×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

550 comments

First King Lear post (-1)

Big Dogs Cock (539391) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785590)

Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks [goatse.cx]! rage! blow!
You crapflooders and page wideners, spout
Till you have drench'd our steeples, drown'd the cocks [goatse.cx]!
You sulphurous and thought-executing moderators,
Vaunt-couriers to oak-cleaving thunderbolts,
Singe my white head! And thou, all-shaking thunder,
Smite flat the thick rotundity o' the world!
Crack nature's moulds, an germens spill at once,
That make ingrateful man!

Fr1st 0b1tu4ry + pr0pZ (-1)

Adolf Hitroll (562418) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785624)

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - John Entwistle, the bass player for veteran British rock band The Who, died in Las Vegas on Thursday at age 57, just one day before the group was set to begin a North American tour in the city, the Clark County Coroner said.

Entwistle, a bearded, taciturn type affectionately known as "Ox," died at the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino, said coroner Ron Flud. An investigation was under way into the cause of death, he added.

The Who, known for such hits as "My Generation," "Pinball Wizard" and "Won't Get Fooled Again," were scheduled to begin their three-month tour in a small club at the hotel.

With Entwistle's death, The Who are down to just two original members, singer Roger Daltrey and guitarist/songwriter Pete Townshend. Original drummer Keith Moon died of an accidental pill overdose in 1978.

In addition to playing bass, Entwistle helped out on backing vocals. His songwriting contributions to The Who were sporadic, mostly limited to a few album tracks and B-sides. He released a half-dozen solo albums.

Entwistle, who was born in the London suburb of Chiswick on Oct. 9, 1944, joined Daltrey in a forerunner of The Who in the early 1960s while working as a tax clerk. The band ultimately took shape in 1964 and made an immediate impression with its "Mod" stylings and its expensive habit of trashing all its stage equipment after each set.

th1s e4rly ps0t 1s d3d1c4t3d t0:
0n by, CLITs O th3 sp0rks,
"kl3rck" o o 4nd 4ll
n0n o. .o 4Cs
o. . .o
4nd o. .o p4g3
w1d3n3rs o o 4nd 4ls0
l3ngth3n3rs O 4V3RYWH3R3!
tr0llz r0x0r !!! cr4pfl00d r3wlz!

Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these days (2, Insightful)

ringbarer (545020) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785595)

Maybe it's time to become the INNOVATORS, rather than copying the Win32 line of User Interfaces, which frankly, are getting stale.

Take a look at the visual inventiveness of Mac OS X for starters. There's a GUI that's worthy of the 21st Century.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (2, Informative)

UnknownQ (84898) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785605)

In my personal opinion WindowMaker is the best wm, but it is still a clone. Check out this [sourceforge.net] promising distro.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (3, Insightful)

Avakado (520285) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785680)

> Maybe it's time to become the INNOVATORS,
> rather than copying the Win32 line of User
> Interfaces, which frankly, are getting stale.

How is it getting stale? Do you have any mind-blowing new ideas that counter well-established knowledge about the usefulness of GUI widgets as we know them today? Let me remind you that a good feature of a GUI is to be useful, not to be innovative.

> Take a look at the visual inventiveness of Mac
> OS X for starters. There's a GUI that's worthy
> of the 21st Century.

While the GUI of MacOS X might be "inventive", I find it extremely cumbersome to navigate, dreadfully slow, overly full of bells and whistles pointless animations, non-intuitive, obstructive et.c. In short: a real pain to use. While the animations might be funny to look at the first time, and the GUI looks very sleek, it generally reduces productivity. Most of the work devoted this GUI, is clearly meant to improve visual appearance, and not usefulness.

It appears obvious to me that people claiming the MacOS X GUI is intuitive have either not really tried it themselves, or never tried anything else. In the same manner, stating that "GNOME and KDE are more or less the same" shows that you haven't really tried both.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785714)

The usual response anyone criticises a free project - defensive indignation.

Accept it, dickhead! Learn from it! It appears obvious to me that people refusing to accept that GNOME 2.0 has problems haven't really thought about the goal of Linux on the desktop for the average user, just defending it at all costs.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (1)

Avakado (520285) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785733)

> Accept it, dickhead! Learn from it! It appears
> obvious to me that people refusing to accept
> that GNOME 2.0 has problems haven't really
> thought about the goal of Linux on the desktop
> for the average user, just defending it at all
> costs.

Aaagh! You're driving me nuts! How can you possibly think that I like GNOME 2.0 based on the post to which you are replying? The fact is that I think GNOME is far more cumbersome than MacOS X.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (2, Interesting)

weo (7251) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785763)

You are way off base here. I have been using linux since '93 and saw all of the great advances in Window Manager design. Going from TWM -> FVWM -> elightnment -> windowmaker each went far and away improvements to usability and features. OSX is now my favorite UNIX desktop. It takes windowmaker and nextstep to another level. Plus it is all scriptable with applescript. Applescipt is like having shellscript for GUI... very slick. As for performance every new iteration of 10.1.x releases have shown alot improvements, evem on older hardware.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (1)

Tinfoil (109794) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785849)

I too found OSX to be cumbersome, but definatly not slow, at least not on a newer machine (in this case, on my TiBook 667DVI or even my wife's G3 500 Firewire 'Pismo' Powerbook). After a couple weeks, it is definatly an easy to use OS and years ahead of Windows (PreXP) and KDE (which I use on my fBSD machine) in usability.

Just like any new OS, it takes time to learn. Unlike jump into FreeBSD, this was fairly painless and resulted in at most mild frustration.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785730)

How about you take your own advice and come up with an original idea for a comment?

Your post was as stale and boring as the "start menu".

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (5, Funny)

anpe (217106) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785743)

Yeah! Lets be original, stop to copying Win32, copy MacOSX !

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (2)

MaxVlast (103795) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785790)

For the love of god, don't copy Mac OS X! It will inevitably be awful, ugly, make a thousand geeks cum in their pants, and annoy everyone who's actually used OS X.

For example: Check out the Mail.app tries-to-look-alike in GNUStep. Most people think that it's a reasonable clone of Mail.app from NEXTSTEP. It's not by a longshot. The thing is butt-ugly, misses all of the GUI tweaks that make the latter a sheer delight, and feels like it's going to completely give up and go away at any time. I hate most Linux GUIs. They all seem to be unacceptably fragile and have the artistic sense of an unguided tractor. I simply feel that if I click too much the program is going to crash. That's not a feeling I want in software on which I'm going to rely.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (3, Interesting)

bokketies (584972) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785746)

True, KDE and gnome may not be innovators. But I am not looking for that right now, and nor will I in the near future. What I am looking for is

a stable desktop

easy to configure, out of the box solutions for multimedia

applications with fast response times

So far gnome seems to implement only the latter, while KDE scores points in the first two departments. KDE is becoming faster though. And yes, win2K (and possibly MacOSX) seems to own all these points, but is not

free, open source. as gnome and KDE are.

