The VAR Guy Pegs GNOME Correctly

Perhaps GNOME has lost its way trying to be everything to everyone. Perhaps it’s just having a mid-life crisis. TheVarGuy pegs it right. GNOME should stick to what it does best if it is to remain relevant, provide a great GUI for desktop/notebook PCs. There’s no need to derail the users who have come to know and love a simple windowed user-interface. There’s nothing wrong with providing a GUI for other devices but why scuttle something that works? Fork or start a new GUI, GNOME. Don’t kill what works.

“GNOME Shell wants to be an interface for smartphones, tablets and other fancy devices on which Linux currently rarely runs, and that endeavor — despite the best efforts of GNOME designers — makes it less useful as an interface for the PCs on which most people are actually running Linux today. You can’t be everything at once, no matter how much you might like to be — or how much proprietary competitors, like Windows, think they can be as well.”

see GNOME's Future: Open Source Desktop Interface In Doubt? | The VAR Guy.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to The VAR Guy Pegs GNOME Correctly

  1. oldman says:

    “Oldman, are you forgetting his claim that the Russian probes brought back samples and that there are numerous satellites due to “everyone” choosing them over alternatives? That is what he used to bolster his assertion that he is such a refined student of history.”

    Nope. I am well aware of the Hamsters relativistic view of facts. THis was an illustration on my part of the “close but no cigar” nature of his assertion.

  2. Clarence Moon says:

    The hamster would IMHO make a great politician.

    Only to the extent that he tells fantastic tales to a select few who are willing victims of his stories due to their biases.

    Oldman, are you forgetting his claim that the Russian probes brought back samples and that there are numerous satellites due to “everyone” choosing them over alternatives? That is what he used to bolster his assertion that he is such a refined student of history.

    How about his expertise in CALs vented in other threads? His deep understanding of .NET? SQL? The Australian military? Anything at all?

  3. oldman says:

    “Could you tell an ignorant fellow such as myself just when the Russians sent an automated system to the moon and retrieved some samples?”

    In the case of the Russian space program it is indeed correct that the Russians did reach the moon first in a series of firsts:

    1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first man-made object in Heliocentric orbit, Luna 1
    1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2
    1959: First images of the moon’s far side, Luna 3
    1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the moon, Luna 9 (this probe transmitted pictures and had was able to measure radiation)
    1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
    1968: First living beings to reach the Moon (circumlunar flights) and return unharmed to Earth, Russian tortoises on Zond 5

    So in fact the Hamster is being factual when he said that The Russians were first to go to the moon and back.

    Well, Actually it was Russian turtles that did so, but its close enough….;-)

    Of course the Russians never got beyond turtles (nor has anyone else in fact, but that’s another affair.

    The Hamsters little homily reminds me of one of the definitions of a politician as a person who lies next to the truth but not upon it.

    He would definitely make a good politician…

    The hamster would IMHO make a great politician.

  4. Clarence Moon says:

    Clarence Moon you are dealing with a person who knows history

    I am going to die laughing if you do not quit posting such things, Mr. O!

    Could you tell an ignorant fellow such as myself just when the Russians sent an automated system to the moon and retrieved some samples? For that matter, exactly how many countries are actually putting satellites around the moon? I agree that it might be cheaper than a manned mission, but I am sure that not “everyone is currently placing satellites around the moon”.

    In fact, my poor memory of history comes up empty for even one such satellite. I can only rely on your vast knowledge of history to help me now.

    Is your Google machine broken? You seem to have fallen back into fantasy mode.

  5. oiaohm says:

    Clarence Moon you cannot add up.

    Vista development started before XP was released. Lot of features in Vista were in fact started back in NT 4.0 that were only include in Vista but were not good enough for 2000 and XP. The $10B figure is a little low.

    Be very careful with my words. Vista took more than what it costs to go to the moon and back. Did I say manned flight.

    The Russians were first to go to the moon and back. USA was the first to land a man on the the moon. Two vastly different things that a lot of USA people lose. USA people like claiming to be first to the moon as well. They were second.

    Manned flight is more expensive.

    Clarence Moon you are dealing with a person who knows history. Russians sent a automated system so they were sure they could get it back and had a few problems so aborted man flight project so USA landed man first.

    The Apollo program is the wrong program to be price comparing to Clarence Moon. Its the Russian program you have to price compare to. Without a human or living 10 billion dollars today is till more than what it costs to send a object to the moon and get it back.

    That is why everyone is currently placing satellites around the moon. Its cheap you can send at least 10 sats for each human and if you lose one. No one is major-ally upset. Even by to-days prices MS spend more on Vista than going to the moon and back as a machine. Its just a funny fact.

    Basically humans have not stopped going to the moon. Just stopped going as humans to the moon.

    Lot of the information the Apollo got include samples the Russians already had without sending humans.

  6. Clarence Moon says:

    Far out!

    In the sense of being factually bogus, as virtually all of Mr. O’s claims are, that is indeed one of the furtherest out claims that he has made lately. As a point of fact, however, the Apollo program cost some $25B overall in 1969 dollars which is considerably more than the cost of Vista, even in 2006 dollars. If you figure in the inflation factors, the cost of going to the moon was over $100B. Additionally, the $10B figure is the totality of Windows division R&D costs for the period Vista was under development and not all that money was spent on it. There was even Windows 7 development going on in that same period.

  7. JR says:

    Serious hi-tech stuff!

  8. oiaohm says:

    Phenom
    “So what? Development of first version of Vista laid the foundations of many hidden improvements”

    The problem is the same was true for KDE 4.0. And the same might be true for Gnome now.

    In every project life cycle some of the best come out of the disasters if they live through it.

  9. Phenom says:

    Scary point the development bill for the first version of Vista was more than what it took to go to the moon and back.”

    Far out!

    So what? Development of first version of Vista laid the foundations of many hidden improvements, which gave fruit later on: new driver model, full migration to 64-bit world, improved scheduler, improved security model, improved GUI, new desktop compositing manager, new versions of DX, improved local search and indexing. Then there come the experimental stuff, which didn’t make it in Vista, but will make it in 8 – like the new storage system.

  10. oiaohm wrote, of M$’s development cost, “Scary point the development bill for the first version of Vista was more than what it took to go to the moon and back.”

    Far out!

  11. oiaohm says:

    Ted I was meaning from the sense Before Windows ME we had Windows 98se that worked. Then MS went tweaking mad and made ME that basically did not work. Same with Vista and many other programs.

    Basically Microsoft had there O my god they have done that to use problems.

    Billions of dollars for programmers does not mean you cannot screw it up badly. Scary point the development bill for the first version of Vista was more than what it took to go to the moon and back.

    There is a requirement of project leads to understand what users want and to be working for end users. Lot of Vista alterations that cause big problems was for big content. That crap was scaled back in SP2.

    Gnome is not the first windows manager Linux had and most likely will not be the last. Microsoft has reinvented the wheel on theirs as well.

    Funny thing here Microsoft runs Mono/Gnome conferences. I have to wonder with Windows 8 that is a case that Microsoft needs to keep there staff away from the Gnome camp because the bad management there is catching.

  12. Ted says:

    “Clarence Moon really do you forget Windows ME and Vista. Microsoft has also scuttled things that work.”

    Vista post-SP2, I’ll give you on a good day, but in what alternate reality did Windows ME ever work?

  13. oiaohm says:

    Clarence Moon really do you forget Windows ME and Vista. Microsoft has also scuttled things that work.

    “With a commercial project making billions, though, such as Windows, there are always plenty of skilled folk ready to take the money.”
    And a lot of non productive rats as well.

    History of windows shows ups and downs. Nothing strange. So does FOSS projects.

    Gnome has a founding ideal problem. KDE was dependant on QT but its goals have been to meet the users needs. Other than upseting people badly with KDE 4.0 its done that goal fairly well.

    Gnome started as something to compete against KDE that was not restricted by GPL license.

    At some point Windows Manager and OS has to merge.

    http://dot.kde.org/2012/07/24/introducing-project-neon-kvm KDE is already heading down this path. Providing premade kvm images.

    Issue with gnome is time is moving on and they are not.

    KDE made one lot of there own hardware platform. Starting to do own OS platforms.

    The split between distribution and Windows manager creates a lot of problems.

    Clarence Moon
    “As the thrill of achieving something wears off, working on such a project becomes more and more onerous and, without a profit to be made, less likely to attract competent help.”

    Lot of projects don’t follow this model. Gnome management has got very bogged down. Failed to make a solid support base. KDE has not had problems working with other commercials for them to make money.

    Its also like gnome announces Gnome OS then goes ok its not going to be a full OS in its own right. Ok Gnome guys make up your down right mind and commit yourself.

    Yes just because everyone yelled and screamed at KDE 4.0 for committing itself at least by committing self to something you have direction.

    Long term projects wine, linux, libreoffice, kde… All of them have something in common commitment and a clearly defined do not go direction. You do that way you will be skinned alive.

    As linus says FOSS developers are like hurding cats.

    Yes you cannot control where they all go but you can give them a scene of where not to go.

    Gnome they don’t have any currently clearly defined don’t take users in that direction.

    Since Gnome lost its founding difference with KDE with Qt becoming LGPL is been a ship without a clear control.

    I have a simple one for you Clarence Moon list commercial closed source programs using GTK and qt. What list is longer. What toolkit was designed to suit the end developer. Designing to avoid having to pay money is the root of the Gnome problem.

    Gnome complete goals are its problem. Question is can it find it feet or will it be replaced.

    Not like there is not possible long term replacements to Gnome waiting in the wings. xfce, lxde and others. That have more clear end user targeted goals and were not design on the idea of just been a more free alternative to something that was more restricted.

  14. Clarence Moon says:

    The Gnome story is likely to be the fate of most FLOSS projects, Mr. Pogson. As the thrill of achieving something wears off, working on such a project becomes more and more onerous and, without a profit to be made, less likely to attract competent help.

    Other than the clearly defined situations where a support group is making an income from a FLOSS project, such as Red Hat or SUSE, the attraction of FLOSS development work is purely vanity fair and such folk move onto other pursuits when the excitement goes away. With a commercial project making billions, though, such as Windows, there are always plenty of skilled folk ready to take the money.

Leave a Reply