Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

GNOME 3.0 Delayed Until March 2011

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the so-little-time-until-2012 dept.

GNOME 201

Julie188 writes "GNOME 3.0 was scheduled to be released in September but during the developers conference, GUADEC 2010 in Den Haag, the organization had to face facts: the much ballyhooed GNOME Shell really wasn't ready. The Shell is supposed to bring 'a whole new user experience to the desktop.' So now, in September, what users will see is GNOME 2.32, distributed as a new stable release. Next target date for 3.0: March 2011."

cancel ×

201 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Miguel is ... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33060456)

too busy with Mono these days ...

Re:Miguel is ... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33060490)

...and his boyfriend is pissed about where he got it from!

Really? (0, Offtopic)

gbutler69 (910166) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060518)

I heard it was the CLAP!

Frist Psot! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33060494)

Frosty piss?

Re:Frist Psot! (-1, Flamebait)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061146)

offtopic? He's late. Like gnome 3.0. And your sister.

Smart (5, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060526)

Better than releasing the Gnome equivalent of KDE4.

Re:Smart (5, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060672)

Better than releasing the Gnome equivalent of KDE4.

...unless it ends up as the Gnome equivalent of Vista - late and not what anyone wants.

Re:Smart (2, Insightful)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060900)

That's what I was thinking. No need to rush it out. If they feel it needs more time in the oven, then so be it.

Re:Smart (1)

linuxgeek64 (1246964) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061144)

They shouldn't burn it either.

Re:Smart (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061630)

Agreed, but if they feel it's too buggy for release, I'll take their word for it. They're the ones that are doing the work...

Re:Smart (5, Informative)

jadrian (1150317) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061366)

They wish they had something even remotely close to KDE 4.0. All they have is a new desktop shell.

Re:Smart (2, Interesting)

Esospopenon (1838392) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061516)

They wish they had something even remotely close to KDE 4.0. All they have is a new desktop shell.

You have to remember there is more to Gnome than what meets the eye.

Re:Smart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061880)

It's a robot in disguise?

What are you talking about? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33062090)

Seriously, what are you talking about? What is this "more" that you speak of?

Re:Smart (4, Insightful)

akanouras (1431981) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061784)

Devil's advocate here - two things they have over KDE are:

  1. Telepathy
  2. gvfs-fuse

Apart from these two, I'd prefer they took the HIG and the other design principles and built a new GNOME over KDElibs.

Re:Smart (2, Interesting)

DrXym (126579) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062382)

I'd prefer KDE took the HIG and implemented it on their own desktop. KDE is a usability travesty which might explain in no small part why GNOME has gained the upper hand.

Re:Smart (2, Insightful)

akanouras (1431981) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063116)

Funny you should mention that - a lot of the newer apps are definitely influenced by it.

Apart from that, I think KDE should keep aiming for flexibility in the UI just as GNOME aims for extreme minimalism - both have their place for different types of users.

Re:Smart (1)

arose (644256) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062488)

So that we can all be stuck with a non-maintained set of libraries when Qt 5 comes out?

Re:Smart (1)

akanouras (1431981) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062946)

Qt 4 came out in freaking 2005. Also, it still has the Qt3Support helper classes for porting.

If 5 years aren't enough for you to migrate your app, by all means feel free to mantain it by & for yourself while the rest of the world has moved on.

Re:Smart (4, Informative)

diegocg (1680514) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062604)

Telepathy

Kopete is being ported to work on top of Telephaty

Re:Smart (1)

akanouras (1431981) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063044)

Sorry, I should've qualified that with "here and now".

The poor chap(s) working on telepathy-qt can only do so much - it's been coming a long time now. :(

Re:Smart (3, Insightful)

shawn(at)fsu (447153) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062348)

What was wrong with releasing KDE 4.0? Yeah it sucked but it's not like once they sent out KDE 4.0 they also removed KDE 3.x from 'the internet'. You have to make a choice at some point esp in an open source product where you you should send it out so at least you can get user feedback on it. I like how OpenSuse handled it. You could install KDE3.x and KDE4.0.

If you try to make it perfect and keep putting it off and putting it off you run the risk of it becoming vaporware.

Re:Smart (3, Insightful)

Etriaph (16235) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063026)

KDE has never been impressive during it's initial releases of new major versions, and I admit that as a KDE user.  However, overall, once you reach a stable KDE version I find that KDE is miles better than GNOME.  I've tried, many times, to get into GNOME to see what others find special about it and all I ever find is that it's still the same old GNOME.  The only single benefit I credit to GNOME over KDE is speed; however, on a modern PC the only noticeable speed increase in GNOME over KDE is startup time.

