×

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!

Red Hat Confirms GNOME Classic Mode For RHEL 7

timothy posted about 10 months ago | from the diplomatic-tightrope dept.

GUI 192

An anonymous reader writes "The H-Online is reporting that the upcoming RHEL 7 will use GNOME Classic Mode over Gnome Shell as its Default Desktop GUI. Speaking to TechTarget ahead of the 2013 Red Hat Summit, Red Hat engineering director Denise Dumas said this regarding the decision: "I think it's been hard for the Gnome guys, because they really, really love modern mode, because that's where their hearts are." She added that the same team had "done a great job putting together classic mode" and that it was eventually decided to use it in favour of the more radical modern interface to spare customers the effort of relearning their way around the desktop again."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

192 comments

Just moving the it to RHEL 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995179)

It's the future of desktop Linux. They will have to relearn anyway.

Re:Just moving the it to RHEL 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997201)

I doubt it. If Gnome couldn't get enough momentum to keep Red Hat from reversing it's initial plan to go with gnome-shell for RHEL 7, what make you think they'll be able to for RHEL 8? Gnome-shell is failed project for the Desktop team at Red Hat.

Fonts (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995215)

The fonts are a mess on that screenshot. How does that not hurt anyone's eyes?

Re:Fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995391)

Obviously fonts are a matter of taste. I have no idea what you're on about.
Maybe if you listed some specific criticisms?

Re:Fonts (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 10 months ago | (#43995431)

The fonts are a mess on that screenshot. How does that not hurt anyone's eyes?

I looked... and I can see nothing wrong with them!

Re:Fonts (4, Funny)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 10 months ago | (#43995765)

The straight lines are straight, and lines on different letters have different apparent thickness.The kerning's a little distinctive as well, making the letters each look a little different. All together, this means that after a few minutes of reading text, your eyes will still be able to read the text! This encourages a computer user to actually use their computer, resulting in a higher risk for repetitive-strain injuries like Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

In contrast, consider the Segoe font Microsoft has chosen for Windows 8 and Office 2013. Its lines are curved, its corners indistinct, and every letter looks identical apart from its shape. The pristine perfection of each glyph allows the brain to properly tangle the shapes together, interrupting the reading process. In my own experience, I've found that after only a few minutes of reading labels in the course of my work, the discomfort in reading is a subtle reminder to get up and look away from the computer for a few more minutes.

From the many interruptions, I'm sure my health has improved, and the total effect on my productivity has been quite noticeable.

Re:Fonts (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 10 months ago | (#43995973)

[serious comment which TL,DR]

Hint: after looking, I can see nothing right either.

Re:Fonts (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 10 months ago | (#43996005)

[serious comment which TL,DR]

If you thought my comment was serious, you clearly didn't read it.

Re:Fonts (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 10 months ago | (#43996923)

[serious comment which TL,DR]

If you thought my comment was serious, you clearly didn't read it.

My apologies... the cross-diagonal reading and the reference to Win8 made me (too hastily) dismissive.
(Now that I corrected that, back to exercising up that CTS of mine).

Re:Fonts (2)

X0563511 (793323) | about 10 months ago | (#43996089)

He's probably complaining about the greyscale subpixel antialiasing. "Most" people are used to the RGB/BGA/whatever methods instead. In my case I can't stand those, and find the settings in that screenshot to be quite agreeable. ... that said one of the first things that would happen is my setting the fonts to the DejaVu fonts, instead of whatever they are using.

Re:Fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997717)

Just nitpicking but greyscale AA is NOT subpixel AA. You need a whole pixel to display grey. Other than that - you are right: I too detest subpixel AA with a passion because I loathe the slightly colored edges of the glyphs. Even on my 120+ ppi TFT I turn it off as soon I install the OS. That and the dreadful fontconfig autohinter.

Yes, I confess I am a typophile.

Re:Fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995719)

I can't be the only person that hates the fonts that ship in, like, all linux distros.
The first think I do in any linux distro is download the microsoft "core" fonts, turn off text anti-aliasing, and switch everything to aerial. (I always find myself going back to aerial because I'm used to it.. It's just comfortable, since I've been using it for so many years.)
To be fair, I do this to windows too. I install a registry hack that replaces the tahoma system font with aerial, and I turn off cleartype.

I cannot stand font smoothing on most displays. It just looks like blurry garbage. This is the unfortunate reality for those of us that have good vision. I can sit 3-4 feet from your average 1920x1080 monitor and count every pixel in a 9 point font. Font smoothing is a hack that only works if your vision isn't great to begin with.

