Beta

×

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

Thank you!

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

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

GNOME 3.2 Released

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the get-it-while-it's-hot dept.

GNOME 205

supersloshy writes "Today marks the release of the latest edition of the GNOME Desktop for Linux-based operating systems. There are numerous fixes and improvements in this release such as smaller title bars (for small screens), the integration of GNOME Contacts and GNOME Documents for easy data management, web application integration, many more configurable settings, and other updates such as a more unified appearance and better chat integration."

cancel ×

205 comments

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

For those of us who prefer a video (3, Informative)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 2 years ago | (#37545882)

Quick search reveals an 8 minute overview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnxvRr-3MSA [youtube.com]

Thought it might come in handy; TFA only contains a few shots.

I think overall it looks better, it's great. But there is still something about the icons that needs to be improved. Maybe too colorful? The shape? It becomes more apparent when compared to an OSX desktop (or other simpler desktops, if you like that kind of style)

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37545978)

there is still something about the icons that needs to be improved. Maybe too colorful? The shape?

As they say: "There is no accounting for taste".
That's what themes were invented for by the way ...

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (1)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546034)

And "pluggable" desktops, too :) That's the power of Linux!

I am/was a fan of fluxbox + gdesklets and that kind of mods. Most beautiful desktops I have ever customized :)

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (1)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546318)

I see no taskbar in that video...you need to zoom out to pick up windows in the same workspace?

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (0)

blai (1380673) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546368)

Yeah. If your left hand is free, you can also use alt+tab.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547234)

Sweet! For so long, I've suffered the inconvenience of clicking once on the taskbar. Now that tedious click is replaced by the much simpler (hold ALT)-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab [fuck, I missed it, keep going] -tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab(release ALT). This makes my life so much easier. What pure unadulterated genius. Thank you, oh GUIcrafters of Gnome. Your legendary names shall ring down the halls of history for all time.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (2)

jvrodrigues (866363) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547414)

Learn to (hold ALT)-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab [fuck, I missed it]-(hold SHIFT too)-tab

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546624)

I see no taskbar in that video...you need to zoom out to pick up windows in the same workspace?

But it's so much cooler than just clicking on the taskbar.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (2)

HJED (1304957) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547316)

Avant Window Navigator, work very well as a taskbar for GNOME. I strongly suggest you try it if you are using GNOME 3.x. It's described as a 'dock', but it is easy to setup like a taskbar.
I have to agree with you though, I find a desktop environment close to unusable without a task bar.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (2)

gehrehmee (16338) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549158)

You can have a task with an extension if you really want one.

That said, you really have to try the overview-style. Whack the windows-key, and you very quickly have almost the entire screen used to select windows, meaning you can see which one you're interested very easily and go to it. It takes some getting used to.... but the added bonus of the zoom-out view being live updates means you get the ability to monitor many windows simultaneously for interesting updates, without needing to throw in a different user-interface to clutter things up.

Try it.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (1)

mfearby (1653) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548266)

That video just demonstrates why I'm sticking with 2.30.2. No traditional taskbar method of switching between applications is a deal breaker. Oh, and that video seems to be 20% visits to "Help > About" windows... quite boring indeed!

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37549334)

That video just demonstrates why I'm sticking with 2.30.2. No traditional taskbar method of switching between applications is a deal breaker. Oh, and that video seems to be 20% visits to "Help > About" windows... quite boring indeed!

Taskbar is a microsoft relic. In gome, that always only was an optional applet. The first thing i do with a new install is removing it. Even microsoft is moving away from that useless and so ugly taskbar.

Also, the video so something picture can't; motion. It give a better idea of the look and feel. In that regard, i find the first few seconds to be helpful. Nobody force you to watch it.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37549436)

No one gives a fuck. Linsux is for faggots who can't afford a real computer. At least if you used some shit like Winblows you wouldn't get accused of being a smelly ass hippy fuck.

Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#37545938)

And, of course, user-defined window manager. Seriously, how do those people expect anyone to use this?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (0)

Marc_Hawke (130338) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546062)

Isn't Gnome the window manager already? So picking Gnome is the user defining the window manager? Or did you mean something else?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546284)

Gnome is a desktop environment, of which a window manager is only a small part.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (4, Insightful)

DShard (159067) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546686)

Gnome is a tablet environment. Without the touch.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546550)

OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)

In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547044)

forking hell, its complicated!

