×

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 ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

232 comments

You can actually play games on linux? (1, Troll)

aywang31 (2078102) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316602)

I didn't know graphics intensive games existed on linux.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

calmofthestorm (1344385) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316616)

ppracer ftw!

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316728)

Quite a few operate well enough through wine. There even are a few that run better on Linux/Wine than windows.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

metacell (523607) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316792)

Civilization IV is faster and more responsive on Linux/Wine than on Windows XP, for some reason. In particular, it loads much faster.

But in general, graphics performance is noticeably slower on Linux due to the lower quality of graphics drivers. The gfx card manufacturers don't feel the need to spend that much time writing drivers for Linux.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (4, Insightful)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316858)

I've not found this to be true. The drivers are buggy - not slow. Speed problems resulting from wine are often from inefficient stopgap code in the Direct X components of wine, or simply games doing things that the wine programmers didn't expect. Direct X is one of the most complicated parts of windows and wine depends mostly on Microsoft-provided documentation and reverse engineering to get it to work. It is really amazing anything can work, I think. Wine is perhaps one of the most impressive programming accomplishments in history.

But I do have a problem with something. As much as drivers cause problems on Linux, using them as a defense for Open Source failings to provide stable and quality libraries and programs is pathetic. I'm not accusing you of this, but already I see posts on here excusing GNOME because somehow, ATI/NVIDIA drivers are worse on GNOME than KDE... yeah, right. It is part of GNOME's job to make sure their library works with the drivers out there. That might not be right, but it's how it is, and making excuses gives Linux a bad name.

Guess what? Proprietary developers have to put up with it, too. The hardware makers aren't (generally) singling out Open Source libraries to mess with. They don't sit in dimly kit conference rooms, laughing maniacally from under their black hoods, saying "ha, we got GNOME to look bad today!" At some point, developers (I'm looking at you, GNOME), need to grow a pair and stop complaining about the world around them.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316942)

Or we could simply not use non-free code. Nuff said. My system runs great and I refuse to use or buy products which depend on non-free drivers/firmware. Except for a BIOS (which is currently not possible to get laptop without such) i got a freedom compatible system.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (3, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317248)

Or we could simply not use non-free code.

Yes you could do that if you're a masochist who wants to suffer an inferior, possibly unusable gaming experience. Meanwhile people who want to use their hardware to its potential rather than in some gimped, buggy form will take any driver that's going whether it is open or closed.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (0, Flamebait)

atomicbutterfly (1979388) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317322)

Yes you could do that if you're a masochist who wants to suffer an inferior, possibly unusable gaming experience. Meanwhile people who want to use their hardware to its potential rather than in some gimped, buggy form will take any driver that's going whether it is open or closed.

I wish more GNUtards understood this. People have standards - they don't want to have to "live" with an inferior experience when compromising yields great benefits, particularly if they gain very little from sticking to the inferior option. It's just how the computing experience is at the moment.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (4, Insightful)

Nursie (632944) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317402)

I wish more anti-GNU-tards understood this. People have standards - they don't want to have to live with a compromise when working with an entirely open source stack yields great benefits, particularly if there's little (only really gaming) they gain from compromising. It's just how some folks like it.

The hard-line FOSS type of thinking is not for everyone. It has benefits and drawbacks. If games are more important to you than access to source code then you go for your compromise system.

Calling people retarded because they have different priorities to you is pretty dumb. When they try and force you to do things that way then feel free to complain, until then I suggest you stick with Windows, sure it's a bit of a compromise, but your games will run just fine!

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317454)

we call gnutards that way because they buy proprietary hardware and joke themselves about using open source free-as-in-stallmanfree drivers.

if that's not hypocrisy and borderline schizophrenia, then they're just plain retarded.

if you value so much freedom and such, why re you using proprietary hardware? because it's better? don't you see a contradiction right there?

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

metacell (523607) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317314)

Do you play 3D games, and if so, what graphics card with free drivers are you using?

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

metacell (523607) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317306)

That may be true; I'm not an active programmer myself, and have to rely on what friends and journalists tell me.

Re: Blaming the manufacturers is pathetic?? (2)

yacwroy (1558349) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317334)

As much as drivers cause problems on Linux, using them as a defense for Open Source failings to provide stable and quality libraries and programs is pathetic ... It is part of GNOME's job to make sure their library works with the drivers out there.

I have to disagree here. Just because it's your job does NOT mean when you achieve slightly less (even if your progress is more impressive) than your competitors while being severely handicapped by forces outside your control that you can't blame those forces.

If the GFX drivers and/or architectures were open source, linux would have better performance, both natively and under wine.

In fact, in an alternative universe where linux graphics drivers had been open source for years, linux could possibly have the best graphics performance of any OS.

This defense isn't pathetic, it's 100% accurate. And it needs to be talked about, and blamed, if we want to get better graphics. I would go as far as saying this issue is the #1 thing holding linux back.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

Ash Vince (602485) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317118)

But in general, graphics performance is noticeably slower on Linux due to the lower quality of graphics drivers. The gfx card manufacturers don't feel the need to spend that much time writing drivers for Linux.

Actually if you read the article you find out that the biggest problems are with the open source drivers or the ATI provided ones. The NVIDIA provided closed source driver had no issues and only seemed slightly slower although this was probably due to then using a much older NVIDIA card for their test.

It seems that NVIDIA is the way to go for anyone using 3d intensively under Linux.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

metacell (523607) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317294)

Well, that may be true for this specific issue, but nVidias drivers for Linux still have noticeably worse performance than their drivers for Windows. (I'm using nVidia myself.)

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316738)

Steam games run fine.

I don't know what you're talking about.

--
BMO

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (2)

atomicbutterfly (1979388) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316810)

Steam games? Or Source engine games?

There are a lot of games on the Steam platform - make sure you're specific on what works. I tend to avoid Wine because I've encountered regressions going from one version of Wine to the other, and having a game start bugging out just because of a bump in Wine's version number does tend to suck (particularly if there have been improvements in other areas of Wine which benefit other games).

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316872)

I have started noticing this recently, it's quite annoying.

I guess it's a difficult proposition, trying to keep things working that already are, but adding in tweaks for known not-working programs almost always seems to break something else.

Some steam stuff works, some doesn't. I've been playing PvZ quite happily, but that's not exactly graphics intensive. The last actual 3D game I played under wine was Portal.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

atomicbutterfly (1979388) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317316)

In my opinion, if you're gonna play games on Linux for any length of time, stick to native games. There are quite a few of them if you know where to look, and they're not all crappy Quake clones either* (Amnesia and the Penumbra series come to mind). If you want to play Windows games, there's nothing wrong with dual booting simply for Windows games. The best tool for the job is sometimes not the one you'd prefer, but if it gets the job done the best, so be it.

*I use "crappy" subjectively. Most Quake clones I happen to like. :)

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317426)

Having just flamed you further up I now feel silly... sorry...

Anyway I agree, if you want to play windows games windows is probably the best option. In fact I keep it around just for that.

the last thing that broke under wine was a small VB application (from the look of it, I'm not 100% sure) for calculating the propertiesd of beer you'll get out of a homebrew setup. You tell it what grains you're going to put into the mix, which hops, how long it's going to be boiled, various other things, and it tells you how strong the beer will be, what colour and how bitter. Why a simple form-based app like that would choke on the latest version, where steam doesn't I have no idea.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316950)

urbanterror.info

savage2.com

Sure, they're a little old. But still tons of fun.

Re:You can actually play games on linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316998)

Second Life. Especially when nearly every texture is an unoptimised beast of a thing and if you enable deferred rendering.

Hextris performance Terrible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316620)

Yes, Hextris, Quadrapassel and GBrainy run terribly under GNOME shell.

too bad (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316626)

I guess that means we can't run *either* Linux game.

Not seeing the downside to this (3, Insightful)

notsoclever (748131) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316668)

GNOME shell exposes performance issues and driver bugs, which in principle means that those performance issues and driver bugs will (hopefully) be fixed, making the drivers more robust and performant down the road. How's this a problem?

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316698)

YES! And since this is open source, the million eyes will solve the bugs right?

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316714)

Unless the bugs are in, say, the nVidia driver.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (3, Insightful)

multi io (640409) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317064)

Unless the bugs are in, say, the nVidia driver.

...which, according to TFA, they aren't. In fact, the bugs seem to be in anything BUT the proprietary nVidia driver.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316766)

Yep. Anything that bugs out on you and doesn't work is actually A Good Thing (tm). Those who disagree run Windows.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316808)

I contend that those who disagree grab an IBM Selectric off eBay.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (3, Funny)

lucm (889690) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317054)

> Those who disagree run Windows

And as a first witness I call the infamous "On error resume next" statement in VB.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (3, Insightful)

pipatron (966506) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316812)

There's no problem at all, unless of course someone would go ahead and make this the default setting for the most popular and visible Linux distribution for non-techies out there today. But why would someone put together a hack like this and release before it's stable.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (4, Insightful)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316976)

There's no problem at all, unless of course someone would go ahead and make this the default setting for the most popular and visible Linux distribution for non-techies out there today. But why would someone put together a hack like this and release before it's stable.

::Sigh:: Well, perhaps its due to the fact that this "unstable" hack is not a long term support release. If any other OS Vendor released every 6 months you may find the same situation for the newest releases -- Even with infrequent OS releases what's the saying? "Wait till service pack 1 before you upgrade."

There are no doubt "non-techies" that accidentally installed an operating system that was not as stable as they would like.

For this I can make no excuse. If only it were noted somewhere prominently on the download page: "...long-term support (LTS) releases are supported for three years on the desktop. Perfect for organizations that need more stability..." -- Perhaps it would be best to place such text right next to the download options [ubuntu.com] , near the giant "Start Download" button.

If only there were several ways to try out the operating system before installing it, as well as step by step instructions on how to do so; Perhaps these should go on the download page as well?

Alas, What fools they are! If only they were even more user friendly! Or -- Perhaps they've made it too easy to upgrade. MS wouldn't think of having a single button + admin password upgrade feature... I bet they don't have this problem on Windows.

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (1, Flamebait)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316878)

Oh, I've got to remember that one. "Oh, sorry I crashed your car, but hey- you should thank me for proving it couldn't stop that fast! Hopefully, you'll buy a better one next time."

You do realize this is why people don't take open source seriously, right?

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (0)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317008)

You do realize this is why people don't take open source seriously, right?

BWAHAHAH HAHA HA Ha ha... heh... oh. You're serious? GYHA, HAHA HA Ha ha... ha... Oh, no -- PLEASE stop, you're killing me!

Re:Not seeing the downside to this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317134)

It's a problem because of several of those performance problems cannot be fixed just by programming: They use technology which should be licensed.

It also mentions KWin. (1, Interesting)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316690)

...and I have noticed some weirdness here. It seems like KWin disables desktop effects on fullscreen windows, yet disabling them entirely (there's a hotkey to toggle it) has a huge impact on the performance of most things (like games) that use the GPU.

Re:It also mentions KWin. (1)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317128)

Disable thumbnails in desktop effects. This was what used to kill full-screen windows. While it usually do not impact performance of kwin, it seems for some reason to impact performance of apps with many updates per second.

Btw. Do not disable deskop effects on nvidia GPU with the proprietary driver. Disabling effects on nvidia will make graphics slower and use more power. The problem is the nvidia has terrible 2D performance, the composer uses XGL which is heavily optimized in the nvidia driver.

Re:It also mentions KWin. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317474)

Disabling thumbnails kills desktop switching performance, so I imagine it's not really thumbnails that are disabled, but caching window contents in general.
That's precisely what makes compositing seem faster - no need to redraw window contents on every expose event. Nothing is actually drawn faster than without compositing, it doesn't make Qt or GTK magically use GL[X] for drawing, it just makes redraws happen asynchronously.

GNOME - Making 'fast' computers slow since 1999. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316692)

GNOME - Making 'fast' computers slow since 1999.

What, no Intel? (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316700)

Seems a shame not to test Intel seeing as they go to the trouble of producing open drivers.

Intel might not be your first choice if gaming was the primary function for your computer, but then Linux probably wouldn't be either.

Re:What, no Intel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316776)

True. Why someone would want to play games on Linux when they can get free Windows (either OEM or pirated), is beyond me.

Re:What, no Intel? (1)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316834)

Not needing to reboot, and not having to maintain two installations is major win...

Re:What, no Intel? (1)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316856)

I like to know that the code for the software I run could be independently evaluated by a third party. Whenever I run Windows, I'm worried my computer is doing something behind my back that I don't want it to be doing and have no control over.

Re:What, no Intel? (2)

bipbop (1144919) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317084)

OEM costs money, and pirating requires a lack of ethics. That said, I spent the money, but I still prefer to play games on Linux when I have the option, since Windows is just annoying.

More tasks for the GPU==Lower GPU performance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316722)

So you ask the graphics hardware to composite your display using opengl and wonder why opengl apps aren't as fast as when the gpu isn't busy with other things?

Re:More tasks for the GPU==Lower GPU performance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316826)

This is exactly why I disable desktop effects in kde before gaming and will NEVER use a desktop package that required compositing to function like fucking gnome 3...

Re:More tasks for the GPU==Lower GPU performance? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317490)

When a game runs fullscreen, there should be nothing to compose (if things are done right).

Memory Hog. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36316866)

Gnome shell is the second biggest memory hog on my system. Only below firefox.

Not particularly the brightest concept using javascript for all it's display work. A shell should be minimal and fast. Scripting GUI's is something belonging in the domain of mentally challenged applications developers, not important operating system components.

That said.. It's certainly very pretty on my Ubuntu box, and makes me at least feel more productive. I don't mind feeding a few GPU/CPU cycles for the sake of that.
And it's a lot more functional than Unity (which is nothing short of a piece of crap: Screw you ShuttleDork - that was your worst mistake ever.)

There's always XFCE/FVWM/console etc..

Re:Memory Hog. (2)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317070)

Scripting GUI's is something belonging in the domain of mentally challenged applications developers, not important operating system components.

Awesome is scriptable and it's only using ~7MB here.

Re:Memory Hog. (0)

lucm (889690) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317096)

> Scripting GUI's is something belonging in the domain of mentally challenged applications developers

so I take it you are one of those not mentally challenged people who still believe that compilation makes things run faster?

I had a coworker like that, we used to call him "CGI Bill".

Re:Memory Hog. (3, Funny)

multi io (640409) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317106)

Gnome shell is the second biggest memory hog on my system. Only below firefox

So Gnome ISN'T using firefox to render its desktop? That must be remedied ASAP!

Dropping in Quality (5, Insightful)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316902)

Not that long ago I had to actually make a decision as to which window manager to use based on the features they supported. However, over the last three years, I've watched both Gnome and KDE go from stable to hacked together pieces of crap that barely run. I stayed on KDE3 for a very long time after 4 was released, because, as has become common, it was released completely unfinished. However I was forced to upgrade because almost no distro supports KDE3 anymore.

Well, that was great! Almost every feature I used either gone or mangled. It can no longer render windows properly, causes video playback to jump and freeze, and is now almost entirely unusable with my new video card. Gnome is even worse.

So, as a strong proponent of open source software, I am really dismayed. I can't even use Linux anymore because no window manager works right with my ATI card, and even before that, were barely usable (older Nvidia) without glitches. How am I supposed to advocate that others use it if I can't?

I think Linux needs a complete change in focus and methodology, or it is going to end up losing what little market share it has. It is time to stop trying to copy Apple UIs and time to start worrying about stability. This whole batch of project managers has failed us - we need mass forks of major projects.

But then, what do I know? I'm a windows user, again...

Re:Dropping in Quality (2)

ILoveCrack83 (1244964) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316952)

Well I'm running KDE 4.6.0 to my full satisfaction! Everything works as it should, it has a lot of features and it looks good. Seriously, I'm turning into a fanboy over here...

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

Bambi Dee (611786) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317142)

Me too; funnily enough, I've set it up rather like Unity with a vertical hybrid task-manager-with-launchers. Being KDE, though, it's easily malleable to new whims and needs. Plasma is a bit of a assemble-your-own-desktop kit. And I love Kmail and Knode, Kate, K3b, and Dolphin. It looked like a gutted toy version of Konqueror at first, but it can easily be set up as an informative but uncluttered and elegant file manager.

But I did disable Nepomuk/Strigi and the fairly puzzling aggregating notification system. Seriously, I could barely tell what was going on with that thing...

Re:Dropping in Quality (5, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316980)

[all WMs seem to suck now...]

Use FVWM :)

I think Linux needs a complete change in focus and methodology, or it is going to end up losing what little market share it has. It is time to stop trying to copy Apple UIs and time to start worrying about stability.

I wholeheartedly agree (caveats below). The obsession with copying interfaces is getting really annoying now. Back in the day when Win9X seemed to be the thing to copy, I could afford a Windows machine (in fact I had a partition then), but I preferred the unixy UI that Linux had. I found creeping windows-isms an unpleasant change. Now Apple seems to be the thing to copy. I can afford to buy an Apple if I want one, but I don't. I prefer the user interfaces that Linux has available, and so I find the creeping appleism's really annoying.

It also comes with this rather annoying de-facto assumption that anything Apple does must necessarily be better.

Ever time I sit down at a new ubuntu install, I find the interface less like what I am used to, and more like interfaces that I actively avoid.

It seems like the only thing I can do is to keep using Linux while the things I love about it are slowly chipped away by people who seem intent on destroying it for what?

Re:Dropping in Quality (3, Insightful)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317012)

Before the above comment is moderated away as a troll or something (it isn't by the way), I'd like to completely agree! I used linux almost exclusively from 1994 until about 2009. Then I gave up, despite my ideals, and just installed Windows. I even bought Windows 7 when it came out and am happily using it. Why? Because I just want shit to work. I don't have the time any more to tweak an OS to a point where it almost works; I need to get work done. But even with that considered I was using linux and KDE to develop my open source app using KDE and KDevelop until KDE 4 came out. Yes, yes, yes, I could have changed my development methods and made things work, but I had (and have) very little spare time these days to "set up an environment" so I just stopped developing it. My app didn't even rely on KDE... had nothing to do with it in fact, but my dev environment was KDE-Based and I had no time to adapt. I reckon others may have been in the same position. I still have linux installed, but instead of on my primary partition it's not even on a real partition anymore -- it's in a VM. I can't see that changing in the near future because, as I said, I need to get shit done and not fuck around with tweaking an OS.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

D4rkforce (1028858) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317312)

WjVpqhp7

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

D4rkforce (1028858) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317324)

What the ...? This was not what the preview did show me ;). So, I will just sum up what I wrote before. KDE 4 has not been very stable or high performance for me either. However, to me this was not a huge problem, because I have been working with fluxbox for a long time anyways. The people around me using KDE4 migrated to XFCE and seem to be happy with their choice. What I do not understand is: Even if KDevelop stopped being a reasonable choice for you (even using another window manager/desktop manager), was your project so heavily dependent on features offered by KDevelop? If there was no time to migrate to a new IDE, how did you have time to actually work on your project? I'm not trying to troll here. I just don't understand what was so special about KDE and KDevelop to you, that you just stopped working on your project because of KDE4 and migrated to Windows 7 (where you had to change to a new IDE anyways).

Re:Dropping in Quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317328)

> Why? Because I just want shit to work.

Yeah, painless installs and consistent performance without all fussing with license keys, AV and application updates, drivers not supported anymore... oh wait, did you say windows????

Re:Dropping in Quality (3)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317024)

Which ui is copying apple?

Birth kde sets are fairly their own, with the desktop one most like windows pre seven.

Gnome three was completely it's own thing when I last tried it.

Gnome two was perhaps an updated take on os 9, maybe, but again I'd say it was more it's own thing.

Unity is closest to os x, but also is quite different.

Unity makes default old apple features (menu at top), and the dock is fairly similar to os x, and the button placement, but it still looks and feels fairly different (window snapping, and multiple desktops being front and center).

Honestly, windows 7 may be my favorite window manager and panel at the moment, followed by gnome two with compiz, but kde 4.6 started to make me rethink that, and unity isn't bad.

Windows' lack of always on top is a bummer, but the new dock/task bar is really fantastic. If unity's starts to work like that I will probably favor it (there's a few rely stupid bits to injury too, but over all, I like it, I think we are in a desktop golden age, with apple being the one that's behind.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317038)

First of all, Linux is doing quite well from servers to cell phones. What you're complaining about is GUIs that run on top of X, both of which do not rely on Linux for their existence. GNOME and KDE may have issues, but those issues don't involve Linux at all.

