The problem with User Interfaces (Score 1)

I work with Solaris and and have used the unsupported Gnome 1.4 on the following machines: 1. Dual Celeron 533 Mhz PC with 1 GB of RAM, 2x 20 GB drives, ATI XPert 98 video card (24 bit color) 2. A Sparc 20 MP with 2 RT626 125 MHz processors, 336 MB of RAM, 2x 4 GB SCSI disks (256 color) 3. A Sparc 5 85 MHz with 256 MB of RAM, 2x 2 GB hard disks running Solaris 9 Beta. Gnome was loaded on each machine and the results are as follows: 1. Dual Celeron, came up slow but once it was running was as fast as CDE (it ought to be with that much hardware). 2. Sparc 20, despite the 256 colors which made it look like crap was slow and the CPU utilization was around 20% at idle! 3. Sparc 5, forget it! A lot of system administrators are not happy with Sun for adopting Gnome (I am one of them) since "eye candy" seems to be more important than functionality. If I am using X as it was meant to be used (remotely) I do not want all my bandwidth and memory sucked up by "useless" features just to run top or prstat from a term window! Don't get me wrong, eye candy is cool, but I don't need eye candy at work! What I see as wrong with the UI community is: 1. A total lack of standards, this is why the "hardcore" adminstrators will stick with CDE. It was built on a standard that doesn't change with a user's preferences. This is what system administrators want and need! 2. The emphasis on the "desktop" and cool features to mimic Windows, MacOS, and other UI's. It might help in the "experience", but at what cost from a performance aspect? I think too many people are getting away from what X was supposed to be and that is a networked GUI to allow a system administrator to use graphical applications from another terminal. X has been a little long in the tooth for improvement but I don't think this is it! What I want is a stable desktop to run graphical applications, not have the "latest ubergeek" interface that has transparent windows and other nonsense just to run a term window and the java console for NetBackup! There are basically two groups that a UI should be designed for, one is the system administrator who wants functionality and reliability over features, the other is the desktop for the "home user" which has the eye candy and the cool features. What needs to happen is that everybody designing UI's for Unix/Linux should get together and hammer out a set of standards for an extensible UI that meets the needs of both sys admins and everyone else. Make the UI customizable to suit the needs of each and do this during installation (rather than the typical X approach of customizing afterward). And keep the code to a "sane" level, I am not saying that it should be coded to support a 386, but at the same time it should also not require an 8 CPU 4500 to run either! The learning curve of this GUI should be minimal and it does not have to mimic Microsoft, Apple, Sun, or anyone else for that matter. I have used Windows, OS/2, MacOS, SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, SCO Unix, and Linux and for the most part have figured out what I need to do something pretty quickly. If you are designing for the "clueless luser", then it will require a certain amount of "handholding" whereas with the seasoned user it should be "lean and mean". A very challenging set of goals for those who wish to "accept the challenge". Robert Escue System Administrator