
GNOME 3.2 Released - Garbage
http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.2
======
jannes

      GNOME core modules now only depend on introspection-based
      Python bindings (pygobject-3) and hence pygtk, gnome-python
      and gnome-python-desktop are not required any more.
    

Interesting. I have been out of the loop for a while. Does this mean that
existing pygtk applications have to be ported to pygobject-3 or is it a simple
"import" change?

~~~
kklimonda
Yes, API is not the same (although very similar) so all applications have to
be ported. Some of this can be automated (using scripts like
<http://git.gnome.org/browse/pygobject/tree/pygi-convert.sh>) but it has to be
done.

------
devinmrn
Anyone else move away from Gnome recently? I've switched to XFCE and find the
workflow better adapted to what I'm used to, I gave gnome-shell a month or two
before I couldn't take it anymore.

~~~
theatrus2
I stuck it out with Gnome 2.x on Ubuntu, until I "had" to convert that machine
to Windows 7 (for running IAR). Windows 7 is somehow an improvement over Gnome
3.

~~~
devinmrn
Yeah, right now I'm running Windows 7 on my desktop which is used only every
now and then and my laptop is running Arch with XFCE. Have you taken a look at
the fallback mode on Gnome 3? I tried it and it brought back the features I
was used to but just the idea that it was a fallback mode was kinda
unappealing, what makes the mode any worse off than gnome-shell?

------
Luyt
I wonder why their showcase features a picture of a DigiNotar certificate [1].
Could it be that DigiNotar was in the news recently?

From WikiPedia: _"On July 10, 2011, a certificate was issued by DigiNotar's
systems for Google by an attacker with access to their systems. This
certificate was subsequently used by unknown persons in Iran to conduct a man-
in-the-middle attack against Google services. On August 28, 2011, certificate
problems were observed on multiple Internet service providers in Iran. The
fraudulent certificate was posted on pastebin."_

..and that was only the start of a whole chain of events...

DigiNotar went bankrupt a few days ago [3].

[1] [http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/cert...](http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/certificate-viewer.png.en)

[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diginotar>

[3] <http://www.diginotar.nl/>

~~~
bkor
The screenshot was made when DigiNotar wasn't yet bankcrupt. The reason for
using DigiNotar is because of two things: 1) my sense of humour 2) makes it
really clear why you might want a certificate viewer. Ok, maybe a 3rd one:
Dutch government initially saying they could still be trusted for some
certificates.

It is not the only screenshot with my sense of humour though

------
wazoox
The "web application" trick is a great idea. I think we may see this idea
stolen soon by all major OSes.

~~~
clhodapp
This type of functionality is already supported by on Windows, OS X, and, of
course Linux-based systems through Chrome, Firefox, and even IE. I believe
that the first way to get this type of functionality was to use Mozilla's
Prism project, which has been around since 2007 (though that is just the first
that I am thinking of off the top of my head). I never end up finding these
sorts of things to be very useful, since I always have a browser open anyway.

~~~
rbanffy
Anyway, this moves support for web apps into the standard plumbing of the GUI.
It's a good thing.

------
ugh
So, what’s with Linux and margins? I thought they had solved that by now but
nope, the margins are still all over the place, inconsistent and visually
distracting.

I feel this is even more apparent now that they dialed up the margins even
more.

~~~
chao-
Please excuse my question, as I am quite design-inept, and often have no
problem with whatever visuals are presented. I'm trying to figure out which
margins are worthy of ire or inconsistent, for the sake of my own improvement
on such visual matters.

The only difference/inconsistency that leaps out at me is that between the
content of a window and its border, in which case there seems to be a clear
divide between popup/info windows ("Save a Copy", "Color", "Online Accounts")
and the more persistent, full-application windows ("Contacts", "Documents" and
the image viewer).

There are differences between the spacing of other UI elements, for sure, but
I don't really understand why one element should or should not be placed a
consistent distance away from another. E.g. in the "Online Accounts" window,
the All Settings button has identical top and bottom margins, but it is a
different margin from left margin, as well as different from the margin
between the white box in the pane below, and its container. Which of these, if
any, would you change and why?

