Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GNOME 2.0 Released

Posted by michael on from the stomping-its-way-to-glory dept.

MAXOMENOS writes "The GNOME team has announced the release of GNOME 2.0. You can get more information about the GNOME 2.0 system here." Congratulations to everyone involved. Use the mirrors...

9 of 424 comments (clear)

  1. Get To Those Mirrors! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    GNOME FTP Sites This site is mirrored at:

    Last updated Wed Jun 26 03:18:01 2002 from our mirror database (webmaster@gnome.org).

  2. Screenshots by frantzdb · · Score: 5, Informative

    For the lazy, here are the Screenshots.

    Great work to everyone who helped with this. Gnome2 is amazing.

    --Ben

  3. YES. by luge · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thank god :)

    --

    IAAL,BIANLY

  4. Incase you are thinking of running metacity... by plastercast · · Score: 4, Informative

    Incause some people out there are running the "experimental" metacity WM, here is configuration tool I wrote that is much nicer to use than the command line.

    http://plastercast.tzo.com/~plastercast/Projects /

  5. Some things missing? by Darth+Maul · · Score: 4, Informative

    Perhaps I'm just missing some things, but I can't find:

    1) The window manager switcher (I don't want Sawfish)
    2) A lot of the cool panel applets from 1.4 (clock)
    3) A way to save a session and have it remember window positions (it'll start programs that were "saved", but they all default to the middle of the desktop)

    Can anyone fill me in? Thanks.

    --
    --- witty signature
    1. Re:Some things missing? by epukinsk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Off the top of my head:

      1) You can switch windows managers in Applications -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Window Manager

      2) The alternative clock applets were not ported to GNOME 2 because it was decided that there should be only one clock applet that is flexible. Having many clock applets was a significant source of confusion for users in Sun's usability test.

      3) Where responsibility for saving windows states lies is still a topic of debate. There is a discussion of this that began this weekend on the desktop-devel-list. There was also a more technical discussion of this last month on the wm-spec-list.

      Erik

  6. Re:Gnome 2 vs KDE 3 by tempest303 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This question will always be a matter of personal preference, and the ultimate answer is, "Install them both and see which one you like best!"

    But you've heard that already, and it's not what you were looking for. ;-)

    What you really wanted was Gnome's advantages over KDE. For me, it comes down to a few things...

    1) Seems speedier on my 400mhz workstation. This is subjective, but I think it's pretty apparent. YMMV! On faster machines, this is less of an issue, but I don't have a faster machine, so it is a big deal to me. :-)

    2) Application "consistency": I personally find Galeon, Evo, and Gnumeric superior to Konquoror, KMail, and Koffice's spreadsheet, so having those former apps match my desktop is nice. While you can run Gnome/GTK apps in KDE, and vice-versa, having your themes between your desktop and Galeon, Evolution, Gnumeric, etc, is really cool.

    3) This is the real kicker for me: Gnome 2 is, IMHO, much easier to configure and work with, and is far more intuitive. One of the Gnome 2 philosophies is that things should "just work", and use intelligent default settings wherever possible, instead of offering "6 equally broken ways to do it, and let[ing] the user pick one."* This means that while Gnome is still configurable, you don't have to wade through a nearly endless sea of preference options just to find that one button you were looking for. *cough*Kontrol center*cough* ;-) The tradeoff is that you might not like the default that's been picked, but I've really found that I haven't missed anything so far. There are a few features I'd like to see (re)added, like the system tray, but that's coming very soon in a future release.

    * thanks to Havoc Pennington for the great quote.

    Once again, though, the only way to decide is to try for yourself.

    Happy GNOMEing!

    --
    The Free desktop that Just Works
  7. Re:Gnome 2 vs KDE 3 by capt.Hij · · Score: 4, Informative
    Well... KDE is mighty slow and gnome is only really slow.

    Gnome 2.0 and KDE 3 seem fine on recent machines with enough memory. (Howz that for vague?) But we have a lab with a bunch of 5 year old machines and 32 mb or ram. We *have* to use icewm on them. It is possible to get gnome running on them but kde just plain won't run on them.

    If you've got a recent machine there isn't much difference between the two, except that kde has some different features which are kind of nice. If you do not have a big machine then gnome is much nicer to work on. If you've got an old beater, then your best bet is icewm.

    If it weren't for ice we would not have a back door for installing linux. Our argument to the money holders is that linux lets us use older machines and still be efficient. We can't do that with these "modern" window managers. The code bloat has just plain gotten out of hand. Thank goodness for ice! It allows us to sneak linux in the back door which then permeates the system!

  8. Re:Gnome 2 vs KDE 3 by Arandir · · Score: 4, Informative

    Personally I think the biggest advantage to GNOME is that you can choose your window manager.

    FUD, FUD, FUD, no go away!

    GNOME will use any window manager, but prefers those that are GNOME compliant. KDE will use any window manager, but prefers those that are GNOME compliant. The fact that KDE ships with its own window manager is about as irrelevant as the fact that GNOME does as well.

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned