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!

Interview With GNOME 3 Designer Jon McCann

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the point-and-counterpoint dept.

GNOME 294

An anonymous reader writes "In an extensive interview, GNOME 3 designer Jon McCann talks about the future of GNOME 3 — why it's all about the apps and why he is convinced that KDE and Ubuntu are actually different operating systems. He also reacts to the outspoken criticism against GNOME 3, which has been making the rounds lately."

cancel ×

294 comments

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

Don't Listen! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122824)

I don't even care what this guy has to say. I'm convinced he's a secret agent out to destroy open-source communities everywhere.

Somebody PLEASE get rid of this guy so we can continue to take steps forward with the GNU Desktop environment.

Re:Don't Listen! (2)

Dracos (107777) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123456)

Nah, that's Miguel de Icaza.

Re:Don't Listen! (2)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123632)

Why do you have to get rid of him? Isn't that part of the point of open source free software, that you can disagree with the project maintainers enough to fork it yourself and take it in your own direction?

So why do you need to get rid of the person you disagree with? There's little stopping someone from coming up with a fork based on Gnome2 and running with it...

Re:Don't Listen! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123872)

First of all, it's not just him. Many of the major open source projects have a similar problem, where "graphic designers" and "UI experts" are calling the shots instead of real software developers.

Second of all, we shouldn't completely exclude people like this from open source software development. We do need somebody to make icons.

It's just all about people knowing their role. Those who are good at graphics can make icons, logos, and crap like that. Those who are good at programming should be creating the UIs and deciding how the application actually work.

Translation: (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122840)

Translation: The newest butthurt diva within the FOSS community has scathing words for why users should just unquestioningly bow down to the decisions of the almighty developers rather than *gasp* criticizing their work when it's crap. First Asa, now this turd? Who's next in the FOSS lineup for being a butthurt diva?

Re:Translation: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122968)

Translation: Yet another AC who uses a ton of FOSS yet contributes nothing back to the community except endless bitching.

Re:Translation: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123008)

It's the same syndrome as people who has been on a stage a couple of times and suddenly become iconic superstars.

Re:Translation: (1)

Lokitoth (1069508) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123132)

The whole point of FOSS is that if you do not like something, you can change it to make it more efficient and useful for you. Stop crying about changes/decisions the original development group is making, fork the project and write you own.

yeah, I changed alright, to xfce4 (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123352)

eos eof

Re:Translation: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123504)

Yeah, instead of listening to what users want, tell them to fork your project or shut up! And people wonder why Linux desktop market share still sucks balls?

Re:Translation: (3, Insightful)

Snarky McButtface (1542357) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123630)

The whole point of any software is to make something efficient and useful. Gnome 3 is anything but efficient. I used it for several weeks. I do not mind making minor changes to make something better suit my needs but the changes the Gnome team made were ridiculous. Rather than fork it, I did what most users do when a FOSS project makes changes they find unacceptable. I uninstalled Gnome and installed something else.

Re:Translation: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123218)

Unfortunately on the internet - and in free software in particular - we have a lot of people whose voices aren't heard very loudly, and we have to take their needs into accounts as well as those who are vocal.

People didn't actually tell us that they wanted us to make a lot of the changes we implemented for GNOME 3, but we made them anyway. Basically, we decided to change things first and then went out and hunted for evidence to support our pre-conceived notion of what was "correct". I am fully confident these people exist, even though I've already just said no one ever asked for these changes and therefore it's impossible to prove that they want them.

Re:Translation: (1)

Certhas (2310124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123626)

I know I'm new here and reading the article is not recommended but he actually says:

Highlights: It's [the criticism] certainly valid...

derStandard.at: Recently there has been some very vocal criticism of GNOME 3.0, how do you deal with that as project? McCann: I think it does affect us as a community more on a personal level than it does on a professional level. It's never nice to hear people that you have so much respect for offering their opinion very mean spirited. But that is their right, everyone has a voice on the internet and can express what they think. And we listen to it all and don't want to ignore it. However: We do have to remain focused on what we are trying to accomplish. Unfortunately on the internet - and in free software in particular - we have a lot of people whose voices aren't heard very loudly, and we have to take their needs into accounts as well as those who are vocal. And that's very challenging to do and very tricky to know what the less vocal people are looking for. So we have to remain sensitive to both sides.

As how we react to those latest criticisms: It's very difficult cause not all of those necessarily agree with one another. In some sense people who are against something think they have something in common, but when you look at it in more detail - which of course we try to do - very few actually agree on much of anything other than that's not what they are used to.

derStandard.at: But would you say there was some valid criticism voiced or is all this just "people hating change" for you?

McCann: It's certainly valid in the sense that people are not making it up and it may indeed not be what they like. And that's fine, there are a lot of different products out there that may fit their way of working better. But if you look at it from a historical perspective, this isn't the first time we have encountered such reactions. Even many of the same people who are now claiming that GNOME2 was such a great thing for them were some of the most vocal opponents of the things we did in GNOME2. People forget that we are the same group of folks that built GNOME2 and it's not that we don't know what was good about it. But we also know what didn't work.

