Re: GNOME Gripes
"Eric G . Miller" <egm2@jps.net> writes:
> On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 07:59:25PM -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > I've been using GNOME for awhile in potato--my first encounter with
> > it. It just doesn't seem ready. I know potato is pre-release, and we
> > may not have the latest GNOME in it, and the GNOME folks are working
> > hard.
> >
> > So I thought I'd gripe, check if this matches others experience, and
> > then maybe file some bug reports if I haven't made some configuration
to the original poster:
which version of gnome are you using ?
There is a much-improved 1.x out now (well, it is currently beta, but
will be released sometime soon: "April" GNOME).
> > goof. I also have no idea if the problem is GNOME or the debian
> > integration of GNOME.
> >
> > I'm running on i386, mostly with sawmill window manager. gdm runs the show.
> >
> > Stability:
> > Balsa crashes very frequently.
Balsa is something like 0.6.x, so consider using a different e-mail-client.
Since I am not aware of any stable GNOME email-clients, I would prefer
a text-based one or kmail if you've got KDE installed.
> > Features:
> > Session management is not there. All my windows come back in the
> > first pane of the desktop. There seems to be no way to get rid of
> > things once they are in there. I tried closing them and resaving the
> > session. I tried deleting them from the session configuration tool
> > (whose help button, by the way, does nothing). The net result of this
> > is that I now have about 6 xman's running when I start up.
> > The features in most places are pretty thin--for example, balsa is not
> > very capable even when it is running.
>
> I wouldn't judge the whole kit-n-kaboodle on one application.
> Especially, one that's slated for replacement. However, I can't
> disagree that most of the GNOME apps have only a rudimentary
> functionality. Still, the improvement over earlier generations is quite
> significant. I read an interview of one of the GNOME developers
> recently who said GNOME is currently around the equivalent of early
> Windows or Windows 3 functionality. So, it's well known there's still a
> ways to go.
> > Aesthetics:
> > I think the default enlightenment theme--in fact most of the themes
> > for most of the window managers--are just ugly. The default theme
> > makes it look as if you have a rusting scrap heap on your desk.
> >
> > Only the NextStep derivatives have a decent look, to my eye.
>
> GTK is just not very attractive. GNOME can't do too much about that
> until the look of the base widget system is improved. But, heck, it
> looks better than Tk apps!
there are themes available at gtk.themes.org (for example "aqua" a la
Mac-OS 9 or "informer" which aims to be plain). You can change this in the
control-panel (win95, motif and pixmap are included by default).
> > Internal Design:
> > I think GNOME's facilities and interfaces should have been done in
> > object oriented fashion. Instead, it's got this clunky C interface
> > that reminds me of MS Windows. I understand KDE went the other
> > route. Yes, I know it can all be packaged in CORBA someday, but why
> > do the How to program for GNOME docs say (it has been awhile since I
> > looked) that the C interface is the native one?
because it is the lowest layer. all other language-bindings are stacked
on top of it.
> Well, I'm not going to get into a C vs. C++ flame war. However, my
> rudimentary knowledge of the GNOME and GTK interface is that it *is*
> designed in the closest approximation to object-orientation that C can
> do. I think there's a promising future for libglade with Python driving
> the show. Then there's a bit more "object orientedness". Still, you'd
> probably want to do heavy processing with a compiled language.
There are also advantages of a C-based GNOME:
- usable from C-applications (like libxml)
- it seems that many fsf-programmers are most familiar with C
- many possibilities for scripting-languages.
- GNOME still uses CORBA, as opposed to KDE. maybe this is only possible
with the the fast C-implementation of CORBA: ORBit ?
(CORBA is a standard for network-transparent interface-definitions)
- C++-wrappers are available: Gtk-- and Gnome-- (gtkmm.sourceforge.net)
--
Felix Natter
Reply to: