Slashdot Mirror


GNOME 2.16 Released

Kethinov writes "The GNOME Project has just released version 2.16 of their popular *nix desktop environment. Among many snazzy new features, is lots of new eye candy, including an experimental compositer in Metacity, feature enhancements, usability improvements, and much, much more. Ars Technica has a review."

473 comments

  1. Awful default "X" icon by Andrew+Tanenbaum · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I really hope that they got rid of the awful, childish default "X" (for cancel buttons) icon. It just screamed "zonk".

    1. Re:Awful default "X" icon by binaryspiral · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhapse you didn't rtfa and see the pretty screenshots.

      You must be an experienced /.'er - carry on.

  2. Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ugh, who wants to use a desktop environment that has a stinky foot as its logo/mascot?

    1. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you mean "The same poeple who are apt-get to run linux"

    2. Re:Sourceforge? by htnprm · · Score: 0

      I saw that coming, and I still LOL'd...

    3. Re:Sourceforge? by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh my fucking God! Laughing out loud out loud out loud explanation point explanation point explanation point one one explanation point.

    4. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I sense a bad joke about to emerge...

    5. Re:Sourceforge? by Eideewt · · Score: 1

      "(Score:1, Interesting)"

      Isn't Slashdot wonderful? Although I would have marked it insightful myself.

    6. Re:Sourceforge? by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Last time I looked, the GNOME foot was bare. Bare feet do not smell. Feet kept in shoes smell, because perspiration cannot evaporate, and bacteria thrive in the warm, moist environment.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    7. Re:Sourceforge? by LarsWestergren · · Score: 1

      You know, I have yast about had enough of this.

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    8. Re:Sourceforge? by fimbulvetr · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm going to compile a list of these bad jokes.

    9. Re:Sourceforge? by creepynut · · Score: 3, Funny
      Bare feet do not smell.
      You obviously haven't met my feet.
    10. Re:Sourceforge? by CastrTroy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It really depends on the shoe. My sandals smell much more than my shoes, yet, there is lots of room for the sweat to evaporate. However, I wear socks with my shoes, so the shoes don't absorb the sweat, the socks do, and the socks get washed. So, what really makes your feet stink is not cleaning them, or something that is in contact with them for days or weeks on end. Try going barefoot for a couple weeks, without taking a shower or washing your feet, and let me know how good they smell.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    11. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh, who wants to use a desktop environment that has a stinky foot as its logo/mascot?

      Maybe you should clean your monitor. My gnome logo isn't stinky.

    12. Re:Sourceforge? by fossa · · Score: 1

      I know you're being funny, but your parent is correct even if the post left out a bit: bare feet smell upon being removed from shoes. Feet that are routinely bare do not smell for the same reason your hands do not smell. What do you thing would happen to your hands if you wore the same mittens all day every day? Hands typically don't get "athlete's foot" or any other fungal infections, even though door knobs and money are shared by many different hands. Even podiatrists who would sell you orthotics before telling you to go barefoot to fix your feet recommend going barefoot as a cure to foot fungus. Smelly things simply can't grow in the open air.

    13. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What the fuck is an "explanation point," shit-for-brains?

    14. Re:Sourceforge? by MrTranscendence · · Score: 1

      Here you go, troll bait. "Exclamation point" refers to a punctuation mark, commonly used especially in languages with a Latin alphabet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclamation_point

    15. Re:Sourceforge? by MrTranscendence · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're missing some knowledge which is necessary for comprehending the written word: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographical_error http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context Hope this helps.

    16. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only necessary when attempting to interpret illiterate numbskulls like you. Don't try to pretend you didn't fuck up in overlooking the error. And don't link to Wikipedia to prove a point, birdbrain. You might as well cite the bathroom wall.

    17. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The first time i read this like a foot smell "caution" sign:
      ------------
        BARE FEET
          ---
      Do NOT Smell
      ------------
      So i was like "Is this guy's saying his feet smell like roses ?"
    18. Re:Sourceforge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean to say "I yum going to compile a list of these bad jokes".