Some of the feedback is certainly valid and we are going to use that to make informed decisions in the GNOME3 cycle - remember we've only had one release so far. In couple of the talks we pointed out that it took us eight, nine years to get to where GNOME2 ended up and we've had like four months of GNOME3. So there are plenty of things we still have to do. There are a lot of holes in our story. People will look at some things and say "Why is this there? Does this really make sense?". And in many cases that's because we didn't get to really finish that off. And that will start to fill in, the story will become a little bit more complete as we go through this cycle. I'm not saying that all this people will be completely convinced and that's unfortunate but I think over time people will realize what we are doing has been at least thought through.

KDE (4, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122846)

he is convinced that KDE and Ubuntu are actually different operating systems

Um... last I heard KDE is not an operating system.

Re:KDE (4, Informative)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122878)

Had to check TFA to see if he was on about apps as in applications, or apps as that mobile marketing bullshit dejour.

It was the latter.

Re:KDE (1)

DShard (159067) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123240)

He also says touch is the most important outstanding feature. How they can say gnome 3 isn't a tablet UI with a straight face is beyond me. I just love that they decided to fork and drop the desktop portion of their desktop environment and expect people not to call them out on it.

Spelling Nazi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123312)

du jour meaning "of the day" in French.

Re:KDE (2, Insightful)

Locutus (9039) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122910)

A big WTF came out when I read that line too. then I figured it out. Given that this guy is a/the "GNOME 3 Designer" and he does not know the difference between Ubuntu and KDE, this explains why GNOME 3 sucks so badly.

LoB

Re:KDE (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122984)

The statement that he's convinced that they are should tell you all you need to know: he's a nutcase that just doesn't get computers.

Re:KDE (5, Insightful)

SlashdotOgre (739181) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123076)

Well the actual quote was, "I really think from an end-user perspective and a third-party-developer perspective GNOME and KDE are different operating systems. As much as MeeGo is a different operating system," and to an extent I can see his point from a end-user perspective. Obviously the underpinnings are the same, but for non-technical users who only use the GUI and never see/care what's below,l it's a significantly different experience. Especially with how Gnome and KDE these days even handle interacting with hardware slightly differently (e.g. GVFS v.s. KIO).

For example my wife currently runs Gnome 2.32 on Gentoo (which I maintain). Switching her to KDE would be a much more significant change than say switching to a different disto running Gnome 2.32. I know this to be the case because I originally had her running Ubuntu before we were married, and the switch to Gentoo (but maintaining Gnome) was painless for her.

Re:KDE (1)

vikisonline (1917814) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123202)

Off topic but. You just didn't want to put the time into configuring her kernel before you were sure and married her? LOL! Thats awesome.

Re:KDE (0, Redundant)

crutchy (1949900) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123676)

Occasionally I get to configure my wife's kernel but I have to be a bit careful it doesn't accidentally spawn a child process.

Re:KDE (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124156)

The beauty of open source though is that you can have many contributors of the source, you are never quite sure who it ultimately belongs to...

Re:KDE (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123092)

but it's just what the user sees that matters to the user.
if they had same configuration menus on both or maybe codebase that would generate it to work with both sets, it wouldn't seem so much like so. but the design people don't work like that, so the ui kit becomes more than the ui kit.

personally i just hate gtk+.

(the linked interview is just general level blah blah blah blah blah by the way, he could have given that same interview about gnome2)

Re:KDE (1)

MurukeshM (1901690) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123156)

But I really think from an end-user perspective and a third-party-developer perspective GNOME and KDE are different operating systems. As much as MeeGo is a different operating system.

Moronic summary. Last I heard, Ubuntu != GNOME != OS != KDE.

Quote: "GNOME and KDE are different OSes" (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123162)

The actual quotation from the article is "from an end-user perspective and a third-party-developer perspective GNOME and KDE are different operating systems." The GNOME platform is as different from the KDE platform as it is from, say, the Wine platform. All three are toolkits that run on top of X11/*n?x.

Re:Quote: "GNOME and KDE are different OSes" (1)

Rob Y. (110975) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123712)

The problem is that people want (and need) to be able to run apps from these different 'OS's' simultaneously. And it can be done, of course - as you said, they're just toolkits on top of X11 on top of Linux. But all the aspects of apps that need to work together are out of sync. I don't care how your preferred launcher and window manager look (after all, that's all GNOME 3 is), but I do care that they at least attempt to conform to some 'linux desktop' standards so that all kinds of apps can behave as similarly as possible, regardless of your choice of launcher and window manager. That is, if you chose to run under KDE, you get a KDE file dialog in your GNOME apps, and your GNOME apps can embed previews in the KDE file manager (and vice versa). There's no technical reason that can't be done, if it were a high priority for all the players. But statements like "from an end-user perspective and a third-party-developer perspective GNOME and KDE are different operating systems." treat toolkit coexistence as unnecessary, and perhaps not even desirable. And that's why Linux will never get 3rd party apps.

