![]() |
2016-09-08
, 08:35
|
|
Posts: 764 |
Thanked: 2,889 times |
Joined on Jun 2014
|
#32
|
(remember, this is about choice, different users have differnt workflows!)
![]() |
2016-09-08
, 10:45
|
Posts: 281 |
Thanked: 679 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#33
|
What's needed is not more options, but sane defaults so these options are not necessary. I don't mean to say 'you're doing it wrong', only 'there are other ways to do it, if not better'. It's never possible to please everyone, and any project which tries to do so will eventually fail.
The Following User Says Thank You to cy8aer For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2016-09-08
, 17:16
|
|
Posts: 943 |
Thanked: 3,229 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Zagreb
|
#34
|
![]() |
2016-09-08
, 19:17
|
|
Posts: 764 |
Thanked: 2,889 times |
Joined on Jun 2014
|
#35
|
![]() |
2016-09-08
, 19:51
|
|
Posts: 943 |
Thanked: 3,229 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Zagreb
|
#36
|
![]() |
2016-09-08
, 20:24
|
|
Posts: 764 |
Thanked: 2,889 times |
Joined on Jun 2014
|
#37
|
![]() |
2016-09-08
, 22:38
|
Posts: 1,548 |
Thanked: 7,510 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Czech Republic
|
#38
|
+1, but...
Does this really work? Looks like the Gnome-KDE dilemma. Gnome: some parameters (too less) - KDE full parameters (too much?). I use gnome but with tweak tool, some gnome extensions, and additional dconf stuff. Less parameters but not good defined.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MartinK For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2016-09-09
, 05:35
|
|
Posts: 6,453 |
Thanked: 20,983 times |
Joined on Sep 2012
@ UK
|
#39
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post: | ||
Back to settings; up to now I am convinced that the best way is to have settings in both a central place and accessible in the application itself, just as you originally stated I think.
There's no overhead really, and that way would suit both schools of thought. (remember, this is about choice, different users have differnt workflows!)