Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on February 18, 2007 05:52 PM
Because not everyone agrees on which is the better interface. I don't like Gnome because it makes things that should be simple hard.
I don't like KDE because it makes things confusing, but at least not hard enough that I have to Google things. (like switching off that stupid spatial browser in Nautilus)
I don't like Windows XP UI because everything is so goddamn large (at least with the uxtheme patch I get to put in LunaQQ)
I don't like Windows Vista UI, because I can't find a theme to get rid of the My documents etc text on the right side of the start menu like LunaQQ.
I don't like the Mac UI because they don't give me a proper maximize button, the menu bar is always at the top and I want a task bar! not this stupid dock that wastes a lot of screen space and that reminded me of OS/2
However, all the UIs have their advantages, and I just like to have the option to tune the interface to match the way I work.
Re: Gnome UI
I don't even get why automatically applying changes is a good thing. You make a mistake in choosing what you click on and the changes are automatically applied. I like the extra step of an Apply button. It also makes a more responsive UI.
Why are the tab orders so demented. Try starting the Run dialog and see how many tabs it takes to reach the ok button. And watch how many of the screen elements actually activate to indicate where the focus currently is. If the bloody themes are done correctly.
Or go to Evolution and try to add a contact. Try to change the e-mail types without touching the mouse.
Microsoft itself has proven itself to work with both keyboard only usage and mouse only usage. With the noticable exception of Internet Explorer 1.0 and below which I couldn't just use the keyboard alone.
If Gnome is that good an interface, a blind man should be able to use it. And if it is really good, it should work without the mouse. But I doubt they did any real accessiblity testing with it.