~~~
exogen
I personally wouldn't cite margins as the biggest visual flaw, but rather
alignment in general, followed by contrast.

The very first screenshot on the page is a very awkward dialog:
[http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/gnom...](http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/gnome-online-accounts.png.en)

* "Use this account for" runs uncomfortably close to the account list. It looks bad. Couldn't they just put that whitespace on the right to use?

* The switch labels (Mail, Calendar...) are aligned with the Email Address label, but the switches themselves aren't aligned with the email value (ovitters@...). The implicit grid is broken.

* Someone was too lazy to style the email address in the selected state of the account list (dark gray on medium blue). There's not enough contrast to easily read it.

[http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/gnom...](http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/gnome-contacts.png.en)

* This is the Contacts app whose sole purpose is to view a person's details. Why are their only details (Away, mail@example.com) the tiniest words on the screen?

* Letter placement in the contacts list (A, C, D) looks reckless and noisy. Horizontally, its margins are not equal. Vertically, it appears arbitrary. It would look better if they were horizontally centered and vertically on the baseline of the contact's name.

* The letters (A, C, D) also have too much contrast; they should be lighter. They're a visual hint, not an area of focus.

[http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/file...](http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/file-save-dialog.png.en)

* Why is the filetype selector only wide enough to show "PDF Docume..."? There is a ton of space.

[http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/colo...](http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-
notes/3.2/figures/color-management.png.en)

* None of these buttons have enough padding around the label when compared to the buttons in other dialogs.

* Why are the lower buttons all squished together?

Most of these can't be fixed by theming, because they were caused by the
dialog creators themselves. In short, there is a lack of attention to detail.
:)

~~~
bkor
File a bug per issue and it'll be fixed.

~~~
exogen
I don't use any of this software, I'm just responding to parent's question.
But hopefully some GNOME developers are listening.

~~~
chao-
I appreciate the perspective you've provided.

------
alperakgun
I switched to gnome 3 and enjoy it so far on my ubuntu. I also like
kde4.6....tried other desktops with pleasure too.

... good to see how bold choices created a diversified spectrum of of linux
desktop.

------
listic
Which Linux distributions are going to use it?

------
nagnatron
Finally anti-aliased window corners.

------
drivebyacct2
I'm happy to see 3 shaping up like KDE4. It seems like the rough edges are
being ironed out very quickly! I'd love to see the font dialog get more
options rather than a simple cosmetic rearrangements. The Mac font chooser
dialog is perfect and very compact too.

------
FlowerPower
Down to the "ON-OFF" button/switch it still attempts to look like something it
will never be, MacOSX.

Down.

~~~
Luyt
This is indeed an unhealthy trend. The past years nearly all major desktop
environments have been adding stuff like window compositing, shadows,
translucent windows and other graphics gimmicks which just add bloat, bling-
bling and no usability value. In many cases usability even suffered. For
example, KDE4 removed a lot of configurability that made KDE3 such a malleable
environment. It's fashionable to remove choices from the user and do
windowdressing instead.

Ever had to drill down the network settings in Windows Vista control panel? As
soon as you're past the initial window and at the TCP/IP settings tab, you're
suddenly back in Windows XP land with the @#$% tiny list of interfaces, having
to use both vertical and horizontal scrollbars, and no way to resize the
window, thank you Microsoft. But at least the Start Menu looks like a glossy
magazine, and have you seen the translucent taskbar? Wow! That's what we
needed!

~~~
thingie
No, of course not. Window compositing _is_ a huge usability feature. It made
me switch from xmonad to Gnome 3, because it just feels so much faster and
responsive. Also, live miniatures are almost necessary (at least for me) while
dealing with 5 terminal windows and another 6 emacs frames. And you lose
nothing (well, ok, you do, in some cases it can be slower, take few more
resources and so on, but that's the case with only some apps, not general).
Making compositing and using accelerated video HW the norm is a step forward,
not an unhealthy trend.

