Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GNOME in the Year of the Monkey

Posted by michael on from the timmah! dept.

An anonymous reader writes "GNOME Foundation's Tim Ney describes some of the project's efforts marking the Lunar New Year of the Monkey with a tip, "Never sit with your back to a lobbyist for proprietary software." GNOME is rapidly becoming popular in developing countries and you can donate to help."

43 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Year of the Monkey cant be that good... by MrRTFM · · Score: 5, Funny

    Developers, Developers, Developers!!!!!

    We all know where this is going to lead :(

    --
    You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just because some watery tart threw a sword at you
    1. Re:Year of the Monkey cant be that good... by arvindn · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It should instead be:

      Components, Components, Components!! ("Universal coupling").

      Seriously, GNOME needs more work going into bonobo. IMHO its the only area where it lags behind KDE. That's the reason why you hear Abiword and gnumeric a lot more than kword and kspread, but you hear of koffice but not of gnome-office.

      Loose coupling is not necessarily a bad idea though. For example gnome apps start quickly when you're in KDE but not vice versa.

  2. Gnome the way to go? by armando_wall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a big fan of KDE, and a few years ago I found Gnome a little bit cumbersome to use on a daily basis (this is not troll... those days I didn't find KDE too special either).

    However... recently, I've tried it once or twice, and man, how it has improved!

    I always liked Gnome because of its GTK+ (C coding is great!).

    I'm even considering switching to it, thanks to Dropline Gnome, a version especially crafted for Slackware. I'd like some opinions from its users (Dropline Gnome).... anyone around?

    1. Re:Gnome the way to go? by pcbob · · Score: 4, Informative

      Dropline is great! If you have fast connection, then installation is painless - just start the instaler, select few options, go outside (gasp!) and when you are back you new gnome is waiting for you.

      I've been using it for some time now, and I haven't found anything missing (besides win32 video codec drivers :) I use Serbian Cyrillic trnaslations, and I'm glad that they included everyting, and it works out of box.

      Also they update packages fairly often (stuff like mozilla); they even provide an applet for panel that checks for updates.

      Overall, strongly recomended for any slacker outhere!

    2. Re:Gnome the way to go? by arvindn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I have nothing against your being a C fan (its certainly way simpler to learn than C++), IMHO one of the advantages of Gtk+/Gnome is the availability of bindings in a large number of languages (python, perl, C#, ruby, C++ etc). Efficiency is not crucial in desktop apps, and so using a higher level language can lead to big gains in programmer productivity. (I have personal experience with this. I wrote gretools in a week, and that included learning python along the way.)

    3. Re:Gnome the way to go? by dolson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I haven't used Dropline, but I do use Gnome, and I was in your position. I had very bad luck with Gnome until version 2.0. I used to swear by KDE and swear at Gnome, but as you mentioned, it has vastly improved. I can't go back to KDE now. I just love how GTK looks compared to Qt. All of my favorite apps are GTK-based anyhow. So all is well.

      I hope it continues, and I like that people have the choice to use KDE as well. It's all good.

  3. Re:This lunar year by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 3, Informative

    Strictly, the Chinese calendar is a lunisolar calendar, not a lunar calendar. I believe that lunisolar calendars have leap years whenever 12 months won't fit easily into one year. Hopefully this means Gnome will enjoy many leaps;)

    --
    This is where the serious fun begins.
  4. year of the monkey by Dreadlord · · Score: 5, Funny

    GNOME Foundation's Tim Ney describes some of the project's efforts marking the Lunar New Year of the Monkey with a tip.

    Huh? Year of The Monkey can only be good for Ximian Desktop.

    GNOME's logo desn't look like a monkey's print anyway.

    --
    The IT section color scheme sucks.
    1. Re:year of the monkey by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

      GNOME's logo desn't look like a monkey's print anyway.

      It's just a pretty rare species is all. And not a monkey really, an ape. The Great Octal Ape. Found only in the deepest jungles of Cambridge, MA.

