2. The only reason it's hard to fix is because certain parts of Python are overly dynamic. Since they broke backwards compatibility in Python 3 it would have been the perfect time to fix it. Instead they broke backwards compatibility for stuff 99% of the community doesn't give a fuck about and now nobody is upgrading even though Python 3 has been out for over 5 years.
That is really insightful, seriously. Python 3 did break backwards computability, this really would have been the time to fix some original design flaws, but they didn't, instead, they focused on stuff, like you said 99% of the people out there don't care about, hence why so many use 2.7 today and how many new projects are even started with 2.7.
There's nothing wrong with design flaws, we all make them, you just at some point have to go back and realize you made a mistake and fix it.
1. they dont' want input from users. they don't want users tweaking its innards. users are expected to update their workflows and expectations to the 'one true path.'
you know this because?
2. sure there is. if gnome 3 is going the flat-learning-curve/flat-power-curve route...
I agree, Gnome 3 with the defaults sucks, WTF could they not have made tweak tool part of the control panel??? or at least default install. But just grab tweak tool and some extensions and Gnome3 is nice.
3. no they couldn't, well, not as easily. gnome2 is say 90% of what modern users want. it's easier to add the 10% and get it working well, than rewriting half of gnome3 and resyncing their changes with every gnome release.
No need to 're-write' it, just use the components, and tie them together differently, basic simple javascript.
4. talk to the gnome3 devs.. their demagoguery is the problem. their slavish apple chasing attitude is another.
Again, you know this because?
Scientists will study your brain to learn more about your distant cousin, Man.