    19. Re:Sourceforge? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      When you post it, I'll get it and check it out. For some of the more obscure ones I may have to checksum references.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  3. So what? by RLiegh · · Score: 1

    As someone who is currently running 2.14.2; what does this mean to me?

    1. Re:So what? by babbling · · Score: 1

      It means that you could now upgrade to GNOME 2.16... duh.

    2. Re:So what? by hdparm · · Score: 2, Informative

      You may want to read release notes for 2.16. BTW, since last night this version is included with Fedora rawhide (just updated FC6, test2).

    3. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not infected by the MONO virus yet. Patent clean.

  4. candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bring on the eye candy! There'll be heaps of complainers who say its unnecessary... but sorry, its necessary to bring linux gradually mainstream.

    1. Re:candy by Jake73 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I basically agree with this, but think the developers should find some real designer talent to bring it about. For example, the screenshots are horrible. They took window shots, then faded the borders to white, then added a drop shadow. If you can't tell that this doesn't look right, you're in the wrong league.

      Don't fade borders if you're compositing a complete window. Faded borders are the graphical equivalent of an ellipsis.

      And definitely don't add a drop shadow to something you've already faded to white. It looks ridiculous.

    2. Re:candy by anagama · · Score: 1

      Eye candy would be nice -- I've been using gnome for about a year now after I burned out on having to relearn where a particular setting control was in KDE whenever I sought to change something. But one thing that really bugs me about the gnome organization is how damn hard it is to find screenshots. Go to the main KDE site and you see a link for "screenshots" in the sidebar. Go to the main gnome site and you have to hunt far and wide for screen shots -- darn annoying.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    3. Re:candy by grcumb · · Score: 1

      I posted some first impressions about running GNOME on Compiz here.

      The bottom line is that not all eye candy is created equal, but some of the features really have a positive effect on the user experience. I for one (heh) am looking forward to seeing a compositing window manager integrated tightly into GNOME.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    4. Re:candy by PeelBoy · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I'm going to have to completely agree with everything you just said.

    5. Re:candy by TractorBarry · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The big trouble with focusing on eye candy is that GNOME has still got so much to do in terms of usability.

      For instance the support for consistent cut & paste, consistent support for keyboard shortcuts and a focus on providing functionality akin to the spirit of *NIXs "everything is a file" metaphor.

      For instance "all text should be accessible". In other words whereever I can see some text in GNOME I should be able to copy & paste that text (using the standard selection methods and Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, Ctrl-Ins, Shift-Ins, menu items etc. etc.) This functionality should be available no matter whether the text is being displayed using a widget such as a list, button, status bar or text area etc. etc. Any application that displays a list should also allow me to save that list as a plain text file seperated by something like commas (anyone for CSV ?)

      And this functionality should be provided in the widget set itself so that simply by adding a widget to a GNOME application the features get built in without the developer having to realise why they're required or, if they've got any sense, eventually getting round to adding them after complaints from irate users.

      Any application that displays a list of files should allow me to double click on a file (or press "carriage return" or enter) and launch the default application associated with that file. Any application whatsoever. If I can't do this why is it showing me the file list anyway ? In exactly rhe same way I should always be able to select file(s) from that list and use copy & paste etc. Going back to my previous point I shuld also be able to save that file list in CSV format.

      Wherever there's a right mouse button menu this should also be available by pressing the right mouse button on the keyboard. Maybe a MAC keyboard doesn't have a "right mouse button" (don't kno never used n one ;) ? So what. They miss out, the rest of the world that does have one (i.e. the vast majority of us) gets to use it in the manner it was designed.

      On another note then for gods sake stop messing around with the right click menus. Using Nautilus you can select "paste" from the "edit" menu. But you can't right click in the file area and select "edit" > "paste" as doing so selects the nearest file to the cursor and removes ("greys out") the paste option.

