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!

GNOMEbuntu Set To Arrive In October

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the would-prefer-mate dept.

GNOME 157

First time accepted submitter Rzarector writes "Good News Everyone! Thanks to the Ubuntu Gnome Community and Jeremy Bicha, it seems that the popular distribution will ship a flavor with a relatively pure GNOME experience in the next release cycle, on October 18. At this point the effort is community based, but hopefully GNOMEbuntu will make it as an official Canonical spin, similar to Kubuntu, Xubuntu, et cetera, in the 13.04 release. This is the story: At the Ubuntu Developer Summit in May, some discussions took place on the need for a Gnome spin. On August 13, Jeremy Bicha posted on Gnome mailing lists about looking a name for the new Ubuntu derivative. After that, I had no news till Stinger gave us a thread in Ubuntu Forums. On there, Jeremy talks about working on an Alpha version! So I contacted him and he verified that GNOMEbuntu will be released together with Ubuntu 12.10."

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

Which Gnome? (2, Interesting)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181509)

If it's Gnome 3, then screw it. It goes into the "ignored trash" category, along with the Unity flavor of Ubuntu.
If it's a Gnome 2 fork (like Mate) or other Gnome 2 flavor, then I might be interested.

We converted all our home PCs from Ubuntu 10.04 LTS to Xubuntu 10.04 LTS more than a year ago,. This was after testing a couple of versions of Ubuntu with Unity in a VM and seeing the train-wreck that it was. Now we're on Xubuntu 12.04 LTS.

Re:Which Gnome? (0)

emurphy42 (631808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181561)

From TFA: "Unity won’t be included"

Re:Which Gnome? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181599)

From TFA: "Unity won’t be included"

From TFA: "Gnome Display Manager (GDM) and Gnome Shell will be obviously included!"

Well... looks like Gnome 3.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182133)

Hence the question of which version of GNOME it would be.

Re:Which Gnome? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181713)

If you base your Gnome 3 experience through your interactions with Unity, please realize that you are practically talking about two different things (even if it is the same libraries)

I know plenty of people who like Gnome 3 but hate Unity, so there is a difference in user experience.

If you really want Gnome 2, well there's two libraries which were targeting making that kind of desktop experience better, with less bloat and cruft. So, why do you want the big, bloated, slow, version of that desktop back? Move on to Xfce or LXDE.

Re:Which Gnome? (3, Interesting)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184061)

I know plenty of people who like Gnome 3 but hate Unity

Me! Hi! I'm here!

No, really guys. OK, I get that things can get rough when major changes are undertaken in your infrastructure. Whether that is Country, State or Desktop. But really all this hating on the gnome desktop has to subside at some point in time. I mean, come on! Ok, the guys made a total mess out of usability testing (not that large scale usability testing is good in any way but still some controlled environment tests are helpful) but in general they pulled it through. Gnome shell, in the past year, has been doing leaps!

Re:Which Gnome? (2, Funny)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181721)

Unity is a train wreck but Gnome Shell seems to be dead on.

Re:Which Gnome? (2, Informative)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181807)

I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.

I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.

I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.

Re:Which Gnome? (2)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182345)

I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.

I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.

I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.

Likewise, I like both Unity and Gnome Shell (at least after extensions). I find that I really don't use the Unity-lenses all that much with the exception of the applications one. Same thing with the HUD. It's interesting and all, but I don't find it improves my productivity. Given that, I find Gnome-shell to be more responsive and productive once I add dock and frippery menu extensions.

But I agree, both are quite usable although different than Gnome 2.

Re:Which Gnome? (5, Insightful)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184219)

What I can't digest about the unity interface is that it can't be effectively used as a mouse oriented UI nor can it be effectively used as a keyboard only UI. And that really makes a big difference for me. In an HTPC mouse only environment it is much easier to just use Gnome3 (even the theming for the living room aka huge fonts and buttons) are better applied by gnome shell. On the workstation again Gnome 3 works better because the keyboard mappings are very very concise and thought out, to the point where you can get to the behavioral patterns of a tiling wm without having done one modification. Unity? its nice if you have one hand on the keyboard and one on the mouse. Only that I am 99% less productive like that and it really doesn't make any sense.. And don't start talking about the hud thing because it plainly doesn't deliver.

Re:Which Gnome? (2)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182671)

I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.

I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.

I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.

Obviously your definition of "serviceable" is more flexible than mine.

I swapped Gnome 3 out for Cinnamon. Not quite everything I used to routinely do in Gnome 2, but closer than Gnome 3.

Re:Which Gnome? (2)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182877)

I used to use the classic mode as well, especially in the beginning.

I still like classic but I think the newer desktops are usable and have way more potential.

I hope classic sticks around though, you need a fairly beefy machine to run Unity/Gnome 3 with satisfaction (Unity being a bigger problem than Gnome 3). It would suck to run them on a netbook that doesn't have a lot of power.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184337)

It would suck to run them on a netbook that doesn't have a lot of power.

Unity does. Gnome 3 I'm using almost exclusively for the last six months. But hey I tinker a lot with my devices.

Actually gnome 3 works acceptably on an 8 year old Sony VAIO. Unity runs at .2 fps. Seriously!

Re:Which Gnome? (2)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183045)

I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.

I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.

I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.

Obviously your definition of "serviceable" is more flexible than mine.

I swapped Gnome 3 out for Cinnamon. Not quite everything I used to routinely do in Gnome 2, but closer than Gnome 3.

You should also look at the Gnome 3 fall back mode. It looks and acts similar to Gnome 2, but is still Gnome 3. Ubuntu previously also shipped Gnome Classic Mode, but this was built on Gnome 2 and has since been discontinued. Cinnamon is Mint's version of Gnome's Fallback mode.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184139)

I use fallback mode, and will keep doing so as long as it's available. It's exactly what I like to use.

Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (3, Insightful)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181953)

This was after testing a couple of versions of Ubuntu with Unity in a VM and seeing the train-wreck that it was

Why all the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? Among my friends, they generally like or at least tolerate Unity. In the Ubuntu Software Center, the most recent (later than March 2012) reviews average 4 star.
I, personally, like it very much. It saves screen real-state and:
1) Provides direct buttons for all the programs I commonly use
2) For other programs, I just hit Super and type the first letters of the program name

It is perfectly convenient.

So why the hate?

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (3, Interesting)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182147)

Because it makes my $2k powerhouse computer running a super geeky OS look like something made by Vtech.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81hhVZULnhL._AA1500_.jpg

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182465)

Because it makes my $2k powerhouse computer running a super geeky OS look like something made by Vtech.

Is its visual, or its functionality that you dislike? "Look like" is a bit ambiguous.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

DeTech (2589785) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183357)

You spent 2K$ on a computer in 2012? you sir are doing something very wrong....

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

mortonda (5175) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183787)

Or doing something very right and making tons of money at it. Some people have expensive computers for a reason.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (4, Informative)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182223)

It's a lingering hatred from Unity's early days when it was still buggy and lacking in customization options. It's less buggy now but still doesn't offer the level of customization that some geeks like to have. As Unity matures, though, I find myself agreeing that it is in fact quite usable.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182521)

It's a lingering hatred from Unity's early days when it was still buggy and lacking in customization options. It's less buggy now but still doesn't offer the level of customization that some geeks like to have. As Unity matures, though, I find myself agreeing that it is in fact quite usable.

This lingering hatred is a pity. Maybe Ubuntu will have to make marketing fireworks with a campaign called "Try the new Unity" or something.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (2)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182795)

I think they're doing pretty well for themselves. You'll always have the die-hards clinging to older DE's with an icy grip but as of 12.04, I have started to notice a changing attitude toward Unity around here.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184461)

No it's not.

In a mouse only environment you have to fish for the "expose desktops" button whereas in gnome 3 it is one concise move. In keyboard only mode you have to do a combination, not very difficult but much less effective than a single keypress. The UI does not deform properly upon parametrization, the hotbar shortcuts are irrelevant once you have actually started the programs (and you are in flow) which is the biggest part of your productive time, otherwise why are they there, lenses mess up the experience and unnecessarily populate your activities,I could go on but I thing my general position is made clear.

MODERATION ABUSE (-1, Offtopic)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182389)

Someone modded the parent "Flamebait".
I hope this person is caught by metamoderation.
The parent is not remotely similar to a flamebait.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

Mike (1172) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182421)

2) For other programs, I just hit Super and type the first letters of the program name

My keyboard doesn't have a "Super" key. And if it did, if I'm running an application I don't commonly use, I often don't know the name of it, so I would like a categorized menu of software to choose from.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182633)

My keyboard doesn't have a "Super" key.

You can click on the Ubuntu icon.

And if it did, if I'm running an application I don't commonly use, I often don't know the name of it, so I would like a categorized menu of software to choose from.

If you want a categorized menu, you just need to click on "Filter results".

Besides, when you run the application, its icon appears in the bar. You can right-click it and choose "Lock to launcher".

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

Mike (1172) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182891)

Ok, so if I know I want, say, for example, some program that will rip music from a CD but I don't have any clue what it might be called, what do I do, precisely?

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184041)

Ok, so if I know I want, say, for example, some program that will rip music from a CD but I don't have any clue what it might be called, what do I do, precisely?

There are at least two options:

1) Open the Dash Home* or the Dash App Lens** and type (the first letters of) "music" or "rhythmbox" (if you know the name)

2) Open the Dash App Lens**. Click "Filter results". Click "Media". On the "Installed" row, you will see "Rhythmbox music player".

Now, I'll grant it is slightly confusing for newbies because Rhythmbox is called "music player", not "cd ripper". It just happens that Rhythmbox has ripping functionality. Gnome 2 would be just as (slightly) confusing (AFAIK).