That's a good sign (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124008)

It appears it's not meant to be taken literally, as in "different kettle of fish" or "horse of a different colour".

Re:KDE (1)

obi (118631) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123212)

Read it in the context of "Gnome OS" which was mentioned in the interview. He knows it's not an OS on its own, but he places it (KDE+linux, implied) on the same level as WebOS, Android, MeeGo, etc.

Re:KDE (2)

Rob Y. (110975) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123866)

Well then he may as well give up right now. If Gnome OS is on the same level as Android (i.e. a 'mobile' OS that runs apps specifically targeted to it), then it's gonna fail. Android has already won that battle, and for good reason. There are tens of thousands of developers who have chosen to target Android, and the network effects have already kicked in. Android ABI's are (mostly) backward compatible, so it's posible to actually release binaries that work on most Android devices. And speaking of Android devices, the hardware vendors make sure everything works.

Gnome (and KDE) still work on traditional PC's and netbooks - I still use them. If they understood why Android is successfull, and worked better together, they may have achieved that kind of success already in their hardware niches. Hell, this stuff's open source, how come there's no community building custom Gnome OS ROMs for, say, the Nook Color? Because it won't work well there. But, hey, they're all scratching their itches, and I guess I'll piggyback on top of them as long as I can still get a PC with drivers for my hardware. But they're not making it any easier for the Linux boosters inside nVidia, Adobe, etc to make their case to their management.

Re:KDE (2)

crutchy (1949900) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123622)

Technically and traditionally KDE isn't an operating system, but the traditional "operating system" was termed during a time when window managers weren't even thought of. No individual part of a Linux distro (such as kernel, x server, window manager) is really an operating system on its own any more because of the open and modular nature of the unix philosophy (different for Windows because of the MS all-or-none policy). Tthe Linux kernel may operate computer hardware, but its just the lowest level that controls the cpu and allows other programs and drivers to run. I think the new operating system as far as the rest of the world outside slashdot is concerned is becoming what the user operates, not what operates the hardware.

Re:KDE (1)

wozzinator (1079319) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123756)

It came from the summarizer who wrote a bad summary about TFA. The GNOME designer himself is not the idiot in this case.

More time? (3, Insightful)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122860)

"There's always things when you look back that you wish you would have had a little more time to finish or polish."

Why does an open-source project have a deadline?? The point of open-source is that _you_ as a developer decide when it is ready, not customers/shareholders/marketing dictating your release schedule.

I work on a open source project. If a feature takes a year to do, we take the time to do it right, rather then hack something up that "works now", but needs to be re-written later.

What am I missing??

Re:More time? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122882)

You're missing: open-source != no-deadline.
But I do agree with you, to some level, that it would be better to take some more time to make something better.

Re:More time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122926)

What am I missing??

That excuses need to be made for poor decisions. Open source does not guarantee good management (in fact, in my experience, mostly the opposite). The good people acknowledge their mistakes, learn from them and do better next time. The not-so-good people make excuses.

Re:More time? (4, Insightful)

webheaded (997188) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122932)

The openness of the source has absolutely nothing to do with this at all. I don't even get why you're saying that. Redhat is open source and they are anything but this. There are plenty of examples of open source COMPANIES. Not every OSS developer is some kid in his mom's basement like some people seem to think. Some of them actually do have deadlines.

Re:More time? (0)

Jimbookis (517778) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123050)

"There's always things when you look back that you wish you would have had a little more time to finish or polish."

Well really, just how long does it take to polish a turd?

Re:More time? (1)

oldmac31310 (1845668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123188)

That sentence needs some serious polishing! 'There's always things...'. What kind of grammar is that? I won't even bother with the rest.

Re:More time? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123208)

Fuck you, nigger. Analyze that sentence.

Re:More time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123326)

was that really required?

If your platform falls behind (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123192)

The point of open-source is that _you_ as a developer decide when it is ready, not customers/shareholders/marketing dictating your release schedule.

If your free software or open source project is a platform, and your platform falls behind the competing platform, then third-party developers are more likely to develop for the competing platform, and your platform will be compatible with fewer and fewer maintained programs over time.

Re:More time? (1)

godrik (1287354) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123370)

I think you are missing that open source software are human that have personal goals. Sometimes, making a perfect open source software is not one of them. So you release what you have even if it is not perfect, and you move on with your life. (Which might involve a new open source projet or not.)

