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!

cancel ×

236 comments

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

Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (4, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 3 years ago | (#36109934)

Unity Vista(tm) [newstechnica.com] is Canonical’s response to the GNOME 3 shell, which uses 1 gigabyte of RAM and four processor cores to exquisitely render a single button in the centre of the screen in beautifully anti-aliased text; when pressed, GNOME tells the user to switch off the computer and do something useful with their life, such as showering.

“This was just not up to the user expectations of Canonical’s vision of the desktop,” said Mark Shuttleworth, from his castle high on a crag in West London. “So we added a ‘minimise’ button too.”

Design is at the centre of Shuttleworth’s roadmap for Unity Vista. “I woke up one day and thought, ‘Gosh, I’d really like to make using my universal general-purpose computer that I can do ANYTHING with feel like I’m using a locked-down three-year-old half-smart phone through the clunky mechanism some l33t h@xx0r used to jailbreak it, I can’t think of a better user experience.’ We’re not quite there yet, but this gets Unity a lot of the way.”

Shuttleworth foresees an exciting future for Linux for the general Internet user. “It’ll be a whole world of Linux devices, which millions of people will use all the time, everywhere! Of course, at the moment those are called ‘phones’ and run Android.”

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (3, Funny)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#36109974)

when pressed, GNOME tells the user to switch off the computer and do something useful with their life, such as showering.

But does not actually provide a shut down option, because that might confuse users too much.

GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport (4, Funny)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110252)

> But does not actually provide a shut down option, because that might confuse users too much.

Ah, but if you are one of the advanced users (who GNOME wishes would just take the hint and switch to another desktop) who insist on a shutdown option, you can go read the arcane lore on a blog that describes in perfect detail how to download a non-supported third party plugin that will add a shutdown option. Of course the blog post isn't easy to find on Google and documents a procedure that doesn't quite work right with the current release and the link to the actual download is now a 404 error with herbal viagra adverts on it.

Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport (1)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110262)

Don't be silly. You just edit the configuration XML directly in gconf. Nothing could be simpler!

Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport (1)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110382)

> Don't be silly. You just edit the configuration XML directly in gconf.

Neener, it is you who are silly, didn't you know gconf is toast and dconf is the new hotness. This week at least.

Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport (1)

Pricetx (1986510) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111322)

Or, there is the rumoured black art of holding the alt key before clicking on the menu. It is said a shutdown option magically appears.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112070)

You're joking, right? Just hold down the Alt key or log out first. Shutting down is a really superficial thing to do and rarely needs to be done (relative to other computer functions), so complaining about a couple milliseconds difference is rather pointless.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

mldi (1598123) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112136)

Just hold down the Alt key or log out first.

So I suppose there's something wrong with wanting a convenient discoverable (keyword) button to do all that in one shot, huh? Then let's just get rid of all GUI elements on the desktop screen and resort to nothing besides keyboard shortcuts. The mouse is really just a superficial input device that has no point.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110022)

I really like the Ubuntu Unity shell. I am a 20 year plus unix programmer and also like OSX. Their approach is excellent. Keep it up ubuntu! and never mind these "developers" who have an extreme dislike of anything new. You'd think computer experts would be up to realizing evolution happens, but alas, are as stuck in their ways as their windows counterparts. Alas.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110162)

I like Unity in principle, but it's way too buggy to be usable currently, and more customization would really help too. It's also much slower than both Gnome and KDE (on GTX460 with binary nvidia drivers).

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110444)

I agree. There are too many bugs and little quirks (which may actually be bugs but I fear are by design) which make it quite annoying to use at the moment. I really want to be able to turn off the Universal Menu on non-maximized windows, and for there to be a better way to manage programs with more than one window open. Those are my main gripes at the moment, and if they are fixed, and the general performance made a bit better, then I think I'd really like it. At the moment I'm torn; I like it enough that I haven't switched back to the old way, but at times it really feels unfinished, and perhaps a bit flawed too. If I still feel like that when 11.10 comes out I'll probably try out the GNOME Shell and see if that's any better.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

gclef (96311) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112058)

To disable the global Menu bar, you do two things:
1) in /etc/X11/Xsessions.d/ move 80appmenu to another location (I created a "disabled" subdirectory and put it there)
2) disable the "global menu bar integration" plugins in Firefox and Thunderbird.