* You can open the Dash Home by clicking the Ubuntu icon or tapping Super
** You can open the Dash App Lens by right-click on the Ubuntu Icon and choosing "Applications" or by typing Super + A.
Holding Super will show a screen that informs you about the keyboard shortcuts.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

kryliss (72493) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182645)

Then hit Alt-F2, it gets the same menu.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

PvtVoid (1252388) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182851)

My keyboard doesn't have a "Super" key. And if it did, if I'm running an application I don't commonly use, I often don't know the name of it, so I would like a categorized menu of software to choose from.

OK. Hit alt-F2 or click on the Ubuntu icon, then the little applications icon at the bottom. It will provide you with a categorized list of everything installed on your system. In my experience, I very infrequently need to do this, so it is absolutely no problem to use one whole extra click relative to the Gnome 2 application menu.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (2)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183109)

2) For other programs, I just hit Super and type the first letters of the program name

My keyboard doesn't have a "Super" key. And if it did, if I'm running an application I don't commonly use, I often don't know the name of it, so I would like a categorized menu of software to choose from.

You could run Gnome 3 and press alt+f1 instead of the Super key and if you install the frippery menu extension from extensions.gnome.org, you will have a traditional applications menu (you can also add a places menu with an additional extension).

Here are other keystroke/shortcuts besides the alt+f1: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fedora-16-gnome-3-review,3155-10.html [tomshardware.com]

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

zrbyte (1666979) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182575)

Agreed.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (3, Interesting)

BoogeyOfTheMan (1256002) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182703)

I used to hate Unity with a passion. But after giving it a shot, I find that its not as terrible as I originally thought.

The main reason I hated it was that you pretty much HAVE to use the keyboard to use it. Not so bad for most people, but my monitor is a 42" tv sitting across the room with my pc. I have a wireless mouse and keyboard, but I usually left the keyboard turned off and sitting on a table out of the way. Until Unity, I could access all of my applications with no more than 3 mouse clicks, and I only had to use the keyboard to enter passwords or for the occasional terminal session. Now, I leave the keyboard turned on and always accessible because I have to use it much more often to actually accomplish anything. Though I have learned that as long as I use the keyboard a lot, Unity is actually pretty decent. I still have some major gripes though.

1- Yes I can just type a few letters and the program will show up, but if I cant remember the name of the program because I only use it once in a blue moon, I need to spend 5+ minutes searching for it. I also cant get programs installed through wine to show up with a few keypresses. (Probably a PEBKAC error, but still annoying)

2- I have to jump through a few hoops to get all my app notifications to show up correctly.

3- I have 5 third party apps installed to tweak various settings in Unity that should be built in

4- I think the universal menu system is retarded. I have it turned off, but it really should be a simple checkbox in the system settings.

5- It needs a better workspace indicator. The one that is stuck on the launch bar should at least tell me what workspace I have active since I cant remove it. (I have an extra mouse button set to open workspace switching, and I have the cube set up where if I scroll on the left or right of the screen, it changes workspaces)

6- I would like the option to only show open application on the active workspace instead of always seeing all open apps on all workspaces. If its already pinned to the launchbar, the little arrows are cool, but I dont really need to see a transmission icon taking up space on my main workspace when I only have it open on workspace 4

Wow, that was more than I thought there would be. After all of that, I still use it because I feel that it has promise, it just needs more polish. I believe that by 13.10 it should be fully featured enough to be a worthy successor to Gnome 2.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183067)

The main reason I hated it was that you pretty much HAVE to use the keyboard to use it. Not so bad for most people, but my monitor is a 42" tv sitting across the room with my pc. I have a wireless mouse and keyboard, but I usually left the keyboard turned off and sitting on a table out of the way. Until Unity, I could access all of my applications with no more than 3 mouse clicks, and I only had to use the keyboard to enter passwords or for the occasional terminal session.

Can't you right-click the Ubuntu icon, choose "Applications", and click on "Filter results"? In fact, the next time you do it "Filter results" will be pre-activated.

1- Yes I can just type a few letters and the program will show up, but if I cant remember the name of the program because I only use it once in a blue moon, I need to spend 5+ minutes searching for it.

See above.

2- I have to jump through a few hoops to get all my app notifications to show up correctly.

I have never had problems with that. What specific problems do you have?

3- I have 5 third party apps installed to tweak various settings in Unity that should be built in

Maybe you are a tweak-freak. I let Unity the way it came.

4- I think the universal menu system is retarded. I have it turned off, but it really should be a simple checkbox in the system settings.

I find it OK.

5- It needs a better workspace indicator. The one that is stuck on the launch bar should at least tell me what workspace I have active since I cant remove it. (I have an extra mouse button set to open workspace switching, and I have the cube set up where if I scroll on the left or right of the screen, it changes workspaces)

The workspace indicator could improve, but I find Super-S (equivalent to clicking the button) to be convenient enough. So that issue is minor.

6- I would like the option to only show open application on the active workspace instead of always seeing all open apps on all workspaces. If its already pinned to the launchbar, the little arrows are cool, but I dont really need to see a transmission icon taking up space on my main workspace when I only have it open on workspace 4

I have never had a problem with that.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

BoogeyOfTheMan (1256002) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184269)

I did not know you could do that with the filter applications, thanks for the tip :) Still more way more clicks than it should be, but now at least it wont take as long to find the app.

As for app indicators, I like to have the Empathy and Xchat indicators showing because the built in notification system isnt very noticeable if you arent looking at the screen when the message comes in. I like having the icon flash at me to let me know I missed something. In order to allow icons to show in the notification tray, you have to edit gconf.

Yes, I am a tweak freak. Most of the tweak apps I have can do a lot of the same things, but certain things are only available in one or are easier and simpler to use in another. Still, the ability to change the color of the launchbar and notification windows would be something that should be included in a default install.

When I am editing multiple text files, I find the universal menu to require twice as much mouse travel, granted its really not that big of an issue, but every once in a while it annoys the crap out of me.

Yes, the workspace indicator is minor, but still mildly annoying. Though I am getting used to it. Its more of an issue when I dont have anything open on a workspace, then I forget which workspace it is. (I use a main, audio, video, and file browser workspace set up)

Yes, I've seen the arguments for leaving all open apps viewable on all workspaces, I still dont like it and would like the option to change it.

Sorry, about the lack of quotes, I dont post very often and never bothered to figure out how to do anything but a full post quote.

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184549)

(I hate to be the Gnome lover but in this thread I turned out to be just that guy.)

You know that all your problems could be solved with gnome 3 right? specially the living room pc thing (aka mouse only environment).

Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41184629)

Install the J programming language. Run the REPL. Then cover the REPL window with another window. The J REPL is then lost for good. I have never seen a window manager lose a window before. I stopped using Unity at that point and started using Gnome3.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

trickstyhobbit (2713163) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182135)

I made the switch to Xubuntu too when Unity came out. It's not that I think Unity is terrible or anything, but it's not what I'm looking for. To be honest, I'll probably just stick with Xubuntu because, in my opinion, Gnome 3 is not very far removed from Unity and suffers from the same set of problems re: multitasking.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

metalgamer84 (1916754) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184069)

Same here, switched to Xubuntu and am back to a simple, usable and customizable desktop.

Its actually kinda funny, I started out a KDE fan. I ran KDE 3.6 till support/updates were finally done and despising all the glitz and glam of KDE 4.0, switched to Ubuntu and got used to Gnome 2 and loved it eventually. Now that Gnome 2 is done and Gnome 3 and Unity are too much about looks and not about simple functionality, I switched to Xubuntu and now love Xfce.

Funny how history keeps repeating itself.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182219)

Another alternative to the gnome-shell in Gnome 3 is to use the fallback-shell. It is similar to the old Gnome 2 interface and doesn't require reliance on where Mint wants to take Cinnamon.

Re:Which Gnome? (1)

bored_engineer (951004) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182455)

I installed Fedora with Cinnamon on an older machine last night. I've found two features that don't seem to work, but beyond that, it's quite manageable. I tried for about a year to get used to gnome 3, but couldn't do it.

2012 (5, Funny)

hammeraxe (1635169) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181529)

This will make 2012 the year of the linux desktop for sure!

Re:2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181585)

That's what they'll say in January 2013 lol

Re:2012 (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181863)

This will make 2013 the year of the linux desktop for sure!

Re:2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41184305)

This is totally not funny. Someone could _possibly_ find this funny the first two times it was said, but after 5000 repetitions, please put this "joke" to rest.
If I had mod points, I would mod you "Overrated".

(Posting anon to avoid the "Off-topic" down-mods)

Sorry, but... (2)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181551)

Kubuntu is no longer an official Canonical distribution.

Re:Sorry, but... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181669)

Go to the back of the class. Kunbuntu is still part of the official family, it is simply no longer directly developed by Canonical.

http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu/derivatives [ubuntu.com]

Re:Sorry, but... (2)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182267)

it is simply no longer directly developed by Canonical

So in other words, it is no longer an official Canonical distribution.

Re:Sorry, but... (4, Insightful)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182367)

For Kubuntu/Ubuntu, this "part of the official family" is pure cynical corporate marketing to Kubuntu's disadvantage. It is only good for Canonical and this thinking can and will hurt Kubuntu in the long run. They have been cast adrift and must admit it, and not just intellectually. In the corporate world you will really ONLY see what "officially part of the family" means when it comes to money.

Mandriva started from Redhat 5.1, is it part of the "official" Redhat family? No? Why? The money thing. Suse adopted the Redhat file structure and RPM package management system. Does that make it part of the Redhat family? Obviously no. If not, why not, for both Mandriva and Suse? Is it because it writes it's own installer and package manager even though for the most part they both can install pretty much the same RPMs? No, that's not it. Having similar and/or compatible package managers doesn't make systems part of the family except manybe for marketing. Taking ownership or spending time and money on it does. You are really only part of the official family if you are part of the corporate family. Otherwise you are part of the "we'll milk this as long as it gives us good marketing benefit" family. And again, that still comes back to money. Marketing is to make money.

