Posted by
michael
on from the world-outside-KDE dept.
JanneM writes "Gnome 2.4 is arriving early september. Sayamindu Dasgupta has installed the 2.3.5 development release to see what's in store, and has written a very nice overview of the upcoming release."Update: 08/14 16:06 GMT by M: The author has provided a mirror.
Well, it does a lot of stuff... you might not use it all, but it's there.
That's why I went to the less able ROX-filer RTFM? Try "gnome-cd-properties". This isn't nautilus' fault in the first place.
Since I'm not using it in Gnome, I didn't think to read the Gnome pages, but I did read the info on Nautilus Then you haven't really closed it now, have you? What do you think is managing your desktop? If you don't like it, there's always KDE, or TWM if you'd prefer...
Well, I had thought that I was using icewm, and that if I wanted to browse some files, I could use nautilus, but I was wrong. Nautilus takes over the whole desktop, placing icons. Again, the reason I went to ROX, so I didn't have to deal with having some monstrous program taking over my desktop just to browse the filesystem and launch files. Finally:
You haven't really answered my questions, now have you, nor did the article. I am honestly curious. I would like to see a Gnome that is less heavy on resources. Is that happening?
Re:On-the-fly Resolution Change
by
wyndigo
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
umm. ctrl-alt-(+|-) are your friend. Unless you secretly like leaving X to change resolutions.
--wyn
Re:GLOBAL Always On Top functionality?
by
leviramsey
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Uh... sawfish (which was part of GNOME from the early days until Havoc Pennington hijacked GNOME and made metacity the default wm), which should still be usable with GNOME (I used it for a while with GNOME 2.2 until I had a RAM module fail and GNOME got dog-slow) allows you to adjust the stacking of windows to achieve always on top.
This is far from a new feature (though it may be new to metacity, the shittiest excuse for a window manager since twm).
BRING BACK SAWFISH! BRING BACK SAWFISH!
Re:Nautilus Useable?
by
xjerky
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Ahhh, gconf....since everyone loves the Windows registry, lets give Unix one too.......
-- A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board:
"You know what? You're right."
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it does a lot of stuff... you might not use it all, but it's there.
That's why I went to the less able ROX-filer
RTFM? Try "gnome-cd-properties". This isn't nautilus' fault in the first place.
Since I'm not using it in Gnome, I didn't think to read the Gnome pages, but I did read the info on Nautilus
Then you haven't really closed it now, have you? What do you think is managing your desktop? If you don't like it, there's always KDE, or TWM if you'd prefer...
Well, I had thought that I was using icewm, and that if I wanted to browse some files, I could use nautilus, but I was wrong. Nautilus takes over the whole desktop, placing icons. Again, the reason I went to ROX, so I didn't have to deal with having some monstrous program taking over my desktop just to browse the filesystem and launch files.
Finally:
You haven't really answered my questions, now have you, nor did the article. I am honestly curious. I would like to see a Gnome that is less heavy on resources. Is that happening?
Put identity in the browser.
umm. ctrl-alt-(+|-) are your friend. Unless you secretly like leaving X to change resolutions.
--wyn
Uh... sawfish (which was part of GNOME from the early days until Havoc Pennington hijacked GNOME and made metacity the default wm), which should still be usable with GNOME (I used it for a while with GNOME 2.2 until I had a RAM module fail and GNOME got dog-slow) allows you to adjust the stacking of windows to achieve always on top.
This is far from a new feature (though it may be new to metacity, the shittiest excuse for a window manager since twm).
BRING BACK SAWFISH! BRING BACK SAWFISH!
Ahhh, gconf....since everyone loves the Windows registry, lets give Unix one too.......
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."