      They do have a cousin though, the Lesser Bonoboctal Ape, found only in the misty, magical land known as Berserkly.

      KFG

  5. Re:Gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    And vi? Who the hell uses vi these days. I installed emacs the other day and I haven't looked back - the cursor keys work, there's no stupid seperate "insert/edit/command" modes, it "just works".

    I have NO idea why anyone would choose vi over EMACS. Perhaps it's time the supporters of VIM and BSD switched to supporting EMACS instead.

    Also does anyone use Macs these days? I just got an Amiga and it is shhweeet. Decent pre-emptive multitasking and a real command line, not like a Mac where you have to install the Multifinder just to have more than one app running at once. Command line? Ha.

    Anyway, I'm converted to Amigas and EMACS forever, I do hope the community gains control over its senses and switches to supporting just these two.

  6. Re:Gnome by SiGiN · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I must confess - I am an WinXP/2000 user. My Linux experience, currently is limited to Cygwin, which is more than enough for me.

    But it isn't always like that - once per year, I try to install 2-3 distro's, and watch what will come out of it.

    Usually everything goes smooth, until I have to choose - KDE or Gnome. And to be honest, while KDE isn't always feel comfortable for me, its A LOT easier to understand than Gnome, especially when you switch from Win.

    The only positive point about Gnome over KDE, I occassionaly have in mind, is that it ran without any problem with VMWare, while KDE needed some tweaking (Slackware it was, probably.. Not sure)

    But after a while, I usually remove partition(s) with linux(and swap) altogether.. That thing, yet not for me, for various (well known) reasons.

    Now, mod me down for using WinXP ;-)

    --
    Dephine URL
  7. Developing countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is GNOME becoming popular in developing countries when it's geared towards newer machines? I mean, you need at least 128M of RAM to run GNOME smoothly, and many systems in developing countries have 16, 32 and (just possibly) 64M of RAM. I would've thought they'd use IceWM or perhaps XFce.

    This is the only problem I see for GNOME and KDE. Powerful and flexible as they are, they're so bulky and huge that they don't feel much faster than Windows XP. If we want to give people an incentive to switch, we want them to FEEL that their machines are faster under Linux. Instead, you can see on message boards around the Net first-timers stating that Linux is "slow" and "bloated" because of this.

    I hope at some point KDE and GNOME developers really make headway into the bloat and performance, because otherwise it's not only unusable for any machine built earlier than 2001, but also doesn't give a good impression. Linux was always known as the speedy, svelte and lighweight OS - this image is being eroded.

    1. Re:Developing countries? by digitect · · Score: 4, Interesting
      [GNOME and KDE] don't feel much faster than Windows XP

      Have to disagree with you there. I use GNOME on a P3-450Mhz at home, and it feels almost as fast as the WinXP I use on a P4-2600Mhz at work; nearly five times the machine!

      As you say, RAM does matter (I have 262Mb on the home machine) but memory is cheap. What's the big deal?

      --
      There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
    2. Re:Developing countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      KDE 3.2 have made some real improvements in their RAM usage and speed. You should try it when it comes out. OpenOffice.org are trying very hard to reduce their speed too. OpenOffice 1.1 was impressive, but the latest developer snapshots are even faster! KDE is designed to be modular, and with the minimal packages it is really fast!

    3. Re:Developing countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      but memory is cheap. What's the big deal?

      The big deal is that some people use GNU/linux because they can get it for $0.

      We don't want Little Johnny to have to ask his parents to upgrade before he can give GNU/linux a whirl.

    4. Re:Developing countries? by Homology · · Score: 3, Insightful
      As you say, RAM does matter (I have 262Mb on the home machine) but memory is cheap. What's the big deal?

      Read the parent post again, and note what he writes about developing countries and older PCs.

      Memory is not cheap when you are poor, so, it's indeed a big deal.