If you haven't yet, download Kubuntu 10.04 and patch up to the latest version of KDE.  Once you see how the plasma desktop can be configured I'm confident that you'll begin to reconsider.

Not a huge loss... (4, Interesting)

Sheetrock (152993) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060530)

I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

I've been playing around with soft lighting in the GIMP, and I think one innovation I'd like to see come up (in X-windows or wherever) would be to allow users to "tint" the whole desktop with a particular color scheme and pattern... something that can hit the windows and wallpaper evenly not unlike the sun is currently hitting my monitor, only not so bright, blurry and distracting.

Think looking at a monitor with the faint reflection of light hitting rippling water... ahh, soothing!

Re:Not a huge loss... (0, Offtopic)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060878)

Think looking at a monitor with the faint reflection of light hitting rippling water... ahh, soothing!

I suppose everyone's different and more options (probably) can't hurt, but that sounds more like gouge my eyes out annoying rather than "soothing".

Re:Not a huge loss... (3, Insightful)

nyctopterus (717502) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060928)

I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

The market for Linux is not mostly made up of newbs who want Windows that isn't Windows, but of power users and people who care about free software. These people are already trying to move AWAY from Windows. Making Linux more Windows-like is no good for usability or differentiating Linux. Gnome should move in it's own direction.

Re:Not a huge loss... (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061044)

Making Linux more Windows-like is no good for usability or differentiating Linux. Gnome should move in it's own direction.

While true, I also think that it shouldn't go in a different direction just to be "different" from Windows. Windows isn't like the anti-christ. Sure, it's got some things wrong with it from both a technically and political standpoint, but as an OS it also does many things right (as painful as that might be for many of us to admit).

Those things that it DOES to right I have no issue with doing the same way in Gnome/Linux. Afterall, the whole POINT of OSS is sharing ideas and avoiding reinvention of the wheel. We can't do that with Windows' code, but we most assuredly can do it with good UI elements (same with UI elements from MacOS). If what they're doing works, then our own direction should be the same way they're going.

Re:Not a huge loss... (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062240)

> While true, I also think that it shouldn't go in a different direction just to be "different" from Windows.

Well windows is a moving target as they think it's better to reinvent the wheel by making changes to UI to increase the psychological cost of switching to other platforms. Since windows is different from windows, I hope gnome doesn't share that kind of philosophy. If something needs to change let it change, otherwise keep things familiar- familiarity makes users gain time.

Re:"just to be different"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33062620)

it shouldn't go in a different direction just to be "different" from Windows.

What about "just to be Gnome"? Allowed?

There seem to be a lot of people 'round here now for whom Windows is a universal and sole reference point.

Re:"just to be different"... (3, Insightful)

lennier (44736) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062986)

There seem to be a lot of people 'round here now for whom Windows is a universal and sole reference point.

That is entirely practical and will continue to be as long as Windows is the dominant legacy system.

But Windows Vista/7 have really broken some of the UI design which made Windows 95 and up great, so as long as GNOME isn't following Apple and Microsoft's trend toward making interfaces more obscure and less powerful, there's certainly room to improve.

(Seriously, Microsoft, wtf. You removed the 'go up one directory' button in the Windows Explorer, and why? I *use* that button! A lot.)

Re:Not a huge loss... (0, Troll)

HBoar (1642149) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063180)

it shouldn't go in a different direction just to be "different" from Windows.

Exactly, you only have to look at OSX to see that needlessly trying to be different just ends up making things awkward.

Re:Not a huge loss... (2, Insightful)

socrplayr813 (1372733) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061122)

That depends on perspective. Personally, I would love for Gnome to be completely unique (as long as its usability is good). However, among the people that I help with computer issues, there has been a lot of interest in free (no cost) software and I've fairly easily transitioned them to open source Windows apps. A 'close enough' interface for Linux would let a lot of them switch without a significant learning curve, which would reduce their computer problems, make my life easier, and possibly extend the life of their hardware.

Again, I don't disagree (something other than Gnome should fill that gap), but there are people with a different perspective that's perfectly valid.

Re:Not a huge loss... (4, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061690)

How about this.
I want an UI that isn't totally different from Windows, Gnome, and OS/X?

Frankly I am begining to feel that OSs are getting to much eye candy at the expense of usability.
What I want from an OS is really simple.
Fast
Reliable
Launches applications
Manages files
Handles IO.

Wall paper is nice and attractive icons are also nice.
Clean readable fonts is a must.

Oh and use the CTRL and ALT keys and not some stupid Windows or Apple key to do stuff. If you start using a stinking TUX key for commands like copy and paste I may have to hurt people!

