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!

MATE Desktop 1.2 Released

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the alternatives-are-nice dept.

GNOME 194

An anonymous reader writes "For those of you who still feel GNOME 2 is the best desktop environment, but don't want stick to old distros, MATE is a fork of GNOME 2, with all the names changed to avoid clashes with GNOME 3. Version 1.2 brings fixes, but also new features such as undo/redo in the file manager." This release features better freedesktop standards integration, adds a few missing utilities, and merges new features into the file manager. The project has a new wiki; the roadmap has a few details on future goals, including porting things to Gtk 3 and using bits and pieces of modern GNOME 3 infrastructure where appropriate.

cancel ×

194 comments

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

First post, mate! (-1, Offtopic)

cadu (876004) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701001)

Hooray!

More Linux fragmentation... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701021)

Just what the Linux community needs: more fragmentation...

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (5, Insightful)

abrotman (323016) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701053)

How is this fragmentation? It's just more choice. Gnome2 is dead as far as gnome.org is concerned. Don't like it? Don't use it.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (5, Insightful)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701105)

One man's "more choice" is another man's "fragmentation".

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

cyberchondriac (456626) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701733)

True.. and *generally* speaking, flexibility is inversely proportional to simplicity; it's just a matter of which choice one personally values more.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1, Informative)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701773)

One man's "more choice" is an anti-choice idiot's "fragmentation".

FTFY.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702047)

One man's "more choice" is an anti-choice idiot's "fragmentation".

FTFY.

People who value trivial choices are the idiots. I'm reminded of Steve Jobs, and his decision to fill his wardrobe with identical blue jeans and black turtlenecks as a way to eliminate such from his head space.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (4, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702349)

Perhaps this is true... in a DICTATORSHIP.

Look. The fact is, the whole point is free as in freedom (as well as free as in beer). The public has cried long and loud about the direction GNOME3 has taken. People respond with "don't like it? don't use it!" Well, when someone actually takes them up on it, someone else calls it "fragmentation." Can't win?

Fact is, GNOME is not listening to its users. It's a problem. We know what happened when XFree86 didn't listen... we've gone to X.org and flourished because of it. Now we have people bringing life back to the Gnome2 DE and I expect a lot of user interest will follow... my own as well. (As soon as I find out how easy it is to install and run it under the latest Fedora... right now, I am on CentOS 6.x because Fedora has failed me...) Maybe I can go back with MATE 1.2... CentOS is good but takes a lot of effort to tweak it the way I want it... moreso than Fedora of whatever version CentOS most resembles.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (2)

johnck (782010) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702995)

Full disclosure: I manage the project I am about to propose your use of. CentOS and its upstream RHEL6 is great on the desktop and I too feel that going from Fedora to RHEL there are just way too many things I miss. I also hated everything Gnome was doing with gnome-shell and gtk3. So I made a fork of RHEL6 that had everything I needed (an OpenVZ compatible kernel), dahdi packages via rpm, proprietary Nvidia packages and something that offered the functionality of EPEL/RPMForge/ELRepo/rpmfusion without them breaking each other through dependencies. We use it as the foundation of our cloud voip platform on our servers but also use it on our workstations so we can easily build and deploy virtual containers. It's called CCT Enterprise Linux (http://www.classiccitytelco.com/?page_id=488) and has most packages from EPEL, gstreamer*ugly functionality, and nvidia drivers for CUDA developers or those that just want functional OpenGL support. It sounds like we ran into the same problems, so hopefully the solution I spent some time on putting together might help you out. If you install it and wonder where all the extra packages are, remember to enable cct-extras and cct-nonfree. That's where all of the non-RHEL packages live. Hope that helps you out, but if you prefer Fedora and Mate, I completely understand.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (4, Interesting)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701315)

Are you forgetting about Cinnamon? It's basically the same thing but starting from gnome3 and working back to gnome2's appearance. As opposed to mate's starting with gnome2's code base, and working towards gnome3's while keeping the apperance the same.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/01/25/1459225/cinnamon-gnome-shell-fork-releases-version-12 [slashdot.org]

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701807)

Yeah I'm leaning towards running Cinammon over MATE as my new DE when I upgrade my laptop to 12.04, it seems to have more new features including the super-useful Win7-ish searchable menu.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (5, Informative)

arth1 (260657) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701869)

Are you forgetting about Cinnamon? It's basically the same thing but starting from gnome3 and working back to gnome2's appearance.