      For those of us that are priviliged, and still want to use older machines, we may have trouble getting more memory. For instance, I've got a Dell Dimension L466cx that can only use PC100 memory. Now, the online stores in my country only sells PC133 memory, so more memory may be hard to get.

    5. Re:Developing countries? by arvindn · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Linux was always known as the speedy, svelte and lighweight OS

      You mean on the server. Which it still is. The *nix DEs never had much of a reputation for speed (except maybe wmaker and other niche WMs). Please don't confuse the two. I remember KDE 1.x being very slow on the hardware of the day. Today's KDE and GNOME are certainly way faster on today's hardware.

    6. Re:Developing countries? by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do you think that developing nations all use ancient equipment? That's not exactly true.

      Often older equipment is more expensive and harder to get, and harder to get support on.

      Developing countries have computers... it's the software licenses that dwarf the cost of those computers that hurts.

    7. Re:Developing countries? by digitect · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Uh, first of all, I was in high school before IBM's first PC. I'm not some flippant high schooler who doesn't understand the concept of value and investment... and neither, hopefully, are my kids.

      Second, half the PC100 RAM in my machine came from my company who was going to throw it away! I'm not proposing you go out and buy a new machine to use GNOME. Just the opposite!

      Lastly, poverty is not caused by making wise use of current resources, which is exactly what I'm talking about. There's no insistance that one use GNOME with a brand new machine, or even a two year old one. (Elsewhere, I've already stated that my machine if 5 years old, beyond the lifetime for a typical business class machine.)

      To say that GNOME is memory intensive is a huge overstatment considering the typical spec sold today. You won't run it with 64Mb, but 128 does just fine. I think that's entirely reasonable, even for someone without a lot of financial resources.

      --
      There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
    8. Re:Developing countries? by nerdin · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm from a developing country: We don't mind about performance, but price.

      You can't complain about performance if you *never* touch a PC, right? You can't have a reference frame when you can't simply use a computer.

      I need pretty much the same hardware to run Win 2000/Office/MS Development tools, and still pay a few thousand bucks to MS if I want to perform any other action than play solitaire (is solitaire still in XP?). And it's that or use pirated versions...

      For being productive as a developer in Windows you need:

      - Office Suite: $400
      - Programming Suite (VS .NET) $1,000
      - Server/Server Edition (at least HTTP server): $650.
      - Probably a non-toy DB (SQL Server + 5 licences): $1,200

      So even 1 GB RAM (About $100 here), a fast processor and a LICENSED distro become peanuts against those licensing prices and I still need decent hardware.

      I make a living using an old PII@350 MHz / 256 MB RAM with all of aforementioned software and have some hacking, business and leisure for less than I'd pay for a *single* MS application by only adding RAM and a non-sucking video card.

      Performance is a small price tag where a decent programmer hourly rate is around $3. Anyway we can brew some coffee while OOO opens or have time off when compiling Nautilus and still be on the cheap side.

      So, no... we don't mind if *anything* is slow on GNOME.

  8. Re:Gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ummm.. Gnome is moving well ahead of KDE in terms of functionality and usability. KDE has become a usability nightmare with hundreds of configuration options exposed in menus.

  9. Re:Gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yep. And the gconf-editor is a usability dream come true.

  10. Re:Gnome by wdnspoon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think that initially, Gnome did lag behind KDE in many areas. Qt had a lot of advantages over the old GTK. The big advantage that Gnome has is a much more open development model. Gnome is not only friendly to its users, but also its developers. This has encouraged Gnome to grow faster than KDE (and GTK faster than Qt). Right now, I'd place Gnome and KDE as being about equal to eachother. I switched completely to Gnome because I believe that Gnome will continue to surpass KDE.