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547258)

A bit, yes. That's one of the prices of modularity - one of the chief benefits in turn being that you can (for the most part) swap parts out at will.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

Smallpond (221300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548914)

OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)

In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.

Incorrect. Metacity was the Window manager in Gnome 2. In Gnome 3 the developers just stabs you in the eye. Can you tell I switched to KDE?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549114)

Hmm. Metacity -> Metastasize. Interesting how close they are, no?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546084)

Where the hell is proper grammar? And, of course, coherent thought. Seriously, how do you expect us to understand you?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

sarhjinian (94086) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546350)

If you need a user-defined window manager there are lots of other DEs out there since you probably won't use GNOME3 anyway. It's a design decision, and not a bad one when you consider where GNOME is trying to go. Mutter isn't awesome or Compiz, but it does what it needs to do well.

On that note, Mutter is the *first* compositing WM I've seen that didn't cause video tearing on nVidia. I've been jacking with Compiz/nvidia-settings for years and I still see tearing, and KWin is only a little better. Mutter got this in one go.

All in all, GNOME3 works well for me. I find myself slapping the Windows/Super key in Win7 all the time to switch between open windows. I'd personally like to see them dump the hard requirement for Evolution, and it's such a shame that there's no polished Ubuntu derivative with it (I find myself typing aptitude search ____ on Fedora all the time, and yumex doesn't hold a candle to Synaptic let alone Ubuntu Software Centre).

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546598)

Have you tried apt on Fedora?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546700)

I tried, but Fedora would always crash before I finished typing out the comm

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (1)

daemonc (145175) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546578)

Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

The same place it's been since 3.0 was first released: choose the "GNOME Classic" session when logging in.

Where the hell have you been?

And some people rejoice (0)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37545942)

GNOME has lost some steam over the time.
From 2001 - 2010 when Microsoft was stuck with XP (dont count vista it was an early beta for windows 7) GNOME had a wonderful opportunity to surpass Windows with a good set of new UI functions. But it laggard and let Apple come up and take the place.

Re:And some people rejoice (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546352)

Apple didn't get ahead by being a better desktop though, they've got ahead through "synergy"/halo effect with iPod/iPhone/iTunes. So much so that my flatmate who loves his iDevices has been considering buying an iMac despite not wanting to touch any other OS than Windows in the past..

Re:And some people rejoice (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547032)

Mac OS X has the most terrible UI in the world.

The GNOME 2.x UI is pretty decent though.
GNOME 3 looks like GNOME for tablets.

Re:And some people rejoice (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549594)

I agree that it is a terrible for you and me however not for the general public. If you think about it from a typical users perspective where they don't interact much with the OS, all their programs are available at the bottom of the screen. That's very convenient for them compared to other DEs where applications are hidden within menus.

Most users simply want to use their programs for some simple basic computing and that's why OSX is in some ways a good UI for their target market. I don't think the same holds true for linux. We don't want to sacrifice ability for simplicity hence why the UIs are typically more complicated.

GNOME sucks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546120)

See title.

Re:GNOME sucks (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546872)

Well, that's what Linus says about gnome 3 anyway.

Multiple Monitor Support? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546224)

Have there been any fixes to how it handles multiple desktop setups? I've been using Gnome 3 for a while and applications like libreOffice still show the splash screen split across both, and the second monitor limited to a 'sticky' surface common to every desktop is irritating.

It would be really nice if the second desktop darkened like the primary in the overview, displayed a similar thumbnail view as the primary but on the left side (when the secondary monitor is on the right it would look cool, and when its on the right it wouldn't be pixels away from the app launcher), and if the 'sticky' functionality was preserved with a second button displayed as an overlay like the close button is.

Re:Multiple Monitor Support? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546546)

If you unset /desktop/gnome/shell/windows/workspaces_only_on_primary in gconf-editor, you get multiple workspaces on the second monitor too (but not the thumbnail view IIRC).

I don't understand... more configurable settings?! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546264)

Last I heard, configurable settings were bad -- they scare, confuse, and intimidate users, and they open the possibility that someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong, which is antithetical to the GNOME way.

Seriously, is this a new direction? Did they make a public announcement or something? Or is this just a one-time concession to reduce the GNOME 3 backlash, perhaps as an experiment so 3.4 can replace all the new options with a selector amongst the most popular configuration for each of desktop|netbook|tablet?

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546412)

Last I heard, configurable settings were bad -- they scare, confuse, and intimidate users, and they open the possibility that someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong, which is antithetical to the GNOME way.