Re:Not a huge loss... (-1, Troll)

bonch (38532) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062526)

Is desktop Linux for regular people or not? I'm confused.

Re:Not a huge loss... (1)

afabbro (33948) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061248)

I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

Yeah, that's always held Apple back.

Of course, we can always go back to FVWM95 if you want...

Re:Not a huge loss... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061912)

I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

Yeah, that's always held Apple back.

You speak in jest, but until OS X hit, yes. Yes, it did.

Re:Not a huge loss... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061642)

KDE4 can. You can't tint the whole SVGs and apps. The dialog is buried somewhere around the custom theme blender one.

Re:Not a huge loss... (2, Interesting)

SpaceAmoeba (1159183) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061802)

I understand the concern, but I wonder if being Windows-like is becoming much less important as people do more on netbooks and smartphones. Gnome Shell strikes me as having some inspiration in the interfaces of those devices so it may actually attract people away from Windows. One can always hope!

Re:Not a huge loss... (3, Interesting)

grcumb (781340) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061998)

I've been playing around with soft lighting in the GIMP, and I think one innovation I'd like to see come up (in X-windows or wherever) would be to allow users to "tint" the whole desktop with a particular color scheme and pattern... something that can hit the windows and wallpaper evenly not unlike the sun is currently hitting my monitor, only not so bright, blurry and distracting.

I've been doing this for years: PNG wallpaper with an alpha layer running through the entire image. Graduated background fill in the colour that suits your mood on any given day. For bonus points, script a slow colour transition that matches the time of day.

Re:Not a huge loss... (1)

akanouras (1431981) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062056)

...one innovation I'd like to see come up (in X-windows or wherever) would be to allow users to "tint" the whole desktop with a particular color scheme and pattern... something that can hit the windows and wallpaper evenly not unlike the sun is currently hitting my monitor, only not so bright, blurry and distracting.

Think looking at a monitor with the faint reflection of light hitting rippling water... ahh, soothing!

xrandr --gamma <r>:<g>:<b>

Tint to your heart's desire ;)

Re:Not a huge loss... (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062346)

I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

You seem to imply Linux is or should be a follower, I'd rather see Linux as a leader.

That's not to say Linux should ditch good ideas even from Microsoft.

To come back on topic, Gnome's problem has always been it's lack of integration and I doubt they can on that front catch up with KDE.

Re:Not a huge loss... (1)

dunng808 (448849) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063256)

Being different from Windows is a good thing. I use Gnome because I was looking for a clean, simple UI, like an old Mac, for other people to use. I actually prefer Enlightenment and all those beautiful game-like looks. I am all in favor of creativity.

http://www.enlightenment.org/p.php?p=about/e16 [enlightenment.org]

http://e17-stuff.org/ [e17-stuff.org]

http://www.enlightenment.org/ [enlightenment.org]

pure pwnage (-1, Offtopic)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060544)

but during the developers conference, GUADEC 2010 in Den Haag

"Weren't we supposed to turn at...'Zoterwould?'"

"I don't know, Zoterwould!...Maybe it's Den Heyjee! Alphan Arms-Dealeridgin, nobody can pronounce that, Kyle. It's ridiculous."

Gnome 3.0.... (2, Funny)

boneclinkz (1284458) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060550)

Codenamed "David"

Learn Lessons From KDE4 (5, Insightful)

SlashdotOgre (739181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060582)

I truly hope the Gnome folks observed the KDE4 fiasco and learned some good lessons. They really need to make sure the product they release is stable and doesn't include significant feature regressions (although knowing Gnome, they'll probably call them usability enhancements...). There's certain types of software that can be unstable, and a desktop environment isn't one of them. I'm very much in favor of them holding off as long as it takes.

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (-1, Troll)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060788)

I'm very much in favor of them holding off as long as it takes.

Really? 'As long as it takes?' I doubt that. I for one would consider repeated product delays as sign of ineptness or a demonstration of gross incompetence.

On this front, folks in both the GNOME and KDE camps have demonstrated this unfortunate trait.

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (4, Informative)

SlashdotOgre (739181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060996)

Actually, I stick by my statement, "as long as it takes," because:
    a) It's an open source effort and if I want to use it, even though they haven't officially released it, I can do it any time I want. In fact I have already tried it using the Gentoo Gnome overlay, and I do agree it's not ready.
    b) They're continuing to work on Gnome 2.XX which is actually my primary desktop. This is very different than the KDE4 situation which basically caused the excellent KDE 3.X DE to be unsupported.