      Personalised, "intelligent" menus are simply crap. Look at Microsoft Office or XP hiding things away etc. If there's data on the clipboard that can be processed by the application then paste should be available. Hiding the option is simply dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

      Personally I use GNOME because I use Ubuntu but I find it so bloody hard to do anything productive due to it missing so many simple, easy to implement, features that it usually send me swearing back to Windows to get things done. I'm so fed up with Nautilus that I now share my home folder on the network and do all my file management from Windows Explorer.

      So enough with the eye candy already. Get the cake properly baked before you start adding fancy icing.

      --
      Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
    6. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bring on the eye candy! There'll be heaps of complainers who say its unnecessary... but sorry, its necessary to bring linux gradually mainstream.

      So that they won't need to unlearn their habit of going into control panel to disable the eye candy after each and every reinstall? Like they have been doing ever since the "ooh, shiny" effect wore off two weeks after the release of Windows XP...

    7. Re:candy by DrXym · · Score: 1
      More importantly usability and simplicity bring Linux mainstream. That doesn't mean the desktop should be retarded but it shouldn't be crowded out with silly settings and buttons that few people ever need or want to touch. GNOME does this, although it is still lacking refinement that you might find in OS X for example.

      Eye candy is great but it should fall out of revamping the desktop to support hardware acceleration. Acceleration makes the desktop (and cairo based stuff) faster even if you have no intention enabling wibbly wobbly windows or other weird effects.

    8. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why is it necessary to bring Linux slowly to the mainstream? I know a bunch of people seem to want to bring Linux slowly to the mainstream, but I personally don't see the point.


      However, assuming that that's your goal, eye candy still isn't what counts. Integration and polish of user experience is where the game is at. As a such, I find the increase in D-bus functionality (better power management interface), improved dictionary, and drag'n'drop into other virtual desktops in the pager to be more interesting than the eye candy. Yes, eye candy can help for a polished user experience - but it's the polished user experience that's important, not the eye candy.

    9. Re:candy by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "For instance "all text should be accessible""

      Yes. I wish windows had this too. Nobody has it now though. It would be great if Gnome was the first windowing framework in the world to give us this.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    10. Re:candy by Fred_A · · Score: 1
      Personally I use GNOME because I use Ubuntu but I find it so bloody hard to do anything productive due to it missing so many simple, easy to implement, features that it usually send me swearing back to Windows to get things done.
      Um, sudo apt-get update ; sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop

      That will get you the KDE desktop if you don't like the Gnome way of doing things. Alternatively there are lots of file managers you can use instead of Nautilus.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    11. Re:candy by Gleng · · Score: 1
      They took window shots, then faded the borders to white, then added a drop shadow.

      I had to go and look at the screenshots to make sure you weren't joking. I can't believe they actually did that! How could they have thought that would look good?

      --
      "Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
    12. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm not a troll, i REALLY like Linux. But, I'm sorry, you are dead wrong. The Linux dev community should not focus on eye candy. What they should focus on is compability. Linux is NOT as compatible as many may think, not even in the x86 arena. Sure most things can run, but not without first going through heaps of config files homepages and forums. I dont think i have ever had an problem-free installation of Linux. And I am not a bad computer use. Sure the "installation part" goes fine and runs. The problems often arrive later at the configuration of the system, or when the system is altered in some way.

      When I see a system that configures itself so flawlessly as for example win XP or os X, and is so stable, dynamic and fast as linux, im happy. Right now, im sorry, im NOT.

      Windows XP is very underestimated by many Linux powerusers, in the sence of easy-too-use and compability. /Bastupungen : bastupungen@hotmail.com

    13. Re:candy by idonthack · · Score: 1

      It looks like that was a mistake. They did the first two window shots okay, without the fade to white, but then it looks like they did the shot in the middle that covered part of the desktop and forgot to turn off the feather select when they did more window shots.

      Honestly, that's no excuse. There is no way they didn't notice. They really should have redone it before putting it up for the world to see.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    14. Re:candy by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      Maybe a MAC keyboard doesn't have a "right mouse button" (don't kno never used n one ;) ? So what. They miss out, the rest of the world that does have one (i.e. the vast majority of us) gets to use it in the manner it was designed.

