Beta

×

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

Thank you!

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

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

GNOME 3.12 Released

Unknown Lamer posted about 4 months ago | from the dude-you-got-a-smelly-foot dept.

GNOME 134

New submitter Sri Ramkrishna writes: "Like clockwork, the next version of GNOME has been released with updated applications, bugfixes, and so forth. People can look forward to faster loading times and a little better performance than before. A video has been created to highlight the release! Check it out!" The release features "... app folders, enhanced system status and high-resolution display support. This release also includes new and redesigned applications for video, software, editing, sound recording and internet relay chat. Under the hood, support for using Wayland instead of X has progressed significantly." There are a bunch of new features for programmers too.

cancel ×

134 comments

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

Meet the new boss: (-1, Troll)

Zanadou (1043400) | about 4 months ago | (#46588341)

Meet the new boss: same as the old boss.

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588399)

GNOME shell has really improved. I've been using 3.10 for a while now and it's really comfortable. Can't wait for 3.12 to hit the Arch repos.

(Posted as a reply because I'm on mobile and can't find a way to start a new thread)

Re: Meet the new boss: (5, Funny)

iggymanz (596061) | about 4 months ago | (#46588491)

even if you were at home on a desktop, GNOME would be making your screen into a big goddamn single-task-at-once cell phone anyway

Re: Meet the new boss: (1, Insightful)

fizzer06 (1500649) | about 4 months ago | (#46588563)

I much prefer xfce.

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

mexsudo (2905137) | about 4 months ago | (#46588581)

Mate

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

TigerTime (626140) | about 4 months ago | (#46588625)

I can't decide which to go on LinuxMint: MATE or Cinnamon? I feel like Cinnamon has come along enough that it might be better at this point, but not sure.

Re: Meet the new boss: (2)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 4 months ago | (#46588809)

I have been using MATE on ubuntu 12.04 its pretty stable and usable but lacking polish. Been a couple of years since I looked at Cinnamon.

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

javajeff (73413) | about 4 months ago | (#46588863)

Cinnamon is very good, and much more dependable than earlier versions. If you have not tried it in a while, it is recommended.

Re: Meet the new boss: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589361)

Cinnamon is indeed great, unfortunately GNOME has found a way to ruin the Cinnamon option by changing the GTK3 based apps into an unusable mess (yes, they changed the UI on the apps as well as the desktop).

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

awshidahak (1282256) | about 4 months ago | (#46589987)

Use Cinnamon with MATE apps like I do. It's a great experience.

Re: Meet the new boss: (2)

mexsudo (2905137) | about 4 months ago | (#46589235)

the Mint version of Mate has the missing polish

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

mexsudo (2905137) | about 4 months ago | (#46589255)

the Mint version of Mate has the missing polish.

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 4 months ago | (#46589461)

I started with MATE but it had a lot of rough edges, and unfortunately the devs kept talking about "innovation" which I don't want on my desktop... so I switched to XFCE. Cinnamon may o r may not be better.

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about 4 months ago | (#46589997)

Why is MATE in all capitals?

It's not spelled that way in Uruguayan Spanish. Did they invent a witty backronym?

Re: Meet the new boss: (0)

sjames (1099) | about 4 months ago | (#46590795)

I just tried xfce4 on Debian and it took me about 5 minutes to make it look nearly identical to my old Gnome2 desktop.

That will work for me :-)

Re: Meet the new boss: (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about 4 months ago | (#46588711)

I use it on two big monitors, and it works fine. It's just windows and a status bar, and two bars which get out of your way. I like it. It's not as clunky as KDE/XFCE, and more polished.

Re:Meet the new boss: (5, Informative)

erice (13380) | about 4 months ago | (#46588467)

Meet the new boss: same as the old boss.

You mean: "Meet the new boss, worse than the old boss". Gnome keeps removing features. Session saving for gnome-terminal was removed several versions ago supposedly because they have a new way of doing this. Only they didn't actually implement the new way. They just took out the old and left it.

Re:Meet the new boss: (2, Informative)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46588565)

Session saving is a hard problem and it requires apps to participate. Since it was never working correctly, it was removed so a better way could be done. But sometimes those things take awhile.

Re:Meet the new boss: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588801)

So remove it just in case it doesn't work for someone properly??