Now I do agree that repeated product delays are not a good sign (although I wouldn't go so far as to necessarily call it a, "sign of ineptness or a demonstration of gross incompetence"). Fortunately with open source software, I can determine for myself when a product is ready for my use regardless of an official release. There may be consequences with that choice (e.g. a redesign causes a significant break or lack support), but it's still my choice.

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061004)

Is gnome a product? Its delay proves gross incompetence to whom?

Isn't this what open source was suppose to be about? No shareholders to answer to, the software is realeased when it's done?

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (2, Insightful)

oddfox (685475) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061478)

Is gnome a product?

Yes, it is. GNOME is a product (software project) that is included with various other products into a meta-product (for-pay distributions, as well as distros that offer support contracts). Matter of fact, a product doesn't have to cost money or be proprietary in order to be considered a product, but the GNOME project has to push their product or they risk losing relevance, market share and mind share if they appear to be dragging their feet and lagging in progress.

Its delay proves gross incompetence to whom?

The core GNOME developers and maintainers of the project along with various sub-projects which have fallen behind schedule quite a bit are to blame.

I'm not personally of the mindset that any of these delays constitutes anything more than very bad management and planning.

Isn't this what open source was suppose to be about? No shareholders to answer to, the software is realeased when it's done?

No, it's not what OSS was supposed to be about and it's not what it is about. The shareholders in the F/OSS world are not only the community members but any businesses which have a significant stake in releasing a solid product. Don't think that if GNOME falls far behind KDE or anything else that major distributions won't drop support for it, or simply remove it entirely from its repositories. Case in point -- Slackware. GNOME failed as a product to satisfy the Slackware developers (Meaning Patrick Volkerding, primarily, if I recall correctly) and was thus dropped in favor of KDE. If it becomes a pain in the butt for RedHat to support a GNOME desktop on RHEL because GNOME feels old and/or crusty they will look for other options.

In short, GNOME can take as long as they want getting to 3.0, but other software projects (especially desktop environments and window managers) are not stopping and waiting for them to play catch-up. The lesson to take away from this is to be a little more conservative about estimates for getting projects needing more attention out the door. Maybe they lost a few or many developers or volunteers, but the most likely explanation to a lot of people will appear to be that they underestimated how much time and how many developers and testers were needed.

FWIW, as someone who wants to see GNOME Shell and 3.0 finished, I am at least glad they have recognized publicly that GNOME Shell is absolutely nowhere near ready. I've tried it out a few times in various distros and it's about as disappointing as can be as far as performance and stability. If they would have stuck to their original release schedule this would have been far worse than the reaction to KDE4 when it landed. It would be like the Four Yorkshiremen skit with the GNOME 3.0 early adopters scoffing at how much easier the KDE 4.0 early adopters had it.

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (1)

ciaran_o_riordan (662132) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061010)

What's your opinion on the other hundreds of questions the GNOME project is working on?

Most people don't have any opinion on those. Anyone can give an opinion on release dates, and everyone loves commenting about what colour the bikeshed should be...

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061584)

Yes, those 70% of Gnome contributors who contribute in their spare time are highly incompetent. They should quit their jobs to have all day to contribute for free to the project.

Re:Learn Lessons From KDE4 (2, Insightful)

IrquiM (471313) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061910)

I don't see KDE4 as a fiasco. It was clearly stated by the developers that they didn't recommend using it in any distro.

The failure wasn't by KDE but the people maintaining the distros!

New GNOME Shell design (5, Informative)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060666)

Another reason they're pushing GNOME 3 back is that Shell's design isn't quite usable yet. I would know because I frequently use daily builds [gnome.org] of GNOME Shell for testing purposes. I mean, look at it. It's so... blah and thrown-together. The design team is working on the design, and the final design will look much different. If you clone the gnome-shell-design git repository [gnome.org] , you'll get the most current mockups. Here's a link [dropbox.com] to those of you unable to use git including the latest mockups as of today. These mockups look amazing and make the shell much easier on the eyes as well as usable. Ever since they announced this new design, I've been looking forward to it much more than I already have.

Re:New GNOME Shell design (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060946)

Totally agree. It's like they all got together and said "Alright guys. People think Gnome is boring. Lets do something REVOLUTIONARY!!!!!". And they then set off to make something that was as "different" as they could. Not useable, not actually "revolutionary" - just different. Personally, I have no qualms with using an old desktop metaphor if it works well, and the current one does. Refine what works - don't topple the whole thing just to try to build a better one.

Re:New GNOME Shell design (3, Insightful)

xxdinkxx (560434) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061208)

Granted, these mocks look awesome. However, could they possibly rip off OSX any harder? I am really surprised that Apple hasn't tried to sue Gnome.

Re:New GNOME Shell design (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062252)

I am really surprised that Apple hasn't tried to sue Gnome.

Probably because they aren't infringing on any of Apple's property if I remember correctly. I prefer the term "inspired by" instead of "ripped-off". Does GNOME 3 use Mac's icons, sounds, artwork, themes, etc.? If not, they aren't doing anything worse than OpenOffice.org "ripping-off" MS Office or Firefox "ripping-off" IE/Opera/Chrome.

just how new can windows desktop be? (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060730)

Lets face it, the windows on a desktop with icons experience pretty much hit it's peak with Windows 3.0. Everything since then has been, well, more windows on a desktop with icons.
 

Re:just how new can windows desktop be? (1)

mweather (1089505) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061444)

I use KDE4, you insensitive clod! There are no icons on my desktop.

Re:just how new can windows desktop be? (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061578)

First of all: Windows 3.0? Seriously? Never used a Classic Mac?

Secondly: Saying "oh the WIMP interface is so old and tired" is really, really easy. Coming up with something better enough to displace it? Now that's fucking hard. It's been tried many times, and never gained any traction so far.

What about GNOME 3? (5, Interesting)

assertation (1255714) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060748)

I haven't kept up on it. What will be special about GNOME 3, particularly from an end user's perspective?

Re:What about GNOME 3? (3, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060830)

It's magical and revolutionary as long as you don't click it in the wrong way.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060902)

It would make Linux Environments less scary.

You might chuckle at this notion, but the longer the thought sits there, the more it creeps in and you know it's right.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (3, Insightful)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061280)

It would make Linux Environments less scary.

You might chuckle at this notion, but the longer the thought sits there, the more it creeps in and you know it's right.

Sometime around Christmas I showed my brother gnome-shell running on Ubuntu 9.10 ... my brother is a mech. engineer and really couldn't care less about operating systems but does care about computing in general since trying to be a physical engineer these days without a computer is like trying to live on the far side of the moon.

I have never seen him react to anything from Linux in that way: "Damn that's cool... "

I strongly believe that it will be a game changer for Linux desktop UI.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1, Informative)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060956)

Have you ever used a Mac? Do you know somebody who has? Macs have a tendency to "just work" much, much more than Windows or most Linux distributions. GNOME 3's their own version of that. See the GNOME Shell design page [gnome.org] and the latest mockups [slashdot.org] for more information.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (5, Insightful)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061050)

Using a marketing slogan like "it just works" doesn't describe anything about the new features Gnome 3 has... What is it with Mac users and their eagerness to repeat ad slogans over and over again?

Re:What about GNOME 3? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061236)

What is it with Mac users and their eagerness to repeat ad slogans over and over again?

It's called brainwashing.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (3, Insightful)

Draek (916851) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061872)

Repeat a lie often enough...

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062114)

What is it with Mac users and their eagerness to repeat ad slogans over and over again?

For the record, I use Linux almost exclusively. I am an Apple hater, not a user. I have tried a macbook before, though, and the hardware and software for it was very intuitive; I can see why people like it. To somebody like my mom that doesn't want to be bothered with updates and interruptions out the wazoo and just user her camera/photos/Facebook, Macs are perfect. Linux, IMO, is in-between Mac and Windows in terms of usability, and GNOME 3 looks very much like it could surpass Mac in terms of usability.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1, Troll)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061512)

Okay I have been using a Mac for development for a bit now.
As to it "just working" honestly not anymore than my PC just works.
Getting my cell phone and another device to work over bluetooth? Have not got it working yet.

Networking and printers are working just fine.

But the UI really makes me nuts.
Why must I grab the bottom right corner to resize a window? Under Windows I can do it from any part of the frame,
And why the stinking apple key! isn't alt and control good enough. I keep hiting ctrl c to copy !
And the Menus always at the top. What a waste of time.
I have to click on the window and then move my mouse to the top of the screen to pick a menu item!
Grrrrr...
Yes it works but so does XP and Ubuntu. It is pretty. I will give you that. Better looking than Windows and Gnome.
But usability is making me nuts.
I think the open apple key is the single worst thing about it. I HATE IT. And I am sure I can map the keyboard if I really want to but where?
Oh and don't hand me the "ctrl and alt are only better because that is what you are used too" crap
Yep but it is also what Linux and Windows both use! If Microsoft put a function like copy and paste on their "Windows keys" I would want to hurt them as well!