      I'm absolutely positive that the vast majority of us won't be getting that enhancement. Only keyboards with built-in pointers (which is mostly only aptops) have any kind of pointer-buttons. Why should there be? A keyboard is not a mouse.

      If we assume that you're actually talking about the right-mouse button on the mouse this is something that absolutely needs to be handled at the individual application level...and it pretty much is.

      All the gnome apps that I use (Abiword, Evolution, Galleon, Gqview, Gimp, Sawfish, Metacity, Nautilus) will give you right mouse buttons almost everywhere. Which ones are you talking about that don't?

      I'll agree about Nautilus, though - it's a nearly useless memory hog.

      The only other point I'd want to add to this discussion is that Metacity was also a huge step backwards from Sawfish, IMHO. This announcement seems akin to "Hey everybody! We're coming real close to getting all the visual capabilities that Sawfish had!"

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    15. Re:candy by aaronl · · Score: 1

      You're keyboard probably does have the right click (menu) button on it. It would be located right next to the right "Windows/Start" key, between Alt and Ctrl. Almost every non-Mac keyboard has those two MS sponsored buttons now. Under Windows, hitting the key is the same as Shift+F10, which is the keyboard shortcut for the right click menu.

    16. Re:candy by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only other point I'd want to add to this discussion is that Metacity was also a huge step backwards from Sawfish, IMHO. This announcement seems akin to "Hey everybody! We're coming real close to getting all the visual capabilities that Sawfish had!"

      I'm with you. Sure, there might have been issues with maintenance of the Sawfish code, amongst other things, but metacity still has a couple of glaring holes they refuse to fill in.

      My own pet peeve is Metacity's refusal to remember the size or positioning of windows. I know the developers claim it's the application's job to do this, but I don't agree. Seems obvious to me, but who am I to insist that a window manager's job is to manage windows?

    17. Re:candy by The_Noid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      all text should be accessible

      That would be nice, but unfortunately, there is no desktop environment that does this, so it's not a specific Gnome problem.

      Any application that displays a list of files should allow me to double click on a file (or press "carriage return" or enter) and launch the default application associated with that file.

      Work on a file, want export it to another format... file dialog pops up, select the filename that you previously used for export and hit enter... I would expect my new version of the file I'm working on to overwrite the old existing file, not for the system to open the old file. Enter should allways be "Do whatever this dialog is meant for, with the selected file". If the dialog is for selecting a file for saving, enter should use the selected file for saving. Your suggestion would be highly unintuitive. Adding "open" to the right-click menu would be fine though.

      Wherever there's a right mouse button menu this should also be available by pressing the right mouse button on the keyboard.
      KEYboad... MOUSE button? My keyboards don't have mousebuttons... If yours does, and it doesn't work, it's probably because you never told X that that strange button on your keyboard is a mousebutton? Did you select the right keyboard in Preferences->Keyboard?

      Personalised, "intelligent" menus are simply crap.
      Gnome doesn't have intelligent menus. The "paste" option when you right-click on a file is not there, because it doesn't make sense to paste files on a file... The past option is there when you right-click on a directory!

      If you don't like spatial mode nautilus, turn off spatial mode, or use something else, like mc in a terminal. Personally, it took me some time to get used to spatial mode, but I really like it now. In spatial mode each location has it's own window, only one window, and always the same window. In spatial mode you don't "browse to a directory in a file manager", no you "open the directory" and it opens in "it's window" in the same place on your monitor you left it last time. If you need a location often, you make a bookmark to it. You can't open a location twice, because that would just clutter the desktop. Instead it shows you the allready opened window.
      And thanks to GnomeVFS, a location doesn't need to be a directory on your computer, it could be anything.

    18. Re:candy by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      If you're referring to eye-sores like this... I agree! I'm no artist but that looks ridiculous. "Rediculous" even! ;-)

      --Joe
    19. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I so agree with you! espically cince it works perfectly already. Cut and Paste is perfect ,etc...

      Oh wait, CUt and Paste does not work reliably and is even in the bug list still.

      Yeah, new icons and wiggly windows are far more important.

