Tweak Tool in Workstation?

kendell clark coffeekingms at gmail.com
Tue May 12 03:07:19 UTC 2015


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

hi
This message makes a lot of sense. While I wouldn't count myself a
power user, I do like to change some settings but I can adapt to
nearly any interface, other than windows 8. Extensions really should
be handled more securely other than a firefox extension. Perhaps
integration with polkit, either ask the user for authorization before
allowing an installation or take the gnome software approach and
simply handle the installation in the background. Either way, I really
feel extensions, as a primary selling point of gnome, deserves prime
placement in the control center. And for those of us who don't use
firefox, we cannot install extensions at all, unless the
chromium/chrome extension was fixed. I don't use chrome, but there it is
.
Just my opinion
Thanks
Kendell clark
Sent from Fedora GNU/Linux


Adam Batkin wrote:
> On 05/11/2015 10:00 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> I agree that Tweak Tool doesn't need to be included by default.
>> It's dead simple to install with the gnome-software search
>> provider, and it's home to the settings that we *don't* want to
>> be offered to users. Anything we expect users to change belongs
>> in gnome-control-center.
> 
> Wait, what? Why don't you want those settings to be offered? Put in
> an Advanced button and throw them in there. That should make
> everyone happy. Seriously.
> 
> Look, we all know that Apple popularized the "minimalist" idea for
> user interfaces. And their UIs are considered by most to be both
> visually appealing and elegant, which in turn leads them to be
> "learnable" (notice I didn't use the term "usable"[1] since many
> power users *don't* consider the Mac to be "usable" - at least not
> without some heavy customization, including a hefty assortment of
> third-party tools). And the truth is that the Mac's UI is "good
> enough" for most. Plenty of my power-user friends don't even notice
> that Command+Tab is LRU to switch between apps, but Command+` is
> cyclical to switch between windows within an app (and it's
> maddening that the latter works that way, as well as the fact that
> everyone fumbles around not even noticing that it works that way
> (of course they may not even bother and use the mouse/trackpad 
> and/or Expose))
> 
> Hypotheses: * A large proportion traditional Linux-on-the-Desktop
> users are "power users" * Somewhere on the order of 100% of the
> Fedora-on-the-Desktop users who will be "spreading the word" about
> Fedora are "power users" or higher * Power users appreciate the
> ability to (often heavily) customize their computing experience -
> not just because "they can", but because they heavily optimize
> their systems for their usage models so they can operate most
> efficiently. We are hackers * "Learnability" is important, but so
> is "usability". "Power users" are willing to put up with *some*
> inconvenience (like additional configuration options in a list, a
> button marked "Advanced", etc...) which may negatively affect
> minimalist ideals, in exchange for increased customizability
> 
> I'm not saying that we should have to drop to a shell to get
> anything done. But I'm saying that the well-manicured,
> super-integrated Gnome UIs could use a few extra tweaks and options
> to make "power users" happy. And let's face it, most people on this
> list would consider themselves a "power user" in one form or
> another and we're the ones going out and advocating for Linux and
> Fedora.
> 
>> * Shell extensions: As long as we're going to offer them, we
>> shouldn't relegate them to Tweak Tool. Perhaps gnome-software
>> would be a better location than gnome-control-center, but either
>> would be better than Tweak Tool. (But the gnome-shell browser
>> plugin is very crashy at worst and unreliable at best, so we
>> should fix that first.)
> 
> Indeed. When I first used Gnome 3, I had trouble finding where to 
> install, uninstall and manage extensions. Then I had trouble
> believing that the only built-in way to do it was through a Firefox
> browser extension. While "innovative", the current model is
> counter-intuitive at best and dangerous at worst (really? are there
> not enough security holes in our web browsers and websites that we
> need to force the primary/only installation method for system-level
> software to use that combination?)
> 
> [1]
> https://rickosborne.org/blog/2007/04/usability-vs-discoverability/
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=YDGA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the desktop mailing list