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1)

AresTheImpaler (570208) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063166)

Getting my cell phone and another device to work over bluetooth? Have not got it working yet.

what devices are you having trouble with? Some of them require either plugins (for sync) or drivers. It not up to Apple or even MS to make sure every device works with their OS. I had a sony ericsson cell that I had to find a 3rd party plug in for isync to make it work.. I don't see how this is Apple's problem

Why must I grab the bottom right corner to resize a window? Under Windows I can do it from any part of the frame

I dont like this either.. so really, dunno why apple does it this way :'(

I have to click on the window and then move my mouse to the top of the screen to pick a menu item! Grrrrr...

of course, you have to focus on the window you are working. This is the same in linux/windows and any other OS. The difference is that you alt-tab to change between windows in other OS. In a mac, you can use the command-tab to change between apps, and if you are in the application you want to use, but in the wrong window, just command-~

I think the open apple key is the single worst thing about it. I HATE IT. And I am sure I can map the keyboard if I really want to but where? Oh and don't hand me the "ctrl and alt are only better because that is what you are used too" crap Yep but it is also what Linux and Windows both use! If Microsoft put a function like copy and paste on their "Windows keys" I would want to hurt them as well!

I'm sorry I'm going to have to use the "ctrl and alt is what you are used too" crap (I didn't say they are better tho, they are just different). When I go back to linux or windows, I try to use the "windows key" to copy, paste, switch between windows, etc. It's just what I'm used to. The main difference between the command key (used to be the apple key) and the windows key is that the apple key was introduced in 1980 for shortcuts like this. That's 15 years before the the windows key was introduced. I'm not saying it's better nor anything like that. I'm just saying that that key was introduced 20 years ago to be a modifier key. When the windows key was introduced, there was no clear reason it was really introduced for. It sucked back then. I'm not sure if it has any better uses now after vista and win 7.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1)

Kerrigann (1401847) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063222)

System Preferences -> Keyboard -> 'Keyboard' Tab -> 'Modifier Keys' button.

It's nice once you get used to it if you do unix-y things a lot, because ctrl-c, ctrl-z, ctrl-d do not conflict with copy paste undo, etc...

However, I understand completely why you wouldn't want to change from what you are used to. That tends to be Apple's thing, though: sacrifice customizability for the sake of usability. BUT, In this case, it IS very easy to change.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061828)

Despite what Apple or any of their apologists say, OSX does not "just work" on any of my machines. In fact it doesn't work at all.

Maybe if Apple let me configure a system with the components that *I* want I would think about getting a mac. Well, they'd have to provide the lube too.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1)

doti (966971) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061002)

the gnome shell [wikipedia.org] , basically.

Re:What about GNOME 3? (3, Informative)

afabbro (33948) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061264)

It's not hard to "keep up" [gnome.org] .

Re:What about GNOME 3? (1)

thePsychologist (1062886) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061282)

Time travel, and it runs in Emacs now.

Probably a good thing (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33060842)

I'm a pretty dedicated Gnome user, but I'll admit that the new shell isn't something I'm looking forward to. It's too non-traditional IMHO. Some basic designs have evolved in the computer UI world because they work very well, and this seems to be trying to shake things up for the sake of being different.

IMHO, the current Gnome UI with the taskbar replaced with a dock (I use Docky for this) is nearly perfect from a useability standpoint. Rather than major UI shakeups, what I want is polishing work. Smooth out the eye candy. Font rendering. Better artwork on default themes and icons. Performance tweaks. More work on specific apps.

All in all, the BASIC system is is perfect. Now's not the time to be changing it. Focus on the little things.

Re:Probably a good thing (3, Funny)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061070)

All in all, the BASIC system is is perfect.

Crap, we were going for FORTRAN. Thanks for the feedback. Back to the drawing board, boys!
  - Gnome Development Team :)

Re:Probably a good thing (0, Redundant)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061358)

I'm a pretty dedicated Gnome user, but I'll admit that the new shell isn't something I'm looking forward to. It's too non-traditional IMHO. Some basic designs have evolved in the computer UI world because they work very well, and this seems to be trying to shake things up for the sake of being different.

IMHO, the current Gnome UI with the taskbar replaced with a dock (I use Docky for this) is nearly perfect from a useability standpoint. Rather than major UI shakeups, what I want is polishing work. Smooth out the eye candy. Font rendering. Better artwork on default themes and icons. Performance tweaks. More work on specific apps.

All in all, the BASIC system is is perfect. Now's not the time to be changing it. Focus on the little things.

I disagree... but I think it's really going to be a user preference issue, some will love it, some will hate it since what gnome-shell does is far more radical than anyone has done in a decade.

The existing menus and toolbars are based on a 15 year old design concept. While, like you, I don't think they should throw out the baby with the bathwater, I do think that something new is in order given all the interesting things that have been done with the OSX, Vista and Win7 desktops.