Re:Meet the new boss: (2)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46589141)

It doesn't work for anyone properly, that was the point. If you have a featuer that is unreliable, it's not really much of a feature.

Re:Meet the new boss: (2)

erice (13380) | about 4 months ago | (#46589363)

Session Saving in gnome-terminal was as reliable as anything else in Gnome and highly useful. Where session saving was not reliable is that it didn't work for all apps. But removing the code from gnome-terminal doesn't help that cause. Gnome-shell still supports session-saving which means you it still saves state for Firefox and Thunderbird. (window location and size, mostly. Firefox has it's own session saving ability)

Re:Meet the new boss: (1, Insightful)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46589801)

Yes, so basically we need to figure out from teh toolkit level how to make this happen and drive a standard so that any app that uses a toolkit will automatically figure out how to save all that so then session saving then works for all apps except maybe those old apps from the 90s.

Re:Meet the new boss: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46591157)

It doesn't work for anyone properly

Except for KDE, which has been doing it successfully for a very long time now.

Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588405)

The KDE and Gnome people have decided that they are going to cater for the most unsophisticated users alone. Thus, they have come up with desktop environments with lots of eye candy that take up a nontrivial amount of resources, that make it difficult to work in ways that are not exactly those that these people espouse, and that make anything but the most perfunctory use of the computer well nigh impossible.

As far as I am concerned both KDE and Gnome can rot in hell. Thank goodness, under Linux we have other desktop choices that don't treat the end user as a moron.

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (1)

Camel Pilot (78781) | about 4 months ago | (#46588435)

I dunno maybe I am moron but I can't understand the new desktop paradigm... An unsophisticated I bet couldn't figure our the new gnome shell but my grandmother could navigate gnome 2 just fine.

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (4, Informative)

enter to exit (1049190) | about 4 months ago | (#46588799)

You're right about GNOME. Those guys won't be happy until they've reduced the Desktop to a single close button and a window.

I think you're being too harsh on KDE though. The usual KDE criticism is that they have too many advanced options. On my machine, KDE (and all it's related processes) are consuming about 90MB of RAM (even with some bling turned on), to compare Chromium is consuming about 400MB.

KDE4 has a unfair reputation for being wasteful. I think the stigma is mainly caused by Anakondi's initial one-time file indexing processes being heavy. People tend to switch to something else before it finishes and leave with bad impressions.

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (1)

enter to exit (1049190) | about 4 months ago | (#46588913)

oops, meant "Nepomuk & Akonadi"...so many strange names ;)

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (1)

efitton (144228) | about 4 months ago | (#46589553)

Kasbar back? I'm mad at KDE because it LACKS the features I found useful back in KDE 3. I don't mind if people also fault it for Anakondi and Nepomuk. Semantic desktop crap.

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589577)

"Those guys won't be happy until they've reduced the Desktop to a single close button and a window."

But that may be an improvement over windows with two Close buttons. (One in it and one on the title bar.) Or how about a Close button, a Cancel button, and a title bar Close button?

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (5, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 months ago | (#46590239)

I've said it before and I'll say it again, KDE looks like a widget factory exploded on your desktop. Of course, GNOME looks like they're experiencing a widget shortage, perhaps due to a widget factory somewhere being out of production due to an explosion.

I'm all in favor of many complex options, but there's no need to present all of them at once.

Re:Good riddance Gnome (and KDE) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46590803)

I don't really mind GNOME removing things. It is extremely bloated. I just wish that they would remove the bloat when they remove the features.

New and redesigned.... (2)

irwiss (1122399) | about 4 months ago | (#46588445)

... related to gnome already sounds negative

Unity-ish UI (5, Insightful)

trainman (6872) | about 4 months ago | (#46588501)

And I see they're still jumping on this Unity-ish sidebar UI bandwagon... ugh, I guess I'll be using xfce for a while longer so I can actually have a normal top and bottom panels. Running apps and workspace picker along the bottom, Application (etc) menus along the top with various system controls... its worked well for over a decade, yes some people might like the newer Vista/OSXy way to set things up, and fine that can be the (annoying) default, but at least give us the *option* to set up our workspace as we like. Saying "we don't support user customization anymore" is simply arrogant and not an option for open source software which was supposed to be all about the user having control.

It looks nice, and I commend them for all the hard work, I'm sure a lot of hours went in to it, but I won't be in any rush to upgrade if I still can't even do something simple like move my panels around.