    20. Re:candy by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I stared at the first several screenshots trying to figure out what you were talking about, then I ran into the ones you mention. It made me wonder: why were some screenshots given this treatment, and others not?

      I think one visual design principle is this: if visual differences carry information, then pointless visual differences convey spurious information.

      The screenshots in question also seem to me to be a bit of a mixed metaphor. The drop shadow makes the things stand out from the page. This, I think, is an OK idea; it's not so much that the drop shadows tend to draw the eye to the screenshots (which they do), but it also conveys the messaage that these are concrete examples we are discussing; that is to say if we're looking at a screenshot of a graph, it's the window we are paying attention to, not the graph inside. By contrast, if there a graph that showed something like the lines of code in Gnome vs. time, you wouldn't expect it to get the drop shadow treatment.

      The mixed metaphor comes in this way: by fading the borders, the windows become less solid, yet they are still casting a shadow. The shadow appears to be cast by a sharp edge from a diffuse light source, but there is no sharp edge.

      What does it mean? It means nothing. Therefore it's poor communication because, unlike the drop shadows, it detracts from what is being said.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    21. Re:candy by 14CharUsername · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you're doing to get the behaviour that you describe. Paste is always available to me in nautilus. If I copy a bunch of files and select paste in gedit it inserts a list of the files I copied (separates by CRs not commas, but you can easily make a script to convert it). And where the hell are you getting the smart menus? I use Ubuntu as my primary OS at both home and work and I haven't seen them anywhere.

      Clicking on a file always opens it with the default app. You can right click and select properties to change the default app. You can open with something other than the default app by right clicking and selecting "open with".

      Yes there is the occasional dialog that you can't copy and paste from, and that should be fixed. But I'm just not seeing all the problems you're seeing. Maybe its some of the apps you're using? If someone makes an app that doesn't comply with gnome's UI guidelines there isn't much the gnome people can do about it.

      I use Ubuntu too so it really is a mystery to me why everything on my system is set to what you describe as your ideal setup by default, but its not working for you.

      The biggest problems with nautilus is that its a little slow (especially over the network) and if you are browsing a remote system with ssh, its extremely unstable. It would also be nice if it had a nice plugin for subversion similar to tortoise for windows explorer. But everything else is pretty much the way you want it.

    22. Re:candy by oohshiny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The big trouble with focusing on eye candy is that GNOME has still got so much to do in terms of usability. [...] Personally I use GNOME because I use Ubuntu but I find it so bloody hard to do anything productive due to it missing so many simple, easy to implement, features that it usually send me swearing back to Windows to get things done. I'm so fed up with Nautilus that I now share my home folder on the network and do all my file management from Windows Explorer.

      Well, all you have given us is a rant and pointed out some potential areas for improvement (some of which I don't even agree with). Do you have any evidence to support your assertion that Gnome has more usability problems than Windows? Do you have any evidence that to support your assertion that Gnome is less consistent than Windows? Note that examples don't count as evidence for your assertions since there are plenty examples of badly designed Windows features as well. Evidence would be actual user testing or some other unbiased evaluation.

      In any case, if there are specific features that you think are missing, then submit bug reports. The Gnome developers will evaluate your bug reports and prioritize them. However, if you're just going to submit a rant like the one you posted here, I can guarantee you that they won't do anything, because basically all you have said is "it doesn't work the way I am used to, so go change it". That's not an argument for getting a feature adopted.

      So enough with the eye candy already. Get the cake properly baked before you start adding fancy icing.

      That's a strategy that nobody in industry is following. Products must look good even if they aren't perfect in other ways. In fact, products must look especially good if they are less than perfect in other ways.

    23. Re:candy by lahvak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For instance "all text should be accessible". In other words whereever I can see some text in GNOME I should be able to copy & paste that text (using the standard selection methods and Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, Ctrl-Ins, Shift-Ins, menu items etc. etc.)

      Yes, I agree, I struggle with this all the time - on Windows XP

      Any application that displays a list should also allow me to save that list as a plain text file seperated by something like commas (anyone for CSV ?)

