[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Package building
From: |
Umberto Cerrato |
Subject: |
Re: Package building |
Date: |
Tue, 19 Nov 2019 12:16:42 +0000 |
This...
> Il giorno 19 nov 2019, alle ore 12:42, David Chisnall
> <gnustep@theravensnest.org> ha scritto:
>
> On 19/11/2019 09:40, Johannes Brakensiek wrote:
>>> I understand that the initial idea was to attract more users/developers,
>>> but… It’s not working.
>> Hm, yes. I think developers don’t need a nice UI at first place (and I think
>> most of what developers need luckily is already provided by Apple as of
>> today). But developers need happy users (if you’re not developing only for
>> yourself) and I think happy users need a stable, solid and consistent UX.
>> That would be provided by a NextStep based UI guideline. But they also need
>> a pretty UI (which is not what you’d call that NextStep look nowadays, imho).
>
> I would add to that: most users will not be using a GNUstep DE. This was one
> of the biggest mistakes that we made with Etoile: we did not have an
> incremental adoption story.
>
> If you want GNUstep to be attractive to developers, you need to make it easy
> for them to ship apps that integrate with an existing *NIX DE and with
> Windows. One of the biggest things that RedHat did for Linux desktop
> usability was teach the GTK+ and Qt theme engines to understand a shared
> format and unify shortcut keys between the two. After that, it didn't matter
> (much) if you needed a mix of GNOME and KDE apps, your desktop still felt
> (approximately) cohesive.
>
> At the moment, people with one GNUstep app feel that it sticks out and is
> difficult to use because it doesn't follow the same UI models as the rest of
> their system. That means that they then don't want a second one.
>
> Qt on Mac has the same problem: the controls are all subtly different and it
> took them years to even have the same shortcuts for navigation in a text
> field, so everyone who ran a Qt application on Mac hated it and never wanted
> to use another one. This didn't matter so much for Qt, because they did have
> good Windows and X11 support.
>
> Currently, GNUstep apps look and feel like native apps on MacOS, when you
> don't use GNUstep. They look and feel alien everywhere else.
>
> David
>
- Re: Package building, (continued)
- Re: Package building, Johannes Brakensiek, 2019/11/03
- Re: Package building, Sergii Stoian, 2019/11/04
- Re: Package building, Johannes Brakensiek, 2019/11/15
- Re: Package building, Fred Kiefer, 2019/11/15
- Re: Package building, Sergii Stoian, 2019/11/18
- Re: Package building, Fred Kiefer, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, cobjective, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, Sergii Stoian, 2019/11/18
- Re: Package building, Johannes Brakensiek, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, David Chisnall, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building,
Umberto Cerrato <=
- Re: Package building, Liam Proven, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, Johannes Brakensiek, 2019/11/19
- Drag'n'Drop (was Package building), Derek Fawcus, 2019/11/19
- Re: Drag'n'Drop (was Package building), Ivan Vučica, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, H. Nikolaus Schaller, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, Matt Butch, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, Ivan Vučica, 2019/11/19
- Re: Package building, Johannes Brakensiek, 2019/11/20
- Re: Package building, Andreas Fink, 2019/11/20
- Re: Package building, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2019/11/20