And with regard to desktop environments, I used XFCE 4: it's relatively small, lightweight, and not resource intensive. OTOH I use my XBox 360 and PS3 for gaming.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317078)

Yes, so you don't actually use your OS to do work and get things done (apart from maybe web browsing or development).

Re:Dropping in Quality (2)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317126)

Yes, so you don't actually use your OS to do work and get things done (apart from maybe web browsing or development).

What exactly do you consider "work"? And no, I don't use the OS to do work. The OS gets out of the way while I do work, which is exactly what it should do.

Re:Dropping in Quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317302)

And no, I don't use the OS to do work. The OS gets out of the way while I do work, which is exactly what it should do.

An OS is a tool, just like a hammer or a calculator. If your OS 'gets out of the way' - if it doesn't support the work you do, you're a fool for using it.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

BreezeC (2040184) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317618)

Linux is the winner in server,that's true,and the smartphone market.
We should know the truth that only Linux likers use Linux as desktop and the number not large.
I use Xfce4 too.Linux should choose a way which belong to Linux,not others.

Re:Dropping in Quality (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317184)

I have been a long time Red Hat (started 6.0) and Fedora user. Due to the limited support cycle of 1 year, I recently had to upgrade my Fedora 13. Decided to go straight to Fedora 15 to avoid the same trouble 6 months from now. Unfortunately, that GNOME 3.0 thing is totally f*cking UNUSABLE. They indeed tried to mimick Mac OS X but then a job very badly done. It is a pity that a couple of arrogant developers think they are usability experts. Same thing happended years ago with the Spatial view in Nautilus, after a few years they also realized they were wrong, a decision that any sane person would have taken from the start. The sole reason I kept dualbooting my Mac with Fedora was because I was accustomed to having launchers on my gnome-panel to open links to web pages via zenity front ends. On GNOME 3 there's unfortunately no panel anymore, they've decided that that was to easy. If GNOME 3 is supposed to be the future then Linux on the desktop is DEAD. Apart from that, even plain simple wired networking didn't work anymore with Fedora 15 out of the box! Goodbye Linux, I am going to port my stuff over and won't look back.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

DEmmons (1538383) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317414)

lol, it's almost more like they're trying to mimic iOS! but if you start to miss Linux, and have some time, try using the XFCE spin of Fedora some time. it still contains a lot of what was good about Gnome 2

Re:Dropping in Quality (1, Insightful)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317230)

"Almost every feature I used either gone or mangled. It can no longer render windows properly, causes video playback to jump and freeze, and is now almost entirely unusable with my new video card."

No; no; and no. All the features from KWin 3 are there. It renders windows fine. Video playback is fine.

"I can't even use Linux anymore because no window manager works right with my ATI card, and even before that, were barely usable (older Nvidia) without glitches. How am I supposed to advocate that others use it if I can't?"

Sounds like a driver problem to me. My Radeon HD 4770 works fine with Kubuntu Natty. So does my NVIDIA 8400M laptop. I use KDE 4 and KWin and it's fine now, just like KDE 3.5 was--better, even.

"I think Linux needs a complete change in focus and methodology, or it is going to end up losing what little market share it has. It is time to stop trying to copy Apple UIs and time to start worrying about stability. This whole batch of project managers has failed us - we need mass forks of major projects."

1. Linux (the kernel--and yes, you need to be specific when advocating changes) is not what your complaint is about (unless it's a driver problem, in which case you should complain to ATI or spend a few bucks and get a slightly newer or different card that has decent drivers--the info you need is out there).

2. A complete change is not needed.

3. You are right about one thing: stability is the most important thing.

4. However, we do not need mass forks. Good grief, man, do you have any idea what that would mean? What are you going to do, clone every developer and install a brain implant so they will do your bidding? What do you even mean by, "This whole batch of project managers"? You're speaking in terms so broad and vague that your words are meaningless.

I'm afraid your vague anecdote is worthless and irrelevant. Either your video card is so old that it's just not supported anymore by current distributions, or it was too new at the time to have good support, or you happened to use a poorly-configured distro and didn't fix it or try a different one.