Re:More time? (1)

crutchy (1949900) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123888)

Re: "Why does an open-source project have a deadline??" ...because paying customers expect things in a timely manner (its actually required by law - you can't just accept payment based on an open-ended promise to deliver). Gnome is a product. Your open source project most likely isn't in the same league as Gnome. Re: "rather then hack something up that "works now", but needs to be re-written later". You haven't developed software in a commercial environment have you? Customer requirements ALWAYS change, so you ALWAYS have to re-write stuff. That's why the concept of "extreme programming" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_Programming or http://www.extremeprogramming.org/ [extremeprogramming.org] ) came about, which I use in my own work. You can spend all your budget planning the perfect product before you realise there is no such thing. Paying customers want results, and are quite happy to pay money for something that isn't perfect but does the job, and they will keep paying money to improve it gradually. If you ask for top dollar to build the perfect software, not only are you setting yourself up for failure, but when you can't deliver after spending your client's investment, you will deliver a half-baked perfect product which is likely to be riddled with bugs and will have to be rewritten anyway because it meets very few of the proposed "perfect software" objectives. Gnome is an evolving product, and given the huge demand for (and already existing user base of) smartphones running Android, it makes sense to me that they would put more effort into targeting that market. Who really cares what a bunch of slashdot whingers want? After all. those who want a better Gnome3 are welcome to fork it themselves.

Re:More time? (1)

crutchy (1949900) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123940)

before people get on their lunchboxes and tell me that gnome isn't a product, it is contributed in large part by commercial interests (redhat, canonical, etc), so it does form a significant visible part of the products offered by these companies. i'm stating the obvious, but there are a lot of slashdot users that are just that stupid.

Re:More time? (2)

DShard (159067) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124136)

Alas, it is too late for gnome to do anything in the tablet or hand held space. The market is huge, but the OS and stacks are well defined. If you doubt this, look no further than how windows phone 7, meego, RIM or webOS have done in the market. Gnome is never going to crack this nut. Anyone who believes it can is delusional.

Considering Red Hat and Novell are the employers of the developers and designers, I wonder how they convinced the Server OS vendors that a tablet interface was good FOR A SERVER. It just doesn't make any sense. Whoever manages these teams for either of those companies should be fired. They are clearly incompetent at explaining why the designer is confused about what pays his/her salary. What sort of workflow FOR A SERVER favors a single app per workspace?

As far a forking, there are plenty of DE that already have developers. Gnome isn't worth saving it from itself.

the past 15 years epitomized (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122868)

I call it "Microwave UI". It's what the past decade plus tendency in Mac OS X, in the Ruby on Rails framework, in Gnome 3 epitomized. Just pull the top off the can and microwave -- if there's anything to "configure" why isn't it that way in the can to begin with???

This design philosophy is simply wrong. The design philosophy, "put it all in the can", can only ever result in "Microwaved food from a can." Honestly, the only thing that is better than is nothing or the very worst chef.

Hitler (5, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122872)

...is still mad about Gnome 3. [youtube.com]

Re:Hitler (2)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122978)

This is bullshit. I'll configure everything back to how it was in GNOME 2.

Brilliant! Best Hitler reaction video yet.

Re:Hitler (4, Funny)

0racle (667029) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123236)

Totally agree with Hitler here.

Firefox release schedule (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123628)

Problem would go away with a Firefox release schedule. The old 7 year releases just do not add innovation enough. Just ask Asa Dolzter?

If we had a Firefox release schedule where every 6 - 8 weeks we have a complely new UI and to top it off ... a new API so all the scripts and preferences will need to be changed we would truly be 21st century modern. I mean Gnome 3 is sooo last April. Its August come on where is Gnome 7!

Re:Hitler (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124140)

Hilarious! Loved it. But, this video should have been made about kde4 which lost a lot of users.
And KDE is/was German.

Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122892)

"It's never nice to hear people ... offering their opinion very mean spirited. [We] don't want to ignore it. However: We do have to remain focused on what we are trying to accomplish."

OSX usage .... (2)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122908)

"You do see a lot of hackers using Mac OS X these days and I think that's a little bit unfortunate and probably there are many reasons why they do that, but that's not immediately what you might think of as a super hacker-focused OS."

Gee, you think people get tired of constantly tweaking this and that, fixing broken apps/models, relearning a UI, and just want shit to work as they get older, so they can work on other things? Go figure!

Re:OSX usage .... (1)

Jimbookis (517778) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122996)

>

Gee, you think people get tired of constantly tweaking this and that, fixing broken apps/models, relearning a UI, and just want shit to work as they get older, so they can work on other things? Go figure!

I agree. My i7 laptop came with Windows 7 and since I bought it I have stayed on Planet Windows having dicked around with KDE and Kubuntu for so long on my old PC. I think Aero uses the right amount of eye candy to make using a GUI nice and smooth without getting in the way with BS like wobbly windows. That said, with Firefox, putty, cygwin, mingw, winscp, TortoiseGit/SVN, etc etc etc all working very nicely for me in Win7 I am not compelled to boot into *buntu any more and deal with Gnome shit or KDE shit any more.

Re:OSX usage .... (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124050)

I switched to Windows 7 as well. I had a tendancy for Windows 7 due to Photoshop and Dreamweaver anyway which I want to learn. I saw the writting on the wall and watched the marketshare on gStat show Linux losing half the marketshare. Even Microsoft announced they won in their annual threat report announced on www.zdnet.com.