Font smoothing looks good on high res displays, like you can find on new smartphones, tablets, and "retina" macbook pros.

Re:Fonts (2)

MBGMorden (803437) | about 10 months ago | (#43996139)

Arial? Man - that's bad for a UI. Even Microsoft doesn't use Arial for their UI. They used Tahoma up through XP and then Segoe starting in Vista.

Truthfully, I don't find Ubuntu's interface font that bad, but I usually switch my interface to use Google'd freely available "Droid" font which is pretty decent.

Also, after much experimenting with the awful looking out of the box Linux GUI's, I actually found that the #1 actual problem with the font setup is mostly just that by default they're too damned big. 10, 11, or even 12px for the normal interface font. I found that if I dropped the standard font size down to 8 or 9px - even with an ugly font - things looked a LOT better.

Re:Fonts (1)

angryfirelord (1082111) | about 10 months ago | (#43995795)

Red Hat doesn't include anything that could potentially infringe upon patents. The reason why fonts in Windows and OS X look good is because a lot of man-hours went into developing them, so companies like Microsoft got a patent for things like ClearType. That said, if you need better Linux fonts, look into Infinality.

Re:Fonts (2)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 10 months ago | (#43996093)

ed Hat doesn't include anything that could potentially infringe upon patents. The reason why fonts in Windows and OS X look good is because a lot of man-hours went into developing them, so companies like Microsoft got a patent for things like ClearType. That said, if you need better Linux fonts, look into Infinality.

All font rendering on Linux sucks. This includes Infinality. You don't notice it much on phones or tablets, because of the high DPI, but with a standard low-DPI monitor or TV set, it's painful.

The only completely open-source solution I've seen that provides acceptable results on a low-DPI screen is Anti-Grain Geometry [antigrain.com]. But as far as I can tell, this was never incorporated into any actual distribution, and has remained just a tech demo.

Re:Fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996689)

The fonts are a mess on that screenshot. How does that not hurt anyone's eyes?

Well, you have to understand, a select few of us DIDN'T force ourselves to develop a Pavlovian response to run a cheese grater over our eyeballs any time we see something slightly a teensy-tiny bit different than what we're used to. Weird, I know, but we somehow get by with our non-grated eyeballs and our adaptability.

GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995263)

GNOME definitely has a long way to go with the new UI theme. I found it fitting for Ubuntu (obviously), but as for Debian 7's default theme... I found myself caught off guard. As "conservative" as the Debian development team is, I'm surprised they defaulted to that.

As for Red Hat, I'm glad they chose classic mode. Maybe it will make the GNOME team step back and fix the annoyances associated with their modern mode.

Re:GNOME (1)

LVSlushdat (854194) | about 10 months ago | (#43995427)

Finally!! a bit of common-sense.. I just hope the CentOS devs carry that over to CentOS7..

Re:GNOME (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 10 months ago | (#43996095)

CentOS wouldn't make changes like that. Their changes are limited to the removal of branding, and stripping out the RHN stuff.

Re:GNOME (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#43995481)

GNOME definitely has a long way to go with the new UI theme. I found it fitting for Ubuntu (obviously), but as for Debian 7's default theme... I found myself caught off guard. As "conservative" as the Debian development team is, I'm surprised they defaulted to that.

As for Red Hat, I'm glad they chose classic mode. Maybe it will make the GNOME team step back and fix the annoyances associated with their modern mode.

You are much more diplomatic than I am. I did a Debian install yesterday, first non-headless one in a while, and narrowly avoided spraying acidic bile all over the keyboard when I saw what GNOME has become...

Re:GNOME (2)

KiloByte (825081) | about 10 months ago | (#43995793)

An easy fix: apt-get install xfce4. For more thorough fix:
echo "deb http://repo.mate-desktop.org/debian [mate-desktop.org] wheezy main" >>/etc/apt/sources.list
apt-get install mate-desktop-environment

And for the love of Yog-Sothoth, remember to clean up the crap Gnome3 pulled in if you inadvertently installed it. Some stuff just wastes disk, some wastes memory, some (like avahi) is a security hole, some (network-manager) is just a wholesale sabotage machine.

Gnome3 Classic Mode is a bad joke: it superficially matches the appearance of Gnome2, while retaining but a small fraction of its functionality.

Re:GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996147)

MATE is not currently as stable as I would like for a Debian Stable machine.

Re:GNOME (4, Informative)

frost_knight (885804) | about 10 months ago | (#43996711)

If you're performing a new install of Debian and want it to use xfce as your desktop right from the start, edit the install cd boot command and add the following:

desktop=xfce

Or you can go to Avanced Options and choose xfce.

Then your system will be configured for xfce from the get-go.

Re:GNOME (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#43997407)

That's what I ended up doing(call me a coward, or lazy, or too dumb for Debian; but why bother exhaustively scrubbing GNOME and then installing XFCE, all to save a fresh, 100%-not-yet-customized install that I could just pave over?)

Re:GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997607)

My glib answer is install KDE... but for someone who wants a fairly lightweight GNOME2-like environment XFCE is it. Cinnamon's not bad either, but isn't as mature as XFCE.

I use the GNOME Shell (2)

shipofgold (911683) | about 10 months ago | (#43995285)

I have been using the GNOME shell in Fedora 15 -> 17. Once they added the "extensions" interface it made it palatable as I have a number of extensions that give me back some of the old features. I do like the http://extensions.gnome.org/ [gnome.org] interface though...makes it easy to find and add the needed extensions. But I can't honestly say that the changes GNOME3 introduced were worth the trouble. The workflow isn't greatly enhanced and the learning curve was bad enough to make me curse more than once.

I haven't seen a single interface enhancement that I can say was worth the headache: Windows XP -> Windows 7 ( I finally turned off Aero). I won't try Windows 8 unless I have to. Firefox upcoming v25 changes have me scared. MS-office ribbons suck.

In most cases I see these as a solution looking for a problem...

Re:I use the GNOME Shell (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995537)

Smacking meta and typing a few characters of what I want to open was, alone, enough for me to take Gnome-shell and Gnome 3 over Gnome 2. There was my productivity enhancement, with a bonus of keyboard shortcuts to snap windows to left/right/full screen. It's just an opinion and all, but Gnome 3 does enough for me, as a window manager and keeps out of my way at other times.

I will say that I am going to miss transparent backgrounds in gnome-terminal when I jump to Gnome 3.8, but I don't think you're really talking about Gnome 3, I think you're talking about gnome-shell.

Re:I use the GNOME Shell (1)

pmontra (738736) | about 10 months ago | (#43997315)

What you do with meta I'm doing it with ALT-F2 usually not more than a couple of times per week. Not that I open my Applications menu much more often. Firefox, Thunderbird, Skype, Emacs, Terminal are all open since boot time and Nautilus can be opened from the desktop. I'm opening the Places menu more often because I have bookmarks stored in there. Gnome 3 doesn't give me advantages, only disruption to my workflow so I stay on classic mode without the top bar. I merged in the bottom one the few things I cared about.

Re:I use the GNOME Shell (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 10 months ago | (#43997615)

I did like XP to 7 UI changes - particularly the way Network & Sharing Center was organized. 7 did do a whole lot of things better than XP. However, I agree w/ the rest of it - I wouldn't bother w/ Windows 8, I'd probably be fine w/ either KDE4 or Razor-qt, but honestly, never liked any of the GNOMEs.

Translation..... (5, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#43995291)

Our Corporate customers have Demanded that we don't make the interface change for only trendiness, so we are sticking with what works best for fur paying customers.

Re:Translation..... (4, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#43995623)

continued translation ".. and just because Gnome UI designers need something to do doesn't mean that we're going to switch our UI every year".

it's not like the changes are likely to stop either. which is the bullshit part, if the new paradigms are so good why the fuck is nobody sticking to them year after year and how many names do we need for desktop widgets really.

Re:Translation..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995707)

Cause its Linux. Some 21 year old something fresh out of college knows how to do it better.

(Yes I am old, now get the **ll off my lawn)

Re:Translation..... (2)

Tridus (79566) | about 10 months ago | (#43995859)

That's funny, Microsoft is doing the exact same bloody thing and they're not making Linux.

It's the new trend from designers - "everything that currently exists sucks, what I think would be neat is clearly the ultimate design!"

Re:Translation..... (3, Informative)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 10 months ago | (#43995943)

Yeah, this poisonous trend is baked deeply into the school of "UI design". It is now an article of faith among UI designers that letting the users choose is a bad thing. It should be the designers making a choice, and that should not only be the default setting, but the only setting. This article [joelonsoftware.com], written by Joel Spolsky way back in 2000, gives some insight into what these people are thinking when they take choices away from users.

Not Just Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995917)

It's not just Linux, it's everybody.

Windows 8
iOS 7

Pending OSX

Re:Translation..... (1)

efitton (144228) | about 10 months ago | (#43995783)

Even more continued translation: And this is why GNOME Classic came about. It had nothing to do with the two successful forks and listening to the lusers. Our bosses made us do it because they know the shell sucks too.