Seriously, is this a new direction? Did they make a public announcement or something? Or is this just a one-time concession to reduce the GNOME 3 backlash, perhaps as an experiment so 3.4 can replace all the new options with a selector amongst the most popular configuration for each of desktop|netbook|tablet?

Its a bait and switch approach. They did it during the 1.x era and then again during the 2.x era.
There is not going to be a 3rd time. Ditch gnome. The whole project has jumped the shark, all they they care about are non existant users.

Go away, geezers (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547384)

Its a bait and switch approach. They did it during the 1.x era and then again during the 2.x era.
There is not going to be a 3rd time. Ditch gnome. The whole project has jumped the shark, all they they care about are non existant users.

GNOME is the only major Linux desktop for which all of the following points are true.

  o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord
  o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns
  o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

KDE fails the non-geek user test - it's both obtuse and verbose. XFCE is like a crappy, featureless GNOME 2/Windows mashup with a hint of SharpE. GNOME 2 is like a weird Windows/OS X mashup - functional, but nothing new there. Unity is slick and crufty at the same time (quite the feat), and its direction is dictated by Canonical. Blackbox, Fvwm et al aren't desktop environments.

All you people criticizing GNOME 3 are doing exactly what your parents did when you tried to get them to use Linux years ago - holding on to what you know, fighting change, refusing to let old habits die or to see the good in a *different* way of working.

The GNOME team is actually trying something new, and that seems rare in the open source world. With the amount of vitriol being thrown at GNOME's developers, it's not really surprising that we seem doomed to keep cloning commercial software so that we can have it for free or tweak it for our piddling little edge-case requirements.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

Re:Go away, geezers (0)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547412)

it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

Most people don't want 'bleeding-edge', they want something that works. If you're pushing something new, then we want something that's, you know, better than what we already have.

When the best thing most Gnome fanboys can say is 'yeah, I know that starting an application from the UI sucks but if you press CTRL+ALT+SYSREQ+BACKSPACE+G and type the name of the application then it's much faster' you know that it's neither of those things.

it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

Gnome 2, yes. Gnome 3 is a tablet UI being pushed onto a desktop mostly used by technical users. It's a disaster even worse than Mozilla's random version upgrades.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

Presumably that includes Linus Torvalds, who's already publically abandoned Gnome because Gnome 3 sucks so bad?

Re:Go away, geezers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547650)

Most people don't want 'bleeding-edge', they want something that works. If you're pushing something new, then we want something that's, you know, better than what we already have.

Basically, what you're saying is that if you had panels in 2.x, you expect panels in EVERY FUTURE GNOME RELEASE and ANYTHING ELSE IS BROKEN.

You're pathetic; you're either indignant because your video card is 10 years old and can't handle GNOME 3's graphics, or you've never actually used it for more than a day. Besides, GNOME 3's classic desktop should serve you well, so your point is moot.

Remember "Better for YOU" does not necessarily mean "Better for everybody." Welcome to the minority.

When the best thing most Gnome fanboys can say is 'yeah, I know that starting an application from the UI sucks but if you press CTRL+ALT+SYSREQ+BACKSPACE+G and type the name of the application then it's much faster' you know that it's neither of those things.

Bumping the mouse in a hot corner and clicking an icon to launch an app is not any harder than picking an app from the GNOME 2 applications menu.

Typing <WIN>te<ENTER> to launch a terminal is way faster. Reminds me of VIM.

it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

Gnome 2, yes. Gnome 3 is a tablet UI being pushed onto a desktop mostly used by technical users. It's a disaster even worse than Mozilla's random version upgrades.

GNOME 3 works great on the desktop. I can use the mouse *less*, which is way faster. It also works great on touch panels. Far from a disaster; it's good design. It's just not what you're used to, Mr. MoreOfTheSamePlease.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

Presumably that includes Linus Torvalds, who's already publically abandoned Gnome because Gnome 3 sucks so bad?

All respect to Linus, he's definitely an old-guard thinker in this. Desktop UIs are not his thing. He's put his foot in his mouth many times over.

Ohh, I get it... you're a follower, parroting your heroes' talking points, shaping your preferences to what you believe they would approve of, in case you ever manage to do anything so noteworthy as to prompt them to take notice of your existence.

Guess what? I respect Lennart too, and I think PulseAudio and systemd are fantastic. That should prompt a few more flames from random losers.