Linux looks uber cool but I am sick and tired of playing with it rather than doing work to get it just right. There is always something to do on it.

Windows 7 is nice and it is great to know if I hate Firefox and Chrome I have IE 9 as a backup. If I support PCs for a living it only makes sense for me to familiarize myself with the platform. I do miss somethings with Gnome 2 and Unix, but KDE 4 and Gnome 3 showed me the writting was on the wall.

Sadly OSX is not an option (5, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123138)

I am addicted to focus follows mouse and silly OSX can't handle that because of its insane menu (you would loose focus of the windows whose menu you are trying to reach, Unity has the same problem).

The real problem is that Gnome2 worked, yes it took a long time, yes it was not perfect either when it started but recently it became simply usable.

And suddenly almost every distro out there throws it all away for a new window manager that is not just incomplete but even downright buggy. What else do you call it when you have to kill processes for browsing windows/samba shares? Is that such a complex hardcore hacker task?

KDE ain't much better, open a file from the network and it will often try to copy it locally first before it can play. Very useful for large movie files I can tell you.

The alternatives? Not much better either. xfce seems determined to use 100% cpu power for showing its native cpu widget.... why bother writing code at all, just put a red picture on the taskbar and call it a day. Same result.

Gnome 3 should have been a side project and an optional desktop. Wanna play with it? Go ahead but if you don't, you don't see it. Ubuntu sorta allows this if you don't upgrade to the next big release but many small distro's just throw it in an update. And there you are, suddenly nothing works anymore and when you reboot you go "Oh shit".

It just ain't ready yet. It crashes randomly, misses functionality, forgets to suspend when a laptop is closed (which finally started to work perfectly and now they broken it again). This is a beta, no an alpha release. Why is everyone using it as their main desktop. Ubuntu and Fedora/Red hat. WHY? They didn't start to use Enlightenment a mere decade after its first alpha release? Why use Gnome 3 straight away?

I think there is a desperate wish for the year of the linux desktop. Fuck it, ain't gonna happen. Never. Why not? Because of this kinda crap. I have converted people to Ubuntu, it is easy, it works, it plays farmville and has no malware. Buttons the wrong side? Noobs don't care they literally just shrug their shoulders and click the other side of the window.

But the Ubuntu 11.01 upgrade? I converted them all back to a pirated windows system. I installed Ubuntu for them because I was fed up constantly supporting them, now I was going to explain to them Unity/Gnome3 instead with more bugginess and unwanted changes then Vista? Is there some opensource developers penis envy? MS can produce a desktop nobody wants, we want it too?

This weekend I will be installing an old ubuntu on my desktop (this is written from a windows game machine) having tried various releases. I have come to a conclusion. I am old. I did gentoo, I did linux from scratch, I made skins, I tweaked, I compiled. Now I just want a fucking simple desktop that just fucking stays the fucking same for longer then two seconds. I REALLY do not give a fuck WHERE the close buttons is but I expect my fucking laptop to fucking suspend when I fucking close it and NOT for this YEARS old GODDAMN issue to come back because some fuck face wants to do a touch desktop and then forgets to include touch because he has some jerkwad fantasy about Linux on some device.

Upset? YES.

Nerd rage? Abso-fucking-lutely.

The proof that Gnome 3 sucks? They had to kill off gnome 2. If they are so convinced 3 was going to be the hottest thing ever, then they could just have let gnome 2 running in low maintenance mode and given the people a choice. You only have to pull a new coke if you know people don't WANT your new crap so you are not giving them an option and hope the rage dies out before you do. Well, I am nerd, hear me roar!

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123362)

I'm with you 100 percent in all the facts and sentiments and rage.

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (1)

Ragondux (2034126) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123408)

You should try XFCE. I recently made the switch due to un-ending frustration with the new Ubuntu; it mostly looks the same as Gnome 2, or can be configured to, but it's more configurable, and its window manager is better than Metacity. And for some reason the bugs I attributed to my video driver must have been Metacity bugs, since they all disappeared.

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123502)

uh, that 100% cpu widget thing is fixed. xfce is nice, I dumped Ubuntu for Debian 6 with xfce. better than the Xubuntu, even.

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123590)

Just a few different points:

And suddenly almost every distro out there throws it all away for a new window manager that is not just incomplete but even downright buggy. What else do you call it when you have to kill processes for browsing windows/samba shares? Is that such a complex hardcore hacker task?

There are still a lot of distros which are using Gnome 2. Beyond Fedora I can't think of a widely-used distro that uses it by default yet

KDE ain't much better, open a file from the network and it will often try to copy it locally first before it can play. Very useful for large movie files I can tell you.

I have done that numerous times and never had that issue.

Why is everyone using it as their main desktop. Ubuntu and Fedora/Red hat.

Unity has Gnome underpinnings but it is not Gnome3.