Re:Translation..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997631)

And it is sad that so many OS developer wastes time just to reinvent the wheel instead of really making progress. Linux destops desperatelly requires intergarion, cleaning of configuration mess (registers), configuration tool (not tools), working and feature rich applications, betters sound support...
Eg. just tried to test USB headset with Ubuntus (13.04) defaul sound recorder. Well, I should't have..
Then Ubuntus default system settings only does some very basic, you have to install that tweak tool, and gconf tool, and compiz tools...
Applications are more important than the way you start them.
Still I try to use it because I don't like to obey and pay to MS dictatorship.

Classic GNOME in the morning (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995349)

I love the smell of classic GNOME in the morning, it smells like... Victory!

This was even a question? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995365)

I can't think of any good reason to put a "modern" (i.e. tablet) interface on a server or workstation. Those interfaces are for home systems, unless I'm missing something. And RHEL is targeted at servers and workstations, unless I'm missing something again.

Re:This was even a question? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995377)

Yeah, I'm a little concerned that the server has a window manager at all.

Re:This was even a question? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995409)

Geez, we have every Wayland thread filled with bitching about network transparency, and then we have RHEL threads filled with whining that you don't need X running on a server. Make up your damn mind!

Re:This was even a question? (0)

0123456 (636235) | about 10 months ago | (#43996471)

Retard.

The reason RHEL users want the network transparency that X provides is so they don't have to run an X SERVER on their servers in order to run graphical programs when they have to do so.

Since you're apparently a Wayland fanatic, I guess you can't be expected to understand how X works or why Wayland breaks so much that we do on a regular basis.

Re:This was even a question? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996665)

And you apparently can't bother to learn how Wayland works. Since, you know, the Wayland team is made up of the core X.Org developers who have been working on X11 for more than a decade. They know far more about X than the random Slashdot neckbeards like yourself.

Re:This was even a question? (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 10 months ago | (#43997671)

So, where's Wayland's network transparency?

How do I run a Wayland app on my Ubuntu server and display the output on a Windows laptop without resorting to a hideous kludge like VNC?

Let's look at the FAQ, shall we?

"No, that is outside the scope of Wayland. To support remote rendering you need to define a rendering API, which is something I've been very careful to avoid doing. The reason Wayland is so simple and feasible at all is that I'm sidestepping this big task and pushing it to the clients."

So basically, the answer is 'that's hard, so I'm not doing it. I'll rely on everyone else to write that code for me and since everyone will write their own, nothing will be able to talk to anything else.'

Wayland is throwing away the biggest single strength of X in an era where the world is becoming more and more networked and the ability to run software on one machine while displaying on another is more and more important. But that's not surprising, since the original X came out when users were getting more and more power on their desktop and didn't need to run their apps on a powerful central server to display on a dumb X terminal.

Re:This was even a question? (2)

deusmetallum (1607059) | about 10 months ago | (#43995503)

You're assuming that the machine RHEL is installed on is a server. If you have mission critical desktop machines, wouldn't you pick RHEL for that?

Re:This was even a question? (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 10 months ago | (#43996033)

Yeah, I'm a little concerned that the server has a window manager at all.

Some functions are better performed from the command line, and some from a GUI. Insisting that servers be command line only is just pointless obscurantism.

Re:This was even a question? (2)

kenaaker (774785) | about 10 months ago | (#43996269)

The server system doesn't have to be running an X-Server to present X-client applications on remote desktops. With X and network transparency, you have a choice.

Luddites (1, Informative)

nten (709128) | about 10 months ago | (#43995517)

It isn't a tablet interface. It is a more efficient desktop interface. I wish I could get it on my workstations where I work, I am much more productive in it. With the initial release I had the same complaint as most everyone, that when you selected terminal (or any app) the second time it just took you to the first instance. I tried holding control while I selected it thinking that would obviously start a second instance, but it did not. But the second release they added the control thing and it is essentially my perfect UI. I think they could use a little more intelligence with the smart docking, but other than that nothing.

Using it for a tablet I would find very rough, every time I start an app I'm typing its name and hitting enter, (I remove all the favorites, I don't like clicky icons and you can't have one for everything you might run anyway), and text entry on a tablet is universally painful until they get the speech thing to work robustly.