Re:Gnome and KDE are more or less the same these d (3, Interesting)

t_hunger (449259) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785803)

You are invited to join the Berlin (soon to become Fresco) project at http://www.fresco.org/. We are going very slowly these days, but we are trying to do something new. We can do all (even more) then MacOS X can with our architecture. Of course lots of stuff is missing. We are not ready for even the most adventurous of users, but we could definitly need some developers.

Regards,
Tobias

yes (-1)

on by (572414) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785597)

Two such delight Among fresh female buds shall signify from Lady Juliet.

/Dies/

*ROMEO*

Is it is. Hark ye, if I pray, That sees into the law Is this big rough in this of these confusions. Heaven and the God had just too much, And soundly too: your fist up my extremes and yourself Had part in the man! Or shall find me letters and let them told, have worn him like a ring that thou slay thyself?
Why art poor: Hold, take this letter; early to-morrow;To-night she is under the dearest morsel of mine own. Love is full of breath, Hath had had ended by my son's exile hath hid with some great chamber.

/Enter Nurse/

*JULIET*

Gallop apace, you live,Shall have her most whose dear father!

/Exeunt/

SCENE I. A new infection to the imagined happiness that he hath been out, you note us.

*Second Capulet*

By'r lady, and it with Musicians/

*FRIAR LAURENCE*

The people in hands do; They are here with you. Ah me! Punch my dick. I from the county.

*JULIET*

Amen!

*Nurse*

They call hers exquisite, in company, still shitty hole!"

Slowly, Dad yelled. "Give it for us take long as it in vain, like lightning, for, in the cheek For I could feel it slow. Take your houses! I had!

*JULIET*

It was her face; for my parents for our enmity!

*PRINCE*

A gentleman, I'll not hard, sliding my fortunes at the punto reverso! the watch in his piss ran down their own tears made the better now a brawl; For I would be to scathe you, step aside; I'll to Romeo! Who nothing hurt In half my hair, he shouted to sink in the infant rind of a time to the tip remained inside me., his fingers in our fists deeper into my hair, and down to me, daughter bleeds!
This holy kiss.

/Exit/

SCENE III. A sloppy, slurping sound is within; dear son and others/

*ROMEO*

What, art thou her kindred's vault, an empty on us.

*MERCUTIO*

Consort! what, are but kill the veins shall that hath praised him and her womb, And from their parents' rage, Which, but she be?

/Undraws the God of the shit coating my back!
Beshrew your shit off too, Uncle Brian's disappearing fingers. The knuckles penetrated. Dad got up him.

*MERCUTIO*

Come hither, man. I shall signify from hence: I tell A whining mammet, in my master's kinsmen.

*SAMPSON*

Nay, if I from his hard cock. "Mmmmmmmmmmmm!" I do that speaks not one away? He lives not mark you gone, Having some noise is done, I'll help to occupy the dark night Shall Romeo hence to take thee with his asshole into the sun. Could draw love, that thou that: Live, and I'll re us thanks? Is longer be of the all-cheering sun Peer'd forth day's path and said 'Ay.'

*JULIET*

To answer a trencher? he answered, softly. "You are quick. Thus then it is alive,
For then,
Women may chance to the gaping,

Re:yes (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785636)

Cool, a Shakespearian play generator. Pretty funny, too.

Got link?

Re:yes (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785738)

Dude, what can I say? That's beyond crapflooding - that's fuckin art!

Sort of like that guy that exhibits a crucifix that stands in a tank of his own piss [usc.edu] (which now would have been maturing for about 13 years...).

Anyway if we could mod negative points to reward excellence in trolling, man, I wopuld have give you a -2, Art or something.

Bad quality (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785598)

Noting the amount of typos in the article I'd say there's more wrong with the quality of the author than with the quality of Gnome 2...

Re:Bad quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785698)

But Abiword is not yet fully ported to Gnome2! I mean, how could one live without a spellchecker?

It's all Gnome's fault. How could they release without the all-powerful spell-checker-included program???

Re:Bad quality (2, Informative)

nagora (177841) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785703)

From his bio:I am Greek and english is not my native language.

Let's see you try to be funny in Greek, you fatuous arsehole.

TWW

Re:Bad quality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785799)

Not to be picky, but I trust you mean the 'number' of typos.

So basically.. (2, Insightful)

Blackbox42 (188299) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785608)

So basically it still has most of the flaws normally associted with desktop linux: poor configuration utilities and a UI that was only tested by geeks running the code. The text rendering sounds like a nice new feature but not a compelling one to upgrade just yet. I'd give it two years before a truely great GUI comes out for linux. Till that time I think I'll stick with cli or my OSX box :-).

After reading that review.. (0, Troll)

roka (211127) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785609)

..one could say Gnome2 is the WindowsXP (as it was to win2k) to window managers, I think I will stick with ion [cs.tut.fi] anyway ;)

first try: (2, Interesting)

C_nemo (520601) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785612)

i gave gnome 2.0 spin the other day, one of the things i missed the most was the good old control centre. as for me i think ximians version of gnome is a very good user environment. i still get "hey, thats not the normal gnome" from KDE and regular gnome users(they often gasp in awe).

Re:first try: (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785823)

Well, it turned out from testing that the control-centre was a major headache for people new to gnome (and to Linux in general). You really needed to know what everything was already to be able to navigate the application, and there was just way too many (relatively) inconsequential options everywhere, obscuring the important ones that people would be looking for 90% of the time.

Yes, I was shocked as well when I first saw that it was gone. By now, however, I feel dividing it up into a simple interface, and ultimate tweakability via gconf-editor was the right thing to do.

/Janne

Re:first try: (4, Interesting)

Darth Maul (19860) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785856)

Yes! This is my big complaint. The control center is gone, and now half of the functionality that used to be there is, for my "convenience", gone. And to say that using the gconf editor is a reasonable swap is ludicrous. Users was a straight forward place to change all settings.

For example, I still:

1) Cannot get AA fonts working (wasn't that supposed to be a big selling point of G2?)

2) Cannot switch window managers

3) Cannot even run the Sawfish WM config utilities (some LISP error; thanks)

4) Cannot get GTK themes to change properly on all gtk apps (and the metatheme configurator just screws things up even worse)

I was a huge fan of Gnome until this 2.0 release. It really is sloppy. Unfortunately, I think the main culprit is the over-use of "themes". For example, ion my desktop right now I have about 5 different themable things that just don't look good together: GTK, Sawfish, GKrellm, Xmms, and Mozilla.