      How would you trigger it? A shortcut? An item in the right click menu? IMHO this sort of stuff would soon clutter the menus to the point where they would become useless. Most users would probably be confused by a menu item offering them to save a list to a file. I think the idea is good, but it should be combined with the cut and paste operation. Selecting the list, or some items of the list, and cutting it should place the comma separated list in the clipboard. No need to open a "save file" dialog. If you happen to need the data in a separate file, just paste them in an editor window.

      Any application that displays a list of files should allow me to double click on a file (or press "carriage return" or enter) and launch the default application associated with that file. Any application whatsoever.

      Funny, that's not how it works on Windows, and probably for a good reason, too. If I am trying to for example open a file in Galeon, I get a list of files. If I double click one of them or select one of them and press enter, I expect it to open in Galeon, not in the default application for that file. What windows does, and IMHO it should be added to Gnome too, is to offer you an option to open the file from the right click menu. I would like to see that.

      In exactly rhe same way I should always be able to select file(s) from that list and use copy & paste etc.

      Interesting. I just tried that on Windows. I opend the "Open File" dialog in excel, selected a file, right clicked, selected "copy". It seemed to work. Then I tried to paste the file in an explorer window. Guess what, the "paste" option was grayed out!

      Going back to my previous point I shuld also be able to save that file list in CSV format.

      See my comment above. Besides, there are so many faster and easier ways of getting a CSV list of files.

      Wherever there's a right mouse button menu this should also be available by pressing the right mouse button on the keyboard. Maybe a MAC keyboard doesn't have a "right mouse button" (don't kno never used n one ;) ? So what. They miss out, the rest of the world that does have one (i.e. the vast majority of us) gets to use it in the manner it was designed.

      I don't have a Mac, but I really don't understand what you mean by "right mouse button on the keyboard". And what about the middle button?

      On another note then for gods sake stop messing around with the right click menus. Using Nautilus you can select "paste" from the "edit" menu. But you can't right click in the file area and select "edit" > "paste" as doing so selects the nearest file to the cursor and removes ("greys out") the paste option.

      I don't use Nautilus much, I cannot comment on this. What I would like to see would be an ability to paste arbitrary data into a directory window in a file manager, and have a new file containing that data created. Kind of like when you redirect stdout to a file.

      Personalised, "intelligent" menus are simply crap. Look at Microsoft Office or XP hiding things away etc. If there's data on the clipboard that can be processed by the application then paste should be available. Hiding the option is simply dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

      True. See above my experience with Windows.

      Personally I use GNOME because I use Ubuntu but I find it so bloody hard to do anything productive due to it missing so many simple, easy to implement, features that it usually send me swearing back to Windows to get

      --
      AccountKiller
    24. Re:candy by be-fan · · Score: 1

      For instance "all text should be accessible". In other words whereever I can see some text in GNOME I should be able to copy & paste that text (using the standard selection methods and Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, Ctrl-Ins, Shift-Ins, menu items etc. etc.)

      Nobody does this. Its potentially useful (for something like copying song titles out of itunes), but also messes with some fundamental things about the user interface. If all text is selectable, then all widgets containing text (ie: all of them), should display the I-bar, rather than the pointer, on rollover. That destroys the basic metaphor of "pointing" to things to select them.

      Any application that displays a list of files should allow me to double click on a file (or press "carriage return" or enter) and launch the default application associated with that file. Any application whatsoever.

      Uh, no. The save dialog definitely shouldn't allow you to open or manage files. OS X does it the same way as GNOME, and its The Right Way (TM). The open dialog is a read-only operation (you can't change anything with it), the save dialog is a write-only operation, and the Finder/Nautilus is there for modifying the directory structure.

      On another note then for gods sake stop messing around with the right click menus. Using Nautilus you can select "paste" from the "edit" menu. But you can't right click in the file area and select "edit" > "paste" as doing so selects the nearest file to the cursor and removes ("greys out") the paste option.

      Which is as it should be. Edit -> Paste is a global menu action, and should not thus be in the context-specific-menu (which is what the right-click menu is for). The only things that should go in the right-click menu are the actions directly applicable to the object that was right-clicked.

