angrykeyboarder at angrykeyboarder.com
Sat Dec 17 17:20:03 GMT 2005
Eric Dunbar wrote:
> On 12/17/05, Scott <angrykeyboarder at angrykeyboarder.com> wrote:
>> Jeff Waugh wrote:
>> > <quote who="Michael Shigorin">
>> >> Maybe someone tells the GNOME usability kids the magic keywords "user
>> >> level"?
>> > You may wish to go back and look at the failures of user levels in projects
>> > such as Sawfish and Nautilus. It merely serves to increase the combinatorial
>> > explosion of preference overload. We've discussed it. We've tried it. It did
>> > not succeed.
>> > Plus there's a lot of weighty academic material written on this issue, which
>> > we haven't ignored.
>> > - Jeff
>> GNOME still has strangely ignored some pretty *basic* newbie-friendly
>> stuff as I've pointed out here:
> hi, that stuff isn't particularly important though! So you can't
> change the colour!
Is everything that's important to you, important to everyone else on the
planet and vice-versa?
Those responsible for the UI in KDE obviously feel it's important. And
I'm sure they and myself aren't alone.
If color wasn't important the Ubuntu art team wouldn't have bothered
coming up with that ugly..um er "lovely" brown. They would have stuck
with the default GNOME theme because they didn't care about color.
If color weren't important, all automobiles would still be black..
If color weren't important we'd all be wearing the same color of clothing.
Need I go on?
> Unless you have a particular visual impairment,
> you're unlikely to be affected by default colour choices.
Unless of course, you don't happen to LIKE the default color choices.
If Windows and KDE (and Mac?) think it's important, it probably is....
As to the part you didn't mention, GNOME menu entries are just downright
Is it "Text Editor or "Gedit"? Rhythmbox or "Music Player" Make up your
mind, GNOME. Better yet, list them like KDE lists applications.
© 2005 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
More information about the sounder