Re:Go away, geezers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547870)

Word. While I'm very happy with my fully supported (in Debian 6) Gnome 2 desktop for the time being, I happily await a nice and mature Gnome 3 as will be delivered by Debian 7. Long live Gnome!

Mod parent up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37548392)

Opinion is unpopular, but largely correct. And the sarcasm is hilarious.

Re:Go away, geezers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37549010)

Har, I see Bassi has learned not to post under his own slashdot id. Pathetic

Re:Go away, geezers (2)

lee1 (219161) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548114)

Can someone explain to me, preferably by giving me a link to an excellent write-up, why Gnome or any other desktop environment would be better than what I have been happy with for five years now - the dwm window manager with no desktop environment at all? For example, I can start a GUI application by typing alt-p and hitting the first letters of any executable; I don't seem to need any task bars or icons; I can move windows around at will and tile them in different ways without taking my hands away from the keyboard. And my old Thinkpad x31 seems plenty snappy, for some reason. I'm sure there are some real advantages to using a desktop environment that I'm just not getting, so please educate me.

Simple (2)

neiras (723124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549374)

I'm sure there are some real advantages to using a desktop environment that I'm just not getting, so please educate me.

No problem. The advantages:

  - Applications written for a DE are better integrated with each other.
  - Apps written for a DE tend to use the same toolkits and work in predictable ways.
  - Desktop environments tend to have collections of blessed applications. Less hunting.
  - Desktop environments tend to have communities filled with like-minded people.
  - DEs are installed by major Linux distros, providing a standard interface.
  - Commercial support is available for some DEs.

It all comes down to convenience. Sure, I used to fuck around with Enlightenment and Blackbox and fvwm. Then one day I realized that powerful computers were cheap, and my time ought to be expensive. So I installed GNOME and never looked back.

No disrespect - you can choose whatever you want to use, or whatever your hardware can support. But you're outnumbered by people like me.

I do miss Blackbox though.

Re:Go away, geezers (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547684)

o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord

What is Red Hat again?

o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

So you like being treated like a Guinea Pig??

o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

non-geeks already have choosen the apple or microsoft way, because these have something gnome 3.2 still doesn't have: IT WORKS and the desktop IS INVISIBLE (Read: designed to help you, not get in your way)

KDE fails the non-geek user test - it's both obtuse and verbose.

True

XFCE is like a crappy, featureless GNOME 2/Windows mashup with a hint of SharpE.

Is minimalist, true, but at least you look at this and you already know where to go from it.

GNOME 2 is like a weird Windows/OS X mashup - functional, but nothing new there.

And that's was their beauty: It was _FUNCTIONAL_, and at the same time, well balanced for non-geeks users.

Unity is slick and crufty at the same time (quite the feat), and its direction is dictated by Canonical.

But is still more functional than gnome-shell and quite clear for non-geeks users. Probably is what gnome shell should 've been instead of the crap nowadays is.

Blackbox, Fvwm et al aren't desktop environments.

They are, but they are minimalist and require the user be a true geek to configure them to the user liking.

All you people criticizing GNOME 3 are doing exactly what your parents did when you tried to get them to use Linux years ago - holding on to what you know, fighting change, refusing to let old habits die or to see the good in a *different* way of working.

When the 9X% of your users says something is wrong, then something must be wrong... The problem is that the Gnome guys aren't known to hear anyone that don't praise their viewpoint of things. Kinda Ulrich Dreppers but more polite.

The GNOME team is actually trying something new, and that seems rare in the open source world. With the amount of vitriol being thrown at GNOME's developers, it's not really surprising that we seem doomed to keep cloning commercial software so that we can have it for free or tweak it for our piddling little edge-case requirements.

Then again, is not something _NEW_ they are doing, what these guys are trying to do is pushing the "smartphone" paradigm onto PC's. That is. Their ideas are not new: they were invented some years ago and introduced with the iphone. The problem is that our PC's aren't I-devices, but i think they don't want to hear that.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

So you're and oldfag huh? well... I'm not that old, but at least i know the difference between a phone, a computer and a console.... I think that's way more than the gnome guys know about these nowadays... and maybe neither you, given what you wrote.

Re:Go away, geezers (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37548208)

o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord

What is Red Hat again?

One of several corporate sponsors. Unity has *one*. That's bad.

o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

So you like being treated like a Guinea Pig??

I'm not being treated like anything, loser. I put the effort in, learned about what GNOME 3 was trying to do, altered my working patterns to give it a fair shake, and now I don't want to go back. I finally have a desktop that surpasses Windows and Mac OSX, and it's open source! Phenomenal.

