Sam Varshavchik:
Someone who's already used traditional desktop environments, with desktop shortcut icons, a taskbar (on top or the bottom), with something that looks like a "Start" menu, a tray, a pager, and a few other familiar UI icons – someone like that should be able to hit the ground running with XFCE.
Samuel Sieb:
Of course, if you're going to use the exact same interactions, then you probably don't need instructions.
If a graphical user interface needs instructions to be usable, it's failed in its creation. The whole point of having such an interface is that you can see what's on offer, and how to use it.
But if you always keep everything the same as it has always been, then where is the chance for improvement? Or do you think Windows 95 was the ultimate desktop interface and there can never be anything better? That's basically what you're describing. :-)
Don't ever hold up Windows as an example of good design! But the idea, which was *NOT* Windows invented, of organised menus, applications in individual windows, and a taskbar to control them, is one of the most productive interfaces.
Back to Gnome, I'd like to know just who thought redesigning the interface of a desktop computer to use the design of a touchscreen device, was a good idea. Very few desktop systems have touchscreens. Page after page of virtually randomly assorted icons (alphabetically sorting them by their wierd names) is useless. Terrible interface for multitasking.