Yes, this is a shitty way to manage that setting.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110310)

Eh - I have a few less years than you - been programming IN GENERAL for 20 years but only on Unix for about 12 now. I like the Mac OS X interface pretty good. Unfortunately Unity is NOTHING like the OS X interface. Blending the title bar of maximized windows into the top pane is DUMB. The new "overlay scrollbars" are DUMB. The unity dock needs to have the ability to switch to the bottom of the screen rather than the side (where on widescreen monitors we have the least amount of space).

Overall, a single Gnome 2 panel a the top of the screen combined with Docky and Compiz was ALL I EVER NEEDED. It was a paradigm that was never broken to need fixing. I'm still using that thanks to Classic mode (though they did manage to finally break my Pulseaudio setup in 11.04), but its days are numbered.

Overall, I think Ubuntu finally just decided to give up reaching parity with the mainstream OS's in the areas that count. Instead they went back to the areas of the system that they actually had FINALLY gotten right, and decided to start all over.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

Homburg (213427) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110522)

Blending the title bar of maximized windows into the top pane is DUMB. The new "overlay scrollbars" are DUMB.

Why?

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (2)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111072)

Because it breaks the consistency of the workflow. When a window isn't maximized it looks one way. It's a trivial adjustment when maximizing to assume that it will look and behave identically when maximized, just that it will takeup the entirety of the open screen. Now, they instead cause the window to adopt two different control schemes between the two modes, AND mingle the window's controls with a distinctly different element of the UI (the base Ubuntu launcher menu).

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111494)

I happen to like being able to look over at a glance and see where the scroll bar is without having to find that tiny thread. I also hate themes that make the scroller "hide" on the bar by making the colors match. Horizontal screen resolution is not a concern. Not sure who thought it was. There's plenty of room for a slider bar.

I'm also not a fan of the menu items up top. It breaks the flow of an app. When you have multiple windows open and you have to go to the top of the screen every time to operate the applications, it feels like there's something broken there. Not sure what it is. I want my menus on the window that they are associated with.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110572)

We'll have to agree to disagree. I might agree that Docky could sub for their launcher, but that's about it. I like the other paradigm changes and really like the spotlight-esque approach and unified menu system.

I don't use multiple monitors so I can't speak to those problems, but i'm running it on VirtualBox (3D turned on of course) on a NVIDIA IGP 320M, and it's usable as much as the first few versions of OSX and will only get better. I DID have to turn off (replaced the graphic with nothing) the shadow on the top pane, this was essential and a "bug" IMHO. It just didn't work.

After that though, it's been a real pleasure, so much that i'm using it to post this and have spent as much time in it as I have in OSX.. Ubuntu under VM is a much tidier place to store my development work (as it's not intermingled with personal stuff) and with the new UI, I am actually coding in it (under eclipse) WITHOUT using ExpanDrive to "reach" into the VM and edit using TextMate. I gotta say, it's not DUMB. It's an excellent opening salvo to making Linux stand up to the big boys. That's how I feel!

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

splict (1024037) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110750)

[...] The unity dock needs to have the ability to switch to the bottom of the screen rather than the side (where on widescreen monitors we have the least amount of space). [...]

Are you saying that on a widescreen monitor there is less width? That doesn't seem right... or am I misunderstanding you?

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

splict (1024037) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110818)

Okay, I guess you are saying that there is less height for icons. That is true, though it seems to be the exact opposite thing that I usually hear people complaining about. More configurability would definately be better.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (3, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111106)

Correct. Using a widescreen monitor you have more room to store a bar horizontally. Placing a menu bar on the side of the screen like that necessitates scrolling through the bar to get to many icons, whereas they'd all be immediately accessible if laid out on the bottom (or even top, though that's not what I'm used to) of the screen.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (2)

Luyseyal (3154) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110326)

I can see how it might work if you only need one desktop and don't have any weird monitor configuration. Unity was sucky on my two monitor system with the secondary on the left, rotated 90 degrees. I couldn't figure out how to move the bar and its interaction with the Gnome panel was odd. I just gave up because I was busy and didn't have time to screw with it.

It's hard to make everyone happy. I'm still irritated that there is no easy way to put a different picture on different virtual desktops anymore. I use 5 because I hate minimizing and unminimizing. It's easier to just hit Alt+F5 and get my email desktop, Alt+F3, browser desktop, Alt+F1, terminal desktop, etc.

So, while I am accustomed to certain ways, if Unity had made more sense to me in the first 10 minutes I might've given it more of a shot. As it is, it was vastly different from my usual workflow and I went back to Classic.

-l

The best part of Unity (4, Interesting)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110948)

I really like Unity, too. It got me to finally try Xfce, and I'm very happy with the change. (I've been meaning to try it out for ages, but never got around to it.)

After switching back to 'classic' I just fired up synaptic, installed Xfce and whatever recommended additions I thought looked good, logged out and back in using Xfce, and I haven't had an urge to go back yet. Granted, it's only been a few days, but the things I do every day work as well or better.

I liked it so much that I installed Xubuntu on another system, and really like the defaults they put in place there.

I think the next time I reinstall the OS on my 'regular' computer (as opposed to just upgrading Ubuntu) I'll be grabbing Xubuntu.

Re:The best part of Unity (3, Funny)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112194)

I really like Unity, too. It got me to finally try Xfce, and I'm very happy with the change.

As said by Groucho Marx:

"I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book."

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

celle (906675) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111132)

"I really like the Ubuntu Unity shell. ...You'd think computer experts would be up to realizing evolution happens, but alas, are as stuck in their ways as their windows counterparts. Alas."

A heretic.
Kill the heretic!!! Kill the heretic!!!

"Boiling people in oil. Those were the days weren't they?" -- Carlin

commentary/
    Come on guys!(and girls) (on slashdot--ah!!) It's just one Gnu/Linux distro(distro?-ick, ah well). How many others are out there? Ubuntu is largely controlled by Mark Shuttleworth so it will implemented as he sees fit, get over it. There is no such thing as something that works for everyone but he's trying. Don't like what Mark is doing to your favorite distro, make your own or switch to one of the scores of other ones or Ubuntu derivatives (Debian, Slackware, Fedora, Mint, ...). Or even maybe one of the desktop BSD versions (PC-BSD, GnoBSD, ...) or even shell BSD versions (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, ...) or even Plan9 or Inferno. It's not like you don't have a selection.

    I know people don't like change, I'm one of them, but I don't believe in the lack of change to the point of complacency is any better. Change is good as it cuts down on the brain rot and looking around we've unfortunately got more than enough in every endeavor. I'm not saying that change should be constantly happening as some consistency is also needed just for stability and comfort(ok, sanity) reasons. Every one has their own individual balance, to each his/her/its own.
commentary/

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111554)

Uh... Ubuntu is a Debian derivative, not vice versa...

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (2)

kbielefe (606566) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111250)

I really like the unity shell too, for casual computing. Trying to do serious work on it actually pushed me back to KDE for the first time in ten years.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110260)

Ridiculous!

Everyone knows there aren't even hills in London, let alone a crag.

Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110970)

I come from Cambridge, you insensitive clod!

What (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36109946)

Really... they are joking, right? LightDM isn't light at all

Re:What (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110144)

*cough* LDAP *cough*

Why is this news? (3, Insightful)

Ex Machina (10710) | more than 3 years ago | (#36109976)

I understand "big changes" in Linux distributions that have a day to day impact on all users like switching to X.org or Unity are important events. But most people spend about 10 seconds tops interacting with Gdm every day. It's just not that important for most users.

Re:Why is this news? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110058)

I'll have you know I do all my work in GDM!!!!!

Re:Why is this news? (3, Funny)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111528)

Wait, GDM has minesweeper _and_ solitaire?

Re:Why is this news? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112374)

All it needs to be a functional desktop environment is pr0n!

Re:Why is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111470)

I can be. For those of us using a lot of linux desktops in an enterprise environment this could be a big deal for things like LDAP auth. For the home user, no it's not, but looking at the bigger picture, it very well could be a problem.

Re:Why is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111956)

Not even that - since I send all my computers to sleep. I only use Xdm on reboot - over all computers maybe once a month or so.

GDM (3, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#36109996)

Considering the number of things that get broken in GDM in every new Ubuntu release, this may not be a bad thing. For example, going from 10.04 to 11.04 gdm started displaying every single user in the /etc/passwd file, except when it randomly only displays the last one who logged in.