Re:This was even a question? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995631)

The last company I worked at, prior to retirement, had a compute cluster of over 100 RHEL boxes, which, when I became the subject matter expert/admin for them, ran in runlevel 5, thus sucking lots of cycles to run a GUI that NO ONE looked at, unless that node had a problem, and then a "crash-cart" with a keyboard/mouse/monitor was rolled up to the node and plugged in. The IT manager, who had had one Linux class, and was pretty much exclusively a Windows type, and who set up the cluster early on, apparently thought this was the "Linux way".. I finally managed to convince him that changing to runlevel 3 and using startx was a FAR better way to go if/when a gui was needed, and of course, he was really the only one who needed the gui, as the rest of the crew were fairly command-line savvy..

Re:This was even a question? (1)

MrNemesis (587188) | about 10 months ago | (#43996829)

How else are you going to operate the server with your touchscreen KVM/tablet if it doesn't have a touchscreen-friendly UI?

Added bonus is that we'll now be able to use autocorrect for all those pesky command-line things that unbellyfeel computers still insist on using (at least until they integrated into an app silo anyway, and then removed). That will finally open the door to speech-operated commands which'll dispense with the need to have supposedly "trained" server operators eating into your OP-EX.

Computer - export the data please
DATA EXPORTED
Computer - format the data please
DATA FORMATTED
Computer - send the formatted data into the reporting engine please
DATA REPORTED
Computer - take actions based on the report please
RHCE'S DOWNSIZED

All you oldthink dinosaurs need to get with the program.

Feeling old... (2)

BladeMelbourne (518866) | about 10 months ago | (#43995395)

When Red Hat 6 or 7 are mentioned in close proximity I automatically think of the CDs I was installing on my PIII 450 MHz many years ago. Before I visited Fedora, *buntu and Debian.

I still have that PIII... maybe I should boot it up and frustrate myself trying to get LILO to install and then unfrustrate myself looking at pixelated pr0n at 28.8 kbps :-)

Re:Feeling old... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995613)

Really only Red Hat 6? I think my dad still has the old Red Hat 5.0 cd somewhere.
Oh the fun of forgetting to run lilo and fiddling with XFree86 config files.

Re:Feeling old... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995861)

Still have a machine running RedHat 3.0.3 Picasso. 386 + mathco; 8 MB RAM. It doesn't run X. It's not very useful anymore, and it's kernel 2.0.0, so it's basically as bad as a SCADA device.

Re:Feeling old... (2)

CyberKnet (184349) | about 10 months ago | (#43995879)

Fully realizing that someone will trump this with something akin to a 300baud modem ...

CR-ROM???

You're not old unless you had to go to the store to buy 100 3.5" floppies so that you could download the 76 1.44MB individual disk images over your 14.4k modem connection, rawrite them one at a time, and then spend the afternoon swapping disks as you waited apprehensively for the # prompt of your new slackware installation. Only to have to start again after disk x26 because disk x26 had a bad sector and failed a CRC check, and gosh darn it but you only had one computer so you need to boot back into windows to create a new disk x26. And start the disk swapping again.

Yeah... those were the days.

Re:Feeling old... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996827)

Pfft!! Amateur...

Old is going to the store to buy 10 5.25" floppies (they were too expensive to buy more than 10 at a time) so you could copy your buddy's 360 KB game disks. If you were lucky, you had a drive speed up program that made your disk copies take 20 minutes instead of 2 hours. Sometimes you had to borrow your buddy's disk drive too, just so you could copy the games to an audio cassette tape, which took even longer, but at least the blank tapes were cheaper.

And woe be to the fool who didn't scan their room for misplaced magnets first.

Re:Feeling old... (1)

LVSlushdat (854194) | about 10 months ago | (#43997297)

Remember those days VERY well..Around 1994, the company I worked for at the time, was wanting to put up one of those new-fangled thingies called a website..Since we were actually a Novell shop, the rest of the IT department wanted to go with a then-available httpd NLM (Netware Loadable Module) for the webserver. Since I was evaluating Slackware, both on and off-the-clock, I suggested setting it up via Linux and its httpd, which would be FREE vs the several hundred dollars the vendor wanted for the Novell NLM. The IT manager went with my idea and I got to run with it.. Fun times!!!

Re:Feeling old... (2)

water-and-sewer (612923) | about 10 months ago | (#43997305)

I can relate. I run VMWare with SUSE8 and SUSE 8.2 virtual machines, partly out of nostalgia, partly because it's neat.

SUSE 8.0 still used Gnome 1.X and I find it much more useful than Gnome 3 (actually I even like it better than Gnome 2, but I know that puts me in the minority). Interestingly, old distros (these are from 2001 and 2002 respectively) are surprisingly useful already and do almost all of what I use a computer for these days, including browsing the web (not all sites, obviously, and yes I'm aware of the security implications).

Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (0)

deusmetallum (1607059) | about 10 months ago | (#43995463)

Surely this level of pandering is an extremely bad thing?

If we're telling our sysadmins that they don't have to learn a new desktop environment, what's the point in them learning anything else? For example, at some point, their favourite firewall software might be discontinued, but we shouldn't pander to them telling them that the old way was certainly best. If they don't want to learn about new firewall software, they're not going to be in their job much longer as their network is hacked.

New != Bad
Old != Good

We should be looking at everything in terms of their own merits, not based on what is going to cause the least tension for stuffy users that want things to always be done their way.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (2)

dbIII (701233) | about 10 months ago | (#43995595)

It's not pandering, it's doing what is required to stay relevant. The new gnome just isn't quite at the point where it works as well as the older gnome interface, so the old one stays if RHEL want people to keep on using their distro.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (2)

punker (320575) | about 10 months ago | (#43995629)

I don't think that's it at all. I think Gnome3 has been weighed pretty well on it's merits. Many people consider it unusable. It made me jump ship for Mint (and I've been primarily running RH/Fedora since the mid nineties). I've tried alot of different desktops (Enlightenment, Gnome 1-3, TWM, KDE 1-4, and then some) . I'm not unwilling to change, and I think that's generally true of linux desktop users. We will try new things, and embrace the good ones. We will also harshly reject the bad ones. That's our culture.

And BTW, linux admins all have the same desktop. It's usually black w/ green monospace characters. ;)

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997357)

And BTW, linux admins all have the same desktop. It's usually black w/ green monospace characters. ;)

Thats all *real* Linux admins have the same desktop...It's usually black w/ green monospace characters

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (3, Insightful)

Stuarticus (1205322) | about 10 months ago | (#43995679)

Cost of unnecessary retraining = Bad.
Loss of productivity due to needless changes = Bad.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (1)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 10 months ago | (#43995731)

Surely this level of pandering is an extremely bad thing?

Not necessarily. If the benefits of GNOME 3 aren't worth the costs of retraining, and GNOME 2 is sustainable for a reasonable period of time, then why switch?

Seems most sensible though when there's some planning for the future. Will GNOME 2 support their needs for the foreseeable future, and is this dallying nothing more than short term cost saving with no consideration given for the future?

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996519)

Gnome Classic != Gnome 2. It's all Gnome 3/GTK-3 under the hood, it just that they coded a panel in Gnome 3 that looks and behaves similar to the panel in Gnome 2.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995827)

Is not broken = do not fix.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (4, Insightful)

wile_e8 (958263) | about 10 months ago | (#43995857)

New != Good
Sticking with the old version != unwillingness to learn

If the old version works better, why should they change? That's looking at it's own merits. Changing just because it's newer isn't.

Change for the sake of change == bad

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 10 months ago | (#43995881)

If we're telling our sysadmins that they don't have to learn a new desktop environment, what's the point in them learning anything else?

Presumably because something else has functionality they need. Do you think sysadmins have extra brains available to learn a new GUI simply for the sake of learning a new GUI? Make it more functional, and they will eagerly climb the learning curve. That's why they're using UNIX in the first place.

We should be looking at everything in terms of their own merits

And the new GNOME interface has very few of those.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995897)

As someone who is not a sysadmin and uses RHEL daily for software development at work and Fedora at home, I applaud this move. Gnome3 has been one disaster after another. They provide tweaks to let the user fix certain things (note: they do not directly correct the problem) and then they break others. Screen unlock on F18 is a #*%& pain in the @$$. It still takes me ages to find the software I am looking for compared to the old menu system. Otherwise it is mouse over to the corner, mouse over to the other side of the screen to the search bar, leave the mouse for the keyboard and type part of the name, go back to the mouse and click on the application icon. Every time I have to do that I want to scream at someone: "Who the fuck taught you HCI?!?!?!"

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (1)

Tridus (79566) | about 10 months ago | (#43995899)

New != Good either. Gnome 3 is not an improvement over what was there before, it's change for the sake of change.

Telling people they have to learn something new because your designers were bored is never going to go over well.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995915)

we shouldn't pander to them telling them that the old way was certainly best

But what if the "old way" really was better?

What if the new GUI paradigms are based on wrong assumptions? Do you think that all GUI changes are guaranteed to be an improvement?

Tinkering with GUIs is always an experiment. Has it ever occurred to you that sometimes these experiments fail?