And for new non-technical users without an established workflow, it'll be even easier to make the transition.

You don't have to like GNOME 3, but you're missing out. And the least you can do is show some respect for a project that is pushing the envelope FOR USERS.

o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

non-geeks already have choosen the apple or microsoft way, because these have something gnome 3.2 still doesn't have: IT WORKS and the desktop IS INVISIBLE (Read: designed to help you, not get in your way)

My god, you truly are thick. GNOME 3 and 3.2 work, very well. No one can plausibly deny that. The only thing you can say is that they don't work for YOU, which would be significantly less offensive and misleading. Not to mention more honest.

GNOME *is* designed to help you and is as invisible as a desktop can get without being non-existent. It does ask you to change your workflow. It's worth the effort.

Non-geeks haven't really chosen anything beyond a brand identity. They just pick one of two widely available commercial platforms, usually based on their financial ability - the rich poser sheep choose macs, the poor non-technical scroungers get Windows 'cause that's what came on their Dell.

We want them to choose open platforms; that means we need to be both DIFFERENT and BETTER. GNOME 3 is the only desktop project moving that way.

When the 9X% of your users says something is wrong, then something must be wrong... The problem is that the Gnome guys aren't known to hear anyone that don't praise their viewpoint of things. Kinda Ulrich Dreppers but more polite.

The thing is, 9X% of users don't say that. Just a few bitter loud-mouths with invalid arguments. You people and your fresh-from-the-ass statistics. The GNOME guys respect debate among CONTRIBUTORS, not armchair critics parroting talking points (like you).

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

So you're and oldfag huh? well... I'm not that old, but at least i know the difference between a phone, a computer and a console.... I think that's way more than the gnome guys know about these nowadays... and maybe neither you, given what you wrote.

I understand now! You're a 17-year-old /b/ tard! Go back to trolling 4chan and running LOIC. You "knowing the difference" between existing platforms now means nothing. Stand back and watch people with actual skills DEFINE the way future platforms will look and act.

Never fear, they'll make things nice and easy to use for smug, self-important people like you.

Re:Go away, geezers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547736)

Just because they are doing something new doesn't.mean it's something good.

Re:Go away, geezers (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549030)

Not fighting Gnome, here. I'm just abandoning it. Why, you ask? Well - among my machines, I have an Athlon 5300+ with 4 gig of memory installed. As time passes, that memory usage tends to go up, but it was more than adequate until I finally tried a distro with Gnome3. I've already posted this in another discussion, but here goes again.

Sabayon Linux version 5 and 6. Grab the CD/DVD's and do an installation with each. You want Sabayon 5 Gnome, Sabayon 6 Gnome, and Sabayon 6 Enlightenment.

Sabayon 5, which uses Gnome 2 runs comfortably under moderately heavy multitasking.

Sabayon 6, with Gnome 3, running the same apps, will quickly run out of memory, and start using swap file.

Sabayon 6 with Enlightenment uses about 2/3 the resources that Sabayon 5 with Gnome uses.

Since doing that little experiment, I've added another 4 gig of memory to that computer - but I have to ask myself why do I want to allow Gnome to use all that memory? I'd rather keep it for myself, and whatever I decide to do with it. As a side experiment, I decided to do a little "gold farming" on a popular MMORPG. With Gnome 3, I was able to keep two clients up and running reliably. With Gnome 2, I can keep 4 clients up and running for - uhhhmm - I forget how long exactly, about 40 hours, I think it was. I meant to add a couple more clients, to see how far I could go with it, but never got around to creating the accounts. Maybe I'll revisit that little experiment, then try it again with Enlightenment.

One of Linux' strongest suits has always been it's ability to run on old, legacy hardware. If Gnome is this resource hungry, then it is clearly NOT going to be running on legacy hardware. In fact, it's not going to be running on modern budget hardware! Yeah, I know, 8 gig of RAM only costs about $150 to $200 these days. But, there are millions of people who either can't afford that much, or they don't understand the wisdom of loading up with RAM. Gnome simply isn't going to cut it on budget hardware.

Re:Go away, geezers (1)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549346)

Although I do like the functionality of Gnome 2.x and have been a long-time Gnome user, I recently switched my Linux boxen to LXDE (Fedora and Lubuntu).

LXDE is fast and configurable.