Such a radical move will only work if it's a better experience all round, and from what I've seen so far the potential is certainly there.

Re:Probably a good thing (1, Insightful)

oatworm (969674) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061544)

I actually kind of understand the need to rework the UI. The file/folder metaphor was a good starting point back when the contents of a computer system were simple enough where you could organize them by hand. Nowadays, it's pretty trivial to have enough documents, music, videos, photos, and so on lying around where the whole metaphor breaks down because there's just no way you can keep track of everything. Consequently, ditching the file/folder metaphor and instead pushing forward with a "what type of stuff do you want to work with?" approach would be rather beneficial, and is something that Windows and Mac have been slowly but incrementally pushing for quite a while.

Think about it this way - does it really matter where things go specifically, so long as you can get there easily? Do I really care that I can find and open a picture at ~/Documents/Pictures/2010/07/28 in seven double-clicks and nearly as many context changes, or do I care that I can go to "Pictures"->"Sort by date"->double-click on today's photo in four mouse-clicks and get a more holistic view of what's on my machine at a given moment? Do I care that I can find some music at ~/Documents/Music/Artist/Album/trackname.ogg, or would I rather just be able to "Play all songs in album Foo by artist Bar"?

Having said all that, I do think that GNOME and KDE (okay, especially KDE) are jumping a bit ahead of the curve on this, which is fine by me. A lot of computer geeks are only starting to come around to the idea of a "semantic desktop" (oh, how I loathe that term...), or, if you prefer, a desktop that functions more like a local search engine than a filing cabinet, in no small part because the people "in the know" are calling it silly things like "semantic desktop", "NEPOMUK", and so on, then ranting about the power of tuples, metadata and RDF. You can just imagine how the rest of the world feels on the subject. I do think that, over time, this is the direction we're going to end up going, though. If you stop and think about it, it's a little strange that we interact with the Internet in one fashion (search for something->load it->bookmark it if I want to come back to it) and our computers in another fashion (traverse a pile of directories->find something?->load it->create a desktop shortcut if I want to come back to it, unless I overload my desktop with shortcuts, in which case I'll need a shortcut to the folder containing the shortcuts...). Since many people are spending more time on the Internet than on local content, doesn't it make sense to use the same mechanisms used on the Internet to find local content? Might as well, right?

Re:Probably a good thing (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061646)

Think about it this way - does it really matter where things go specifically, so long as you can get there easily? Do I really care that I can find and open a picture at ~/Documents/Pictures/2010/07/28 in seven double-clicks and nearly as many context changes, or do I care that I can go to "Pictures"->"Sort by date"->double-click on today's photo in four mouse-clicks and get a more holistic view of what's on my machine at a given moment? Do I care that I can find some music at ~/Documents/Music/Artist/Album/trackname.ogg, or would I rather just be able to "Play all songs in album Foo by artist Bar"?

What you seem to be describing is a meta-data based filesystem. Believe me, I have NO issue with that. The filesystem itself I see as outdated. HOWEVER, that's not what Gnome will be acheiving with this. They're shaking up the desktop metaphor, and needlessly IMHO.

I mean, seriously, look at this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/GNOME_Shell.png [wikimedia.org]

Do you realize how much of that screen is wasted by unneeded UI clutter? And none of it is really doing some great revolution in the way we store or perceive our data. It's just goofing around and shaking things up.

As to your statement about the different between the way we perceive information on the net vs locally, I've always viewed that more as a side effect of the limitation of HTML pages. I know that personally, I can typically find something much faster, and have it presented in a cleaner fashion, if it's on my local system vs a web page. Granted, I like the centralized storage options (hence, I do use Gmail), but that goes but so far.

Re:Probably a good thing (1)

oatworm (969674) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062144)

What you seem to be describing is a meta-data based filesystem. Believe me, I have NO issue with that. The filesystem itself I see as outdated. HOWEVER, that's not what Gnome will be acheiving with this. They're shaking up the desktop metaphor, and needlessly IMHO.

True, but a metadata-based filesystem isn't going to make much sense if it's presented in a file/folder context because it's not file/folder-dependent. GNOME Shell, at least from what I'm seeing (including your screenshot) is an attempt at presenting the data in a more metadata-"native" format. So, you have some default categories that make a bit of sense - presumably, you either want to start a program (Applications), go somewhere on your filesystem (Places - not a fan of this, actually, since we're trying to get away from precisely this sort of behavior, but I suppose you have to build a bridge somewhere), or go somewhere you've been recently (Recent Documents). I'm assuming the stuff on the left can be configured to show pretty much whatever you want, so you could presumably show something like "Music" or "Photos" or whatever instead of "Places". In order for these categories to be useful, they have to be big enough to show enough data to be worth parsing.