But the Ubuntu 11.01 upgrade? I converted them all back to a pirated windows system. I installed Ubuntu for them because I was fed up constantly supporting them, now I was going to explain to them Unity/Gnome3 instead with more bugginess and unwanted changes then Vista? Is there some opensource developers penis envy? MS can produce a desktop nobody wants, we want it too? This weekend I will be installing an old ubuntu on my desktop (this is written from a windows game machine) having tried various releases. I have come to a conclusion. I am old. I did gentoo, I did linux from scratch, I made skins, I tweaked, I compiled. Now I just want a fucking simple desktop that just fucking stays the fucking same for longer then two seconds. I REALLY do not give a fuck WHERE the close buttons is but I expect my fucking laptop to fucking suspend when I fucking close it and NOT for this YEARS old GODDAMN issue to come back because some fuck face wants to do a touch desktop and then forgets to include touch because he has some jerkwad fantasy about Linux on some device.

If you didn't want to do support nor deal with tweaking why did you choose a normal-release Ubuntu, which is notorious for breaking things? Why not use Debian Stable or even Ubuntu LTS to start?

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123614)

I am addicted to focus follows mouse and silly OSX can't handle that because of its insane menu (you would loose focus of the windows whose menu you are trying to reach, Unity has the same problem).

For extra fun, try using a REALLY EXPENSIVE OSX setup. The sort with a mac pro and dual cinema displays. Have you any idea how bloody far it is from the bottom left corner to the menu bar? It is utterly silly and not very usable. I have no idea why someone would shell out for such an expensive setup when the user interface is utterly inadequate for dealing with it.

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124056)

I don't know how to explain this any better - I want GNU/Linux with Windows XP interface and behavior in terms of GUI.

Can I have it? Obviously not unless I completely write it myself. Would anybody want it except me?

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124072)

> But the Ubuntu 11.01 [sic] upgrade? I converted them all back
> to a pirated windows system.

you should have gone with xubuntu 10.04 FTW.

Re:Sadly OSX is not an option (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124178)

You had me up until loose.

Re:OSX usage .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123264)

Ah yes, OS X zealotry, world famous wankers, unbeatable. Back in the real world, the rest of us don't have UI issues. Strange that it's limited to OS X and the pathetic inconsistencies Apple force onto their customers. But don't worry, like the sheep you are, you put up with it because you are so incredibly insecure, anything resembling an Apple cock-up, you take personally. Don't worry, your HIV+ leader won't be around for long. Freedom isn't far away.

Re:OSX usage .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123582)

Don't worry, your HIV+ leader won't be around for long. Freedom isn't far away.

Did you ever see that episode of Southpark where they found the cure to HIV/AIDS?

It's simply money, lots of it. Unfortunately their "leader" has a lot of money too so he will be sticking around for some time.

Re:OSX usage .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124106)

...OS X is hacker-focused as long as you're not running it on genuine Apple hardware.

Wow, never knew McCann was so ghetto (4, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122940)

That part in the interview where he called the KDE designers a "bunch of punk-ass bitches" was a bit uncalled for, I think.

Re:Wow, never knew McCann was so ghetto (1)

RanCossack (1138431) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123004)

I actually RTFA to see if he said that.

<spoilers>Not in so many words...</spoilers>

Re:Wow, never knew McCann was so ghetto (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123078)

lol...same here. Brilliant method of getting people to RTFA.

Hmmm Gnome App, KDE OS like DE....True. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122948)

I hadnt thought of it this way before, but its true. I like gnome on my laptop because I pull up something to work on and thats it. On the other hand KDE on my desktop gives me a full suite of tools that I can use like a Swiss army knife. Context, shells, protocols, and the blessed single click and decent file management with KDE, an app at a time with Gnome.

Measure Twice Cut Once (1)

jimmerz28 (1928616) | more than 2 years ago | (#37122964)

At cursory glance I initially read "John McCain" and almost had an aneurism.

Re:Measure Twice Cut Once (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123402)

I initially read "John McCan't" .

bjd

Shutdown is preferred (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37122994)

But specifically for shutdown we do think that suspend should be encouraged. It is the easiest way to use your system.

Bullshit. Suspend was a dumb idea to start with, trying to replace poweroff with suspend is even dumber. If I'm done using my computer, I turn it off. If I'm not, I throw up xscreensaver and lock it. A computer is either on, or it isn't. Suspend is just a screensaver that takes ages to come back from. /rant

Re:Shutdown is preferred (1)

someSnarkyBastard (1521235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123650)

Actually, Suspend-to-RAM is damn useful for laptops, you can keep all your documents, windows, webpages, whatever up as you move from place to place and you don't have to wait for your computer to power up/down, it all just comes back instantly. For a minor powerhit on the batteries I consider that a more than satisfactory trade.