It's not the appearance that's an issue, but the functionality.

Like working support for multiple buttoned mice, multiple displays and display orders, overlapping windows with focus-follows-mouse and user controlled Z order, multiple sessions of the same programs whether or not the apps themselves provide an "open new instance" functionality, remote X logins, adjustable DPI (for wysiwyg DTP this is a must)...

Most people seem to complain about panel apps, but to me, that's a minor thing compared to how basic functionality has been sacrificed. The fallback mode is nothing like Gnome 2, and changing the looks to get it more like Gnome 2 will accomplish diddley squat.

The first Gnome 3 dev who has guts enough to say "dudes, we fscked up this one, bad" will get my respect.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702973)

The first Gnome 3 dev who has guts enough to say "dudes, we fscked up this one, bad" will get my respect.

He would be a hero. A voice of reason. A voice of intelligence. A voice of sanity.

The sad thing is, he would be shunned and likely ejected. The Gnome usability experts have all, already told the Gnome 3 developers they are fucking up very badly. The gnome 3 developers told them they didn't have the intelligence to understand their visionary thinking. In other words, according to the gnome 3 developers, if you disagree with the gnome 3 developers, you are an idiot. This is not hyperbole. This is straight from the mailing list. Its disgusting.

At this point in time, either you've drank the koolaid and have long since turned off your brain, growing like a mushroom, or left gnome 3 development. Otherwise, according to the gnome 3 developers, you're an idiot and not likely unqualified to contribute to the project.

It isn't going to happy because it already happen, in mass, and the gnome 3 developers labeled them idiots.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39703165)

For me, it IS a matter of appearance!

1) If I wanted a fscking smartphone UI, I'd have bought a fscking smartphone.

2) Gnome3 (or whatever those pedantic sh!ts want to call it) now requires a 3D graphics adapter with a speed that my machines don't have, and I'm not willing to spend extra money to get. Even in basic mode, G3 won't install.

3) Even if my graphics could take the hit, the enviornment now requires that my machines have at least 768M-1GB of RAM, which many of them are incapable of handling, due to the fact they can only see 512MB max.

So, all of these issues have everything to do with appearance, as G2 and many other DEs don't require these things. It used to be that Linux was the go-to for older machines, but thanks to developers like Gnome and KDE fscking their user base, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to Win98SE.

Kudos to MATE and Cinnamon!

Cinnamon != fallback (1)

slinkp (136716) | more than 2 years ago | (#39703167)

Clarification: Cinnamon isn't "the fallback mode," by which I think you mean the thing variously referred to as "GNOME Fallback" or "Gnome Classic"
(I can't keep the terminology straight either, maybe this will help: http://askubuntu.com/questions/83351/which-is-correct-gnome-classic-or-gnome-fallback ).

Cinnamon is like the fallback mode in that it builds on Gnome 3 while attempting to feel familiar to Gnome 2 users. But it's a different codebase worked on by different people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinnamon_%28user_interface%29)

You are correct that both Cinnamon and "fallback" still lack quite a bit of Gnome 2's functionality. I'm keeping a hopeful eye on Cinnamon, but still running Gnome 2 indefinitely.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701055)

Shut up.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (5, Insightful)

ddd0004 (1984672) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701101)

Fragmentation is not a bad thing. Think of it as natural selection in the open source software world. This is the mutation that may result in a new or different product.

Fragmentation is a terrible thing (5, Funny)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701173)

I went to the Citroen garage to pick up my roof rack the other day, and do you know what? They had *five* different models of van. Five! Talk about fragmenting the market! Obviously everyone should all just use a Relay dually, because fragmentation is bad.

It gets worse though, because on the way out of there shocked by the fragmentation of five different models, I drove past the Peugeot garage - and *they* had five different models too! Then I drove past the Ford Commercials garage and my Transit-identifying neurons melted.

Fragmentation! Aaaaaargh!

