Slashdot Mirror
GNOME 2.10 Beta 1 Screenshot Demo
linuxbeta writes "GNOME 2.10 Beta 1 has just been released. There is a nice screenshot demo here. Also known as 2.9.90, GNOME 2.10 Beta 1 is the first pre-release intended for wide public scrutiny before the final release in March. It is packed full of tasty GNOME goodness. This release is a feature frozen snapshot primarily intended for wide public scrutiny before the final GNOME 2.10 release in March. Like the good old days of Linux kernel development, GNOME uses odd minor version numbers to indicate development status. Please check the 2.9 start page for more info. - gnomedesktop.org/node/2138"
Absolutely right, just as five years from now Apple will need to produce yet another product to maintain it's relevence in the computer industry. Let's not forget how Apple's mainstream appeal tends to fade after the mainstream consumer market get's over the fad that Apple produced.
I mean obviously the iMac is still the powerhouse it was in 1998.
As for the $499 dollar price tag, nice move on Apple's part but to quote Mr Steve Ballmer "DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS" which I'm sure that Apple will have in abundance once Linux moves into #2 in the desktop cosumer market (thus further erroding Apple's relevence).
But hey, you keep your narrow little Mac Zealot view of the world and all the Linux user's in the world will be there thumbing there noses at your elitist crap... Troll.
I dont care about some small release that means nothing. That's not important enough to have on the slashdot front page.
Looks like Gnome got the OS/2 look-and-feel down pat.
That the *nix people are still holding on to the belief that they can compete with professional OSs by using unprofessional naming conventions, poorly designed UIs, etc. Let me relate an exchange between myself and my superior recently over the usage of Windows and *nix at work:
Me: "You know Ken, Some of our customers really only need web access to do their jobs. We could change out some of these expensive Dell laptops for really cheap Linux boxes running a bootable Linux distro. Our customers never really move around with the Laptops anyway. I could arrange a demo, if you like."
Ken: "Sounds intriguing. Let's have a look at your proposition at the next Officer's Meeting this Thursday."
[Flash forward to Thursday. I show up with a homegrown box and a copy of Gnoppix. Total cost of my venture, including the media for Gnoppix? $358.23]
Me: "So you see, gentlemen, not only could we save considerably on our own initial expenses, but we can pass a portion of those savings onto our customers which should help us earn more market penetration. It's a win-win."
Ken: "Umm, how do I change the resolution on this thing? We need to get it in sync with the overhead"
[I make necessary changes]
EO#1: "Sounds great, but what does Gnome mean, anyway? I'm confused. I though gnomes were tiny little dwarf-like people, not computer applications. I mean, with Windows, the customers know exactly what they're paying for; a Windowing system to run their computer. You say this is independent of the operating system and more modular than Windows. Can we rename it and brand the splashscreen with our own design? What are the legal implications of that?"
Me: "Sure, we can make any changes we want to. But, the way the software is written and licensed, we have to make freely available all changes to the source code if requested to do so."
EO#2: "I would have to ask our onboard lawyers about that, but it sounds like you're saying that there's no way we can keep any proprietary changes to ourselves. Is that correct?"
Me: "Yes, that is correct."
EO#2: "So what you're saying is that we would be paying our developers to work on this project, and essentially anyone else can just come along, pick up where we left off and that's that? That doesn't really seem fair, if you ask me."
Me: "Well, sir, I-"
EO#1: "Sounds like software communism. But, I can understand why it would be set up that way. I was looking for a magnifier so I could zoom in on this text here and all I can find is this thing that tells me it needs something called a 'Gok' package. What the hell is Gok, anyway? I mean, Windows is pretty straightforward, and I know our customers appreciate its intuitiveness. Windows calls it Accessibility, which makes a lot of sense, but I don't think our customers would appreciate it if we replaced their current systems with Gok, or troll, or Gnome, whatever it's called."
Me: "Sir, as I've already stated, we can make any changes to the UI and look and feel that we want to-"
EO#3: "Assuming we make it freely available to anyone who wants it. We're basically working for free."
Ken: "We only have to give up the code if someone requests it, Jim. There's nowhere in the GPL that states-"
EO#2: "What is the GPL?"
Me: "Gnu Public License, G-N-U"
EO#2: "GNU?"
Me: "It Stands for Gnu's Not Unix"
EO#1: "Okay, gentlemen, thank you for your time, but I've had enough of this. I've heard a lot about the Linux phenomenon, and I have been meaning to get with you so you could clear it up for me, but from what I see, it has a long, long way to go. Windows is already at that point, and it does what we need it to do, so I believe we'll be sticking with that for now. Gnu, Gok, a UI that looks like it was designed 20 years ago, it's all too unprofessional to be springing on our customers, even with the substantial savings you mentioned. Goodbye now, gentlemen"
*sigh* Thanks, Linux Phenomenon. There goes my next promotion.
End of Line.
If you want to know more about it, google some of the terms you don't know about.
...a panel! That's it, a panel. That's a word that nobody relates to human-computer interfaces. It makes the learning curve steeper for absolutely no reason. It's perfect!
Tell me again why this "Linux" thing is gonna take over the world? Is it the "this control is unnecessarily complex" attitude that's gonna be the key to their success, or the "this is not meant for you to understand" attitude that's gonna win the hearts and minds?
It's named that because that's exactly what it is.
No, it's named that because somebody decided to try to make it sound like more than it was. "Sound output?" Oh, God, no. Far too mundane. "Audio controls?" Still to pedestrian. "I know! Multimedia system selector!" Throw a random plural in there and erroneously capitalize that second "M" and you've got a winner!
Panels are the bars at the top and bottom of the screen.
And they're not called "bars" why? Could it be the "not invented here" phenomenon? Apple called it a "menu bar" in 1984; the term is ubiquitous and universally understood. But we have to be cool, so we'll come up with a different name. We'll call it
they hold programs called applets.
Applets are little doohickeys that used to run inside a Web browser back in 1994 before everybody realized that they were basically stupid. Things that appear on the screen and that can be manipulated are called controls. Oh, but wait, we can't use the term everybody else uses. We have to make up our own. This time, rather than choosing a word nobody understands (like "panel"), we'll choose a word everybody understands and use it in a completely foreign way: applet. Perfect.
See the little speaker icon at the top right? That's what any user trying to change the volume would go to
Not necessarily. A user who didn't know to look for controls in the menu bar --oh, crap, sorry, the "panel" --wouldn't, particularly one who's used to Windows. Windows puts on-screen controls in the bottom right corner, you see. A user who's familiar with Windows would look for the volume control -- dammit, "applet" --in the usual place, not find it, and default to looking at the sound control panel.
it's an advanced configuration program not meant for most users to deal with
Then why is it there at all? Given that Gnome is so obviously unfinished, why is effort being put into features that nobody will use when basic features remain incomplete? I mean, the fonts are obviously not finished. They're just bitmapped placeholders. The "close" buttons all have a black placeholder mark on them. The icons haven't been drawn yet. The list goes on and on. Why are people wasting their time on hideously complex features that nobody is going to use?
Pop in one of the many live CDs that have been posted on Slashdot over the past week or so and try out GNOME. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by how much easier it is to use than you think.
Hm. Doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement to me. "You think Gnome, on a scale of one to ten, is a dead-flat zero, but trust me! It's actually a one!"
Pass.