Re:GDM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110172)

Thankyou.

My response to Ubuntu - Do whatever the fuck you want to do as long as Ubuntu:

1. Doesn't crash.

2. And I can still run my favorite apps: Open Office and everything Mozilla. Everything else I can live without.

Re:GDM (1)

Lord Bitman (95493) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110790)

3) When you change the defaults, it needs to seamlessly migrate to the new one.
4) If an update fails, the update should roll-back (config files aren't versioned by default? still no sane "diff3" option when updating? wtf?)

Re:GDM (1)

Requiem18th (742389) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111316)

One problem is that they actually change the underlying packages enough they introduce more bugs. Or unwanted functionality which is just the same.

woohoo! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110042)

orifice ostrich will be the best ubuntu ever!! year of the desktop linux? MORE LIKE DECADE OF THE DESKTOP LINUX!!!

Re:woohoo! (0)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110072)

I'll wait for anal aardvark, or perhaps penile porpoise.

Re:woohoo! (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110194)

Wanking Walrus will rule them all!

Re:woohoo! (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110226)

Just wait until you see what you have to do to log onto a Homo Hippopotamus desktop session...

That the hell is GDM/lightDM... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110092)

and does this change actually fix anything? or does it just break stuff as usual?

Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... (4, Insightful)

jank1887 (815982) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111062)

why did i have to get this far down to find this question, and why is there no answer yet. is it that hard to spend 3 words in the summary telling me me what a DM is in this case, and whether G or light will matter to me?

Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... (2)

TheCycoONE (913189) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111670)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_display_manager_(program_type) [wikipedia.org]

Specifically it's the spot where you type your username and password before logging in. Since most Ubuntu users run their computers as single users on a desktop box, and only ever access one session profile (gnome) I doubt this will make any impact on anyone's life.

I run slim on my mediacenter because it was easy to configure kiosk mode (auto login), and also I could launch other programs in it without learning to write proper session files; but it has some problems and I may look into lightDM.

Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112098)

Specifically it's the spot where you type your username and password before logging in.

No, it's the place where you click your username out of a list (unless you run a little gconf-fu on the command line su'd as the gdm user). Does LightDM allow configuration or are users just stuck with the GUI user selection screen?

the real question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110106)

The real question is whether they will switch from Unity as the default to something else. Anything else.

Re:the real question (2)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111070)

We need a new fork. Gubuntu, for everybody who was perfectly fine with GNOME. Then their flagship Ubuntu releases can sport whatever hot new thing they want to roll out every six months.

Extinction-level event (2, Interesting)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110158)

Natty goes from Gnome to Unity
Oneiric goes from GDM to LightDM, Firefox to Chromium and X to Wayland.

While it's not quite on the level of OS9 to OSX and definitely not without losses, 2011's Ubuntu releases will change the landscape of Linux for the better.

Re:Extinction-level event (0)

Sodki (621717) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110348)

I prefer GNOME over Unity, I prefer GDM over LightDM, I prefer Firefox over Chromium and Wayland is nowhere near ready for mainstream. And I still prefer Gentoo over Ubuntu.

Re:Extinction-level event (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110606)

Then I guess you are free to use Gentoo..!

Re:Extinction-level event (4, Interesting)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110388)

Dunno about LightDM or wayland, but Unity and Chromium are a massive step backwards rather than an improvement. Unity is buggy and a pain to use, and Chromium has shit for extensions and still won't work right with adblock. No thanks. You want a better experience, install XFCE and XDM with Compiz Fusion for the eye-candy. You want bloated garbage that makes your computer completely unsable, install the new default Ubuntu or Kubuntu distros.

Re:Extinction-level event (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110658)

chrome and chromium are way better than firefox (thats right, I said it). i was loyal to firefox for almost a decade, tried chrome for two days, and made the switch.

unity blows ass though. I went back to 10.4 (or 10.10, can't remember) because of it. if I wanted a mac-like interface (except worse), i'd go hump steve jobs like the rest of the "it just works" users.

Re:Extinction-level event (1)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111090)

I went back to 10.4 (or 10.10, can't remember) because of it.

You do realize that you can use many different window managers or 'desktop frameworks' or whatever without having to install an older release.. right?

I'm running Natty with Unity, Gnome, and Xfce installed, currently defaulting to Xfce. It's just a drop-down widget at log in. Srsly.