Re:Fragmentation is a terrible thing (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701649)

Transit-identifying neurons? Fragmentation ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701207)

This is EXACTLY why Windows reigns supreme over all the 2^42 versions of Linux. You know exactly what you are getting into. When you need help, there's no need to write a 5 page dissertation on all the variants of Linux/Window Managers you're running (along with God knows what else). I get the whole open source thing, really I do. It's great for those who are capable enough to strike out on their own. Idealogically, it rocks. But in the real world where those of us that have to keep hundreds or thousands of machines up and running or face the wrath of management, it's a non-starter.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701305)

And when Windows goes off the deep end by foistering upon its users a retarted interface, the users get ass raped with no choice whatsoever. So in my world having choice is better always. Even mother nature agrees.
If you want the one choice ideology go join Apple or the Gnometards.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701835)

Gnome is like a nirvana of choice compared even to Windows, don't paint them with the same brush as the Appletards because they like the keep things simpler than the KDE crowd.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701439)

Not quote.

Windows reigns supreme over Linux because it was deeply entrenched by the time Linus even started. Windows "reigns supreme" because it is effectively this years version of MS-DOS.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701539)

because it is effectively this years version of MS-DOS.

Do you mean that as a sort of metaphor, or do you think Windows 7 (and 8, shortly) actually is MS-DOS based?

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

TheDarkMaster (1292526) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701965)

And because Windows just "works well enough" to the average user. If you want to be the market leader, you need to be better than the current leader in all aspects.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701619)

100% this. Anyone that has to manage the 9-5 machines understands this.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (4, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701723)

This is EXACTLY why Windows reigns supreme over all the 2^42 versions of Linux. You know exactly what you are getting into.

Yes. You can choose:

XP Home
XP Pro
XP 64
Couple of other varieties of XP
Various server versions of Windows
Six or so varieties of Vista
A dozen or so varieties of Windows 7, 32-bit or 64-bit
And soon, Windows for Tablets on the Desktop

People complaining about Linux 'fragementation' and then using that as an argument for running Windows are highly amusing. I can't even remember all the different versions of Windows you can run with different features and radically different UIs.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701997)

Bullocks, everyone pirates only the latest and greatest version!

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702819)

Still, they have binary compatibility.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702761)

you are talking out of your ass. in the windows world, you need help you get Habib in south asia reading to you from a script. you get apps that won't run in win 7 enterprise but are fine in other version of windows 7. you get apps that can't run on 64 bit. you get apps that security patches break. and yes you still get the blue screen of death.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701663)

Fragmentation is not a bad thing. Think of it as natural selection in the open source software world. This is the mutation that may result in a new or different product.

Or it will disappear because it can't adapt to his ecosystem....

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701739)

So what? If this one dies, that one will hopefully survive.

That was his point, I think.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (2)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701121)

is this fragmentation or diversity? we talk about how having diversity is a good thing in meatspace why is it supposedly bad in computing?

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701485)

As long as all of the actual applications are using the same underlying libraries, there really is no "fragmentation". These idiots whining about fragmentation are just clueless and superficial. What shell you happen to use is not the sorts of problems that "fragmentation" are supposed to represent.

Besides, if anything is going to cause "fragmentation" it's the new stuff that no one really wants rather than the old stuff that most people are content to keep on using (including Windows users).

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701911)

It isn't bad in computing, those who complain about "fragmentation" are implicitly promoting the One True Way, and therefore, promote curated (walled-garden) computing, whether they realize it or not.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (2)

Korin43 (881732) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701125)

Not choices! I hate when I have the ability to replace something I hate with something I love. I'd be much happier with Linux if I was forced to use ${your favorite desktop environment}.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701357)

I don't run X you insensitive clod!

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (4, Insightful)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701323)

Nothing wrong here. If a Mac user doesn't like the way Mac OS X is going, they're choices are to use old and unsupported software or bitch and complain. If a Linux user doesn't like the way things are going they can fork.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

sshirley (518356) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701793)

Nothing wrong here. If a Mac user doesn't like the way Mac OS X is going, they're choices are to use old and unsupported software or bitch and complain. If a Linux user doesn't like the way things are going they can fork.

Fork off!!