Now, should they be drawers that slide on hover instead of big, static blocks? Perhaps. Could they use other, more traditional UI elements to show the same information? Probably. I'll grant that execution isn't what it could be; then again, GNOME agrees with us on this which is why they're delaying the project into 2011. Of course, there was a fair amount of deviation between the various file/folder UIs in the '80s and early '90s while people sorted out what worked and what didn't, so I'm not particularly surprised that we're seeing some trial and error now that the underlying file organization scheme is radically changing. At least their naming convention is better than KDE's, though. I don't know about you, but when I think of a Dolphin, I think of a friendly grey cetacean, not a graphical file manager.

Re:Probably a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33062776)

Yes, because nothing says "file manager" like "nautilus"

Re:Probably a good thing (1)

Fwipp (1473271) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062572)

That entire left panel isn't there most of the time. Most of the time, you have your top bar and your active window (of which there are four showing on the right).

Re:Probably a good thing (1)

arose (644256) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062588)

Do you realize how much of that screen is wasted by unneeded UI clutter?

Do you realize what the screenshot shows?

Havoc Pennington? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061038)

Have they got rid of that guy yet? When he took over he destroyed GNOME and I quit using it. If he's gone I might consider switching back from XFCE.

Re:Havoc Pennington? (4, Insightful)

pavon (30274) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061240)

If you didn't like the UI simplification that occurred in GNOME 2.0, you will positively hate the new Gnome Shell that is being introduced in GNOME 3.0. Just stick with XFCE.

Re:Havoc Pennington? (3, Informative)

diegocg (1680514) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062678)

He is one of the main programmers of gnome-shell.

By the way, do you know what language did they use to program gnome-shell? Javascript.

Re:Havoc Pennington? (1)

akanouras (1431981) | more than 4 years ago | (#33063208)

+5 Hilarious :D

Re:Havoc Pennington? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33062824)

Your not alone, that and the introduction of a windows registry for a linux desktop. Oh dear.

preview. (1)

IMightB (533307) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061206)

I've been using gnome-shell off and on again since f12. It's real easy just yum install gnome-shell

ironic (1)

dicobalt (1536225) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061296)

I hope there are different operating "modes" for Gnome3 because that screenshot displays a huge waste of screen real estate. It also looks way too much like a cell phone interface. Ironic how a Linux GUI can get so obscenely dumbed down while the core is as difficult as ever to configure.

Re:ironic (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061616)

I hope there are different operating "modes" for Gnome3 because that screenshot displays a huge waste of screen real estate.

Indeed. While that may be OK on a 1920x1080 or larger LCD, it looks like a horrific interface for a laptop or netbook with limited width and even more limited height.

Re:ironic (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 4 years ago | (#33061648)

That interface recedes auto-hide style from your active window. The real estate wasting view is for switching between apps or opening a new one.

Re:ironic (1)

arose (644256) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062024)

I guess in a sense it does have different modes. The screenshot is of the "high-level overview mode" where you switch between applications/windows (my favorite part by far, think expose over all of the desktops), start applications, open documents, log out, etc. The typical "working on this-or-that mode" only has a bar on the top (and an optional, collapsible sidebar).

Re:ironic (2, Interesting)

Draek (916851) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062108)

Why would it be ironic? regular users aren't interested in configuring a system so it's irrelevant how "easy" or "hard" it is as long as it's done automagically for their limited usage scenarios, but they are interested in *using* a system so they'll need an interface that's simple and "friendly" enough for them.

Gnome stopped being aimed at power users with version 2.0 *eight* years ago, so you really have no excuse. I'd suggest using Xfce or Openbox instead, perhaps even a tiling WM like wmii or awesome if you're feeling daring.

KDE NINJA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33061576)

GNOME SUCKS. A LOT.

LDAP based auto-configuration of gconfd. (2, Interesting)

Zombie Ryushu (803103) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062028)

Does anyone know if more of Gnome will support LDAP auto configuration?

Need to look like windows (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33062126)

If someone wants his/her desktop environment like windows, then use windows. Gnome is not developed to imitate windows.

Re:Need to look like windows (1)

thoughtsatthemoment (1687848) | more than 4 years ago | (#33062914)

Is there a Windows that's free (as in freedom) and uses the Linux kernel?

Why upgrade if the current version works fine? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33062820)

Why do they need a new version all the time if it works don't break it.
My Linux machine works just fine I only have problems when I upgrade. Think I will just turn off upgrades fuck it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?