And that's the crux. Right now the Kubuntu community is still in the, "we can still be friends stage." Later when it is understood that Canonical doesn't give a flying fuck about Kubuntu financially (and that means no free help or declining free help over time until reality sets in). And BTW, I don't blame Canonical, it is business. The now all volunteer Kubuntu needs to get that through their heads too. They should start with a name change to make it readily apparent in heads and in hearts.

I thiink right now there is still some warmth between kunbuntu and canonical. But as time goes by and less or no support comes from Canonical the rose will come off the bloom.

FWIW, when I use Linux (on my VM guest on Windows 7) I use Kubuntu.

Re:Sorry, but... (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182571)

I really don't understand why the Kubuntu people even bother. If they're not getting any more help from Canonical, why even bother keeping the distro going at all? They should just throw in the towel, and join the Linux Mint KDE team. Linux Mint is little more than Ubuntu with some modifications, and LM even has their own KDE version which is featured prominently, unlike Kubuntu which has always been treated like a red-haired stepchild. They should join forces, move to the Linux Mint camp, and make all their contributions there. I'm sure the LM team would be happy to have the extra help. Why bother maintaining two separate distros which are almost identical?

Re:Sorry, but... (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183207)

I really don't understand why the Kubuntu people even bother. If they're not getting any more help from Canonical, why even bother keeping the distro going at all? They should just throw in the towel, and join the Linux Mint KDE team. Linux Mint is little more than Ubuntu with some modifications, and LM even has their own KDE version which is featured prominently, unlike Kubuntu which has always been treated like a red-haired stepchild. They should join forces, move to the Linux Mint camp, and make all their contributions there. I'm sure the LM team would be happy to have the extra help. Why bother maintaining two separate distros which are almost identical?

Using that reasoning, then why did Linux Mint even release a KDE version instead of just working with Kubuntu? Mint KDE is not just Kubuntu fixed up. They have different goals. The real questions are how and why is Blue Systems supporting Mint KDE, Kubuntu and Netrunner? I'm glad they are, but you would think that putting all of those resources into one KDE distro sponsorship would be more efficient.

Re:Sorry, but... (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183849)

Using that reasoning, then why did Linux Mint even release a KDE version instead of just working with Kubuntu?

Probably for the same reason they made Linux Mint in the first place, instead of just working with Canonical. Or, because they already had LM in place, and adding KDE under the LM umbrella made more sense than contributing to a red-headed stepchild that Canonical hated.

They have different goals.

Which are what? I'm running both, on two different computers, and there's little difference between the two except the theming.

I can see how Netrunner is different, they have a different menu and appear to be aiming for a particular kind of user, rather than making a vanilla KDE distro. However, LMDKE and Kubuntu are both very vanilla KDE distros. And Netrunner even says it's based on Kubuntu.

Re:Sorry, but... (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182969)

Yeah.
So why was Kubuntu dropped? Looking at the Ubuntu website I can't even tell there are other variants.

Re:Sorry, but... (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183267)

The real irony is that you can make Kubuntu (or any KDE distro) look and act pretty darn close to Unity, sans lenses (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHqRRP9fVHQ [youtube.com] ). Maybe Ubuntu didn't want to keep Kubuntu around to remind them that you really could have different interfaces tailored to different platforms but one core underlying system.

Re:Sorry, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182109)

I don't know if it's "official" or not, but it's still by far the best ubuntu-based desktop for advanced use.

Re:Sorry, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182359)

I'm thinking it is still an official "derivative", but dotancohen is correct in that it is not a "Canonical" distribution. Canonical stopped sponsorship of Kubuntu sometime around Feb. or March of 2012. Blue Systems is now the official sponsor of Kubuntu. http://blue-systems.com/ We're splitting hairs though imo. The important thing is Canonical is no longer the sponsor; Blue Systems is.

because? (1)

Jodka (520060) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181593)

Seriously, why should I care at all about this? What will make this any better than regular Ubuntu?

Re:because? (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#41183397)

Well, it'll come with gnome installed, which some people want. So, that'll keep some people from ditching Canonical instead of going with Gnome's own independent Debian based distribution.

Oh, better for users? Fuck users, who gives a damn about them?!

Which version (2)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181637)

If it's Gnome 2, I would consider it. Actually, no; I've already moved on from Canonical's increasing ego drama and switched to LMDE.

Re:Which version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182911)

If it's Gnome 2, I would consider it. Actually, no; I've already moved on from Canonical's increasing ego drama and switched to LMDE.

Yeah because Canonical are the only ones not offering GNOME2 anymore, OH WAIT.

I'm holding out for CinnaBuntu... (5, Insightful)

steveha (103154) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181685)

...but I would also go for MateBuntu.

http://cinnamon.linuxmint.com/ [linuxmint.com]

http://mate-desktop.org/ [mate-desktop.org]

Re:I'm holding out for CinnaBuntu... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41183095)

So why not go for Mint, which has either option and is compatible with Ubuntu, or if you choose, Debian.