Re:Go away, geezers (1)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549208)

ahh yes.. you're the geezer stereotype that clings to every new thing that comes along without any balance or perspective for critical analysis because he's so desperately trying to stay socially relevant.

the whole ipad on pc trend is shit..plain and simple.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546452)

Last I heard, configurable settings were bad

Someone lied to you or you misheard. Go read the original article by Havoc Pennington.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548292)

Someone lied to you or you misheard. Go read the original article by Havoc Pennington.

You don't read what someone writes, you look at their actions. The behaviour of the Gnome project over the years says otherwise.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547424)

someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong

Last I understood that's kinda the point of a *NIX system, the fact that you have so much control.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547740)

Way to miss the blatantly obvious sarcasm.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547804)

Eh... As of late the ACs have seemed to be even more stupid than usual so I thought OP was serious...

Login screen? (1)

tirnacopu (732831) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546274)

I don't get this. Why was work and detailing involved in such a feature? Was I able to login before? Yes. Am I still able to login? Hope so, unless they botched something.
3 years ago, I had to patch and rebuild GDM to allow fingerprint authentication, with code from an IBM developer (awfully sorry for not remembering the name). Today - do I have fingerprint by default? Hell no, but it is "integrated with the rest of the user experience". Quite disappointing.

Re:Login screen? (1)

neiras (723124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547404)

Today - do I have fingerprint by default? Hell no, but it is "integrated with the rest of the user experience". Quite disappointing.

Fedora 15 has fingerprint authentication by default, and I've had it for years with a bit of work (fingerprint readers weren't so common 6 years ago). This kind of integration is usually a distro-specific thing.

Gubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546440)

If only one day we could get a solid install of this on Debian/Ubuntu. Debian seems reluctant to go beyond Gnome 2.3. Ubuntu main is off playing in Unity land and despite offering Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Lubuntu, Gnome has simply disappeared as a supported official platform.

I played a bit with Gnome 3.0's ppa, and despite essentially destroying my Linux install and being horribly glitchy with my ATI card, I quite liked where the interface was going. It reminded me very much of my experience with WebOS - just start typing for whatever you want. Get rid of all of the stupid buttons you don't really need. It is a big paradigm change, but it seems they actually thought through it.

Re:Gubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546506)

why "typing" when "point and click exist"??

Seriously, any desktop manager that requires doing so, should be considered a failure.

Oh wait! this is linux...

Re:Gubuntu (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546656)

Oh wait! this is linux...

Linus said that Gnome 3 sucks and he's switching to a sane UI. So don't blame him.

Re:Gubuntu (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546888)

So don't blame him.

I didn't know Torvalds was on the gnome development team.

Re:Gubuntu (1)

rasmusbr (2186518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546666)

...I quite liked where the interface was going. It reminded me very much of my experience with WebOS - just start typing for whatever you want. Get rid of all of the stupid buttons you don't really need. It is a big paradigm change, but it seems they actually thought through it.

Yeah, I like where it's supposedly going, but that's nothing new and it's not nearly there yet.

My Gnome 2 desktop has worked like that for years thanks to applications like Gnome Do. Gnome 3 is nowhere near Gnome Do in ease of use or features. Especially not in ease of use since it doesn't learn which applications I open the most. With Gnome Do I can just hit Super T and get a terminal running. Someone who doesn't use the terminal might hit Super T and get the text editor. In Gnome 3 the application that opens when you type Super T is set in stone.

Gnome 3 seems to me like a promising tech demo that needs a couple of more years of work before it's ready for general use.

Re:Gubuntu (2)

aix tom (902140) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546804)

"Just start typing for whatever you want?"

That's what I have been doing in my little terminal window for 15 years already with tab completion.

It pretty much seems Gnome is trying to combine the shortfalls from the command line with the shortfalls of the GUI. Make a GUI that is supposedly "optimized for touch" and then you have to "type" to get to stuff?

Good thing I already fled to LXDE.

Re:Gubuntu (1)

HJED (1304957) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547354)

I'm running GNOME 3 on ubuntu using the ppa and it feels very stable. However the lack of a taskbar is annoying (I had to install one).

Re:Gubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37548984)

if you have to add a search bar for your dialogs, you've failed in the basic point of having them.

Gnome is ambivalent in design (1)

ripdajacker (1167101) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546466)

The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.

KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546544)

The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.

KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.