Re:Extinction-level event (1, Interesting)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111286)

Chromium works fine with adblock and has for the last year or so. It is also significantly faster than Firefox.

Re:Extinction-level event (0)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112354)

Nope, and nope. And, even if it happened to be true in 1% of cases, firefox still wins out in extensions alone. Chrome is ok for the average user, just like IE, but you won't catch me using either one of them except for compatibility-testing my sites.

Re:Extinction-level event (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111984)

... or just install Ubuntu and install the Firefox and XFCE packages. That's what I do.

Re:Extinction-level event (3, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112292)

Wayland is a massive step backwards too. Everyone's just going to run an X server on top of Wayland, so it will do nothing but add another layer to slow things down and break.

If people start writing native Wayland apps, that's another massive step back since Wayland doesn't have network transparency, forces clients to provide their own window decorations, etc.

Re:Extinction-level event (3, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110874)

2011's Ubuntu releases will change the landscape of Linux for the better.

I'm not sure everybody would consider those changes better.

Re:Extinction-level event (4, Interesting)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111296)

While I like the idea behind LightDM & prefer Chromium over Firefox, that wasn't why I said it would change Linux for the better.

I think there is a lot of dogma within the Linux universe which needs to be shaken up once in a while. Survival of the fittest and all of that. We've seen recently where LibreOffice forked away from OpenOffice in a move that was almost universally welcomed and which has breathed an incredablt amount of new life into the project. Ubuntu's move to Unity, while much less warmly received, caused a large amount of navel gazing within the Gnome ranks and I believe it will pay a lot of dividends in the near future especially with interoperability.

Is Wayland ready for primetime? Nobody thinks so yet. Is Chromium better than Firefox? Depends on your opinion. But with the major trend setting distro making these changes, it forces everyone to re-evaluate and that is the best thing that can happen.

Re:Extinction-level event (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111570)

Evolution is better than revolution, at least if you're doing anything well and have any user base. The whole move to Unity by Ubuntu was a colossal embarrassment. It was pretty clearly rushed to meet an arbitrary release schedule and looks really amateurish compared to what they had. I'm not really sure that it made any sense to default to using Unity rather than making users install it or manually switch to it if they were interested in trying it out.

I can only imagine how they'll screw this one up. Personally, I think it would be better to fix the mess they've got presently before opening up more places for screw ups.

Re:Extinction-level event (2, Insightful)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111582)

it forces everyone to re-evaluate and that is the best thing that can happen.

Disputable.

What, precisely, are we re-evaluating? Novelty for novelty's sake is a disease. Stability can be important, even overridingly so.

Please provide a concrete example of an actual problem that these "innovations" purport to solve.

Ubuntu is in danger of rendering itself irrelevant to any but the "Oooh, shiny" crowd, and Apple already has a lock on that.

Re:Extinction-level event (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111822)

> Is Wayland ready for primetime? Nobody thinks so yet.

In particular, Wayland breaks THE killer feature of X: remoting an app over ssh -X. The answer to this is hemming and hawing and pointing out that you can run an X server as a window in Wayland just like you can on Win7, and display a remote app on that. Which of course completely misses the point that it's the seamless integration of apps from multiple networked machines on a single display that is what many people depend on on a daily basis. Having to run a separate X server in a window defeats the purpose, and makes Wayland yet another reduced-functionality replacement.

Re:Extinction-level event (1)

ElusiveJoe (1716808) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111218)

Oneiric goes from Firefox to Chromium and X to Wayland

No, it doesn't. Would be really stupid.

Re:Extinction-level event (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111330)

I would be quite surprised if Canonical actually has the developer muscle to make Wayland usable for them in that timeframe. Awesome if they do...

Changing the login manager or default browser just aren't "landscape-changing" things.

Smart Move (1)

nssy (1530925) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110206)

This decision seems logical, especially for interfaces that might be used on netbooks. No need for fancy stuff before you even login to your desktop

FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110216)

Need I say more?

Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! (3, Interesting)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110340)

> Need I say more?

In a sane world I'd disagree. But I know we live in an insane one and it won't take long for the idiots who thought using an HTML rendering library to render the login screen will start adding net based content as plugins to the login screen. Why not put a weatherbug up? Or a news ticker. Or the phase of the moon, and getting it locally is just too much trouble. Stock tickers? Why not. Until an exploit.