      Personalised, "intelligent" menus are simply crap. Look at Microsoft Office or XP hiding things away etc. If there's data on the clipboard that can be processed by the application then paste should be available. Hiding the option is simply dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

      It's not a personalized menu. It's a context-sensitive menu. Personalized menus change seemingly arbitrarily. Context menus are always the save for a given object.

      GNOME is designed according to a set of HIG principles. It's actually very rigorous in its application of them. Those HIG principles are fairly foreign to Windows users, since they are partially rooted in the classic MacOS HIG, and its not like Windows strictly follows an HIG anyway. The fact that they don't mesh with your Windows-programmed instincts doesn't make them bad, it just means you have to understand how it works, or just use Windows if you can't.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    25. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's wise that you have done such usability comparisions. However beware that not all GNOME developers read slashdot, and it would be really helpful for your comments to get credited if you post them to bugzilla.gnome.org, it won't take much more time than posting in here, and you will get more feedback about your comments and also you will also can contribute development of GNOME this way. Every comment, bug report is very much appreciated on GNOME Bugzilla.

    26. Re:candy by Xabraxas · · Score: 1

      What they should focus on is compability. Linux is NOT as compatible as many may think, not even in the x86 arena. Sure most things can run, but not without first going through heaps of config files homepages and forums. I dont think i have ever had an problem-free installation of Linux. And I am not a bad computer use. Sure the "installation part" goes fine and runs. The problems often arrive later at the configuration of the system, or when the system is altered in some way.

      I have to utteryly disagree. Linux supports a wide array of hardware, and although it doesn't support every piece of hardware that Windows supports, the opposite is also true. As far as system configuration is concerned it can go either way. GNU/Linux is packaged in a myriad of different ways. As a Gentoo user I expect to set up my system myself. Suse on the otherhand provides a very good default install, as does Ubuntu and Fedora. Windows is a pain to have to setup. First you have to install the OS, and then you have to search for drivers and install them, then you have to install the applications you want, and then you have to search for and install all of your codecs. Most linux distros allow you to choose all of those things and then install them all at once. Even Gentoo is easier in that respect.

      --
      Time makes more converts than reason
    27. Re:candy by timothy · · Score: 1

      I looked through these screenshots last night, and didn't even notice until I spotted this thread that fading-edge treatment. I agree (mostly) that it's not well applied, but it depends which shot.

      The deskbar shot, and the Tomboy shot, are actaully enhanced by the faded edges: they show some context; if the taskbar were neatly hacked out into a rectangle, it would be hard to tell how it fits into the desktop, and if the Tomboy notes were shown without the background, it would be harder to tell how the notes fit into the desktop as a whole. The fading makes the background more ... backgroundy :)

      But in the single-window shots, Yep, they'd look nicer if they were more cleanly presented (esp. without their title bar being half-erased!); I like the look of the first few (they took a hard rectangle, softened and emphasized it a bit with the drop shadow.

      timothy

      --
      jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    28. Re:candy by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      it's called highlighting what you want to copy and middle-clicking in the window you want to paste it to at the right spot, not overly difficult, standard X way of doing it to my knowledge, oh and I for one, am generally against ctrl+c and +v ALWAYS be copy and paste, cos you know, ctrl+c is a nice universal way of quitting programs (at least all noteworthy console ones)

