Firefox crippling

[Enrico Scholz]

thacker at math.cornell.edu (John Thacker) writes:

>> >Altogether, Gnome2 is a very unergonomic piece of software. Userfriendly
>> >software should adapt to the user, but with Gnome2 the user has to adapt
>> >to the software. This is caused by the refusal of Gnome2 developers to
>> >allow configuration of their software and the frequent changes of the
>> >user interface.
>> > 
>> Any claim like this should probably start with a definition of user ;-).

I think on my mother which was not very amused when the desktop had a
completely different behavior after the Gnome2.4->2.6 upgrade. Or on me,
who wants to use his ~/.Xmodmap and ~/.Xresources files and is stopped
in this by the arrogance of the Gnome2 developers.


>> I would imagine that someone who does, say, marketing, would never 
>> configure their desktop (for better or worse).
>
> Yes, and shipping a large combination of software with dramatically
> different icons and keyboard shortcuts for the same tasks forces a
> user to adapt to the software, and can hardly be considered user
> friendly.

1. The default firefox icons are not "dramatically different" from the
   default Gnome2 icon theme

2. I do not care about the default setting as long as:
   - it can be configured
   - does not override current settings

3. What is the meaning of "different"? Different to what? Firefox is the
   only Gnome2 application I am using, so why am I forced to see these
   ugly icons?

   I do not know KDE, but I can imagine that people with this desktop
   environment will be shocked also when they see the current firefox
   icons; they probably do not match the KDE theme neither.




Enrico
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 480 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20050608/8ee4969e/attachment.sig>