Re:Unity-ish UI (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46588529)

Why not use http://extensions.gnome.org/ [gnome.org] and then you can probably add the stuff you need to make it more what you are used to. There is also a classic mode which tries to mimic GNOME 2. Of course, there is always Mate. :)

Why not extensions (5, Insightful)

efitton (144228) | about 4 months ago | (#46588757)

Because:
  • -They are Beta software
  • -They are not typically upgraded when Gnome upgrades, if at all
  • -They are an attack vector
  • -They can and do conflict causing stability and speed problems
  • -Only can be installed when online

But mostly because just about every extension is really something that should be a preference and is every way inferior to a checkbox.

Re:Why not extensions (2)

efitton (144228) | about 4 months ago | (#46589199)

Also forgot the "wack-a-mole" effect. 46 pages of extensions, many that do the same thing. Have fun finding and picking the right extension. Again, clearly inferior to system settings and checkboxes.

Re:Why not extensions (4, Informative)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46589523)

Anything added to the web site is code reviewed for attack vectors. Most of the extensions are fairly simple and easy to write. The extension I wrote to put a lockscreen on the topbar was all of 20 lines. Yes, only online because of attack vectors as you said earlier. We should see some improvements, some of the breakages come from the fact that gnome-shell is in active development and so some times extemsopms break because the code is getting refactored. In the past, we were not able to put out an image for extension writers to test. Now we have both a continuous integration build that extension writers can literally test everyday for breakage and also a QA team is spinning up so that we can at least check the popular extensions and bug extension writers to port. Once gnome-shell becomes more stable extension breakage will happen less.

Putting in prefs and checkboxes also increase code complexity as that is just more than you have to test and secondly the behaviour should be correct the first time without having to modify the behaviour. Basically it should do the right thing 99% of the time. If there are cases that it doesn't work that way then agree a preference should be put or if there something that a user does need a choice due to hardware or some behaviour.

The irony is that if created a bunch of preferences, a number of you will abandon the platform because it is bloated and move to i3 or awesome or something perceivably "light" like XFCE.

Re:Why not extensions (2)

efitton (144228) | about 4 months ago | (#46589621)

http://www.ioccc.org/ [ioccc.org]

But yes, the attack vector is the least of my worries. You write: "Putting in prefs and checkboxes also increases code complexity." True, having the extension increases the code complexity by at least the same amount. But no testing, no planning, no updates, no review. Just an unorganized mess of hundreds upon hundreds of extensions that conflict.

Gnome has the reputation, and for very good reason, of not acknowledging when users need a choice of behavior. Look at your own plus.google post about the negative feedback on Nautilus. Users want those options, you and I both know it. The response: 1) We don't acknowledge that people don't like the changes. 2) People who don't like the change are elitist. 3) Yes, it is worse but it works better for touch.

Think about leaving the laptop on when the lid closes. No one has argued that that should be the default. Many gave reasons why it should be a preference. Users were not given an option but you can easily read the snarky comments from developers: "you can run this line of code and keep both halves if your system breaks" on blog posts. And self congratulation for doing the tough work while users fume or leave. Same story with power off as the only option under the name. I read that bug report with my mouth hanging open. I honestly claim that 50% of users would want the other option and Gnome developers would not give their users the check box. Moreover, there is a good chance most would come across as arrogant asses while discussing it. You and Emily do a fantastic job, but I read what others write and I don't want to even give Gnome a fair shot; not that it much matters.

Re:Why not extensions (1)

willoughby (1367773) | about 4 months ago | (#46590117)

You say , "... the behaviour should be correct the first time..." and this is wrong. The behaviour should be *selectable* by the user. That's why folks are asking for checkboxes and configuration dialogs. The behaviour cannot possibly be "correct" because it is a preference and what I prefer may not be what you prefer.

I realize that the Gnome folks really believe there is only one correct way for the desktop to look and behave, but they are wrong.

Re:Why not extensions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46591219)

Possibility for configuration is the only way to handle things, where there is not a "right way" to do something. Any newschool UI designer does these "this week the window close button must be on the left side of window" decisions, but only a arrogant bastard removes the possibility from user to make a selection that suits himself.

Re:Unity-ish UI (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589185)

Yeh awesome that it now takes 25+ extensions written by random peeps, who may or may not have any clue, to get back functionality thats been removed.