The fact is that hardware support and out-of-the-box configuration in Linux distros has never been better, and it works better and more simply than Windows in most cases. And the fact that you switched back to Windows simply lends credence to the suspicion that you didn't know what you were doing and didn't bother to find out.

Re:Dropping in Quality (3, Interesting)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317406)

And the fact that you switched back to Windows simply lends credence to the suspicion that you didn't know what you were doing and didn't bother to find out.

He used Linux for 15 years as his primary OS and happens to also develop his own software. It's quite likely he does indeed know what he's doing. And I am in a similar position myself too: I started using Linux as my primary OS somewhere in 1996 and dropped it last year. I simply got tired with something always breaking or not working correctly and I feel quite a bit more satisfied nowadays.

Re:Dropping in Quality (5, Insightful)

DEmmons (1538383) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317376)

no, you're on to something. I'm neither a windows user nor a KDE user, i like Gnome 2 on Fedora, but my experience is the same. it's supposed to be about personal choice. Gnome 2 was simple and gave room for customization and generally had become something i could proudly show my friends and have them say "oh, this is Linux? it's not hard to use. and the effects look nice! why did i keep hearing Linux was hard?". Gnome 3 with Gnome Shell, or even in fallback mode, is crap. it takes away tons of tools, features, customizability etc. that are sorely missed and gives in return, what? a new ugly interface that no one likes, which is clearly designed for touch screens. why do i need a touchscreen interface for my six-year-old laptop? it means several extra clicks to get anywhere and a first-time Linux user isn't going to intuitively find Firefox or LibreOffice and be able to get to work on it like they can with my current setup. I can see making this interface available as an option for high-end touchscreen computers, but making it the default for everyone with no way to get back the old, useable Gnome 2 desktop? it's unforgivable. I'll hold out until my Fedora 14 install starts showing its age too much and jump to XFCE. note to Gnome devs: there are many people using linux with touch screens - they're using Android. We Gnome users are using actual, proper computers, and we want a proper desktop, or at least one customizable enough to turn into a proper desktop with a little tweaking, and you already made that. wtf is this new crap?

Re:Dropping in Quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317436)

All I can say is give XFCE 4 a go. The complete train wrecks of Unity and KDE got me to try it again and I was very pleasantly suprised at how good it was. All the little niggles I found when using previous versions seem to have been fixed and it's really configurable, pleasant on the eye, and seems fast and stable.

It's now my desktop of choice on all Linux boxes I have and I'm not going back to any of the other crap.

I only hope XFCE doesn't go down the same drain as Gnome/KDE or I'll just give up on Linux desktops and will go out and buy a copy of Windows. At least with Windows the interface remains reasonably usable and consistent between versions.

Re:Dropping in Quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317530)

Fluxbox. Configure it once, stick your fluxbox.conf in a dropbox or similar, and just symbolically link it. K, thanks, come again.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

salparadyse (723684) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317588)

KDE on slackware 13.37 works beautifully.

My only complaint is the inclusion of the nouveau driver - which despite being present as the default driver for all NVIDIA cards, doesn't work with all NVIDIA cards. It's included in every distro I've tried recently, despite this shortcoming - a poor decision from all distros.
Not a problem with slackware as it treats its users as intelligent beings instead of clueless eyecandy junkies and installing the blacklist package is a doddle.

There's little, if any, reason to have to install the latest release of any distro - half the world is still using XP and that came out 10 years ago. Don't like Unity? (Can't say I blame you - it's a piece of filth from a design/user awareness point of view) - stick to an earlier version.

Re:Dropping in Quality (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317660)

Maybe it you just used the default settings instead of incorrectly trying to tinker with stuff, it would work for you as it works for everybody else?
I have no problem with Gnome 2 nor KDE4, be it on ATI or Nvidia cards.

Now it is widely known that some ATI cards were only well-supported by fglrx and fglrx dropped support for them (ATI's decision), so if you're using one of those (like the Radeon 9800 Pro) you're better off buying a new one if you're using Linux.
But the nvidia drivers usually work flawlessly and they don't drop mid-old cards like this.