GNOME3 is missing the basic utilities. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123006)

As for which apps we do want to write in GNOME we have a list of about 6-10 that we consider a "different class of application" than core utils. Things that every computer needs to be able to do. Like managing photos, music and documents. So we want to write some of those basic utilities,

Straight from the horses mouth - GNOME 3 is missing things that "every computer needs to be able to do"

I'd like it to be able to manage my multiple screens without dying at boot. I'd like it to be able to manage my ati cards without that girly rainbow effect. I'd like it to be able to provide cpu/net/disk/sensor information in a panel.

Re:GNOME3 is missing the basic utilities. (1)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123088)

As for which apps we do want to write in GNOME we have a list of about 6-10 that we consider a "different class of application" than core utils. Things that every computer needs to be able to do. Like managing photos, music and documents. So we want to write some of those basic utilities,

As if no one up til now ever worked on GNOME applications to manage photos, music, and documents.

Oh wait, I forgot those were written by some guy who no longer bothers to waste his time with GNOME, and the API has changed twice in the meantime, so they have to be rewritten from scratch, only this time we'll do them right!

Re:GNOME3 is missing the basic utilities. (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123996)

Hell I want a minimize button. Good god even Grandmas using Windows 98 will be looking for this

Get rid of him. Pleeease. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123052)

Really ...whoever is in charge of gnome. Please, I beg you, get rid of this guy. Remove his commit rights. Reverse all the changes and design"improvements" he made in the latest version. The UI is absolutely horrific. Unusable.
I don't know anyone who likes it. Really.

So much wasted time... (4, Insightful)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123224)

I still find it utterly unreasonable to just scrap the Gnome 2 desktop. It was the most stable, "just works" DE for *nix, and they just threw all that work out for eye candy. I tried to like Gnome 3 but it feels more like a toy than KDE4 did when it came out. It makes me wonder how many thousands of development hours were just flushed down the toilet for this. I could understand it if they used Gnome2 as the foundation, and added to it, but they didn't.

Re:So much wasted time... (2)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123292)

On the bright side, Gnome 3 and Unity are some of the best things that could have happened to Xfce, LXDE and other competitors.

Re:So much wasted time... (4, Interesting)

Arker (91948) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123394)

I still find it utterly unreasonable to just scrap the Gnome 2 desktop. It was the most stable, "just works" DE for *nix, and they just threw all that work out for eye candy. I tried to like Gnome 3 but it feels more like a toy than KDE4 did when it came out. It makes me wonder how many thousands of development hours were just flushed down the toilet for this. I could understand it if they used Gnome2 as the foundation, and added to it, but they didn't.

I really got a chuckle out of this. A wise man said "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" and GNOME is posterchild for that saying. The GNOME 1.x series had a lot of potential and was starting to be really usable when they scratched it entirely in favour of GNOME2. It wasnt just that 2 was released in a very early unusable state, though that was true too - but deeper design level decisions consistently ensured that, even once the bugs were worked out and the project more finished, it would certainly never be useful for me. Sure, if I had forced myself to use it for all the intervening years I suppose I could have gotten used to it - the way people eventually get used to having leprosy or chronic excema. But why would I do that to myself, and why would anyone else? Even if you agreed with the design atrocities involved in GNOME2, surely seeing that transition should have warned you that they would just scrap it and make something even more monstrous once it started to get properly polished.

And now all you fools that stuck with them through 2, submitted to their control of your computer, taught yourself to work with their broken interface and even convinced yourself it was an improvement... now they tell you to get screwed and just break it all again. I laugh.

Re:So much wasted time... (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124120)

Look at my UID number. Do you honestly think I even used Gnome 1? I mean really. Not all of us got started in the 'good old days'. For me, Gnome 2 was the reason I finally started liking Linux. When I got started with Linux the popular DEs were Gnome 2, and KDE 3. So for me this is only the second time I've seen an enormous amount of work just flushed down the toilet. Now years later KDE is actually getting pretty good, but now here we are right back at square one with Gnome.

Now you can proceed to call me a n00b fool that doesn't know wtf I'm talking about anyway, and that I should just STFU and not have an opinion, because it's just free software. Right?

Technical solution to cultural problem (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123226)

From the article:

Photos were like the first to be cloud-enabled - if you will, Flickr and Picasa are enormously successful. And Documents are also increasingly cloud-hosted. Music was the latest, that was a sort of a hold-out because of a all sort of legal complications

Why would music be a hold-out? People could publish photos that they took on a web server and possibly distribute them under a license for free cultural works. (Case in point: Picasa and Flickr.) Likewise, people could publish songs that they wrote and performed on a web server and possibly distribute them under a license for free cultural works. (Case in point: the old MP3.com, and later Myspace.) Might the "legal complications" have something to do with a cultural preference for songs that established professionals in the music industry have written over songs that members of the general public have written? That says more about the lack of participatory culture [wikipedia.org] in the industrialized world than about any underlying technical problem.

Removing the file system (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123396)

is what it seems they want to do.

They want to give up on the idea of organizing your files as trees. Put all your files of one type into one "application" and then use a search engine or the "recent documents" feature whenever you want to open it again.

