Active Topics

 


Page 3 of 5 12 3 45
Reply
Thread Tools
kinggo's Avatar
kinggo is offline kinggo
2016-09-07 , 18:30
Posts: 943 | Thanked: 3,229 times | Joined on Jun 2010 @ Zagreb
#21
The thing is, all those settings we set up once and that's it. And I don't see the need for that to be outside of an app itself.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to kinggo For This Useful Post:
ejjoman is offline ejjoman
2016-09-07 , 19:20
Posts: 114 | Thanked: 409 times | Joined on Jun 2011 @ Germany
#22
AFAIK Jolla is using the same pattern as Nokia did back in the days. I remember that on the N900 and N9 most of the App settings were in the central settings app (at least the Nokia core apps) - correct me I'm wrong.

I really liked it, just because I *knew* where I could find a specific setting without searching them in the app in some sub-sub-sub menu.

IMHO in the end the only thing that matters, is *consistently*. If every app has their settings in the central settings app, why should I care? I know where to find them even without searching.

The main problem here is Jolla: They are so busy trying to "secure" their system and have non-breakable **** that nobody can really publish a "professional" app in harbour.
We don't have services/daemons, we can't really integrate into the system (accounts, custom notification categories, *settings*, etc.), we can't link against "unstable" libs... Srsly... why do they even care?

If I write an app and an update breaks it... Well, I have to put my fingers on it and fix it.

I had an app in the OVI store which executed a pre-uninst script that deleted app-made desktop entries. How can I do this on Jolla? I can't, just because the ****ing script is executed with privileged rights...

Sorry for this rant and off-topic ****, but I had to say it... I don't know where this should lead... Sometimes I think Jolla is more restrictive than Google or even Apple, while they have just a fraction of users.
 

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to ejjoman For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
pichlo is offline pichlo
2016-09-07 , 19:30
Posts: 6,453 | Thanked: 20,983 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#23
Exactly, @kinggo. Plus, who is to decide which options you "setup once"?
Three examples from Sailfish of settings I use all the time:
  1. Picture size in Camera. I change that based on what the picture is for.
  2. Delivery reports in Messages. My provider charges me 2p per SMS where all others charge 10 or 12p, but at the price of charging extra for delivery reports. So I enable them only when needed.
  3. Clear browser history. Need I say more?
In all these cases, a direct access to those settings straight from the relevant application would make much more sense.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
nthn's Avatar
nthn is offline nthn
2016-09-07 , 20:12
Posts: 764 | Thanked: 2,889 times | Joined on Jun 2014
#24
Originally Posted by ejjoman View Post
The main problem here is Jolla: They are so busy trying to "secure" their system and have non-breakable **** that nobody can really publish a "professional" app in harbour.
We don't have services/daemons, we can't really integrate into the system (accounts, custom notification categories, *settings*, etc.), we can't link against "unstable" libs... Srsly... why do they even care?

If I write an app and an update breaks it... Well, I have to put my fingers on it and fix it.

I had an app in the OVI store which executed a pre-uninst script that deleted app-made desktop entries. How can I do this on Jolla? I can't, just because the ****ing script is executed with privileged rights...