  11. Re:Gnome by deminisma · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah - I use GNOME. Why you ask?

    1. More consistentcy between apps due to the Human Interface Guidelines
    2. Nicer interface layout. Better spacing, and I like the OS 9 style menu up the top, feels less like a windows clone, taking the best from both worlds. Also less flashly, more standard than KDE.
    3. Options. Apart from Gconf, GNOME comes with far less options. KDE is nice, but trying to locate an option in the KDE Control Center is hell. GConf is a far better way to go.
    4. Apps. GNOME/GTK2+ has all the apps I want. Gems like Rhythmbox and the GIMP when there is nothing that compares on KDE. Also the old standbys like Abiword, Bluefish and Gnumeric.
    5. Lastly, the GNOME community! Sites like planet.gnome.org and gnomedesktop.org help GNOME rock just that much more.

  12. Re:Gnome by zsau · · Score: 4, Informative

    1. More consistentcy between apps due to the Human Interface Guidelines

    This used to be a point in favor of KDE didn't it? :)

    2. Nicer interface layout. Better spacing, and I like the OS 9 style menu up the top, feels less like a windows clone, taking the best from both worlds. Also less flashly, more standard than KDE.

    The menubar isn't OS 9 style. KDE can do an OS9 style menubar up the top, GTK can't. OS9 style menubars are per-application, not for the desktop. The two are incomparible because they create a different user intereface style, one that focusses on the application more than the file.

    (Disclaimer: I prefer Gnome-apps to KDE apps, but run ROX.)

    --
    Look out!
  13. Re:Gnome by digitect · · Score: 4, Informative

    Note that desktop environment usability should not be judged on its similarity to another. If you've only ever used Windows, and you like the Windows interface, and you judge everything against Windows, KDE may seem more appealing. But that doesn't mean KDE (or GNOME) is better.

    For many of us, the Windows interface is not ideal. I might also question the quality of the SuSE GNOME environment, too, since they have long been a KDE based desktop (confession: I've never tried it). Try a GNOME-centric distribution (like Fedora) and try GNOME, you might find it more appealing.

    Finally, GNOME's widgets can all be themed, did you only use the default? art.gnome.org hosts tons of widget, window and icon themes with which I could nearly convince you your environment was any number of other OSs.

    --
    There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
  14. Innovation by arvindn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The GNOME people have always been bold in trying out new strategies. After the gnome2 drive to simplify the UI and move away from featuritis it has come a long way. There are some exciting developments like dashboard, gstreamer and desktop integration bounty hunt. Watch out for 2.6!

    1. Re:Innovation by Elektroschock · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What's really important is a common strqategy with KDE.

  15. Re:Gnome by no+longer+myself · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Now, mod me down for using WinXP

    WinXP is it's own punishment. I can swap out my motherboard, change my video card, and use a different hard drive, re-install Linux in 15 minutes, and never have to report to Gates Inc as to why the registry keys don't add up.

    But I see your point. KDE is more like MS Windows, and you can even make it look and feel almost exactly the same, though most Windows users never figure out the "how", and most Linux users never justify the "why". Gnome is a little more light-weight though, and if it weren't for the smelly foot logo, I'd probably have stuck with it.

    It doesn't surprise me that we've seen a lot of push for Gnome recently. They do have a better deal for a would-be developer. KDE's license is just too scary for those of us who wear protective tin-foil head gear.

    For right now I need a more compelling reason to switch to Gnome. "Just 'cause," isn't good enough. I need solid reasons... That, and a quick primer on converting my e-mail archives out of KMail...

  16. Re:Gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was a KDE user for the first half of 2003 and then switched to Gnome to see what was up, and stayed with it until now. The main reason for me to switch was almost all of the apps I was using were using GTK+. Gnome 2.4 did everything KDE did, and it is faster and lighter. Nautilus was a bit weak before, but recent versions are pretty good. Gnome has a lot of nice things once you spend a little time learning it. It looks better than KDE. Try Gnome with Industrial window borders and Industrial controls (and any icon set). Its fast and nice looking. I could never get KDE to look good, and I've tried a lot of themes.