Whis is this not a meta-package? (4, Interesting)

Zombie Ryushu (803103) | more than 2 years ago | (#41181753)

Why is is this not a meta-package? Why is it necessary to have a completely different Ubuntu for Gnome?

Re:Whis is this not a meta-package? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181841)

In fact, it is, but since Ubuntu is targetting people who are not expert on computer usage, this is much easier for them to have a different version, even if under the hood, that's just the same with different set of package.

Re:Whis is this not a meta-package? (3, Informative)

stevenh2 (1853442) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182035)

If the people are not an expert, then they have no need to know what GNOME is. In reality, it's really easy to install the GNOME package, go to the software center and install it, then change your desktop at login.

Re:Whis is this not a meta-package? (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182187)

Why is is this not a meta-package? Why is it necessary to have a completely different Ubuntu for Gnome?

Because Ubuntu changes some of the gnome things, like the control center, etc., to include Ubuntu things, or to integrate better with Unity, like the notification system, etc. The goal of GNOMEbuntu is to be a pure Gnome 3 implementation, or at least as close as possible. That can't be done by simply installing packages. As to whether or not the differences between the Gnome versions and Ubuntu versions are significant enough to warrant the extra effort, that's to be seen.

i just took a super satisfying shit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181887)

my anus feels so relaxed and airy now

Oh boy... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181903)

Ubuntu and Gnome ? Two trainwrecks in one package.
Users will appreciate.

Re:Oh boy... (2)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182605)

I don't think that's fair. Ubuntu isn't a trainwreck, only the Unity component is. The rest of Ubuntu has long been a very good distro (largely because of Debian, which it's based on). It's Unity that's crap. Gnome3, of course, is also crap, but with this GNOMEbuntu, you're just trading one POS for another POS, so it's still only one trainwreck in the package, not two.

However, from what I'm reading, it seems that Gnome3 is a bigger POS than Unity, so this is still a downgrade it appears.

GNOME (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41181955)

It will have 1 button: shutdown PC. Less is more! Surely using computers is unhealthy for the eyes and GNOME already has taken good care about everything for you, just take a stroll in the park!

Is GNOMEbuntu really the best name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182021)

Why not Gubuntu or GNUbuntu?

Re:Is GNOMEbuntu really the best name? (1)

tolan-b (230077) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182473)

Because there's already /Goobuntu/ and GNUbuntu.

Re:Is GNOMEbuntu really the best name? (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182617)

GNUbuntu

Ubuntu running with HURD?

Less is more (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182031)

Gnome 10 (if they get that far) will see the gnome-tards finally achieving enlightenment.
They will finally realise the one true way to computing is to abandon computers. No keyboard, no mouse, no screen, no printer no nothing. With this realisation they will hopefully jump off a cliff and finally the rest of us can continue to use a computer for work.
   

*Buntu = Suck (1)

ilikenwf (1139495) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182097)

Not trolling, but never have I seen such a horrible distro, short of CentOS (by far the worst ever). Between the dependency hell every dist-upgrade, and the drama every time anything changes, I am surprised more people don't jump ship for vanilla Debian at the least, or move up in terms of distros and go for Archlinux or Gentoo...

Not only do Arch and Gentoo provide much more vanilla experiences, but they are more "rolling release" than set milestones, so upgrading is a lot less of a pain the majority of the time. Debian, of course, is rock solid though, and I don't see why anyone would take Ubuntu server over Debian Stable..it makes no sense.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182331)

Some of us prefer not to be bleeding edge, and would let other users like you vet out bugs before taking it up. This is why I stick to Ubuntu LTS releases.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (0)

ilikenwf (1139495) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182591)

Debian LTS is better - Ubuntu is all cruft.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (1)

raddan (519638) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182503)

I ditched Gentoo when the "rolling release" schedule you so highly praise decided to upgrade libc. Practically the entire system stopped working. I haven't touched Gentoo since 2005, so maybe things are better now, but it left a bad impression.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182687)

I don't personally use Gentoo but it's not terrible. You mixed your own drink when you chose something you had to build everything for, so you had to suffer the consequences...Not bashing - at least with Arch you don't have to build it all yourself unless you want to.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (1)

PvtVoid (1252388) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182723)

I ditched Gentoo when the "rolling release" schedule you so highly praise decided to upgrade libc. Practically the entire system stopped working. I haven't touched Gentoo since 2005, so maybe things are better now, but it left a bad impression.

I stuck around a little longer, but finally threw in the towel on Gentoo after the expat-2.0.x upgrade debacle in 2009. Never again.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (1)

Urza9814 (883915) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182841)

God yes. I used to be a huge fan of Mandriva after trying a dozen or two different distros throughout highschool. I was reinstalling the entire system at least once a year to get the latest version, and getting stuck in dependency hell CONSTANTLY, which I _thought_ was one of the things a package manager was supposed to help avoid. Switched to Arch around 3 years ago, the only time I've reinstalled was when I got a new laptop. And my system is never more than a month out of date. And it's easier to use/configure (no more 'do I set this through KDE or MCC?'), more stable than anything I've ever used, and just generally exactly what I want with near zero effort.