Bet WebKit's squalid bulk didn't go into the 5KLoC vs 50KLoC size difference.

Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! (1)

kripkenstein (913150) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111886)

Bet WebKit's squalid bulk didn't go into the 5KLoC vs 50KLoC size difference.

From the docs it looks like WebKit might be optional in LightDM. But if WebKit is used on Ubuntu, then I don't see why loading a 25MB HTML engine (+ it's dependencies!) is a good thing. WebKit is pretty bulky. And this is a login manager we're talking about!

And it's not like WebKit will be loaded later anyhow. Even if you do use a WebKit based browser, that is most likely Chrome, which bundles it's own copy of WebKit - so no sharing with apps that use the system WebKit like LightDM.

Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111348)

Why in the world are you allowing unprivileged users to set the theme for something that runs as root?

It's not like you're on the internet browsing random sites, it's pulling a few things from disk you have to be a privileged user to set.

If the user has the privileges to change the theme, they had the privileges to corrupt/delete important files.

Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112116)

You could let root install the themes, and just let an unprivileged user choose between them.

You could also run the GUI as an unprivileged user and the core as root, similar to xscreensaver.

Why not SLiM? (4, Interesting)

lolcutusofbong (2041610) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110394)

It's a normal X login manager without all the extra crap from gdm and kdm, and since it's in the Ubuntu repos already, all it needs is a good theme.

Re:Why not SLiM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36110468)

And a user list, and buttons for shutdown/suspend/reboot

Re:Why not SLiM? (2)

lolcutusofbong (2041610) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110538)

A user list? If people are too stupid to remember their username, they don't deserve to log in. Also, unless you're running some sort of ancient pre-ACPI system (in which case you're likely running Puppy, not Ubuntu), you can just press the power button to shut down.

Re:Why not SLiM? (3, Insightful)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110926)

If people are too stupid to remember their username, they don't deserve to log in.

We are not all teenagers. Our family computer has logins for more than 20 family members. How does Auntie Gladys remember whether her login is "Gladys", "gladyce", "glad", or "auntieg"? (She only uses it alternate Christmasses)

I do not want family members to login as "guest" because that would (a) leave them insecure, and (b) set a bad example.

Incidentally, most have been able to use Ubuntu/OpenOffice with no instructions at all, some without even being told its not Windows. (Quite a few of my family use OpenOffice on Windows, following problems opening old Word files with new versions of Word). Most seem to prefer it, and ask "why is your computer better than mine?" - the computer in question is a P4 with 512M!

Now get off my lawn.

Re:Why not SLiM? (3, Interesting)

silanea (1241518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111284)

I am too lazy to type my username. Why should I, really, when I can just press enter instead? I thought computers were there to make our lives easier, not even more annoying.

Re:Why not SLiM? (3, Interesting)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112296)

One reason: Why broadcast your login ID's to someone ? Make them work for it.

Re:Why not SLiM? (5, Interesting)

grumbel (592662) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111340)

Not only that, the username field is also the only field in which you can type clear text, thus the only field where you can actually see when you have capslock on or loaded a wrong keymap. It always drives me nuts when I have to enter my password and can't even verify that the keys I am hitting are really the keys I think they are.

Re:Why not SLiM? (1)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111632)

>> It always drives me nuts when I have to enter my password and can't even verify that the keys I am hitting are really the keys I think they are

Holy shit! Apple just patented the idea and you already have got the keyboard??!?
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/05/12/162208/Apple-Patents-Keyboard-That-Knows-What-Youll-Type [slashdot.org]

Re:Why not SLiM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111722)

I tried slim for a while. It wasn't so great and I changed back to gdm. I can't remember why. The old memory and all that.

Re:Why not SLiM? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112332)

Not supporting remote logins is one good reason.

Re:Why not SLiM? (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112396)

Because that wouldn't fuck shit up enough.

The good news (3, Interesting)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110564)

If you like GDM, you can use it. This is free software (in both senses), and just because Ubuntu's main branch is going a particular direction doesn't mean you have to. If you want to be based off of Ubuntu, you could do a kubuntu-like fork. If you want to do something completely different, you can switch distros (e.g. I switched to ArchLinux because I didn't want all the eye candy and complexity of what Ubuntu was doing).