Even more awesome when plugins you found rather important to workflow become incompatible with the latest version and become 'outdated'* and not possible anymore. It's like every time I find a happy workflow they fuckin remove more shit.

Why, thats a whole lot of awesome.

* such as:
- hide activities button ( I don't fuckin want the fuckin thing i have a damn 'windows key' not to mention the hot corner BS )
- move-free message tray ( the message tray is a braindead way of hiding notifications in the first place, the fact it fuckin scales everything else is idiotic... )
- overlay follow focus ( Why the fuck is this not possible? Maybe it makes too much sense )
- status area horizontal spacing ( 720p screen and forcing an entire icon worth of space between each icon, fuck that )
- window options ( All i fuckin get is quit if i click on the top title bar? wtf )

Re:Unity-ish UI (1)

vux984 (928602) | about 4 months ago | (#46589335)

its worked well for over a decade,

Over a decade ago, I had a single 17" CRT and yes "it worked well". Today I have a pair of 24" wide screen monitors.

It doesn't "work well" anymore.

The left side panel works better especailly on modern wide screens, where the limitation is usually vertical, and for most applications you have extra horizontal space.

But still flawed on large multimonitor desktops.

Of course, I agree with you that providing the option to change it from the defaults is generally a good thing, especially with linux.

Re:Unity-ish UI (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 4 months ago | (#46589485)

A decade ago a lot of people had already had dual screens of unusual sizes for a decade.

Re:Unity-ish UI (1)

vux984 (928602) | about 4 months ago | (#46589753)

And even today "a lot of people use a single 4:3 screen"

But the balance has certainly shifted wouldn't you agree?

Re:Unity-ish UI (2)

Aighearach (97333) | about 4 months ago | (#46590089)

The "balance" doesn't mean squat. When I came to slashdot over 15 years ago, it was normal for people to have multiple screens, of various sizes, and the open source technology already supported it. The main difference now is that we don't have to calculate (or look up) modelines and hand configure a bunch of crap. But the windowing systems already had good support for it, and the X Window System surely doesn't care how many screens you want to configure.

The newer desktop paradigms seem to be driven by devices with very small screens, so it seems that more traditional desktop environments might actually have better support than the newer ones.

Re:Unity-ish UI (1)

sjames (1099) | about 4 months ago | (#46590887)

For many, it works well. For those who don't think so, let them configure a left side panel. Even make it a default that can easily be changed.

Re:Unity-ish UI (1)

hodet (620484) | about 4 months ago | (#46589517)

This right here. I have settled on XFCE. Some people may find the UI dated but to me it just stays out of my way and just works. When I need to do something then it facilitates that with no hassles. Thank god for choice.

New submitter (5, Funny)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46588541)

Jezus, I've been on this site since Malda was still using it as a tab on his website. It took them this long to actually accept a submission of mine.

Re:New submitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588647)

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

Re:New submitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588837)

Would you kindly fuck off with that meme?

Re:New submitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589083)

I do like a bit of Gorgonzola!

Re:New submitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589051)

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

I do like a bit of Wensley Dale

cheddar plz (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46590017)

i like cheddar :)

Re:New submitter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588683)

Yes standards have finally fallen to your level!

Re:New submitter (1)

inode_buddha (576844) | about 4 months ago | (#46588839)

Wow, that's patience... I've been reading since 1997, first submission in 1999 IIRC. Karma will be good to you I bet.

Re:New submitter (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46589147)

I don't really care, it was more of a bemused comment. :)

Re:New submitter (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589327)

http://slashdot.org/~Sri+Ramkrishna/submissions [slashdot.org]

Submission Summary: 0 pending, 2 declined, 1 accepted (3 total, 33.33% accepted)

Not sure what you're complaining about.
You make it seem as if you've submitted dozens of stories during a period of many years.

Re:New submitter (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 months ago | (#46590373)

You make it seem as if you've submitted dozens of stories during a period of many years.

Most of my submissions aren't shown in the interface. It only shows submissions which occurred after some psuedoarbitrary date.

new poster here (1)

rewindustry (3401253) | about 4 months ago | (#46590377)

thank you and the horse you rode in on for the most useful news i've had here in a while.

gnome is driving me nuttier than i thought i could get at the moment, but am sticking with it, is better than nothing.

which about sums up the alternatives, when they're not trying to be everything.

