On 28/02/2008, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Kelly Miller pisze:
> You're joking, right?
No, I'm not. From users point, YaST-GTK is more readable and
better
organized.
> I mean, two minutes with YaST-GTK and I'd
> already gotten sick of the fact that it acts like just about
> everything else in Gnome anymore; that the user should only be able to
> reach the minimum of options and anything else should be buried.
You use KDE, right?
As do I. You have a problem with KDE, right? It's bad? It offers
options and you think that people don't want options => must not allow
configuration?
> And it's a fact that the GTK installer is utterly
brain-dead.
Don't be rude... Most of people do not require LOAD of options,
but they
expect simple "just works", without hassle.
I find it rude that you're suggesting that having options => doesn't
"just work". You could have the same behaviour as "default" but let
people change it; having sane defaults is not the same as refusing to
accept people won't always like *your* defaults. This *is* fairly
common with GTk / GNOME based applications (and it seems to be a trend
throughout that particular stack / framework / whatever you want to
call it). It's extremely frustrating.