Sometimes the customers are the first to realize that these experiments are a failure. And sometimes the developers, who have a tremendous amount of time and ego invested in the new GUI, are the last to realize the failure.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (5, Insightful)

David Gerard (12369) | about 10 months ago | (#43996701)

If it is possible for a new desktop to be better than its predecessor, then it is possible for it to be worse.

The users largely hate GNOME 3. Therefore, it has failed user acceptance testing. It is worse than its predecessor.

In this case, it's Red Hat - who pay many of the remaining GNOME devs - saying "dunno what you're here for, but we're here to serve our users." It's nice someone is.

Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (1)

ADRA (37398) | about 10 months ago | (#43997107)

Yes, so lets talk about merits. Lets say retraining costs are zero and every one of your admin's is a rock star 10 years ahead of the crufty enterprise OS, you still have to deal with:
1. Is the new system cheaper/better for productivity?
2. Will the new system help retain cheaper/better staff?
3. Will the new system help other systems work cheaper/better with this one?

If you can't answer these questions about the new design honestly, you'll start to understand why companies stick to things they know and understand. You'll still see eg. netware based enterprises out there today for no other reason than its a known quantity even though huge parts of their stack are so obsolete even the vendors want to stop supporting the products (but don't stop support because cash is king).

As a Sabayon/Gentoo use (1)

Tighe_L (642122) | about 10 months ago | (#43995513)

I tried using the new Gnome and found it slowed me down. I now use either Mate or just Fluxbox.

Re:As a Sabayon/Gentoo use (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43995701)

Yes but the version of Gnome in Mate and Fluxbox is just not up to spec with Gnome 3.

phewww (1)

SebNukem (188921) | about 10 months ago | (#43995567)

Dodged that bullet. In all sincerity, thank you redhat.

Re:phewww (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996119)

Dodged that bullet. In all sincerity, thank you redhat.

Seriously, it feels to me like we're living in unusually risky times.

I'm seeing these companies roll out major, unwanted, unnecessary changes to the proven desktop workflow paradigm (Win8, Unity, GNOME 3, etc.).

It feels like a huge threat to my future productivity. And I haven't got a clue why they insist on threatening my productivity. I don't understand what they stand to gain by inconveniencing me. It feels like I'm being punished, and I don't know why.

I love my two 30-inch 2560x1600 monitors, and I love having 10 windows open at the same time. But they want me to use a GUI designed for a smartphone, and they're powerful, and their ideas are spreading, and I'm afraid that they're eventually going to win.

Re:phewww (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 10 months ago | (#43997707)

And I haven't got a clue why they insist on threatening my productivity. I don't understand what they stand to gain by inconveniencing me. It feels like I'm being punished, and I don't know why.

They made the mistake of hiring 'UI designers'.

Imagine you're a 'UI designer'. Do you:

1. Say 'that UI is just about perfect, lets change a few pixels here and there and call it done' and find yourself on welfare the next week.

Or

2. Say 'that UI sucks, it's got too many options, it's confusing to users, we should throw it all away and build a completely new UI with all these fancy hidden windows that I'll have to design and a bazillion new icons that make no sense to anyone but me' and have a job for years before you say 'that UI sucks, let's redesign it all over again'?

Re:phewww (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996587)

Your thanking Red Hat for dodging a bullet? It's their developers that fired the gun in the first place! You're basically thanking Red Hat for being a lousy shot while trying to commit suicide!

Re:phewww (1)

David Gerard (12369) | about 10 months ago | (#43996721)

This is why it's interesting that the people who pay the bills are finally calling "bullshit" on the devs' idiot ideas. Red Hat largely didn't care because their market is basically command-line; but GNOME 3 sucked hard enough that their paying customers were displeased.

anyone even use red hat ent desktop any more? (1, Interesting)

rubycodez (864176) | about 10 months ago | (#43995773)

so many other distros have such superior and polished desktops. And other distros, not redhat, allow access to their repositories by anyone since paying customer pay for *support* and having public access to repos is way of advertising, marketing and getting community goodwill. All have which became foreign concepts to Red Hat long ago. I haven't seen a RedHat enterprise desktop in a decade. and that's a good thing.

Re: anyone even use red hat ent desktop any more? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997037)

I think that you need a GUI to run a standard Oracle installation.

Re: anyone even use red hat ent desktop any more? (3, Insightful)

rubycodez (864176) | about 10 months ago | (#43997371)

you don't need local desktop manager running for that, you can do remotely with ssh -X

Thank God! (1)

organgtool (966989) | about 10 months ago | (#43995803)

We will be upgrading some of the workstations in our ops center in the future and some of those workstations have three monitors on them. If I had to hop across three monitors every time I need to get to the app's menu under the new unified Gnome menu, I would probably be throwing things across the room in a very short period of time.