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701809)

Yeah, I'm a Linux user and I fork my girlfriend all the time!

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (1)

DemonGenius (2247652) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702321)

How do you fork that... which does not exist?

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702525)

Yeah, I'm a Linux user and I fork my girlfriend all the time!

Your hand does not count as a girlfriend.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (2)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702507)

Nothing wrong here. If a Mac user doesn't like the way Mac OS X is going, they're choices are to use old and unsupported software or bitch and complain. If a Linux user doesn't like the way things are going they can fork.

I think you are confusing users with developers and that is part of the problem with linux in general. An end "user" cannot fork a damn thing because they don't know how to program.

If a developer on OS X does not like something, they can write their own extensions/plugins or applications that publish a "service" that can be used in other programs via the services menu in any cocoa application. You can replace the "finder" with a third party replacement like Pathfinder or write one yourself and license it however you wish. Xcode is available as a free download.

The problem with linux is that there is no strong underlying framework for UI and window management other than X which is rather primitive by modern standard so you end up with multiple competing window managers with their own frameworks, APIs and controls.

Re:More Linux fragmentation... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39703133)

I concur. Gnome 3 project should just give up.

Excellent (3, Informative)

ichthus (72442) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701083)

Without MATE, Linux Mint 12 wouldn't even be an option for me (I'd stick with 11).

Re:Excellent (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701291)

MATE just seems to be another phone desktop being forced onto a PC. I installed Linux Mint 12 last weekend and MATE was almost a deal breaker. Fortunately I discovered I could easily switch to Gnome Classic.

Re:Excellent (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701375)

MATE? MATE is basically gnome 2. Its a desktop environment top to bottom. You're thinking of shitty gnome 3.

Sorry, you're TERRIBLY confused and misinformed.

Re:Excellent (4, Informative)

RDW (41497) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702251)

Without MATE, Linux Mint 12 wouldn't even be an option for me (I'd stick with 11).

I might say the same for Ubuntu 12.04 (though to be fair, I could also live with Xfce). I just installed MATE 1.2 on the latest 12.04 beta and it works like a charm, as here:

http://www.howtogeek.com/110052/how-to-install-the-mate-desktop-go-back-to-gnome-2-on-ubuntu/ [howtogeek.com]

For my money, Gnome 2/MATE is still the best available desktop for Linux. I've tried the other approaches to taming Gnome 3 (Cinnamon, the classic 'fallback mode' panel, even Unity) and all currently seem lacking in comparison, with more limited features, or lower performance on resource-limited systems, or (in the case of Unity) annoying design choices. The benefits to developers of building a desktop on the Gnome 3 foundation (ease of maintenance, etc.) are all very well, but as an end-user, I'm going to go for the more responsive, fully-featured alternative. The situation may be different in a year or two, but right now MATE remains my top choice.

Re:Excellent (3, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#39703013)

I never understood why when things were getting nice and stable both KDE and GNOME would suddenly shitcan all that work. i mean what was wrong with them? They both looked nice, ran fine, were low resource, so what was wrong with what they had? Could they just not live without an assload of bling like OSX and Windows has gotten?

BTW for those that prefer the KDE way of doing things Vector Linux [vectorlinux.com] has a "KDE Classic" edition based on 3.5.10 that is nice.

Doomed, try cinnamon. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701097)

This approach is doomed to failure. The better approach is Mint's Cinnamon project. There they maintain a gnome2 like desktop environment, but it rests on gnome3. There are ppa's (https://launchpad.net/~merlwiz79/+archive/cinnamon-ppa) that let you install it into official Ubuntu distros, so no need to install a full-on mint distro. It would be even better if canonical moved these packages into universe or something.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Merk42 (1906718) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701129)

I agree keeping it GTK2 is terrible, but the summary says "...future goals, including porting things to Gtk 3..." Of course at that point, why have both Mint and MATE when they're both GTK2 UI built on GTK3?

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701425)

The real question is how long can the limited Mint development team support both MATE and Cinnamon? One would think that eventually, one is going to have to go and since Gnome 2 had a ton of programmers, it doesn't seem possible that MATE is going to be sustainable in the long run.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (3, Informative)

RDW (41497) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701721)

MATE is independent of Mint and has its own team (Clem is a member, but Mint ddidn't start and doesn't run the project). The MATE team is small, but their goals are much more modest than Gnome's - they (thankfully!) have no ambitions to design a new 'desktop paradigm'.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702027)

MATE is independent of Mint and has its own team (Clem is a member, but Mint ddidn't start and doesn't run the project). The MATE team is small, but their goals are much more modest than Gnome's - they (thankfully!) have no ambitions to design a new 'desktop paradigm'.

I stand (or type) correct. That said, one of the issues with prompting the shift to Gnome 3 was that the code base for Gnome 2 was unwieldy. Hopefully, they will be able to maintain it. My real concern would be with the other gnome applications (evolution, brassero, etc.). Will these all be forked or will the G3 versions be used and if the G3 versions are used, trying to integrate them into G2 may be a monumental task.

I wish the MATE team all the best.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39703001)

I know they're forking Nautilus but I don't think they plan to do that for everything.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701155)

they wont though because thou shalt not have a traditional desktop, you most have unity because unity is the way of the future and it is the perfect form factor for in Linux in all environments be it desktop phone tablet or tv all must be one and don't you dare ask to put it on the right side it must be on the left.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (2)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701273)

Join the unity or perish, PERISH, perish.
(fallout reference)

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702205)

Is it really a reference if you have to explain it?

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702411)

Yes.

Do you not know what a reference is?

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702649)

Generally, a "reference" in this context is synonmous with "allusion"--hence, my comment. But yes, you are in fact—pedantically—correct about "reference" in a more general sense. Good job; you've corrected someone on the internet.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701249)

The nice thing with MATE is that it works will already, it has been used for years by millions of people.just because gnome official has stop improving it does not mean that it suddenly broke. Redhat are committed to maintaining GNOME2 for another 10 years.

Maybe in 3 years time cinnamon, or xfce or something will exceed GNOME2 (for the folk who still consider GNOME2 best).

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (4, Insightful)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701275)

This approach is doomed to failure. The better approach is Mint's Cinnamon project. There they maintain a gnome2 like desktop environment, but it rests on gnome3. There are ppa's (https://launchpad.net/~merlwiz79/+archive/cinnamon-ppa) that let you install it into official Ubuntu distros, so no need to install a full-on mint distro. It would be even better if canonical moved these packages into universe or something.

You are missing the point! I don't want Gnome3 and I don't want a Gnome2-looking interface stuck on Gnome3. It wasn't the look of Gnome2 that I liked. It was the flexibility and feature completeness. I could drag app links to the bar on top. I could use the bar on bottom as my taskbar. I could put a "widget" on my top bar that showed me my process or usage, RAM usage, network activity, swap activity, CPU temperature, fan speed, CPU speed, case temp, etc, etc, etc, all without adding any special repos. I can't do any of that on Gnome3. Not because Gnome3 doesn't LOOK like Gnome2, but because it's Gnome3.

I don't want Gnome3, period! I run XFCE and KDE now, thank you very much.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701453)

Yes, and the project he's talking about does much of that on top of Gnome3. Imagine 2 that just also has the hot corner and such.

And really, suck it up nancy. They're getting there, and in the meantime you can use mate.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701531)

Actually, *you* are missing the point.

Everything you said above is not "GNOME 2". It's just GNOME Panel and Panel Applets, a very small subset of GNOME 2 in terms of code.

However, the MATE project does not just maintain this small subset. They maintain the *entire* GNOME 2 codebase, including complex stuff like GTK 2 and core apps that have absolutely *nothing* to do with what you said above. They maintain a fork of the GNOME 2 version of GNOME Terminal, for chrissake!

Porting Panel and Applets to the GNOME 3 stack is much more reasonable and scalable, and that's what the Cinnamon project intends to do.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701961)

Where did you get the idea cinnamon was a port of gnome 2 stuff?

AFAICT it's a different beast again. A good one, certainly, by comparison to Shell, but a different thing.

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702647)

"Porting" was perhaps a poor word choice, but from the beggining the goal of Cinnamon was offering new features *over a core that does everything the Panel did*. GNOME 2 users might have problems with one or two things like the different main menu, but overall Cinammon is aimed at making them feel at home. In particular, it offers the addition of abritrary shortcuts and applets, which is what most GNOME 2 users miss in Shell. ArcherB being the obvious example.

Try KDE (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702065)

I've just been fooling around with KDE because I had some problems with my graphics card, and the builtin graphics don't do 3D. That means no compiz, and no window placement.

That means I was being driven nuts manually bringing down browser windows to the bottom half of my screen where I like them.

So I tried KDE. Turns out I like it. And you can basically set it up the way I had Gnome set up:

-Focus follows mouse with delayed raise
-Choice of keyboard shortcuts for keyboard layout change
-You can set desktop switching to have the same shortcut as in Gnome (Ctrl+Alt+arrow)
-You can use the Documents, Music, Pictures, etc. folders in KDE. You just have to set up the shortcuts/bookmarks once.
-Best of all, you can set automatic window placement without compiz (i.e., no need for 3D for something which manifestly doesn't require it)

Still missing:
-The neat world clock/weather applet (anybody know of a good one for KDE?)
-Also keyboard shortcuts seem to double send (i.e., do Ctrl+Tab in Chrome, and it goes two tabs over sometimes, not just one)

Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (1)

allo (1728082) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702299)

cinnamon seems the better approach, because much of gnome3 is still what it was in gnome2. so just replace the sucking parts. And this is what cinnamon does ... replacing the shell, but not the rest.

Great (5, Interesting)

flakron (1146337) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701113)

This is what I love about open source: Don't like it ? Change it!

Re:Great (5, Insightful)

slapout (93640) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701471)

Or in this case, change it back!

Undo/Redo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701131)

"Version 1.2 brings fixes, but also new features such as undo/redo in the file manager."

Wow, welcome to the 1980s.

Re:Undo/Redo (3, Informative)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701297)

to be fair gnome had this for awhile. then removed it due to them thinking it 'confuses' people, back when gnome 2.0 was under their direction. they are just putting it back in.

What's the point? (0)

nej_simon (2441972) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701169)

Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.

Re:What's the point? (1, Interesting)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701231)

Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.

Then don't contribute to it. Some people watch NASCAR in their spare time. There are plenty of ways people "waste time" these days -- as far as "wastes" go, this is by far and away one of the least wasteful, even if there are others that would be even less so IMHO.

Re:What's the point? (1)

Tharkkun (2605613) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701255)

Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.

Well everything developed for open source is technically a waste a time. Wasn't Linux originally a waste of time? Something developed as a hobby for himself until it took off?

Re:What's the point? (3, Insightful)

HiThere (15173) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701313)

Well, I haven't actually tried it, but Gnome3 won't run on my system. So I'm rather glad that Mate is producing something that will be usable when Debian stable incorporates Gnome3.

(And the Gnome3 fallback to Gnome2 fallback mode is so eyetearingly ugly that I installed the stable branch, replacing the testing branch, to get away from it. Of course, what I'd really prefer is KDE3, but pearson seems to be rather slow in making that usable [under the name trinity], so I may end up with Mate. Or possibly LXDE or some such. I tried it for awhile, and it's usable, but I much prefer Gnome2.)

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701487)

As someone who has run both gnome 2 as well as most of gnome3 (applications, I wasn't actually using the new gnome shell at the time) I can tell you the default themes for gtk-3 (all themes? I don't really know since I didn't feel like dicking around with figuring out how to change the theme) run *HORRIBLY* on older hardware. I have an old system with a radeon 7500 in it (PCI based, and 9xxx ATI cards crash frequently in it) that ran UI interaction pretty smoothly (many of the applications were... less responsive for their more computationally intensive parts). Fast forward to GTK-3, the default menubar takes 3-5 seconds to display *EACH MENU* with no apparent speedup going back through previously opened menus.

That was when I took the plunge and installed XFCE for all computers needing 'desktops' and reverted the rest back to WindowMaker (which had served me unmodified since... what, 2003? Needing only the truetype update, and the recent round of bugfixes to make it basically the perfect windowmanager, sans a few annoying default keybindings.)

MATE converting gnome 2 to GTK-3 seems more like turning a solution into a problem than the other way around. But maybe I'm wrong :D

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702719)

Is Mate going to be available on Debian though? Maintaining packages for a whole desktop environment is a lot of work, and I don't think the Debian Gnome team is interested in that much multitasking.

Re:What's the point? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701459)

Gnome 3 devs have stated in IRC that classic desktop in Gnome 3 is deprecated by defult and will be removed sooner or later. They don't have any interest in give life to it.

That's why some developers went and fork gnome to develop Cinnamon. Gnome 3 devs just block any contribution that differs of their vision of what a desktop should be.

Re:What's the point? (1)

arth1 (260657) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701935)

To me, that suggest that the Gnome 3 developers are the root of the problem. They are not functional and should be replaced.

Since this can't easily be done within the Gnome organization, a fork seems the right way to go.

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702997)

What I don't get is why Redhat allows the dev's it is paying to do this crap. (Otherwise Oracle or someone else will give them the option).

Re:What's the point? (4, Interesting)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701463)

Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.

Can you put a weather widget on the top bar on Gnome3 Classic? How about a CPU temp sensor? How about a graph that shows CPU, RAM, swap, and network usage? Maybe a sensor that shows the CPU speed for each core with the ability to change them to ondemand or performace? Can you put the taskbar on bottom bar? Can you put just a gnome foot (start button) on the bottom left like Windows and the full menu on top (Gnome-foot, Places, System)?

The last time I tried Gnome3, none of these things were possible. These were not an option on Gnome3 Classic either. I want my old Gnome2 back, not the "look" of Gnome2 stuck on top of Gnome3. I don't want "New Coke" in an "Old Coke" can.

Re:What's the point? (2)

nej_simon (2441972) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702143)

Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.

Can you put a weather widget on the top bar on Gnome3 Classic? How about a CPU temp sensor? How about a graph that shows CPU, RAM, swap, and network usage? Maybe a sensor that shows the CPU speed for each core with the ability to change them to ondemand or performace? Can you put the taskbar on bottom bar? Can you put just a gnome foot (start button) on the bottom left like Windows and the full menu on top (Gnome-foot, Places, System)?

The last time I tried Gnome3, none of these things were possible. These were not an option on Gnome3 Classic either. I want my old Gnome2 back, not the "look" of Gnome2 stuck on top of Gnome3. I don't want "New Coke" in an "Old Coke" can.

You can do all those things in gnome fallback (though you need to hold alt when right clicking on the panel). The same applets are available: http://omgubuntu.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/gnome-fallback.jpg [amazonaws.com] Besides you seem to be missing my point. I never said that gnome classic is great. But if you want to maintain a traditional desktop it would be better to start with gnome classic rather than taking on the huge job of modernizing gnome 2 since most of the effort has already been done.

Use XFCE (3, Informative)

Artemis3 (85734) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702147)

All of that can be done with XFCE, but without the bugs and sluggishness the gnome developers never cared to fix.

They don't know gnome panel 3? (1)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701513)

It's already ported! It's cleaned up code, GObject introspected (hint: you can write extentions for it with same ease as for GNOME Shell), GTK+3/GNOME 3 technologies ready.

But no, should do your own port, because using native GNOME 3 (just without GNOME Shell) is blasphemy.

Re:They don't know gnome panel 3? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701593)

And Gnome Panel is gimped compared to Gnome2. It may look similar but it doesn't function the same way.

Re:They don't know gnome panel 3? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701909)

The gnome people have made it pretty clear that the moment they can get gnome shell working with software rendering, that the legacy gnome panel is going away. So Mate's work here is pretty necessary.

Code quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701681)

I remember one of the reasons the GNOME team said they were dropping GNOME 2 in favour of version 3 was because the old code base was too much of a mess to maintain. Now here is a small group of developers who have come along and shown they can not only maintain the code, but improve it. Makes me wonder if the GNOME folks were just looking for an excuse to throw out their own design and start new.

Re:Code quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701749)

Duh? The Gnome team is seriously incmpetent.

Re:Code quality (1)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701795)

A small group of developers starting on a fresh (to them) project, which is often the most productive time, have shown that they can add a couple minor features, fix a few bugs, and do some renaming. You can always do something. The question is how effective you are. How much would they have accomplished if it was a nice clean codebase?