Disable Desktop effects shut off Compiz. (4, Insightful)

Zombie Ryushu (803103) | more than 2 years ago | (#36316932)

Disable Desktop effects shut off Compiz. This has been known for a very long time, whether it be Warzone 2100, Quake 4, Doom 3, Unreal Tournament, or Warcraft 3. These "desktop effects" do nothing but slow the box down.

Re:Disable Desktop effects shut off Compiz. (1)

Bambi Dee (611786) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317148)

Doesn't GNOME Shell use its own compositor (Mutter) instead of Compiz? It might be required to run.

Re:Disable Desktop effects shut off Compiz. (2)

nnull (1148259) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317232)

Cool story, ever tried to turn off desktop effects in the new version of Ubuntu? It's not in the usual place where you'd find it, in fact, that option is completely gone! So people unfamiliar with the terminal can't turn off compiz so easily. Thus you end up with a completely buggy desktop that's supposed to have been stable upon release (or at least close too).

Summary (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317166)

The new GUIs are bloated pigs and eat processor and GPU resources.

Yeah, that's about the sum of it. I'm still on Fedora 14 and I don't see any cause to go to 15 just yet. I may never go to 15. If they resolve these problems, I might go to 16.

I hate to say it, but I think it's just about time that Linus Torvalds started wearing black turtlenecks and began influencing vendors and developers to come together under a grand mystical vision. The biggest problem with Windows is the multitude of directions development takes and the "I'm the only thing running on a computer" mentality we see from the likes of HP and other manufacturers and vendors. I think it is clear we are seeing similar mentalities at play here. Are various developers considering more than their scope of work? Are they ensuring that their UI software doesn't inhibit applications performance? Doesn't seem like it.

Re:Summary (1)

jgrahn (181062) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317258)

The new GUIs are bloated pigs and eat processor and GPU resources.

So don't use them. Noone forces you to, not even on a new machine with all of some flashy, userfriendly new Linux distribution installed.

My desktop environment is, and has always been, at work and at home, on Linux and Solaris, on huge 16-core multiuser systems with 66GB RAM and on old Pentium boxes with 0.032 GB RAM, ctwm as a window manager. It has a menu for starting programs, and it has multiple desktops. It's supported everywhere, and always will be. The same goes for fvwm and many other window managers.

Re:Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317296)

ctwm authors say: "Spending hours configuring CTWM is among the most fun one can have, if you ask me."
Linux that just works seems very far away.

Re:Summary (1)

equex (747231) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317596)

Linux is good only if your time is worthless. Sad but true. As a regular geek I like tweaking OS's but Linux takes the cake sometimes. I stay with Windows XP and Ubuntu 8.04 LTS! Seems newer Linux kernels has dropped support for the SB600 south bridge (a very common ATI chip) as well. Therefore the newest versions of Slackware, CentOS, OpenSuse and Ubuntu does not recognize my hard disks. If nobody fixes that soon i am going to the store to buy Windows 7.

get a life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317200)

You people are a joke. Always complaining about which OS or which stupid WM is best. A modern computer user should simply use what is best for each job or task. You should be equipped with what is best for you. If its an Android device for this, an IPad for that, an XBOX for this, a Linux system for that. Anyone, that claims to be doing everything they need with one device or system ain't really doin much.

natural selection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317256)

Natural selection applies here. Unusable window managers will die out, others develop and thrive, a benefit to the users (eventually)...
Wishful thinking?

Just pull the chain already. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317384)

Gnome shell and Unity...

When will these turds get flushed ?

IceWM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317390)

Consider icewm. Simple, works, gets our of your way.

http://www.icewm.org/

just gaming? (3, Insightful)

Errtu76 (776778) | more than 2 years ago | (#36317642)

gnome-shell hurts productivity as well, taking away all the nice features that were in gnome 2. Like hamster-applet and being able to easily customize .. well, anything! Sure if you know javascript it's cool, but for those who were used to adding items to gnome-panel the new gnome-shell is horribly complex to use and customize.

It feels like we just jumped 10 years back in time.

wheres the fire? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36317644)

According to recent benchmarks by Phoronix, using the GNOME Shell will cause a large performance hit when running OpenGL games on Linux.

Sooo...... no problem right?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...