And if you're really not seeing the choices you like out there, you can always roll your own [linuxfromscratch.org] . I've done that too, it's time-consuming but not particularly difficult. And if you really like doing that, you can fairly easily set up your installs with a package manager, set up a repository, and all of a sudden you're well on your way to having your own distro.

As it stands, I'm interested to see what Ubuntu comes up with, but I don't equate them to desktop Linux. There are just too many good options out there for that.

Re:The good news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111452)

Or you could just use the commercial OSes that have sane defaults that fit what 95% or more of users want rather than dicking around with distro hopping or building your own distro because a group of asshats think that changing things to change them is sane development policies.

Some disagree with the decision: (3, Informative)

Yfrwlf (998822) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110678)

http://www.advogato.org/person/mjg59/diary.html?start=296 [advogato.org]

To summarise, their argument is that LightDM is light on code because it can't do as much as GDM and the others, and if you removed those features from the others they would be light as well.

If that's true and that is the main difference, maybe it'd be easier to strip out, or turn off, parts of GDM if Canonical wants to dispose of certain features to achieve a faster boot time.

11.04 is SO SLOW to boot in comparison to 10.10.

Re:Some disagree with the decision: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36112108)

Yeah, like Ubuntu gives a shit about what a former Ubuntu contributor (and now Redhat employee), who left Ubuntu because he got into a spat with another Ubuntu developer, thinks about the decision to go with LightDm. He trashed Debian after he left it for Ubuntu. Now that he's with Redhat, he concern trolls about Ubuntu. Pathetic.

Does it have user switching? (3, Interesting)

doti (966971) | more than 3 years ago | (#36110872)

Many a time I searched for a replacement for GDM, but none of the alternatives provide the switch-user feature that I need (that is, the ability to have multiple users logged in at once, with an option to switch from one to another; useful for when there are more users than machines at home).

Re:Does it have user switching? (1)

korgitser (1809018) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111232)

Kde has user swithching, dunno if it's in the DM or the DE..

Re:Does it have user switching? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111384)

Try KDE (Kubuntu) - it supports this quite nicely.

KDE is sort of Gnome without being so dumbed down.

Re:Does it have user switching? (1)

Jon.Burgin (1136665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111904)

+1 very important for me as well.

Re:Does it have user switching? (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112002)

User switching is implemented in both Gnome and KDE. Maybe you mean user switching without having multiple X servers though? I don't know much about X, but I can't see why that couldn't be implemented somehow.. Maybe there are security issues though.

11.10 will be Gnome-free for me, then. (1)

Bloodwine77 (913355) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111476)

I have been planning to make XFCE my default session in 11.10 since Gnome 2.32 will no longer be an option. Combine that with the news that GDM will be replaced with LightDM, my system will be relatively Gnome-free. I can't find too much information on LightDM, but I hope it is easily customizable and that it isn't ugly-as-sin or too-basic out of the box. I have been disappointed in 11.04 on the lack of easy customization/configuration of GDM. I know I can always edit the raw conf files, but I'd like a nice GUI to manage it like I would other aspects of the theme.

mjg weighs in (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 3 years ago | (#36111648)

Haven't made up my mind yet, but I often find Matthew Garrett's blog posts insightful, and he doesn't like it: http://mjg59.livejournal.com/136274.html [livejournal.com]

Re:mjg weighs in (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36111918)

Who? Anyway, I found the comments disagreeing with him much more insightful.

Re:mjg weighs in (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112104)

Who? Anyway, I found the comments disagreeing with him much more insightful.

On the internet you can search for names, and the site I linked is a so-called blog that lets you read, for example, previous articles.

Re:mjg weighs in (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36112198)

Oh looky. Matthew Garrett, former Debian contributor until he got pissed with them, then left to contribute to Ubuntu until he got into a spat with Scott James Remnant, and then left and got a job with Canonical competitor, Redhat, is concern trolling about Ubuntu again.

YAWN.

Linux is ready for the Desktop... (1)

AlienIntelligence (1184493) | more than 3 years ago | (#36112228)

You know... I've finally adopted the 'use linux as much
as possible' mindset... settled on a distro and now they
are trying to fuck it up as much as they can.

Bravo.

-AI

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>