Plus, this is free software we're talking about here. Working on messy code is something we do for money, but even when it's fulfilling, make no mistake, working on messy code is work. When it comes to doing stuff for free, I know I for one have a high likelihood of just moving on to something else if working with it gets tedious. That's a pretty natural human reaction, so if you want more people to work on your stuff for free, it makes sense to create an environment that's fun to program in. The end result will very likely be more people working on your project, and not only that, well-structured code tends to result in less bugs from developers unfamiliar with the environment.

Re:Code quality (1)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701821)

That's not to say the MATE guys are wrong or wasting their time, either. Trying to force them to work on GNOME 3 would be just as stupid as trying to prohibit the creation of GNOME 3.

Re:Code quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39701915)

Well considering how long it's taken KDE4 and Gnome3 to actually get usuable from new codebases, probably not much. But then again such ideas of scraping new code to rewrite from scratch is mostly the harebrained ideas of lousy programmers.

Also, the idea that it's 'easy' to come up to speed on a highly complex piece f software encompassing easily hundreds of thousands of lines of code is a hilariously stupid statement.

Re:Code quality (1)

poppopret (1740742) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702971)

How much would they have accomplished if it was a nice clean codebase?

If it would be more, then I'm glad they have a mess. The whole point here is to STOP SCREWING WITH THINGS. It's not broken and it doesn't need fixing. GNOME 2 wouldn't need any changes at all except for the fact that GNOME 3 has claimed the "gnome" name and thus forced a name change.

Really, it's OK to go decades without significant changes. It ought to be infinity, but security holes pop up and sometimes an idiot breaks the underlying platform.

OMG WTF!?!? (1)

YankDownUnder (872956) | more than 2 years ago | (#39701951)

Whaddaya mean I can have a desktop that doesn't look like a mobile phone????

I DON'T LIKE CHANGE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702131)

I'll stick with my enlightenment dr16 desktop, thanks very much.

Lubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39702235)

This is a good time to mention another 'Gnome 2' type distro for the interested.

Lubuntu is a Canonical-supported LXDE-based distribution. What do you get? You get the classic 'Gnome 2' aka 'W95' toolbar GUI on the familiar Ubuntu packages.

Lu tends to be overlooked from pigeon-holing as yet another "lightweight" distro for older machines. It does that just fine, but it's a little different from the usual lightweights in that you never get stuck with CLI for configurations, or searching online to figure out the key-click combos to unearth a setting you want. It's /familiar/ for Ubuntu users, and is fully-equipped with dialog boxes. It's probably the least effort for people who don't like Unity/G3, and don't want to learn a new desktop manager. Really, more people need to check this out. The search to replace your old Ubuntu is over once you do.

FYI, if you don't like the default PCMan file manager, just install Nautilus. The sole detail is change the launcher command to "nautilus --no-desktop", so Nautilus doesn't try to be the desktop manager. Then you'll have the familiar Nautilus that still doesn't have Undo in 2012 (facepalm). I recommend Dolphin instead. You probably should have tried that years ago.

Linux Mint Debian Edition will use mate as default (1)

voss (52565) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702337)

As of update 4 which is currently the Release Candidate.

http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1967 [linuxmint.com]

Re:Linux Mint Debian Edition will use mate as defa (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702869)

I love mInt for desktop and I love Debian for servers, but I've found that since mint team uses unstable for basing their Mint-Debian it's too hard to keep up with broken things and updates that break things.

Forks make me think (5, Interesting)

aglider (2435074) | more than 2 years ago | (#39702603)

Now we have MATE from GNOME v2 as a form of dissatisfaction of v3.
We already had Trinity [trinitydesktop.org] forked from KDE v3.5.
Then there's Razor-Qt [razor-qt.org] as "something almost completely new".
And the pletora of "alternative" desktops we all love: XFCE, LXDE, etc.etc. [wikipedia.org]
Is it actually a problem of fragmentation, or is it that some projects after a few years (and some amounts of donated money) just go into technology decline?
I personally tend towards the second option.

Gnome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39703215)

Lubuntu is where I'm headed.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?