Sorry for this rant and off-topic ****, but I had to say it... I don't know where this should lead... Sometimes I think Jolla is more restrictive than Google or even Apple, while they have just a fraction of users.
Completely agreed. I'm all for enhanced security, but some (most, all?) of their restrictions are bonkers and based on ludicrous imaginary situations. Shouldn't Harbour be there precisely to prevent malicious applications from entering a user's device, rather than prevent nearly every application from doing so just because they require privileged access to this or that and these privileges might be abused in case the application should turn out to be malicious?
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to nthn For This Useful Post:
nthn's Avatar
nthn is offline nthn
2016-09-07 , 20:20
Posts: 764 | Thanked: 2,889 times | Joined on Jun 2014
#25
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
Exactly, @kinggo. Plus, who is to decide which options you "setup once"?
Three examples from Sailfish of settings I use all the time:
  1. Picture size in Camera. I change that based on what the picture is for.
  2. Delivery reports in Messages. My provider charges me 2p per SMS where all others charge 10 or 12p, but at the price of charging extra for delivery reports. So I enable them only when needed.
  3. Clear browser history. Need I say more?
In all these cases, a direct access to those settings straight from the relevant application would make much more sense.
To you, yes. But: I don't know anyone who ever lowers the default resolution of their camera, you can achieve better results by shooting with the default resolution and editing afterwards as necessary. If storage is an issue, pictures on the Jolla phone only take up about half a MB each at the highest resolution anyway, and I assume phones with very high res, high quality cameras will have storage plenty - and if they don't, it isn't up to the operating system to clean up the mess. Charging for delivery reports is insane, nobody else has this problem.
Clearing history I can see, but you can also either use private mode or set your browser to automatically clear history on exit.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to nthn For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
pichlo is offline pichlo
2016-09-07 , 20:58
Posts: 6,453 | Thanked: 20,983 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#26
The point is that one man's "set once and forget" is another man's "change all the time". Someone else can probably provide completely different examples of settings I never touch but he needs to change frequently. If anything is "insane", then it is discriminating between different types of settings. All settings should be treated equally.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
nthn's Avatar
nthn is offline nthn
2016-09-07 , 21:15
Posts: 764 | Thanked: 2,889 times | Joined on Jun 2014
#27
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
All settings should be treated equally.
Which is why they should all be found in the same place instead of being scattered all over and up to the user to figure out in which submenu they might be hiding.
 
pichlo's Avatar
pichlo is offline pichlo
2016-09-07 , 21:18
Posts: 6,453 | Thanked: 20,983 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#28
Be my guest, I give up. Hopefully someone else will make an alternative application with settings in a sensible place and that is the one I will choose to use.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
 
juiceme is offline juiceme
2016-09-07 , 21:21
Community Council | Posts: 4,920 | Thanked: 12,867 times | Joined on May 2012 @ Southerrn Finland
#29
Originally Posted by nthn View Post
Why, though? Which problems do you see with systemd that can't be applied in the exact same way to the Linux kernel as well?

Some replies in advance:

It's monolithic -> Linux, but also, it isn't really
It's against the UNIX philosophy -> no, it isn't, and also -> Linux
It's against choice -> GNU/Linux is not about choice (see http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedor.../msg00861.html)
It's really big -> Linux; if space is your concern, you might want to look for another kernel which isn't enormous, maybe Hurd. I wonder which will be first, Hurd or Neo900.
GNOME/KDE/... now have systemd as a dependency so it has to be installed -> okay, I can see this, but on the other hand, why not? Who on earth manually installs these behemoth desktop environments? And -> they all also heavily depend on Linux
systemd is overtly complicated piece of code that adds crazy dependencies both upwards and downwards. Really the only benefit from it is probably a speedier startup but that can also be achieved with upstart. Besides even a full serial startup is fast enough when you are using solid-state disks.

As for your arguments, most of those I consider invalid.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to juiceme For This Useful Post:
MartinK is offline MartinK
2016-09-07 , 22:41
Posts: 1,548 | Thanked: 7,510 times | Joined on Apr 2010 @ Czech Republic
#30
Originally Posted by juiceme View Post
systemd is overtly complicated piece of code that adds crazy dependencies both upwards and downwards.
Do we really need to turn this thread to a systemd thread ? If it really needs to be discussed I suggest creating a new thread.
__________________
modRana: a flexible GPS navigation system
Mieru: a flexible manga and comic book reader
Universal Components - a solution for native looking yet component set independent QML appliactions (QtQuick Controls 2 & Silica supported as backends)
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MartinK For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 3 of 5 12 3 45

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:15.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top