Lately, web browsers have been trying to replace the URL bar by a search engine. This was utterly stupid.
But what they want to go? It is way beyond that. It makes absolutely no sense. UNIX was built on the idea that the filesystem is the centre of the operating system. Clearly, they have forgotten that.

Another photo app, document app, music app?! (3, Interesting)

he-sk (103163) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123436)

Early in the interview he says that they need to write apps for "things that every computer needs to be able to do. Like managing photos, music and documents. So we want to write some of those basic utilities, that are more part of the OS than a third-party-application would be."

The only conclusion I can draw from such a statement is that the existing Gnome apps are crap. Why else reinvent the wheel?!

Re:Another photo app, document app, music app?! (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123466)

Why else reinvent the wheel?!

Otherwise they might have to actually, you know, fix some bugs.

Re:Another photo app, document app, music app?! (1)

Dracos (107777) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123606)

If these are the types of apps Gnome is focusing on, they clearly are chasing after a market that they don't have (and won't get anytime soon) while abandoning the market they do have.

Re:Another photo app, document app, music app?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123652)

Because the old wheels are round and don't fit into new Gnome's triangle holes.

Re:Another photo app, document app, music app?! (1)

stdarg (456557) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123746)

Being as charitable as I can, I'm thinking maybe he meant improvements to the file manager for photos music and docs. I seriously doubt they're trying to reinvent e.g. openoffice.

Perhaps it's more like the way file managers all handle thumbnails these days, and extending that to stuff like full-text search for documents, or "sounds like" search for music, etc. His comment about "basic utilities, that are more part of the OS than..." makes me think it's some non-ui stuff, like a framework for applications to plug into.

Gnome lost me when... (1)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123598)

they decided I didn't need to be able to tell the screensaver where my directory of slideshow images was... crap like that pi55ed me right off especially when the gnomescreensaver dude told us he wasn't going to fix it... Anyway... KDE 4 came and went... and now I'm happy with LXDE on Mint... no fscking plasma desktop memory leaks anymore... I can leave myself logged in for ages on the desktop and connect to same desktop from wherever I'm currently roaming...

Downright Nixonian... or totalitarian? (5, Insightful)

jejones (115979) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123608)

"Unfortunately on the internet - and in free software in particular - we have a lot of people whose voices aren't heard very loudly, and we have to take their needs into accounts as well as those who are vocal."

Go ahead and call them the "Silent Majority". You know you want to.

What really surprised me, though, was how he just came out and said you don't want to make it too easy to figure out how to change things, and that letting the user customize things is undesirable..."And I think there is a lot of value to have that experience you show the world to be consistent. In GNOME2 we didn't do that particularly well because everyone's desktop was different." I think that GNOME3 really carries through the premise of gnome-screensaver, another result of Mr. McCann's work--in it, the user is the enemy, and can't be trusted not to do something evil if you let him configure things, (Kind of like the justification for DRM, come to think of it.)

lost his way (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123684)

Open source projects and their developers are losing their way, ignoring user needs and input, going off on a tangent and off the cliff

No one bothers to fork bad wares, they're just left to die

Only one? (2)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 2 years ago | (#37123842)

Am I the only one who actually likes Gnome 3? I've been using KDE for years, but when I wiped my laptop a few months ago, I decided to give Gnome 3 a shot and I haven't gone back. I'm still using KDE on the desktop, but I will probably try Gnome 3 there too when I have the time.
I would like an quick way to switch between windows within an application though, Alt-Tab switches between applications and each application can be expanded for all the windows, but I would like a shortcut for switching between application windows.

Re:Only one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37123902)

I would like an quick way to switch between windows within an application though, Alt-Tab switches between applications and each application can be expanded for all the windows, but I would like a shortcut for switching between application windows.

Alt+[key above Tab]

For more shortcuts see:
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet

Re:Only one? (1)

coffee_bouzu (1037062) | more than 2 years ago | (#37124150)

I didn't care for GNOME shell at first but it's been growing on me as I use it more. The last remaining thing that I don't like are the huge buttons and menu headers on the windows. I think that it would be possible to hack in some changes for that but I haven't tried.

alt+` on a US keyboard layout (whatever the key above tab is for other layouts) switches between windows of the same application. There are some other good shortcuts in the GNOME shell cheat sheet [gnome.org] .

Re:Only one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124200)

Are you a RedHat employee? Certainly there must be some employees there whose desktops
must have been switched to Gnome3 (or else they would get fired).

A what? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124084)

Wait a second ... GNOME 3 has a designer?

Apple envy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37124092)

It always strikes me how obsessed some people in OSS seem to be about emulating everything that Apple does lately. File managers are a "pretty advanced interface"? It's like they couldn't quite get over the assault on their egos by all those grandaunts and Excel-using businessperson parents deriding their OSes as weird and overly complicated stuff for hackers and pimply teenagers because they couldn't start up Solitaire with one click.

I'd offer a generous donation for Apple to make McCann an offer he can't refuse. It would be a good riddance.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>