    The ability to drag and drop just about anything is good. Try dragging and dropping a file from Nautilus into a Gnome file dialog. It switches to that file and its directory. That eliminates any complaints I have about the file dialog. Also, little things, like the theme configuration menu, you can drag and drop a theme onto it. You can drag and drop a file onto a program shortcut to execute the program with that file.

    Gnome panels are pretty nice. All the little mini-apps you can add to them are cool (weather, mail checker, etc). The drawers are pretty nice, too.

    And then there's the apps:
    Gaim, Evolution, Rhythmbox, Totem, Gimp, etc.

    KDE is great, but Gnome is great, too, and fits much better for me and has made my Linux experience much nicer.

    BTW, I know I'm responding to a troll (the part about supporting a single GUI gave it away), but I'm sure someone is truthfully saying exactly what this guy is saying.

    If you haven't, try the latest Gnome. And I'll try the next KDE release when it comes out of beta. I'm not committed to either, I'll use the one that works the best for me. Right now that one is Gnome.

  17. From my observations... by Xpilot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...I've always found slashdot to be rather GNOME-hostile, with many vocal critics always bashing it rather nastily (especially in comparison to the more "integrated" KDE). I use GNOME, and I don't get the hang-ups over "integration" and "consistency". I care more about applications (My favourites are Evolution, Gaim, Galeon, XChat...all of them GTK apps), so even though I don't require GNOME to use them, it seems all of my favourite stuff uses GTK, so using the GTK-based GNOME is only natural.

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
    1. Re:From my observations... by insomaniac · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well for my tastes gnome is a little too bloated, sure this is fine if you want all the menus and (ugh) nautilus. But I prefer a desktop based on the nice light gtk based XFCE4 and replace it's desktop module with the sweet gtk based rox desktop/filer. But I guess it's all about personal taste.

      --
      The way to corrupt a youth is to teach him to hold in higher value them who think alike than those who think differently
  18. Re:Gnome by imr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For many of us, the Windows interface is not ideal.
    and
    art.gnome.org hosts tons of widget
    And there you find that the most download theme is eXperience.
    http://art.gnome.org/themes/metacity/index.php?sor t_by=popularity&thumbnails_per_page=24
    gnome developpers need some monkey to shout to them "users! users! users!".
    Users are used to one interface and NEED to find it when they use their computer, before they switch the interface, if ever. Most USERS i know Dont want to switch interfaces, whether they are on windows or on one of the 2 desktop environment.
    For the same reason, they NEED the OK button to be on the place they are used to it, but no, some usability expert said since people read from left to right, we must change that, and then USERS switch to kde, because they find it more userfriendly because it respects their habits.
    Users are all habits, unless your target is users who doesnt know computers yet. DOnt respect that, and you're pissing against the wind.

  19. Performance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    > I hope at some point KDE and GNOME developers really make
    > headway into the bloat and performance

    This point would be right now. As of version 3.2, KDE apps are routinely faster and lighter than equivalent third-party apps (mostly because of their strong policy of code reuse, I think, up to 80% of any given app's logic is exported to libs that are shared with all the other KDE apps, and only need to be loaded once). I've successfully run it on a Pentium-class computer. It works completely fine.

    And GNOME seems on their way to significant performance increase as well, with the replacement of their slow and heavy CORBA infrastructure with the much lighter D-BUS system.

  20. Re:Gnome by digitect · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Heh, the theme you linked to prove your point was only uploaded today. Downloads per day at art.gnome.org is calculated over a very recent period. (Like maybe even 24 hours.) So popularity is nowhere close to indicating the most number of downloads.

    GNOME users are not some homogeneous group. (Are the other desktop's users?) We come from Mac9, MacX, Win95, WinXP, KDE, Solaris, the command line, and others. So to define your "one interface" is perhaps not as simple as you seem to think it is.

    Half of the real question about the quality of a desktop environment is how well it works for someone who has never used a computer before. (The other half being for someone who has.)

    --
    There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
  21. Re:Fortune? by peragrin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    proprietary software vendors will stab you in the back. Think of all the small vendors that microsoft, got close to, stole their ideas, and then destroyed them.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  22. Re:Fortune? by Epeeist · · Score: 2, Funny

    Absolutely - think of Stac and Spyglass.

    Hopefully we won't have to add "and Mono" to the list.

  23. Tried KDE 3.2? Gnome has a lot of work ahead.. by ultrabot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Right now, I'd place Gnome and KDE as being about equal to eachother. I switched completely to Gnome because I believe that Gnome will continue to surpass KDE.

    Have you tried KDE 3.2 beta or rc? I'm currently running on KDE 3.2 rc, and I'm not all that sure whether Gnome will continue (or even start) surpassing KDE. The 3.2 preversions still have some bugs, but boy, is it snappy and sweet! This was the first time a Linux desktop passed winxp in point-and-drool usability.

    Gnome is doing alright, I guess, but it still doesn't approach KDE. I'm waiting for Gnome 2.6, hoping it will be snappier (and less buggy) than 2.4. There are no reasons why Gnome wouldn't "win" KDE in the "end", with all the corporate support (at least in spirit, if not developer hours) and superior licensing (LGPL vs. GPL-or-pay-up), but meanwhile, KDE continues to Work Better (tm) and I will continue using it on my home desktop. I give every new version of Gnome a chance, trying to keep using it for a few weeks or so, but I always go back to KDE.

    For starters, Konqueror just kills Nautilus. Does Nautilus have a shortage of developers or what is wrong with them? If Konqueror could just be ported to use GTK...

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  24. You're new here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're new here. Well, you're not, but you're not old enough...

    Back in 1999, Slashdot was pro-GNOME/anti-KDE.

    Once KDE started to pull ahead feature-wise, the people here started loving it. Oh, and Qt going GPL didn't hurt either.

  25. Re:Gnome by Lobo_Louie · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yikes, ya should've read the emacs/vi civil war we had on nmlug.org last week. It was one for the ages (whatever that phrase means)!

  26. Understanding the options dilemma by the-matt-mobile · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This I don't understand. I mean, one of the most common complaints about KDE is "it has too many options!". Well, how is GNOME better? It has less options, fine. But you could achieve that in KDE as well: just don't change the options!

    From a newbie perspective (which is what I am - honest) this actually is a problem for me. The "too many options" thing is difficult not because fewer options is necessarily better, but because it's extremely difficult to find the specific options I'm looking for with all the extra clutter! I actually switched from Knoppix to PCLinuxOS (Gnoppix is still beta and it shows) because I just like the lack of clutter that GNOME provides and I wanted that choice. I'm not saying that gearing a desktop towards a newbie is better. Actually, as potentially an eventual power user I want to have the... well, the power. But, there's nothing I despise more than clutter when I'm just trying to get things done. Each person will have their own preferences, and I'm not arguing that your preference for KDE is wrong - for me it was just things like Konq's vertical sidebar with zillions of unnecessary buttons and the control panel without an easily navigable organization that lead me to just like the simplicity and the look of GNOME better.

  27. Re:Gnome by zhenlin · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hmm, what is the origin of this particular piece of flamebait? Seems quite old. Apple System Software and Multifinder died quite some time ago. MacOS cooperative multitasking and no-CLI died with OS 9.

    Besides, we all know we can't run EMACS on Amiga... yet.

  28. Re:Fortune? by trouser · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nothing in Gnome is based on Mono.

    Besides, Mono is a GPL implementation of the .NET development framework and I don't see anything wrong with that.

    I don't like Microsoft's business practices and I can't stand Windows, MS Office, etc. but Mono, C#, the CLR and, by inference, .NET are all pretty cool if you can get past the basic aversion to anything that comes out of Redmond.

    --
    Now wash your hands.