- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
gwenview: user friendly?
|
|
|
Comments (35)
15 earlier comments in the full thread.
@Bigg, I'm honestly not sure what you're meaning is a matter of common sense. I was in no way trying to intimate that anyone was showing a lack of common sense. I do think think that most people are showing a great deal of resistance to something slightly different and new. It's taken me next to no time to get used to KDE4 (once they released a stable version), I just find that most things work in the same way and those that don't are easy and intuitive to work out. Why is it that as a normal KDE3 user I can do that?
It's interesting reading Aaron's blog that there are a number of non KDE users coming to KDE with the advent of KDE4. Maybe it's all part of losing some users and gaining others?
It's interesting reading Aaron's blog that there are a number of non KDE users coming to KDE with the advent of KDE4. Maybe it's all part of losing some users and gaining others?
> @Bigg, I'm honestly not sure what you're meaning is a matter of common sense.
I was referring to what you called common sense. It's mostly a matter of preference, yet there seems to be an effort on the part of KDE devs to define what is meant by "smart preferences".
I was referring to what you called common sense. It's mostly a matter of preference, yet there seems to be an effort on the part of KDE devs to define what is meant by "smart preferences".
Oh brother. Usability reviews, hey look it's shiny, no substantive responses, just silly attempts to distract from the core issues and justify a policy of ignoring what they don't want to hear, which bigg summarized beautifully:
None of the KDE persons answered any of my points directly, except for maybe sort of conceding that the two bits of thumbnail data that I mentioned might maybe be something good to consider. They were so busy dismissing everything else, and defending their 'throw it away because we think it looks icky' design philosophy they didn't address any of the issues raised at all. They dodged the key problems of efficiency and workflow, of discarding features for no good reason, and making it harder for users who like to control their own computers. Can you believe all the comments defending removing features because they personally don't need them??
'Let's do usability reviews!' is shorthand for "we don't want to hear what those annoying people who love KDE3 have to say." I must be a genius and the KDE leaders are not geniuses, because apparently it takes genius to understand that radically changing a popular set of software, and discarding the features and customizability that users love, and telling those users that they want doesn't matter, is going to upset them. DUH. When you have miles of bug reports, wish lists, comments on forums, emails, mailing lists, blogs, and articles, you already have a wealth of useful feedback to study. DUH.
All along I have biding my time and not wanting to jump on the KDE4 Flame Train. I reasoned that it would take time, and that a little patience was in order. I was wrong, all the patience in the world is not going to be rewarded because they're heading in a totally different direction.
Quoting: It still gets back to the same issue: KDE 3 is a completely different animal, and they have thrown it away. KDE is essentially an abandoned project.
I think Aaron's post is a perfect example of where the KDE 4 team has really been messing up. They've decided that KDE 3 users didn't know what was good for them...
And this line:
Quoted: I suggest maintaining KDE3 or working on new software that fits that worldview.
Translation: we're doing what we think is fun, if you don't like it, go away.
None of the KDE persons answered any of my points directly, except for maybe sort of conceding that the two bits of thumbnail data that I mentioned might maybe be something good to consider. They were so busy dismissing everything else, and defending their 'throw it away because we think it looks icky' design philosophy they didn't address any of the issues raised at all. They dodged the key problems of efficiency and workflow, of discarding features for no good reason, and making it harder for users who like to control their own computers. Can you believe all the comments defending removing features because they personally don't need them??
'Let's do usability reviews!' is shorthand for "we don't want to hear what those annoying people who love KDE3 have to say." I must be a genius and the KDE leaders are not geniuses, because apparently it takes genius to understand that radically changing a popular set of software, and discarding the features and customizability that users love, and telling those users that they want doesn't matter, is going to upset them. DUH. When you have miles of bug reports, wish lists, comments on forums, emails, mailing lists, blogs, and articles, you already have a wealth of useful feedback to study. DUH.
All along I have biding my time and not wanting to jump on the KDE4 Flame Train. I reasoned that it would take time, and that a little patience was in order. I was wrong, all the patience in the world is not going to be rewarded because they're heading in a totally different direction.
Quoting:I must be a genius and the KDE leaders are not geniuses, because apparently it takes genius to understand that radically changing a popular set of software, and discarding the features and customizability that users love, and telling those users that they want doesn't matter, is going to upset them. DUH. When you have miles of bug reports, wish lists, comments on forums, emails, mailing lists, blogs, and articles, you already have a wealth of useful feedback to study. DUH.
Except that it is not that clear cut. There are people out there that like KDE4 quite well, even old time KDE3 users. Heck, where I work, most of them even prefer KDE4 over KDE3. I am currently standing in as the system administrator of our universities mathematics institute with approximately 60 users, most of them using Linux and nearly all of them deeply entrenched to KDE. Due to long time illness of the "regular" sys admin, most people still had KDE3 installed on their machines (timeframe: openSuSE 10.2/10.3), some had early KDE 4.1 or heavily modifed openSuSE installations.
Part of my job was to update the computers, so what I did was to setup a test machine with a reference KDE 4 and KDE 3 installation, let people access the machine via the network and work with them in person directly at the machine, asking them after some time to choose what they would like. If somebody had problems with a specific setting, we (my colleauge and me) would try to recreate the workflow from the KDE 3 days, but sometimes we had to find alternatives or workarounds.
There are five KDE 3 installations left in the department, mostly due to the fact that some people are uncomfortable with the workflow of okular + latex (e.g. they are used to kdvi/kghostview). There are a lot of small problems, but so far I have yet to see people rushing into my office yelling "I want my bloody KDE3" back. So far, people are quite satisfied. Did I mention that most of them are seasoned KDE3 users?
So my question is: What have I done wrong? Somewhere along the line must have succeeded in brainwashing hordes of highly intelligent and organised people, to use something, that is no longer intended to be used by bright beings like them because it is supposedly dumbed down beyond recognition.
Just out of curiosity: What's wrong with usability studies?
Just out of curiosity: what's wrong with listening to what users are already saying, and not just the ones saying what you want to hear?
It's quite simple and obvious: removing features and creating inefficient workflow affects the users who rely on such things. OTOH, leaving everything in bothers no one, except for users who are upset by the sight of features they don't use. If the huge volume of upset and feedback, much of it specific and detailed, hasn't made an impression already, it's a lost cause.
It's quite simple and obvious: removing features and creating inefficient workflow affects the users who rely on such things. OTOH, leaving everything in bothers no one, except for users who are upset by the sight of features they don't use. If the huge volume of upset and feedback, much of it specific and detailed, hasn't made an impression already, it's a lost cause.
Carla, I can see both sides of this.
On the one hand I do think it was poor that Aaron didn't address your particular point about how it's affected your workflow, but it's not fair to say he just dissed your other points. He gave sensible reasons about why some things had changed and agreed with you about some missing functionality. I think you're overstating the case when you say they're radically changing a popular set of software; they are making some changes and most things work the same or in similar ways. In exactly the same way you claim they're ignoring all your points, they could say you're ignoring some of theirs.
It *is* good, however, that someone has finally given a concrete example of something that has changed for the worse for you - compared with older versions - with your points about file size and navigation. No-one else has managed to come up with anything similar since the latest release.
Personally, I *can* believe other people's points defending removed features because they don't use them. For them, it's made the program easier to use and so from their point of view it's better, which is as valid as an opinion as yours. Also, there were a number of substantive responses all down the blog, it's just that they didn't coincide with your view.
Unless and until you file a feature request and that request is ignored then I respectfully disagree with a large part of your argument. If you have, and the devs have flatly refused your particular requests, then I think, in terms of Gwenview, you have a perfectly good reason to complain. So many things have been fixed since KDE4.0 and moved it closer to the functionality of 3.5 I think it *is* right to believe required functionality will come with patience.
To (potentially) fix your current plight, have a look at Phatch as described above.
@Bigg, sorry, I was being a bit numb by not seeing what you meant about common sense.
On the one hand I do think it was poor that Aaron didn't address your particular point about how it's affected your workflow, but it's not fair to say he just dissed your other points. He gave sensible reasons about why some things had changed and agreed with you about some missing functionality. I think you're overstating the case when you say they're radically changing a popular set of software; they are making some changes and most things work the same or in similar ways. In exactly the same way you claim they're ignoring all your points, they could say you're ignoring some of theirs.
It *is* good, however, that someone has finally given a concrete example of something that has changed for the worse for you - compared with older versions - with your points about file size and navigation. No-one else has managed to come up with anything similar since the latest release.
Personally, I *can* believe other people's points defending removed features because they don't use them. For them, it's made the program easier to use and so from their point of view it's better, which is as valid as an opinion as yours. Also, there were a number of substantive responses all down the blog, it's just that they didn't coincide with your view.
Unless and until you file a feature request and that request is ignored then I respectfully disagree with a large part of your argument. If you have, and the devs have flatly refused your particular requests, then I think, in terms of Gwenview, you have a perfectly good reason to complain. So many things have been fixed since KDE4.0 and moved it closer to the functionality of 3.5 I think it *is* right to believe required functionality will come with patience.
To (potentially) fix your current plight, have a look at Phatch as described above.
@Bigg, sorry, I was being a bit numb by not seeing what you meant about common sense.
tc... I tried illustrating above that getting involved with the project is the easiest way to get heard. If you want to keep using KDE, then get involved and get your 60% satisfaction up a few notches. Miffing on blogs/forums/etc. does not accomplish anything. This is what free software is supposed to be - community driven, not community drivel.
The example I used above, your request to see file size info and dimensions, you are not the only one to ask for that, hence there is a ticket for it. And if any one thing has enough demand, it is likely to get included.
The example I used above, your request to see file size info and dimensions, you are not the only one to ask for that, hence there is a ticket for it. And if any one thing has enough demand, it is likely to get included.
jacog --
Ummmmmmm.....
Maybe the real answer is for all of us to accept that proprietary software is the best answer for mainstream desktop users, that FOSS projects really have no interest in reaching the largest segment of computer users.
Ummmmmmm.....
Maybe the real answer is for all of us to accept that proprietary software is the best answer for mainstream desktop users, that FOSS projects really have no interest in reaching the largest segment of computer users.
That's an awfully broad statement.
> that FOSS projects really have no interest in reaching the largest segment of computer users.
I wouldn't say that about all projects. Heck, I would not have said that about KDE3, or 2, or 1.
I wouldn't say that about all projects. Heck, I would not have said that about KDE3, or 2, or 1.
Ah, Bob --
You understand!!
'Tis a little scary, though.
With FOSS being, well, free as in "I'd like to work on this project", you can never be sure the infection won't spread.
The ease and arrogance with which FOSS developers embrace an ethic of "Screw the user! We'll do it MY way" is disconcerting.
Exists in proprietary stuff, too, btw, but proprietary software at least has management that says -- "Whoa! That's how we make our money"
Not perfect, but at least remembers users are out there.
Kind of funny, though. Once upon a time, I would talk about the absence of change for the sake of change as being a strength of free software as opposed to proprietary warez from companies that want to sell you the latest edition.
You understand!!
'Tis a little scary, though.
With FOSS being, well, free as in "I'd like to work on this project", you can never be sure the infection won't spread.
The ease and arrogance with which FOSS developers embrace an ethic of "Screw the user! We'll do it MY way" is disconcerting.
Exists in proprietary stuff, too, btw, but proprietary software at least has management that says -- "Whoa! That's how we make our money"
Not perfect, but at least remembers users are out there.
Kind of funny, though. Once upon a time, I would talk about the absence of change for the sake of change as being a strength of free software as opposed to proprietary warez from companies that want to sell you the latest edition.
"File a bug report, get directly involved, let's have studies!" are all code for "go away." There is nothing new in any of this, it's all been buglisted and wishlisted and oh pretty pleased to death. Users who want a dumbed-down desktop already have Gnome.
Jacog, it was 40% satisfaction. And declining.
Jacog, it was 40% satisfaction. And declining.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=210891
There, they added the one feature that was requested.
And tc, I think your KDE is borked if you can't do batch processing. Works really well here.
There, they added the one feature that was requested.
And tc, I think your KDE is borked if you can't do batch processing. Works really well here.
Jacog, I didn't say I couldn't do batch processing.
I must say, I had a quick play with G4 and batch resizing, and if you choose detailed view in the picker, the file size is there. The size in the terms of x by y in pixels isn't though although that's been fixed for next release apparently. Why is the file size important for you in deciding which file to resize? (That is not sarcasm, a genuine question.)
DiBosco, did you read ANYTHING? This pecking at irrelevancies and asking questions that have been answered several times, instead of addressing the actual issues, is why these discussions almost always derail into useless circular rehashes.
I despair of KDE4 ever becoming as useful and efficient as KDE3 because of this kind of nonsense, especially when it comes from the lead devs. Aaron Seigo's response, for those who actually bothered to read it, is entirely emotional:
Say what?? What on earth does that have to do with anything? How was I tricked? Is the same functionality that I liked before still there, but implemented differently? No, it's not, and he never even tries to answer that. A task that I could perform quickly with a very few clicks in the old Gwenview now takes about four times as long, and requires many more clicks. That is not my idea of elegant, anymore than lipstick on a farm animal makes it elegant.
My original article was about functional and workflow problems in Linux, and how I think they're being ignored in favor of eye candy and a misguided attempt to appeal to a fictional, non-existent userbase. This Gwenview issue was simply one example to illustrate that, and even though it was a small and limited example, I would say that Mr. Seigo's response, and many of the other responses, support my assertion better than I could ever support it myself.
Again, those who read before commenting know that I went on to highlight the problem of increasing inaccessibility under the hood of Linux. I think smart userspace design in Linux is taking a beating, perhaps because of new generations of devs and contributors who don't have a Unix background, but perhaps Windows or Mac, and who don't understand or care about the original Unix and Linux design principles, and why they came about in the first place. The result is an increasingly user-opaque Linux, harder for users to understand and control. That is the opposite of how it is supposed to be.
I despair of KDE4 ever becoming as useful and efficient as KDE3 because of this kind of nonsense, especially when it comes from the lead devs. Aaron Seigo's response, for those who actually bothered to read it, is entirely emotional:
Quoting: It seems that Carla was "tricked" by a UI that doesn't scream in your face "I HAVE LOTS OF POWER!!!!! LOOK AT EVERYTHING I CAN DO BECAUSE IT'S ALL PLASTERED ON YOUR SCREEN IN SUCH AN INELEGANT WAY THAT YOU CAN'T IGNORE HOW POWERFUL I AM!!!! HOPE YOU WANT TO DO LOT OF POWERFUL THINGS, RATHER THAN VIEW YOUR IMAGES!" Yes, Gwenview in KDE 3 screams just like that.
Say what?? What on earth does that have to do with anything? How was I tricked? Is the same functionality that I liked before still there, but implemented differently? No, it's not, and he never even tries to answer that. A task that I could perform quickly with a very few clicks in the old Gwenview now takes about four times as long, and requires many more clicks. That is not my idea of elegant, anymore than lipstick on a farm animal makes it elegant.
My original article was about functional and workflow problems in Linux, and how I think they're being ignored in favor of eye candy and a misguided attempt to appeal to a fictional, non-existent userbase. This Gwenview issue was simply one example to illustrate that, and even though it was a small and limited example, I would say that Mr. Seigo's response, and many of the other responses, support my assertion better than I could ever support it myself.
Again, those who read before commenting know that I went on to highlight the problem of increasing inaccessibility under the hood of Linux. I think smart userspace design in Linux is taking a beating, perhaps because of new generations of devs and contributors who don't have a Unix background, but perhaps Windows or Mac, and who don't understand or care about the original Unix and Linux design principles, and why they came about in the first place. The result is an increasingly user-opaque Linux, harder for users to understand and control. That is the opposite of how it is supposed to be.
Quoting:DiBosco, did you read ANYTHING
Yes.
I could ask the same of you really.
Giving direct answers to problems you claim are there is not pecking at an irrelevancy.
Aaron's reply is absolutely not entirely emotional; you have chosen a little bit from it above and missed out large swathes where he either agrees with you or gives very good, sensible, well thought out reasons why things have changed. Also, if you read to the end of that blog you will see he fully addresses your issues and has already fixed issues you wanted.
I get and accept your point about your file sizes/image sizes (which have been addressed) and the daft bug where the file picker goes back to root , but I don't agree with your other points, I just don't see how they make any difference at all to efficiency. All the other issues were calmly and sensibly dealt with by Aaron. Do you honestly not agree with how he dealt with any of those other configuration issues? If not and the only thing that will satisfy you is things returning to exactly how they were then the discussion is pointless because nothing will get resolved.
Yes, your original article was about general inefficiencies, but to be fair, you did raise Gwenview and it's only fair that Gwenview was addressed because it's the only concrete example of where the inefficiencies are. Did Aaron agree with some of your points? Did he fix them? The answer clearly is yes and he deserves some credit for that. You see, you say Aaron's answers support your assertion, but I see an almost completely different picture. Also, my own experience with KDE4 (and may others) tells a very different story.
Hmmmmm.
DiBosco, you've just about convinced me ---
There is no going home.
Sigh.
I used to love KDE, thorugh all its iterations.
I have never loved "Screw the user".
DiBosco, you've just about convinced me ---
There is no going home.
Sigh.
I used to love KDE, thorugh all its iterations.
I have never loved "Screw the user".
Dino, I am aware that trying to defend what KDE have done with KDE4 is possibly putting people's backs up even more, so I'm sorry if I am antagonising.
Anyway, at least you reply to points raised, so thanks for that. I will respect your dislike for the new desktop and disagree with it. :~)
Anyway, at least you reply to points raised, so thanks for that. I will respect your dislike for the new desktop and disagree with it. :~)
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
( and I know you are joking, but the voting is quote public and you can see who voted on what at any time )
And yeah, lots of lynch-mobs in the FOSS community(ies). A lot of people would rather whine on forums about things than actually jump in and do something about it. I have had two of my feature-requests carried out on KDE in the past. And I have only ever asked for three things. Once was a KDE3 thing, and two KDE4 requests.
The one thing that has not been officially fixed has already got an available patch, so it'll get into the trunk eventually.