Re:Thank God! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997411)

Its bad enough with two monitors.. I can't imagine what Gnome3 would be like with 3 or 4...

Re:Thank God! (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 10 months ago | (#43997587)

What on earth are you talking about?

There is no "new unified gnome menu". The apps menu is where it has always been.

Who Cares? (1)

CoolHnd30 (89871) | about 10 months ago | (#43995989)

Who even uses a desktop on RHEL server? I have X installed to remotely tunnel a few apps through ssh, but I won't ever run a full desktop on a server...

The Console looks the same (2)

theJML (911853) | about 10 months ago | (#43996047)

I don't even have X installed on my CentOS and RHEL servers. It's so much easier to manage from the command line... especially remotely.

But then I'm the kinda guy MS had to come out with "Server Core" for, I suppose.

Default window skin still needs fixing. (1)

johnw (3725) | about 10 months ago | (#43996487)

A great improvement, but it still seems to use that stupid window skin by default - it appears to be designed to waste as much vertical space as possible in the header of the window. Obviously this makes a lot of sense in a world of 16:9 monitors where vertical space is at a premium.

I can understand the Gnome guys re-working the internals of the desktop to make it more maintainable in the long term, and having been using it now for six months I find some of the features of Gnome 3 are quite nice - e.g. the ability to start a program just by hitting the command key and then typing the first few letters of its name. The bit that drags Gnome 3 down though is their insistence on taking away so many other useful time-saving features. There's no reason why the internals couldn't have been tidied up, and new time saving bits added, without crippling it at the same time.

My personal pet hate is the adoption of Windows's brain-dead approach to problem reporting - "Something went wrong". This is one of the worst possible mis-features of Windows, so why port it to Gnome?

Re:Default window skin still needs fixing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997517)

YES THIS!!!!!! Lately EVERY time I install a copy of Ubuntu 12.04, right after the install completes, and EVEN THOUGH I told the installer to do all the updates during the install, I get a series of "an error has occurred.. do you want to report it?" after the initial reboot into the clean OS.. I'd MUCH rather KNOW what the error info IS... but nooo you have to poking around /var/log to see what the error is... One of the MANY reasons, I've recently decided to give up Ubuntu and go to the source, Debian... WAAAAAY less problems/stupidity...

2013: The Year of the User (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43996521)

Will 2013 be the Year of the User? If both Red Hat and Microsoft capitulate to the people who have to actually use their software, maybe it will be! Much like the people rose up against SOPA and got the government to back down, now users are rising up against user interface disasters and getting big companies who don't want to listen to users to back down!

What's to stop them killing it? (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | about 10 months ago | (#43996763)

I bet Gnome kills classic mode because too many people are using it.

Re:What's to stop them killing it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#43997093)

Gnome is Red Hat. Gnome still likes to pretend that it's "community" driven, but the majority of core Gnome components as well as GTK development is driven by Red Hat developers. Gnome classic was revived because Red Hat corporate told them to revive it. What with the forks, and abandonment of experienced Linux users to other DE's, universally negative feedback found on forums like /., and likely internal polling results among Red Hat customers, Gnome devs had no choice but to bring the classic mode back.

Good move on Red Hat's part (1)

apexwm (1612713) | about 10 months ago | (#43997701)

RHEL is a conservative release anyway, but this move is a good one. I suspected they would either pick "Classic mode" or use the MATE desktop environment instead.

Re:Good move on Red Hat's part (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 10 months ago | (#43997733)

Since Red Hat paid for Gnome 3, I think they'd be a bit too embarassed to switch to MATE. Which, IMHO, is the best desktop around now.

We'll get there (2)

emblemparade (774653) | about 10 months ago | (#43997737)

This shows a lot of maturity on the part of the GNOME devs (for creating a usable classic mode), and on the part of RedHat for defaulting on it.

Radical change may be exciting for developers and vendors, who are too aware of the usability issues with the "old" desktop paradigm, but it's not trivial to change a culture overnight. We're not all Steve Jobs clones who understand what people want better than they seem to know. iPhones were greeted with love, but the new experimental desktops coming out of the free software world seem to cause more angst than adoration. It takes maturity to recognize that maybe you are going too far all at once.

Slow but steady is the smart way to go: allow for radical experimentations while not breaking usability patterns built over years of using computers.

Good show, everyone involved.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...