It's not for everyone I suppose, but aside from the occasional KDE bug (which are getting rarer every month since it's always updated,) Arch with KDE is the PERFECT OS for me. Well, I wish I could shave a couple seconds off the boot time too, but I haven't yet found any distro that will do any better. Most are worse because they run a bunch of services you don't want. And once my computer starts getting old and slow, I'll just drop KDE for something like RazorQT.

Re:*Buntu = Suck (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182879)

>>> they are more "rolling release" than set milestones, so upgrading is a lot less of a pain

I'd like an OS that doesn't upgrade at all (except security fixes), so I know my software will still work today in 2012, or in the future in 2020. I am sick-and-tired of these bullshit "upgrades" that make things break on my PC. I call it a DOWNgrade when programmers break your favorite tools. Can you image if carmakers did that? "We upgraded the firmware in your 2010 Civic and, sadly, the radio and air conditioner don't work anymore. You'll have to visit the nearest mechanic and buy new ones."

deprecated == you suck, removed = you REALLY suck (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41184605)

Totally with you on this one.

Every time I see "deprecated" or "removed", I curse the programmers to hell.

I installed a new webserver a few weeks ago, basically a job of moving working, production setup to new hardware and so of course a new OS level (though still linux.) moved some very vanilla Perl scripts to it, and bingo, they wouldn't run.

Fucking Perl changed how one of its special variables worked so that you have to use regular expressions to get the same effect, not to mention the scripts spew all manner of warnings about using references for hashes is deprecated. I then spent days digging through the code to change things so they'd work again. That wasn't all, either. Fucking Perl DBI module wouldn't talk to our postgreSQL server any longer, either, was bitching about "protocol", had to actually call python from perl so we could get to our data -- python still works (python 2 series... python 3... not even the same language, not interested, but thank you SO much for not breaking Python 2!!!.) Ended up writing a replacement for DBI that essentially is a wrapper around Python. Fucking fuck.

Fucking Apple broke the living shit out of cron in one "upgrade." And even once it was "working" it was spewing errors to the system console, which they promised to fix, but never did. They thought nothing of moving the ground by fucking with the PPC emulator, too... I fucking PAID for my PPC software, I'm not particularly inclined to just give it up because some Appletard thinks its "old."

Windows XP broke all the windows metrics that let devs know how to deal with titlebars.

When this shit happens, I just fume. Here we are, trying to do things the way we're supposed to, and fuck-all does it matter when the underlying OS or language or library takes a left turn because they're too fucking lazy or stupid to deal with how they told people it used to work. I swear, it reminds me of that scene in some movie where these two guys walk up to a door, open a listing, and ask "were you online in such and such a chatroom on such and such a date?" and then proceed to beat the living shit out of the guy. That's just how I feel about the assholes who break compatibility with prior use.

Fucking fucktarded fuckheads.

Programmers: If it isn't fucking broken, don't fucking fix it. You want new functionality? Fine. PUT IT IN A NEW MECHANISM. DON'T FUCKING BREAK THE EXISTING ONE. YOU FUCKING TARDFUCKERY ASSMUNCHING CARELESS DOUCHENOZZLE SUCKING ASS-BRAINED CHUCKLEFUCKS !!!ONE!LEVENTY!ONE!!!

I should feel better, but I really don't. Because I know it's going to keep happening. Because those new kids really kinda suck at this whole programming thing.

Gubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182107)

Based on the naming scheme of the other spins, I would have guessed the name would be Gubuntu. GnomeBuntu, well, i dunno, it's too long and doesn't have ubuntu in the name. Not my project so whatever.

Would much rather prefer a Mubuntu with Mate+Ubuntu.

GNUbuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182131)

Doy, why don't they just call it GNUbuntu?

Aha! That's where it went (1)

Skewray (896393) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182173)

Debian gives Gnome the boot, and it has to go somewhere...

This is ridiculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182191)

The reason why I ditched Ubuntu AND GNOME was that they had both jumped the shark and were now both ridiculous projects. GNOME Shell and Unity both suck, in my not-humble-at-all opinion.
 
Debian + MATE desktop for me now. Sorry Ubuntu.

I'm confused... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182213)

isn't this just Ubuntu + apt-get install gnome?

Nice development (2, Interesting)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182239)

I like Debian and Ubuntu, because of systematical structure, good packaging system and overall atitude to open system development. However, I strongy dislike Unity (nothing objective, just subjective feeling), and I love GNOME Shell. So this is good news, because I would like to work on Ubuntu and Debian, while still using GNOME stack.

It's nice to see that while with lack of resources (this and KDE version of Ubuntu are realeased without support from Canonical), Ubuntu has all popular enviroments to install. While someone like GNOME founder/now troll Miguel like to blame fragmentation why Linux isn't bringing him millions, I think having it is not bad - altough I vote for lot of integration which already have took place.