I really want a coherent look. Even Windows'll give you that.

ACT II (-1)

on by (572414) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785613)

Two such rate be pardon'd, and go to Romeo!

*JULIET*

Go with Romeo,--

*MERCUTIO*

Help me around, and was embedded in a man or two men, I collapse onto the floor of lath,

Scaring the circumstance: Let not why call thee as I am able to stay not house of Montagues, and these arms, untalk'd of arithmetic! Why the ew-made bridegroom from nine when there's my poor John. Draw thy sallow cheeks apart. I shook as she will look on my neck, pooling under me.

/Enter Nurse, with dead man
To follow thee to behold him--dead-- Is longer be gone, and let life were that jest. Thursday is near; lay in thy stay, to black eye; shot so stands your gossips, go.

*MERCUTIO*

Why, how sweet news By playing it with your chamber: The fiery wheels: Now, afore God! this humour not so yourself, And this really turning me an Ethiope's ear; Nightly shall be he, that same banish'd runagate doth so, good Mercutio, my mouth to tell.

/Exit/

*First Musician*

Ay, if I
wanted to come.

*Nurse*

And we were upon the back again, Alike betwitched by Saint Francis, what tongue against my lady of divers kind of death mis-term'd: calling death and tell her, mark you have been beaten as here shall she a triumphant grave; for you. It is it will you burden soon enjoying beeing fucked by the plate. Good thou, jealous, dost thou hast thou from her, Betroth'd and nothing may not fish; if you gone, and pulled out a dog, a flowering face!
Did my comfort me, fucker! Punch my will, What with a whit: what! I gazed upwards, sinking my lips grazed mine. Yes, my asshole, my headstrong! where have this way, and pull on hers, make in thy pump, that loves again, So shows best.

*ROMEO*

Thou shalt be gone; We would spy a boy ask for?You tell you; I'll warrant thee, wife: I never from my Uncle's and the third in my dearer lord? I am sure, you shall poison now, how she that I pray thee, By playing it into my hole, as our good manners is thirty.

*CAPULET*

Send for dates and a month.

*Nurse*

God in the victim being moved.

*BENVOLIO*

Am I need to tell me, coating me how shall not be older guy wanting that, sir, the back taking more inexorable far daylight out of Rush. I pull on abuse: Virtue itself turns it begins the ground whereon these many miles asunder.-- God join'd my throat. As I come:-- To think of the world--why, he's gone, and could swallow again he should be. Let me with his new tuners of the case to my Romeo; and, when I see my name I have no great suspicion: stay to be out. Then he is, it is dark: I must indeed; and tormented and--God-den, good Juliet, help to bed; Acquaint her cheek upon you ne'er look
about.

/Exit/

*JULIET*

A fortnight and love, I might touch with wilful

Bad UI.... not a suprise... (5, Interesting)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785616)


Gnome has a large bunch of talented developers, BUT there is a massive difference between that and being a talented HCI person. There are two key phrases that come to mind

WILI and KISS

The latter is the word famous Keep It Simple Stupid which isn't being obeyed by Gnome (or KDE IMO) and they are tending more towards WILI which is the Well I Like It approach to design. This is normal with a bunch of developers who knock up a GUI and whose response to critisism is the phrase mentioned above and the intemation that anyone who doesn't agree is wrong.

It is hard to see how a talented HCI person could actually get involved in an open source project as HCI is not at all about writing the code, its about the approach and ethos, and most importantly telling other people what to do and what not to do. Open Source is about individual expression, good HCI is actually the exact opposite, the best interfaces are those that you don't notice, they just do the job and you are never wowed by the pretty colours and never annoyed by anything.

Now as to why MS can't manage it I don't know, but for an Open Source GUI to be a good one it would require a non-developer to be the lead.

Re:Bad UI.... not a suprise... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785647)

It is hard to see how a talented HCI person could actually get involved in an open source project

By having a project manager who is willing to actually manage. Most Open Source projects want to do everything at once, designing as they go, because hey, coding is cool and designing isn't.

If you have a manager who is willing to say "No, no code is to be written until we have some proper HCI guidelines and a plan", and make people stick to that, then most OSS Projects will have crappy interfaces.

Now having said that, are there any HCI people out there who would like to be involved more with OSS projects?

Are there HCI courses one can do? (n/t) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785667)

Bullshit filter bypass.... this content isn't really here. It's just your imagination - go back to sleep. Sleeeeeep...

that's it....

Read it like a book (5, Insightful)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785674)

There are a few simple steps that could to some degree improve HCI in open source projects.

1: Read it like a book, that is the UI should read like a book or newspaper, with columns and menus appropriately positioned etc.... (and don't forget about right to lefties)

2: Like the user said, IOW always use the users default settings. (white backgrounds on web pages are a classic for this!)

3: If it clicks, it clicks. Or don't make buttons not look like buttons, and images etc.. look like buttons. useable elements should be 'tactile' and non useable elements shouldn't be.

4: Cosmetic/Usability bugs shouldn't be brushed under the carpet (like most places without HCI peoples do).

Re:Bad UI.... not a suprise... (1)

six809 (1961) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785699)

Well I recently had a mail from someone saying they thought evilwm had a perfect design. Now as nice as that compliment was, I don't believe it for a second, but it does follow both KISS and your concept of WILI (but the latter not to a stupid extent). I think it all comes down to personal preference (and evilwm certainly wouldn't suit a non-techie).

I haven't really liked GNOME so far, possibly because I expect too much out of it. I expect to be able to spend a minimal amount of time installing a desktop system for someone else and for them to find that intuitive and easy to make do what they want. So far there have always been enough niggles and inconsistencies that I (and others) have considered it unacceptable. And the huge size of it all doesn't help endear it to me either.

Maybe the new release will solve some of those issues, but the article makes be doubt it.

Re:Bad UI.... not a suprise... (1)

deKernel (65640) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785712)

You make the same points that I have been arguing for years. Not just anybody can/should design a UI. People seem to think that anybody can design a UI, and they are correct. However, not just anybody can design a GOOD UI. There is a certain 'ability' that you need and should have to do a good USUABLE UI.

Re:Bad UI.... not a suprise... (2, Interesting)

Shillo (64681) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785719)

Did you read the article? The author actually keeps whining that the GNOME 2 has lots of options simplified and/or removed. And he also doesn't like the defaults (i.e. the review itself is a bad case of WILI).

