Panel colors in KDE 4.2.2

Mark Greenwood fatgerman at ntlworld.com
Wed May 6 20:15:43 UTC 2009


On Tuesday 05 May 2009 23:38:53 marc wrote:

> >> 
> >> You've used that argument before, but it's completely counter-linux. 
> >> There are always situations where a knowledgeable user wants to change
> >> a _single_ item, and current theming prevents that.  It's not what
> >> we're used to,
> > 
> > You see, this is the sort of argument that *really* annoys me as a
> > software developer. It's that kind of thinking that has held desktop
> > design back by years. "It's not what we're used to therefore we don't
> > like it and we're going to moan about it". Or put another way "It's
> > different and I don't like it".
> 
> You see, this is the sort of argument that *really*, *really* makes me 
> raise an eyebrow as a software developer. Sometimes both eyebrows.
> 
> That is, using the excuse that users claiming about the removal of 
> features is a "fear of change". It's at best a non sequitur.

That wasn't what I was arguing. Yes, complaining about removal of features is perfectly valid; but using the argument that "it's not what we're used to" is utterly stifling. How can progress ever occur if you can't change what people are "used to"? Put another way "you've removed this feature and I don't like that because I was using it for such-and-such and now I can't do that" is constructive. "you're removed this feature and I don't like that because it's not what I'm used to" isn't constructive or helpful, it's simply foot-stamping.
 
> > Arguments like that make progress and
> > real innovation next to impossible. Thinking like that creates
> > stagnation.
> 
> No. It's a failure of developers to understand the process of making 
> change while keeping the train running and on the tracks. Usually, it's 
> because the developers/architects don't have the necessary skills, and/or 
> the imagination.

But using that argument makes it impossible to remove any features or change any of the fundamental concepts. Sometimes useful changes result from a complete shift of philosophy. I'd much rather see that than the endless, mind-numbingly tiny shifts in concept we see at the moment. Some of the most unique and wonderful UI design ideas I've seen have been shelved simply because they are "too far ahead of their time".. what on earth does that even mean?

> They will regardless. However, the regressions are huge and that's a 
> concern. I'm not sure many of us would go through this again, however 
> many years it is down the tracks.

Regressions are something different. My argument was all about the "it's not what we're used to" attitude expressed in one post. I agree, KDE 4.2 is not finished, it's not ready... but there are many things about it I like, and I like them precisely because they're not what I am used to; they are progress, and they are different.

ATB,

Mark




More information about the kubuntu-users mailing list