-- dear linus, who is git, and to what is he objecting? --

Gnome = good (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588543)

After a few missteps, Gnome is now a pleasure on the desktop. The window management is intuitive and functional - the first desktop since the late 1980s that isn't a morass of windows. The applications menu is well laid out instead of a wobbly tree of menus. Overall it's quick and stable.

I do miss the dual pane in Nautilus, but I just installed the alternate file browser from the Mate/Cinnamon project. After all this is Linux, we have choice. Here's hoping that they put those features back, as they have done with the other features they "took away" in app rewrites.

I tried KDE for a few weeks, it claims to be ultimately configurable. But you can't even do simple stuff like assign the meta key as a shortcut, or have a menu to the left of screen that works well. KDE is too much like the familiar but difficult Windows desktop paradigm.

Re:Gnome = good (0)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 4 months ago | (#46588553)

Thanks!

Re:Gnome = good (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 4 months ago | (#46588843)

They took out the the duel pain feature?!?!?! WTF.
I keep hearing people say "oh its nice but,..." and they list a feature that the gnome team broke or just removed. Guess I will be sticking with mate for now.

Re:Gnome = good (4, Funny)

lennier (44736) | about 4 months ago | (#46590121)

They took out the the duel pain feature?!?!?! WTF.

Yeah, I hate it too when I score a counter-riposte to my opponent's flying parry and there's just a beep on the referee's scoreboard and no blood.

Re:Gnome = good (2)

KozmoStevnNaut (630146) | about 4 months ago | (#46590839)

I tried KDE for a few weeks, it claims to be ultimately configurable. But you can't even do simple stuff like assign the meta key as a shortcut, or have a menu to the left of screen that works well. KDE is too much like the familiar but difficult Windows desktop paradigm.

Super/Meta is a modifier key. You wouldn't assign a shortcut directly to Ctrl or Alt, would you? If you truly want to use Super/Meta as a single-key shortcut, ksuperkey does what you want.

I've been using my main panel on the left ever since I got my 2560x1440 monitor. I assume that's what you meant by "menu to the left of screen". It works perfectly fine, BTW. Just drag the panel there and resize it a bit.

yahoo? (1)

mexsudo (2905137) | about 4 months ago | (#46588571)

âoeGNOME is the desktop environment of choice for many Yahoo developers..." so That is the reason Yahoo went to hell! When Gnome2 was abandoned the "team" showed its true colors, a big Fail

File, Edit, View.... gone! (5, Informative)

jabberw0k (62554) | about 4 months ago | (#46588597)

Wonderful, the unusable interface of 'evince' (Print is hidden under a sun icon or a gear, or something -- with no known way to open the menu from the keyboard) now comes to gedit. Now editing a file becomes impossible too! Please, folks, follow CUA , the Common User Access [wikipedia.org] protocols, with named menus we can access with Alt+keystroke or F10. Arrrrrgh! Stupid! Make it stop! Give us back our File, Edit, View menus and all the rest!

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

CRCulver (715279) | about 4 months ago | (#46588703)

Print is hidden under a sun icon or a gear, or something -- with no known way to open the menu from the keyboard

Besides the fact that Print is accessible, like everywhere else, through Ctrl-P, the "gear" menu can be opened with the keyboard by hitting Tab until the focus goes to the toolbar, then using the arrow-keys to move focus to the gear icon, then hitting Return. I am not a big fan of Gnome and am deeply unhappy with many of their changes, but getting where you need to go with the keyboard remains fairly easy to figure out in most applications.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46588811)

[...] the "gear" menu can be opened with the keyboard by hitting Tab until the focus goes to the toolbar, then using the arrow-keys to move focus to the gear icon, then hitting Return.

Let me guess: GNOME developers use Emacs?

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

CRCulver (715279) | about 4 months ago | (#46589013)

Nice try, but Emacs users wouldnâ(TM)t advocate use of arrow-keys.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589029)

So you have to keep hitting Tab and watch carefully for a little bit of highlighting to determine what GUI widget is selected (which might not be in a logical order depending on how the GUI was built). How is that any better or faster or easier than hitting Alt (which would traditionally automatically highlight the menu) then pressing the arrow keys to select your menu option of choice?

We're going backwards and people seem not to know any better.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589221)

Does Tab not insert a \t in gedit anymore?