This is all that is wrong with KDE and Gnome projects. Trying to rip off OSX or Windows.
Why don't they embrace 100% the unix/linux philosophy. No mainstream application (except for Gimp) nowadays uses multiple windows on linux (why ? because of trying to copy Windows).
No shit, they even want to do away with focus follows mouse.
Damn, if I wanted the windows or osx experience I would be using a damn windows pc or a mac.
Can't we throw away these designers in a fire and get some people that know what they're doing ?

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547430)

Or just stop supporting gnome/kde.....

personally I'd love to see xfce/flux and all the others get more attention (hell, if anything xfce4 is more like gnome2 or kde3 than gnome3 and kde4 are, so this would be the perfect time for people to jump over). It's amazing how the major distros got so focused on using nothing but gnome or kde that even when the majority of users don't like it they keep on using it....

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547470)

GNOME 3 is not like Windows or OSX... here is a project using their own ideas and doing something new, and everyone complains about it not being enough like the old Windows-like versions. WTH?

And for the parent's-parent poster... merging KDE and GNOME is a terrible idea. If you think both projects are bad, why would you think getting both groups together would be a good idea? You obviously don't care for any of their ideas, so what makes you think you'll like what they create together?

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design (1)

zixxt (1547061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547562)

The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.

KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.

I find KDE 4.7.1 to be quite stable and IMHO a better desktop than Gnome 3 or Win7, However I do think Mac OS X is still the best but not but a wide margin. AA YMMV

Real linux users use... (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546556)

http://fluxbox.org/ [fluxbox.org]

If you need a windows replacement, that looks exactly like and functions exactly like windows, you can go to...
a. the store
b. the piratebay

Seriously, fluxbox has everything under right click, and it's easily and fully customizable, and it's pretty lightweight, those are my big 2 arguments for it, besides its had transparency for like a decade lol.

Re:Real linux users use... (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546626)

I thought you were gonna say ratpoison or xfce.

I do like ratpoison on my development box... I need a nice terminal prog to attach to my screen sessions, and a way to toggle to web browser occasionally. Thats about it.

Re:Real linux users use... (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546710)

I started using fluxbox such a long time ago, back when you had to compile Gentoo from source.

I don't code in linux though, I tend to enjoy the networking apps and some of the "unretard" windows systems functionality such as fdisk, gparted, and DD programs / commands.

So much about these lightweight window managers is dependent on how the user sets their stuff up though through config files and stuff, as you said you made yours work for you :)

I'd like to try them out, but am reluctant to switch as I made fluxbox work for me :)

On that note, ratpoison looks very close.

Re:Real linux users use... (1)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546818)

"I thought you were gonna say ratpoison or xfce."

That's funny, I'd rather swallow ratpoison than use GNOME3.

Re:Real linux users use... (0)

debiankicksass (2472726) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546862)

Does anyone still use gnome??

Re:Real linux users use... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546916)

Does anyone still use gnome??

The gnome devs still think so.

Re:Real linux users use... (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547164)

As a Debian user, of course I do. When they decide to migrate to Gnome 3 then I'll make the switch to something else.

Re:Real linux users use... (1)

Trogre (513942) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547282)

I moved to GNOME 2.x after the KDE 4 disaster (okay, I stuck around until 4.6 to give them a chance). Once 2.x (or "classic" mode) stops being supported I will move to something else. Possibly XFCE or LXDE *sigh*

Re:Real linux users use... (1)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547518)

Does anyone still use gnome?

Depends. Did they change the annoying menus behavior? Meaning, even after the gtk-menu-popup-delay=0 custom, sub-menus that were never opened take 1~3 seconds to appear when the mouse goes over the main expendable menu.

Re:Real linux users use... (2)

sqldr (838964) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547644)

How is gnome 3 anything even remotely like windows? Windows has a taskbar. Gnome has zooming/search + the alt-` behavior. Windows has it all in a pop-up menu like fluxbox. Gnome-3 bravely got rid of the taskbar. If you're looking for a window, try the meta key and start typing. 3 letters is usually sufficient and a lot quicker than grabbing the mouse, a-la pop-up menus. Windows and fluxbox have desktop icons. Gnome 3 got rid of them (never used them anyway.. the desktop is where I put my windows. They're a waste of time).

It's just different. The amount of time I save being able to find stuff, especially since making much more use of multiple desktops than I used to is significant. If you want something that behaves exactly like the old days, go to the store, get windows, etc.

I guess you use your mouse more than I do.

external monitor only on laptops? (1)

hazem (472289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546562)

I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached? With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.

I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).

I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.

Re:external monitor only on laptops? (2)

ludwigf (1208730) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547300)

I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached?