So thanks goes to devs who undertook this rather daring quest.

Re:Nice development (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182917)

If you want Ubuntu without Unity, try using the minimal ISOs at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD/ [ubuntu.com] . It will install a base system that boots to a terminal. From there, just "sudo apt-get install gnome-shell, lightdm, xorg, firefox, gnome-terminal" and whatever else you want. You'll get a lightweight gnome-shell DE without kitchen sink.

When have you tried Unity? (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | more than 2 years ago | (#41184347)

I strongy dislike Unity (nothing objective, just subjective feeling)

When have you tried it last? It is progressing nicely.

Man why wait Sabayon (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182251)

Gnome is damn fine.

what happened to GnomeOS? (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182401)

i thought i read on slashdot a few weeks ago that the Gnome developers were going to build their own in-house linux distro? did that fall by the wayside?

Meh (1)

PvtVoid (1252388) | more than 2 years ago | (#41182475)

The bastard stepchildren of Ubuntu are never going to be as well looked afer as the main tree. Better to go with another distro if you want something optimized for a different environment.

I may be the only person on Slashdot who thinks so, but I have been using Unity for several months now, and I really like it. I don't like absolutely everything about it, but the package as a whole is very usable, attractive, and reliable. (And yes, I frequently use the command line, have many windows upen at once ... bark bark woof woof.)

Grousing about how much better Gnome 2 was is just reactionary noise. Kudos to Ubuntu for valuing simplicity and elegance!

Knock, Knock, Neo.. PARTY VAN!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182507)

Memorable quotes for
Looker (1981)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/quotes [imdb.com]

"John Reston: Television can control public opinion more effectively than armies of secret police, because television is entirely voluntary. The American government forces our children to attend school, but nobody forces them to watch T.V. Americans of all ages *submit* to television. Television is the American ideal. Persuasion without coercion. Nobody makes us watch. Who could have predicted that a *free* people would voluntarily spend one fifth of their lives sitting in front of a *box* with pictures? Fifteen years sitting in prison is punishment. But 15 years sitting in front of a television set is entertainment. And the average American now spends more than one and a half years of his life just watching television commercials. Fifty minutes, every day of his life, watching commercials. Now, that's power."

##

"The United States has it's own propaganda, but it's very effective because people don't realize that it's propaganda. And it's subtle, but it's actually a much stronger propaganda machine than the Nazis had but it's funded in a different way. With the Nazis it was funded by the government, but in the United States, it's funded by corporations and corporations they only want things to happen that will make people want to buy stuff. So whatever that is, then that is considered okay and good, but that doesn't necessarily mean it really serves people's thinking - it can stupify and make not very good things happen."
- Crispin Glover: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000417/bio [imdb.com]

##

"It's only logical to assume that conspiracies are everywhere, because that's what people do. They conspire. If you can't get the message, get the man." - Mel Gibson (from an interview)

##

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William Casey, CIA Director

##

"The real reason for the official secrecy, in most instances, is not to keep the opposition (the CIA's euphemistic term for the enemy) from knowing what is going on; the enemy usually does know. The basic reason for governmental secrecy is to keep you, the American public, from knowing - for you, too, are considered the opposition, or enemy - so that you cannot interfere. When the public does not know what the government or the CIA is doing, it cannot voice its approval or disapproval of their actions. In fact, they can even lie to your about what they are doing or have done, and you will not know it. As for the second advantage, despite frequent suggestion that the CIA is a rogue elephant, the truth is that the agency functions at the direction of and in response to the office of the president. All of its major clandestine operations are carried out with the direct approval of or on direct orders from the White House. The CIA is a secret tool of the president - every president. And every president since Truman has lied to the American people in order to protect the agency. When lies have failed, it has been the duty of the CIA to take the blame for the president, thus protecting him. This is known in the business as "plausible denial." The CIA, functioning as a secret instrument of the U.S. government and the presidency, has long misused and abused history and continues to do so."
- Victor Marchetti, Propaganda and Disinformation: How the CIA Manufactures History

##

George Carlin:

"The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else.

But I'll tell you what they don't want. They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago.

You know what they want? Obedient workers people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And, now, they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it. They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the big club.

This country is finished."

##

We now return you Americans to your media: Corporate, Government sponsored and controlled (rigged) elections..

Most of you are all so asleep it's time you woke up!

Gubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182693)

they should have called it

Ubuntu with GNOME 2 exists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41182987)

Some people are wondering why there isn't a GNOME 2 or MATE version of Ubuntu. There is one already, two really. Mint has a MATE desktop option and Decent has a MATE desktop on top of Ubuntu's base.

gnome-session patch breaks Gnome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41183063)

Hopefully this will have the bug fixed where without compiz installed it's not possible to run Gnome. gnome-session in Ubuntu (not in Debian) includes an extra patch which forces compiz to be the default window manager. If one chooses to use Gnome without Unity and Compiz installed under Ubuntu, s/he must recompile the package without said patch.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?