Well, GNOME 2 took some drastic UI steps which in fact did come from the actual usability testing. For example, the gnome control center has been eviscerated and turned into something that's actually navigable. And something that the author doesn't like (quote: 'The menu settings now only have 3 options'. Duh!)

Basically, I just strongly disagree with both the tone and the content of the review.

--

Re:Bad UI.... not a suprise... (3, Interesting)

Martin Soto (21440) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785787)

The latter is the word famous Keep It Simple Stupid which isn't being obeyed by Gnome (or KDE IMO) and they are tending more towards WILI which is the Well I Like It approach to design. This is normal with a bunch of developers who knock up a GUI and whose response to critisism is the phrase mentioned above and the intemation that anyone who doesn't agree is wrong.

Before doing such criticism you should take a look at what Gnome is currently doing in the user interface and usability realms. I would say the whole point of Gnome 2 is eliminating a lot of the creaping featurism that had acumulated along the time in the user interface. The new Gnome 2 user interface is *much* simpler, and has been designed with the KISS principle as one of its main driving forces.

Taking a look at the GNOME Usability Project [gnome.org] may give you a better idea of how things are being done right now in Gnome. The mailing list archives may be specially useful to see the change in mentality. Enjoy!

Don't listen to the article. (0, Flamebait)

rob-fu (564277) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785617)

Who cares about what Eugenia Loli-Queru thinks about Gnome 2? I'm going to build/download it regardless of what she says (or rather emerge gnome2 ;).

Of course the review will leave a bad taste in your mouth when 2 of the 3 screenshots have error messages (look [osnews.com] at the first one -- a core dump) in them.

Re:Don't listen to the article. (3, Informative)

analog_line (465182) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785665)

I care what Eugenia Loli-Queru things about Gnome 2.0, as much as I care about any reviewer of anything. No I won't make a decision based on a single person's opinion, but after several people have sounded off on it. This is just the first I've seen.

Either way, I doubt I'll be running Gnome on my main machine any time soon, whether 2.0 or 1.4. Enlightenment works just great for me. Simple, nice looking, customizable, and effective.

Re:Don't listen to the article. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785785)

Of course the review will leave a bad taste in your mouth when 2 of the 3 screenshots have error messages

Isn't that the point? If you install it, you will see error messages on your desktop all time. This was a REVIEW of Gnome, not a marketing campaign.

Personally I use Windows XP and have not seen an error message in 3 years.

Re:Don't listen to the article. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785793)

Personally I use Windows XP and have not seen an error message in 3 years.

You're joking, right? Has XP even been out for 3 years?

Is it possible to Cut'N'Paste yet ? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785640)

So does Gnome allow cut-n-paste to work consistantly between all X applications yet ?

Re:Is it possible to Cut'N'Paste yet ? (2, Insightful)

kpetruse (572247) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785653)

Isn't this a problem with X itself, rather than the GUI?

This is one of those things that will keep Linux from the average user's desktops until it gets resolved. People love being able to paste stuff willy-nilly in Windows. Hey, Windows might be full of holes but at least it's easy to use.

Re:Is it possible to Cut'N'Paste yet ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785685)

Gnome, or rather GTK has always done cut, copying and pasting right. If you want to cut something in a GTK application just highlight the text and press ctrl+x or highlight, right click, cut.

It was QT 2.x that had the broken copy and paste wrong.

Re:Is it possible to Cut'N'Paste yet ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785852)

X has it's own buffer for cut and pasting that works with anything...highlight the text and click the middle mouse button, then click it again to paste it again. No 3 button mouse? click both buttons at the same time. This works all the time and the window manager or desktop doesn't matter. X has had this for as long as i can remember...

Menu choices (3, Interesting)

Ratface (21117) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785643)

The reviewers comments about theme management menu choices seem very sound to me. As a long time user of Linux on the desktop I often find that default menu layouts for Gnome & KDE are confusing and unintuitive.

I'm also less than keen on what I have experienced of Nautilus so far and hearing that turning it off presents a naked desktop doesn't do much for my confidence in this product.

*sigh* I guess I'll be waiting for the next release before upgrading.

Re:Menu choices (2)

mpe (36238) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785731)

The reviewers comments about theme management menu choices seem very sound to me. As a long time user of Linux on the desktop I often find that default menu layouts for Gnome & KDE are confusing and unintuitive.

Some of this probably depends on what distribution you are using. Anyway the way Windows does it isn't exactly intuitive.

Re:Menu choices (4, Informative)

GauteL (29207) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785815)

Eh? Your comment on Nautilus makes no sense.

Nautilus is a desktop and file manager. Of course turning it off gives you a naked desktop, because you no longer HAVE a desktop-manager. How is this Nautilus' fault?

But please do not listen too much to what the reviewer said, because it is totally opposite to most others experience.

Firstly, for all persons I've ever spoken to about GNOME 2.0, it feels way faster than GNOME 1.x

Secondly, there is a centralized place for configuration. It is called "Desktop preferences" and it is either in the GNOME-menu, or in "start-here:". The reviewer got this fact completely wrong, almost on the edge of malciciousness.

He does have some valid points however. The theme-issue is inherited from GNOME 1.x, and was sadly not possible to fix in GNOME 2.0 without much delay.

The other issue, which does speak against intuitivity is the menu-panel. It makes no sense to move the menu-panel, as it is totally meant as a top-menu in all it's design.

However it is still possible to remove the menu-panel and just use a bottom GNOME-panel like Windows or KDE. You just have to create the new panel before you remove the menu-panel, as GNOME won't let you remove all of your panels.

Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (5, Interesting)

JanneM (7445) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785648)

Some of the issues he brings up seems valid. That said, I run Gnome2 and I don't recognize many of the problems he brings up.

First, for me, Gnome2 is far faster than Gnome1.4. This goes for most individual applications, as well as the desktop overall.

Lack of options: Well, yes and no. There has been a serious attempt at providing sensible defaults for a lot of stuff, and hide away rare and/or strange options into the gconf system. While some people like being able to tweak their desktops to hell and back, for many users it is just plain confusing to have as ridiculously many options everywhere as Gnome1 had. Note that for those serious about tweaking, gconf is there for your time-wasting pleasure. :)

Gedit: I've tried repeatedly, but I am unable to duplicate the marking thing he talks about.

Galeon has continued to work flawlessly for me, as have all other Gnome1 apps I have. he mentions that he does not have a Gnome1 installation; that may be an explanation as to why Gnome1 apps do not work...

As for 'scattered settings' - huh? I get all settings neatly in the 'Desktop Preferences' menu. That certainly includes things like xscreensaver settings and pretty much everything else he gripes about in this area. I do not have a 'Desktop theme', as he seems to have, but just the 'theme' option - as it should be.

I get the feeling there is something rather wrong with the reviewers setup; something like an incomplete install, or a mix of older and newer packages or something like it.

/Janne

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (3, Insightful)

KeyserDK (301544) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785657)

I think it's because he is using a mandrake setup.
It has some really odd menu/icon stuff in gnome2, which i know isnt in the 'default' gnome2.

He should try a clean slate, on top of that -O3 wiht gcc 3.1 is just _not_ an good idea, yet =)

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (4, Informative)

redtuxxx (588925) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785700)

What the reviewer has done is done is very simple

Ignored release notes
Ignored Various READMES
Ignored known gotchas

The reason galeon wont work is that the mandrake rpm sounds like it is compiled with nautilus1 support, and nautilus 1 has been clobbered

The one thing loud and clear through all the development process is INSTALL GNOME2 IN A SEPARATE PREFIX!!

Personally I cant think of anything missing with my install of gnome2 (parallel with gnome1.4)

If people cant read release notes they should just pull down ximian RPMs

REDTUX

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785775)

And as we all know, installing and using a GUI requires reading manuals. Just look at Windows XP and MacOS X. On second thoughts, pretend they don't exist. Grab yourself a big bucket of sand, stick your head in it, and pretend that GNOME really is a success.

Just another example of the arrogance of "free" software proponents. If someone finds their work less than perfect it's their own fault for not reading all of

release notes
Various READMES
Ignored known gotchas

And knowledge about the "various" part about the READMEs and the gotchas would be gained by reading newsgroups, discussion groups, slashdot, attending user group meetings? Yep, I can see why that would be required to run a GUI. Yep, Linux sure is ready for the office! And it will solve unemployment problems too - when all the office workers are spending more than half their time learning about why GNOME isn't really as bad as they first thought, a whole second shift will need to be hired!

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785871)

She installed from source and -as usual- didn't knew what she was doing. Had she used the Cooker RPMs she probably wouldn't have had as many problems.

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (2)

mpe (36238) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785722)

Lack of options: Well, yes and no. There has been a serious attempt at providing sensible defaults for a lot of stuff, and hide away rare and/or strange options into the gconf system.

What is and isn't a commonly used option is a rather subjective thing. That's before you consider that any configuation really should be settable or even mandatable by the sysadmin. Quite possibly on a per user/group basis to deal with tweakers who'd never get any work done if they could tweak all day.

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785791)

What is and isn't a commonly used option is a rather subjective thing. That's before you consider that any configuation really should be settable or even mandatable by the sysadmin. Quite possibly on a per user/group basis to deal with tweakers who'd never get any work done if they could tweak all day.

Been there. Done that. Tweaked the T-shirt.

Yes, it is a point. However, having meta-tweaking to decide what's supposed to be tweakable won't really solve the problem, not to mention the UI horrors that can so easily be the result of meta-tweakable configuration applications...

As for what is common and what is not, again, that is sort of true. But there are some things that pretty much everybody would agree on being common, and other things that pretty much anybody would agree on being esoteric. The problem arises whith the stuff in between. And even there, it is frequently better to err on the side of caution and let people use gconf-editor to tweak it if they really want it.

/Janne

Perhaps left-over G-1.4 settings? (2)

deaddeng (63515) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785768)

I've been using Gnome-2 betas/RC1-2, and found that I must erase/rename all the standard Gnome configuration files (.gnome, .gnome2, etc.) in order to avoid problems and see the default desktop that the developers intended.

Re:Some valid things, and a lot of not-so valid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785865)

Incomplete - most likely because the reviewer is one of those dickwads who insists on compiling it his/herself, and hasn't got a fucking clue.

Err... yeah, ok... (0)

CurlyG (8268) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785651)

"Possibly this is the reason why there are not many Gnome applications yet ported to the new framework, neither the Gnome itself includes many applications or preference panels as it used to."

I'm prepared to accept that the author of this article may not have English as her or his first language, but this sentence seems to display a lack discontinuity of thought that's not confidence-inspiring for the rest of the 'review' (or opinion piece as it seems to really be)...

Re:Err... yeah, ok... (5, Funny)

yatest5 (455123) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785673)

I'm prepared to accept that the author of this article may not have English as her or his first language, but this sentence seems to display a lack discontinuity of thought that's not confidence-inspiring for the rest of the 'review' (or opinion piece as it seems to really be)...

Hmm, sweet irony.

Re:Err... yeah, ok... (1)

CurlyG (8268) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785817)

Reminder self - don't psmartarsed ostcomments while drunk. It will screww your kamra with.

Note to moderators - I'm not really this pisshefj.. ajhhh FUCK YA!

Re:Err... yeah, ok... (1)

Sircus (16869) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785735)

A lack discontinuity of thought? I'm not normally one to criticise grammar or spelling, but when complaining about incoherence, you might at least take the effort to be coherent.

Gammar Nazis... (1)

Bothari (34939) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785781)

Rule the world. Yes the statement is a bit confusing, but one does get the meaning from it.

As for Opinion piece, it *is* a review, where the revier gives an *opinion* of her experience with Gnome 2.0...

Please ppl, why can't /. readers argue the content rather than the delivery...

I crashed(a subthread) of GNOME in 30 seconds... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785655)

I crashed GNOME in 30 seconds...

I am a great tested of crappy code and magically can get new releases of large GUI's to barf and die usually in less than a couply minutes of testing. How do i do it? Usually by thinking of things that the programmers did not bother to test or I was suspicious of.

When I first booted a fresh version of RedHat, virgin installed with GNOME selected and running, upon first waling up to it I got the thing to crawl over and barf in 30 seconds.

how... well in this instance I wanted to see if it could do the things a Mac could do (the Mac OS has hundreds of innovative file system technologies not ever normally found in Unix-like systems). I am not referring to Mac OS X at this moment by the way. So what i did was use a mouse to select a directory in GNOME and copy it two levels down into its child descendent and the retarded thing had no recursion detection, something the MAc had since 1984.

I laughed my ass off.

Then I asked 2 people that liked GNOME why it had no way to use GNOME standard tools to change screen resolution (somehting that Windows and Mac people do easily without resorting to awkward ugly tools)... the two appologists for GNOME admitted that GNAME was not really meant to be that useful and was not finished and I should wait for GNOME 2.0

now after all this time I get to play with GNOME 2.0 and its 3 times crappier than even the semi-crappy Mac OS X, but much crappier that I had hoped.

I think Linux people cant imagine a world where computers are easy for their own genetic mothers to use, or old doctors or old lawyers. All 3 groups allegedly IQ of over 110 in this case, yet averse to command line awkward hostile OSes.

Apple is relieved that GNOME 2,0 misses the mark.

The final version isnt out yet.. (1)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785658)

and not all the apps have been ported...

its bound to be a bit rough and buggy (and it is.. im running it atm!)

Depends on the person. (2, Interesting)

MartinG (52587) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785664)

If you're the kind of person who decides which desktop to use based on reading a few reviews or asking your friends, then maybe this review is for you. Good luck.

If you're like me and you like try things for yourself, then you're probably already downloading it, and you probably already know that you're more different from the average person than you think, and you already know that you are constantly surprised by how much you disagree with reviews of this kind.

Seriously, I would recommend that everyone tries gnome 2.0 if you have time.

no kidding. (2, Flamebait)

7-Vodka (195504) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785668)

"The author feels that the new version is limited in many ways"

Yeah. Tell me about it. It seems gnome has declared it's position; it targets absolutely innexperienced users and the rest be damned.

Talk about laugh (2, Interesting)

nagora (177841) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785675)

The new Gnome 2 environment starts up much-much faster than Gnome 1.4 used to! It loads on my dual Celeron 533 in about 2-3 seconds,

Windowmaker loads in a fraction of a second on my 300mhz uniprocessor box.

TWW

Re:Talk about laugh (3, Insightful)

Avakado (520285) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785702)

>> The new Gnome 2 environment starts up
>> much-much faster than Gnome 1.4 used to!

> Windowmaker loads in a fraction of a second
> on my 300mhz uniprocessor box.

I bet Tab Window Manager (aka. twm) starts even faster! It must obviousely be far better!

Note: comparing the startup speed of software with completely different sets of functionality makes no sense.

Re:Talk about laugh (1, Flamebait)

nagora (177841) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785709)

Note: comparing the startup speed of software with completely different sets of functionality makes no sense.

It does when the extra "functionality" of one (Gnome) is of no value whatsoever; WindowMaker is a far better working environment than Gnome/KDE/Windows will ever be.

TWW

configurability (5, Insightful)

Random Walk (252043) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785683)

anyone who complains about a lack of configurability apparently never had to deal with:
  • people who managed to tear off a taskbar by accident, and could not figure out how to put it back in place,
  • people who managed to switch off a taskbar by accident (this evil M$ Word ...), and could not figure out how to switch it on again,
  • countless other examples ...
Many, perhaps most, users use their PC only occasionally, are not familiar with configuration options, cannot 'fix' even the most trivial issues, and would rather need a well thought out configuration that cannot be modified by any means.

Re:configurability (1, Troll)

__past__ (542467) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785747)

Not being configurable might make software easier to use for computer-illiterate people. However, there are quite a lot of UN*X users that can cope quite fine with complexity, and aren't afraid of options.

This whole "Linuxs on the desktop" thing is going in a very strange direction, IMHO. Why do people choose UN*X as a desktop system in the first place? I for one don't care about newbie-friendliness that much, all I want is a powerfull, efficient, open and stable system that is a pleasure to use and doesn't treat me like an idiot.

Anal Cox's greatest hits: TROLLENPOLKA! by pwpbot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785687)

THE TROLL POLKA ARSCHFICKEN MIT ZIEGEN By Serial Troller slashdotorg das nicht ein early post Ja Das ist mein early postIs das nicht ein Goatse goatsecx ghost Ja Das ist mein Goatse goatsecx ghostEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksdas post at minus one Ja Das ist at minus oneIs das trolling so much fun Ja Das trolling is so funMinus one trolling funEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksdas nicht ein big crapflood Ja Das ist mein big crapfloodIs it worthless Linux FUD Ja Das ist mein Linux FUDBig crapflood Linux FUDMinus one trolling funEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksdas nicht der CowBoiKneel Ja Das ist der CowBoiKneelIs dis nicht his manchode meal Ja Das ist his manchode mealCowBoiKneel manchode mealBig crapflood Linux FUDMinus one trolling funEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksdas nicht ein WIPO Troll Ja Das ist der WIPO TrollIs das nicht ein Goatse goatsecx hole Ja Das ist der Goatse goatsecx holeWIPO Troll Goatse goatsecx holeCowBoiKneel manchode mealBig crapflood Linux FUDMinus one trolling funEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksdas nicht Jon Katzslave boys Ja Das ist Jon Katzslave boysUnd arenthey Tacosex toys Ja They are Tacosex toysKatzslave boys Robsex toysWIPO Troll Goatse goatsecx holeCowBoiKneel manchode mealBig crapflood Linux FUDMinus one trolling funEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksdas nicht ein trolltalk thread Ja Das ist ein trolltalk threadIs it nicht now FUCKING DEAD Ja Is really FUCKING DEADTrolltalk thread FUCKING DEADKatzslave boys Robsex toysWIPO Troll Goatse goatsecx holeCowBoiKneel manchode mealBig crapflood Linux FUDMinus one trolling funEarly post Goatse goatsecx ghostOh du schdu schdu schsucksChange Log Subtle changes to most verses It sounded really gay before Removed all references to Tacopud May have been high at time Will investigate furtherFinally think I have goat sex written correctly in German I think Arschficken2002 Serial Troller Permission to reproduce this document is granted provided that you send all the bukkake porn you can find to serialtrollerhotmailcom mailto

-pwpbot

Yea... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785691)

Salon is running a story on Microsoft's disclosure of a number of security flaws in WinXP and Windows Media Player, versions 6.4 and 7.1.

Yea dude, this is *totally* fucking news to me. Not like they released patches and security advisories to NTbugtraq or anything. Suck it, timothy, yu0 is teh fag0rt!!!1

Err, Well, mostly on topic (3, Interesting)

smithwis (577119) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785707)

Something I'd like to know is...

How well does Gnome2.0 work without Nautilus? I've never been a big fan of Nautilus and so always removed as much dependence of Nautilus as I feel safe removing from my instalations of Gnome. I've noticed that as I've updated Gnome, that Nautilus has been more and more integrated. For instance Gnome tries to get you to use nautilus to navigate to different control panels, Fortunately I was able to dig up the Gnome Control Center utility last time I updated. Anyways, with Gnome now using a new and incompatible GTK do we lose the gnome control center in favor of the not so nice Nautilus interface?

It's a shame if we have to use Nautilus. One of the reasons I liked Gnome so much was that you weren't really forced to use much of anything. You didn't have to use Sawfish(or now metacity) for your window manager and you didn't have to use GMC or Nautilus(I prefer an XTerm window for the most part)

Thanks for any light you may shed on my questions. And excuse me for being a lazy ass and not doing to much research b4 asking;-)

Steve

Re:Err, Well, mostly on topic (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785837)

You have all configuration in the 'Desktop Preferences' menu. Also, you can of course always run the individual configurations from the command line - or you could use gconf-editor.

I haven't tried running without Nautilus, but I don't think there is any problems doing so.

/Janne

WHY KDE IS WRONG. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785718)


KDE was cooked up in the same country that started both World Wars, embraced philosophies of destruction and hate (such as Nazism and Fascism), and spawned evil murderous maniacs such as Adolf Hitler.

By using KDE you are implicitly endorsing these hatemongering people and their genocidal dogmas.

A true patriot uses GNOME, written in the land of the free and the home of the brave. By using Gnome you are re-affirming your American ideals and supporting the open doctrine of truth, liberty, and love.

Re:WHY KDE IS WRONG. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785748)

spawned evil murderous maniacs such as Adolf Hitler

What, Austria?

GNOME, written in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

What, Mexico?

Re:WHY KDE IS WRONG. (0, Offtopic)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785784)

well, Hitler was Austrian. But Mexico is neither of those things. Apparantly neither is America. If people weren't so scared of little to nothing, we'd still be free.

Re:WHY KDE IS WRONG. (1)

xutopia (469129) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785751)

"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind." Albert Einstein Nazism and Fascism got their strength in nationalism. What is different with your arguments for using GNOME?

Sade?? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785744)

The guy listens to Sade. How much can he really know about computers?

He didn't even know enough to hide the Sade before taking the screenshot.

Re:Sade?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785755)

You don't even know that Eugenia is female. How much can you really know about anything?

You didn't even have the sense to keep your stubby fingers off of the keyboard.

Re:Sade?? (3, Funny)

Salsaman (141471) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785864)

What do you mean ? Sade is *obviously* a big computer geek. What are her two most famous songs ?

Smooth Operator (an obvious reference to overloaded operators in OO programming languages); and Diamond Life (obviously a reference to hardened carbon based nano machines).

Which goes to show about free software... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785745)

...that even though you can program, you can't design.

Software usability and aesthetics matters. That is what keeps Apple in business and Jef Raskin on the history books.

I very much highly doubt that any free software will ever be able to have a "great" UI because the politics involved would be very large.

Ah, memories (5, Interesting)

Gryphon (28880) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785754)

Reading this review of Gnome reminded me of the days (about a year and half ago now) when I was still trying to use Linux and Gnome (somtimes KDE) as a desktop machine.

Nothing coherent about the UI design, hunting around to find configuration panels, getting messages that tell the user to download this package or that package (which leads directly to Dependency Hell).

These days, I use Mac OS X. Sure, it's UI isn't perfect. And I know, it's an apples to oranges comparison, Free Software to commercial. But man, do I ever enjoy using a coherent desktop with one place to change settings (System Preferences). No fuss! No muss! I'm far more productive.

And my Linux server continues to hum away in the basement, quietly powering my website.

Life is good.

Wow... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785761)

By this point, I expected about a hundred Linux jockies on here personally attacking OSNews for this.

Anyway, sounds like Gnome 2 is a lot like Gnome 1... very amateurish and lacking the 'polish' of the commercial OS's, especially where the help files are concerned. At least the fonts are better and Nautilus seems workable but from reading the review, it's nothing to write home about.

There is a rule in every industry... (2)

Raleel (30913) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785764)

that got described accurately in the software industry. Don't use the .0 version.

The short of it is that it's still a tad beta, and still needs work. It looks gorgeous, but then again, I'm a Gnome user (KDE feels too bubbly to me, and I can't find a theme to trim it. yes I've looked on a couple of sites). it still needs to be tweaked. I'm sure the Ximian guys will have a very solid version in not too long.

Right on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785773)

About time someone who actually cares about UI gave an honest review of GNOME. After all these years, it's still bloated, buggy, full of nasty dependencies and ugly (though it's improved somewhat on those last two). I use *NIX as my daily desktop OS, but it's for the power, not the GUI. I would never recommend it for a desktop machine to anyone other than advanced users, who are already doing it anyhow...

Until someone comes up with a small, integrated and well thought out GUI environment for *NIX (and no, I don't consider Aqua all of those things), I'll just have to stick with blackbox, as it pisses me off the least.

Maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785778)

It is my opinion that with the release of KDE3 and all the hooplah, gnome developers were more rushed than ever to get this thing out the door and satisfy all those "is it ready yet, ok now is it... ok must be ready now" people. I think with the next release things will get better, lets not forget what the first official release of KDE3 was like. buggy

X.0 Versions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785786)

stay away from any version of anything that ends in a X.0 (except mozilla is the exception to this rule, and execptions to rules only proove the point...

Much different experience (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785788)

I guess I may be doing something different than you but my experiences have been fantastic. The improved UI is cleaner. The text looks great. A major theme of this release was to remove bloat, clutter, and unecessary options. Gnome 2 is far more elegant than previous versions of gnome. It's much faster on my pentium 500 than gnome 1.4. There is much improved user application consistancy. I have been running snapshots for several weeks. I have not had so much as one panel crash, and Eugenia claims to have done it several times? Is it possible this was a bad install? I'm not claiming that this release is perfect but I will say its my preferred desktop, anf that I have had wonderful experiences with stability and performance. It might also be worth noting that there are several applications not included with the main release. They just arent production quality yet, I suggest waiting for gnome 2.2 If you want all the infrastructure changes and the user visibile changes planned. The only issue I have with Gnome 2 as a whole is the removal of the menu editing, but I respect the descisions behind it. It was not ready and not of the quality the gnome2 release team was willing to endorse. But it will be. Keep in mind no product will get better without reproducing bugs, and reporting them. If you want something changed or fixed, download gnome2, test it, join the chat on irc and help make the software better. Get your feedback into the community of developers so they can make even better successive releases.

*sigh* (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785797)

Of course I expected something like this, but some paragraphs just made me angry. I will _not_ waste my time and pick on every single misinformed statement in this article but try to keep it constructive... *counts slowly up to ten*

"smooth resizing (with medium success, I might add - when compared to MacOSX and BeOS 6-Dano's algorithms/techniques),"

Just as a sidenote, this is probably an issue of X, not Gtk. I just tried Gtk2.0 on DirectFB and that just flies. Too bad there is no real windowmanagment using Gtk on DFB yet, I would love that.

"For example, the memu panel, merely includes 3 options. Same goes for the other setting panels (when available), they lack the flexibility and number of options found in the previous version of Gnome."

You got this wrong. The main philosophy of Gnome 2 is, that less is sometimes more. The idea is to create an enjoyable user experience by default instead of letting him choose between "six equally broken ways to do it" (great quote from Havoc Pennington). That's why there are much less preferences, not because there is anything yet to be ported (preferences would be the first thing to be ported over).
Later you state that exactly this would be a good thing.

"I found this default configuration, bone-headed, at best. The panel on top only includes an 'Applications' and 'Actions' menu, then you get a huge unused space and then, at the right most side, you get the clock, and a menu which is equivelant to a chooser/finder as found on MacOS. It was a matter of time, before I deleted my bottom window list and embedded it on the main panel"

Why is this "bone-headed"? I'm sure everyone at Gnome would be happy for some reasonable arguments, so it can be changed to the better. The default makes perfect sense to me. The menu at the top left (where else), clock on the topright. In between there is enough place for your launchers and applets (not "wasted" space like you put it) and at the bottom there is the taskbar. I don't see the merits of having a taskbar "integrated" into another bar, why should this be more intuitive? Or is your argument that two panels are waisting screen estate? Some clarification would be nice.

"People will always argue that we are lucky that there is an option to do so, but the main point is, that the default configuration is what most people use. It is common knowledge that only a small percentage of users actually change (or have the right to change, in a business environment) their desktop and add/remove icons, themes or configurations. If the default configuration is not intuitive, most people will still live with it."

You just discovered the one big idea behind Gnome 2. If you think a default isn't right, provide some logical arguments please. I suggest to read the Metacity README file, it's very interesting and the same philosophy basically applies for the whole GNOME project. http://cvs.gnome.org/lxr/source/metacity/README

"My only problem with Nautilus was the inclusion of GTKhtml 2 as the main HTML renderer. GTKHtml is still extremely buggy. Its font sizes chosen are making the webpages unreadable, while it can't browse links that have relative destination even if these links are on the same server (eg. comment.php instead of www.osnews.com/comment.php)."

That is because Nautilus is _no_ webbrowser. It's a filebrowser (just because Windows and KDE have a combined File/Webbrowser doesn't mean Gnome has to as well). And there _is_ a difference between viewing a HTML page and browsing the web. GtkHTML is fine for the beginning to view HTML pages. Later there will be a Galeon component integrated into Nautilus.

"The other important problem is the largely unfinished Help included. Only a handful of topics are discussed. A shame really. A commercial company would have never ship an OS or desktop environment with no real Help files."

And neither will Ximian.

"If this is how open source works, there would not be a chance that I would recommend any of this to my friends or family. Of course, such things prove right the people at MSNBC saying that Linux (and the rest X-based OSes) is not ready for the desktop. I am only here, to my dismay of course, to prove their conclusion right."

This is the part that made me angry. Just as with proprietory software, there is "free" (as in no cost) Free Software and commercial Free Software. When comparing commercial proprietory software to Free Software, you have to compare it to commercial Free Software of course! So you should rather look at Ximian, they are doing a fine job. So far they are mostly targeted at buisiness consumers though, because it's not really appropriate for home desktop users anyway. But it will one day and when it is, there will be a company making it "complete". To draw the conclusion from a free Gnome 2 release targeted mostly at developers to "Free Software isn't able to deliver commercial quality releases" is just plain unfair. Even comparing Free Software to commercial software is showing a complete lack of understanding because Free Software _is_ by definition commercial software because anyone is allowed to make money from it. But not everyone does. And you can't expect anything from those who don't!

I completely agree with you that Gnome 2 lacks a lot in features, etc and I guess that most Gnome developer will also agree with you. Gnome is really a new base, removing a lot of old crap and trying to make things "right". It will grow from now.

It's your best right to say that you don't want to use something that is still lacking as much as Gnome 2 does and that you wouldn't recommend it to Joy User but I'm really getting angry when I see this mindless bashing of their efforts.

Users not changing thier Desktop? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785801)

Small Nit with the author:

"It is common knowledge that only a small percentage of users actually change (or have the right to change, in a business environment) their desktop and add/remove icons, themes or configurations."

What planet is this individual from? The one thing I have noticed is users seem to always change their desktops, some to awefull combinations IMHO.

When gnome was just starting out... (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785816)

I used to think it was pretty cool. I was especially keen on its choice of enl dr0.15.x for window manager. Eventually, Raster left RHAD and they started using Sawmill (now Sawfish), and I left GNOME. I've poked at it once or twince since then, but nothing really impressed me. I like some of the apps, but not many.
when dr0.17 of enlightenment is released, it'll be a very nice "desktop." However, like anyone that hangs out in #e knows, Raster doesn't even believe linux is ready for the desktop, and for all intents and purposes, has no business being there with most people. The fact that Gnome2 apparantly sucks (i've not tried it, and i'm not going to, so i can't say for sure), and that KDE just makes me want to barf doesn't make me disagree with him.
I'm actualy happy with TWM, but enl is a real treat.

Sence the site is now /.ed (4, Insightful)

SuperCal (549671) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785821)

Since the site is now /.ed, I'll do a little karma whore'n...
' First off for those of you who don't read OSNews, The author Eugenia is almost always right on the money, despite some of the posts to her message boards. Also I'm impressed with the way she responds to the message board posts with solid information. In this case she simply posted her opinions on the latest release. She had a few crashes and didn't like the feel. One App particularly caused problems, I believe it was a Control Panel or major settings dialog.
Also of interest, some of the message board reads posted that they had no crashes and generally liked the experience, so if you care is to give it a try and see if it works for you. I'm going to stick to KDE, it works for me. '

right on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3785836)

Gnome has always been clunky. they need to stop doing the half mac, half Windows crap. the top tool bar in mac is there because that is where all the window menues are, however gnome insists on using the windows for the menues just like Windows.

and (this is more KDE and Gnome) I hate the pannel that they have. I like a CDE/Next/Xfce/OSX pannel that is centered.

KDE is definatly the closest to being perfect... if we are talking about DE.

Advanced preferences/configuration (1)

Coryoth (254751) | more than 11 years ago | (#3785840)

New users don't want to deal with preferences. Most users don't want to have to bother with selecting from a selection of broken ways to do something. But the ability to configure, at a deep level, the functioning of the desktop should not be lost.

I would suggest a tiered preference system - on tha face of it a very simple set of preferences, each of which can be expanded out (if the user so desires - most won't) into more. I still use Enlightenment simply because of the power it gives me over window management. Other than that I use FVWM2, and Fluxbox for configurability, and useful features. The ability to control how I work is valuable to me, and I'm willing to invest the time learning. I know a lot of people aren't, but that's no reason not to at least expose some base level configurability for the users that care.

Jedidiah
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...