I read this one quite often and no it does not suspend if an external monitor is attached. 3.0 didn't either.

With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.

I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).

You know, you can just select which one is the primary display in the settings. Not sure what's wrong with your setup but all you describe works fine fore me. (using: Fedora 14, sandy bridge cpu/gpu 24" external monitor with desktop spawning both displays or built-in one deactivated; suspend on lid close - if no external monitor attached as well)

I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.

It's not like the intel driver developers are writing chat programs instead of doing there work or is it? If you like to complain, complain at the right topic, I don't see how any of your described problems is related to GNOME.

Re:external monitor only on laptops? (2)

hazem (472289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547432)

I complain about Gnome because it's the one that doesn't work.

I don't have any problems with Kubuntu or Fedora's KDE spin. I use xrandr to get the setup the way I want, but doing that under gnome locks the whole system up tight. I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well.

The sad thing is, I actually find the Gnome 3 interface appealing in a lot of ways, even though it's pretty different from what I'm used to. It's really innovative and I think it could do interesting things with my workflow. But that I can't get it working right with an external monitor is really frustrating.

Maybe I'm the only one with this problem.

But does the Führer like it? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37546802)

Hitler: NEIN!

Sorry Gnome devs, you fail until Adolf approves.

Do they have the basics down yet? (1)

Rix (54095) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546834)

Like a working desktop pager?

Re:Do they have the basics down yet? (1)

amirulbahr (1216502) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548736)

Yes. If you'd read TFA you would have seen this:

The workspace switcher in the overview remains expanded by keeping its full width displayed when you are using more than one workspace.

Looks interesting (1)

dasherjan (1485895) | more than 2 years ago | (#37546914)

The wow factor is nice, but I still haven't seen anything that makes want to switch over.

Re:Looks interesting (0)

Flammon (4726) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548868)

The wow factor is nice, but I still haven't seen anything that makes want to switch over.

You won't see anything because it's an experience. You need to try it to realize how good it is.

move along, nothing to see here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547098)

session support still broken, and desktop still stuck with the asstastic "gnome shell"? i'll pass, thanks.
wake me up when gnome actually goes back to producing a *D*E instead of mindlessly copying the ui from whatever consumer-only TOUCH device is hot this month.

Does not work on nVidia-based machines (1)

Magnus Pym (237274) | more than 2 years ago | (#37547266)

Gnome 3.0 does not even start up on most systems with nVidia-based graphics cards. I've been trying to get it started to no avail. Nobody seems to know or care about the problem. I've had to switch to xfce.

Makes no sense to me; KDE4.x works fine, so does Gnome 2.x. X itself has no problem either for 2D, 3D or sound. Hope they have fixed this in 3.2.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37547356)

That's xorg and gnome devs guilt: Gnome for force an xorg update, and xorg for breaking again the ABI/API...

That's what you get for using propietary drivers anyways... (lol freetard!!!)

And that's what you get for using gnome 3 in the first place (lol retard!!!)

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines (1)

msevior (145103) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548588)

Works fine on this machine. F15 with gnome-3 and NVIDIA. This is a really nice workstation.
*shrugs*

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines (1)

Flammon (4726) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548894)

Sadly, you'll need to install the hardware vendor drivers for best performance. Nouveau isn't quite ready yet.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37549548)

Works fine with both Nouveau and proprietary drivers here.

Much more productive (5, Interesting)

Flammon (4726) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548666)

The new shell is absolutely fantastic. The flow between the apps and tasks is incredibly smooth. It's really too bad that Ubuntu didn't see the potential and decided to go their own way. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for competition but it would be really nice to see Ubuntu join the GNOME shell effort. Unity is just getting in the way when it's trying to get out of the way ironically. If you haven't tried the new GNOME shell, you're missing out on a really cool experience. I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago.

Re:Much more productive (1, Redundant)

TheTyrannyOfForcedRe (1186313) | more than 2 years ago | (#37548786)

If you haven't tried the new GNOME shell, you're missing out on a really cool experience. I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago.

+1

I wouldn't go back to the old gnome if you paid me.

Awesome! (3, Funny)

neiras (723124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37549470)

Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.

Hey bashers, take note! :-)

How to try this out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37549534)

I saw a video of this, and it actually looks quite polished. I'd love to try replacing my current Gnome 2 with it, but it's just so hard to install.

Does anybody know if there is some straightforward way to make this bad boy run on Ubuntu LTS (10.04) without risking completely hosing the system?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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