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 months ago | (#46590171)

Besides the fact that Print is accessible, like everywhere else, through Ctrl-P, the "gear" menu can be opened with the keyboard by hitting Tab until the focus goes to the toolbar, then using the arrow-keys to move focus to the gear icon, then hitting Return.

Oh yes, tab arrow key return. How obvious. I mean, sure it's obvious to you and I, but even KDE has menus which are obvious to anyone who's used a computer before. I don't think most people who haven't will even know what a gear is, or why it would make sense for it to be used for settings. Woops, that's not even what they're using it for, is it? Fail, fail.

GNOME should stop trying to invent the new thing in the mainline. They're not very good at it. That's okay, most people/projects aren't, but most people/projects accept that.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589187)

Could not agree more. Evince was a useful replacement for Acrobat reader for a while, until they decided to jump into user experience bandwagon and made their application to the fantasy users, who have not used any computer application before. Btw, why does one need to start reading a pdf by re-selecting the preferred page layout? Is there somewhere a hidden button, by which one can store the reader settings?

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 4 months ago | (#46589501)

I'm using XFCE and I can just type "evince" in xterm. I still use a lot of gtk and gnome-based apps, but they only way to escape innovation is to abandon projects that innovate.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 4 months ago | (#46590153)

You could type "atril" if you wish so, it's Mate's version and will spare you having to use some GTK3 gunk to read documents.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 4 months ago | (#46589529)

Gedit is so slow that its startup time has been used as a strawman by Wayland folks to push their view that X is too slow to use. There are plenty of other editors better than that cobbled together MS Notepad lookalike.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46590635)

The first bit of the video was a bit hard to follow because of the lightning speed of Gnome (I think Ms Sandler had had too much coffee) but when she breezily announced "an overhauled user interface" for gedit, all I thought was, oh no, where have you put the menu. Has it gone to the top of the screen? Why did you put the menus up there?

I use Gnome on a desktop monitor and even when the design is OK it's often lacking basic features - I just had a look at the Updates available (this is what prompted me to reply), clicked on OS Updates to be presented with a list of package names and versions in some random order, no sort or search available. Click on an update once you've found it to be greeted by a few lines of description if you're lucky, maybe a bug ref. Can you copy or drag the text? No.

I shouldn't have to use gsettings to turn encryption off for Desktop Sharing (ie, [t]rusty old VNC).

Sometimes the design isn't OK: users don't want a status bar in the file manager (minimalism, you know) so we'll pop one up when something's selected and hide the last item in the list. There's an open bug for this with no response.

Surely it's possible for Gnome to present different UI elements and options depending on what size and type of screen you have, rather than giving everyone the simplest version possible? If the designers are aiming for Windows 8 Metro-land then they'll lose a lot of users. I think it's time for me to install KDE.

IIRC, Windows 3.1 had a Sound Recorder. It's not that impressive in 2014.

Re:File, Edit, View.... gone! (0)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about 4 months ago | (#46589975)

Why not use Okular?

Like clockwork? (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about 4 months ago | (#46588817)

Because it winds you up?

After watching the video.. (5, Informative)

sc0ob5 (836562) | about 4 months ago | (#46588829)

After watching the video I find I have been pronouncing Gnome incorrectly for all these years. Ga-nome, I've been saying Nome..

Re:After watching the video.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589121)

Next you'll be telling us that you didn't know that the K in KDE was silent.

Re:After watching the video.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589455)

It was called GNU+Noam, but Richard Stalinman had Chomsky's contributions to free software purged from history, so it was changed to Gah-nome.

Re:After watching the video.. (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 4 months ago | (#46589539)

Yes I found that funny the first time I heard it too - just file it with SQL versus "sequel" and say whatever you like.

Re:After watching the video.. (1)

hodet (620484) | about 4 months ago | (#46589561)

I thought it was common to interpret your own names for months and years before being corrected. Started for me with Linux being pronounced L"y"nex. I also called gnome noam for a while. There are many other packages that I did this with but none are coming to mind right now. I always thought it was funny how oss folks name their products, would make marketing people run for the hills.

Re:After watching the video.. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 months ago | (#46590157)

After watching the video I find I have been pronouncing Gnome incorrectly for all these years. Ga-nome, I've been saying Nome..

I think it's like GIF, piss on the 'official' pronunciation, do what makes sense. It's spelled 'nome', say 'nome'.

Slightly more user friendly than Windows 8 (5, Informative)

lophophore (4087) | about 4 months ago | (#46588841)

Gnome 3.12: **slighltly** more user friendly than Windows 8, which is like saying it is slightly more user friendly than a rabid zombie wolverine in a kindergarten playground.

I watched the video. Gnome 3.12 still sucks. It is an embarrassment to Linux; it is one of the reasons why after 10 years we still don't have "the year of the Linux Desktop". This is a continuing example of the developers deciding how the users should work, not thinning about how the users are used to doing things. Yecch.

Thank goodness for XFCE. XFCE's developers seem to actually have the user experience in mind.

Re:Slightly more user friendly than Windows 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589493)

>xfeces
It's good to like depreciated bug-ridden screen tearing desktop environments.

Re:Slightly more user friendly than Windows 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46590329)

Some people consider "annoys idiots too stupid to set up compton" a feature.

Re:Slightly more user friendly than Windows 8 (3, Informative)

dbIII (701233) | about 4 months ago | (#46589563)

Some people like it (there's one in my worplace - others look at his screens in horror), but the thing I hate the most is you can't use the old gnome and the new gimp at the same time unless you run one or the other remotely from another machine. Some utter bastards in the gnome team deliberately created name conflicts to prevent old gnome applications working at the same time as new ones. That's something like bringing DLL hell to *nix for the first time, but with required background applications instead of libraries.

Now with 30% fewer options! (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589105)

...

Are people still working on that shit (-1, Flamebait)

terjeber (856226) | about 4 months ago | (#46589259)

Goodness. It's worse than Microsoft Bob.

Gnome 3 is sluggish and slow (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589277)

Sorry to say that but with every new version of Gnome 3 the Desktop is getting sluggisher and sluggisher.

I compre here my experience of Fedora 18 vs Fedora 20.

I know all these tasks in the background like tracker, pulseaudio, journald, packagekit make the system crawl but gnome-shell still feels slow.

I also don't understand why the entire desktop gets grayed out and modal once I get a dialog where I only need to click cancel or ok. I't not possible to reach other features and other applications (time critic ones) once put into background. Stupid idea!

Excessive Hard Drive searches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589583)

Does this release include the "search my hard drive every time I try to open an app" feature? I'm sure the people with SSD drives think it's great but it sucks on magnetic drives whenever you want to open a program you have to click on a search bar and the machine slows to a crawl while it searches the hard drive while you type in the program name

i know ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589639)

beta or not:
gnome 3 is like portal 2 on steroids but without the white portal panels : }

Are We That Resistant to Change? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589839)

At first I had major issues with Gnome 3, but I kept an open mind. After a little while, I became more productive with it than with a traditional desktop UI. My favorite thing is that I don't have to point and click anywhere near as much as I did before. I can do almost anything with my keyboard.

Re:Are We That Resistant to Change? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46590489)

you could do that in a traditional desktop as well, you were just never forced to learn that ability

for instance I can operate windows 7 without a mouse even attached to a computer just as easily as using a mouse, instead of a bunch of clicks its a bunch of clicks on a keyboard.

so thanks for your input, please come back when you know how to operate a computer.

Re:Are We That Resistant to Change? (1)

InfiniteLoopCounter (1355173) | about 4 months ago | (#46591231)

Wow. I was scrolling down to find a positive comment for the new GNOME release. Well done and hats off to you sir.

For me I'll be keep using GNOME 2 until something usable replaces it, checking GNOME release thread for signs that the devs might go back to producing a high quality and functional DE.

Re:Are We That Resistant to Change? (2)

Roxoff (539071) | about 4 months ago | (#46591357)

No. We aren't resistant to change. We're resistant to unusable desktop environments.

Gah-Nome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#46589943)

I watched the video. She says it as "Gah-nome". I always pronounced it Gnome (that is, nome). I had to replay it several times to get past the Gah! There are other reasons why I worry about them breaking the traditional desktop experience, but if the Gnome group don't ruin the desktop for the user, there is always Ubuntu. So long as my USB mouse works after booting up, and I get rid of the 13 and counting error message popups when I first start X, I will be happy.

Is it usable yet? (1)

Roxoff (539071) | about 4 months ago | (#46591347)

No? Didn't think so... Here's looking forward to Gnome 4. I'll give this one a miss.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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