    29. Re:candy by db32 · · Score: 1

      EDGE FLIPPING AND WINDOW MATCHING!!! I'm sorry for shouting but I totally agree with you on the Metacity thing. I think Metacity is trash, even outside of the fact that its missing those two key features, I have noticed flipping back and forth between the two, Sawfish has a considerably sharper display, Metacity looks slightly blurred. Every time I have complained about Metacity not being able to do edge flipping and window matching I'm told to go get such and such projects (i forget the names) and that they do that just fine for metacity and its better designed. Uhm...well the window matching one requires overly complex text configurations to do anything, when Sawfish has a nice point and click setup for window matching (to include window information grabbing with a click). And I searched for 3 damned days for the source for the stupid edge flipping thing for Metacity...apparently its a dead project and has vanished. I did manage to find it tucked away on some archive from another distro's sources, but by that time I gave up and just went back to Sawfish.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    30. Re:candy by camg188 · · Score: 1
      The new compositing features also depend on support for the GLX_texture_from_pixmap extension, which is only available to owners of Intel i830 to i945
      My expensive Nvidia card trumped by on-board video. Whoda thunkit?
    31. Re:candy by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      You totally missed the point of the GP. He agrees that Linux is at least ok for installation. What he mentioned was configuration. And I partially agree with him. When Windows can do something, configuring it is easy. There's almost always a GUI for it. Even if there's not, there's generally only one way to do it, so any example you pull off the net will work with maybe a little modification.

      On Linux, every example for anything is context sensitive. If your issue isn't exactly the same, down to the version and related software, the solution may not work. Due to the huge number of packages for any particular task, configuration of a system may be significantly harder. I think having a choice is better than not, but "better" != "problem free".

    32. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only things that should go in the right-click menu are the actions directly applicable to the object that was right-clicked.

      The problem here is that right clicking in the background gets you the nearest file. In the metaphor of the files being inside of a folder, right clicking in the background of that folder should get you the folder itself. (Or consider a group of plates spread out on a table. If I want to point to the table, I want to point to part of it with no plates and not have to crawl under the table and point to its foot or something)

    33. Re:candy by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Making all text (such as labels) be selectable and copyable would be a good idea, but I'm worried that it would conflict too much with what people are used to from Windows. Clicking on any label would move the focus and current selection to that label, which is annoying if you are used to clicking there to raise windows. I did some experiments earlier with making "output text" and I thought I could require the user to drag to select text and that clicking would do nothing and it would not take the focus, but it appears to not work, without the feedback on button press showing the insertion bar nobody could figure out what is happening, and they could not use shift+arrows to adjust the selection. So a simple click would have to move the insertion bar (and thus the focus) to the label. Also I don't see any easy way to allow you to select the text in a menu item or button or anything else that you would normally click on.

      I agree with some of your other things. It is absolutely insane that a Unix based system does not have a trivial command-line method of "do what double-click in the file browser does". If this was added, a program could make clicking on files it is displaying do the correct operation. But instead it requires linking in an enormous library and database. Comon, make a program, call it "open" or "start" or whatever, and that should *be* the what happens when you double-click a file. In fact users could change this program and change what the file browser does.

      While you are at it, try to follow the Unix conventions, and make programs to bring up file choosers and error messages and so on. I don't want to link in GTK if I just want to ask the user a yes/no question. And this would provide a powerful and easy way to customize the system. If file choosers were programs you exec'ed, I think Linux would change from having the worst file choosers to having the best ones in about 3 months.

      I don't know what you mean by the "right mouse button on the keyboard", like the others here. I'm guessing you mean something on laptops? If that button is not acting like the right mouse button, there is something wrong with X.

    34. Re:candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the OP will tell you off in a righteous huff that his keyboard is indeed not sullied with such Marks of The Beast...

    35. Re:candy by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      KEYboad... MOUSE button? My keyboards don't have mousebuttons
      A standard windows keyboard has a right mouse button equivalent key between the right hand windows and ctrl keys.
      This is the keyboard that the vast majority of PC's have, so it's hardly an obscure alternative.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    36. Re:candy by juhaz · · Score: 1

      It is absolutely insane that a Unix based system does not have a trivial command-line method of "do what double-click in the file browser does".

      You mean the trivial command-line application "gnome-open"?

      While you are at it, try to follow the Unix conventions, and make programs to bring up file choosers and error messages and so on. I don't want to link in GTK if I just want to ask the user a yes/no question. And this would provide a powerful and easy way to customize the system. If file choosers were programs you exec'ed, I think Linux would change from having the worst file choosers to having the best ones in about 3 months.

      That one is called "zenity".

      You really should take a look at what already exists before bitching it's not there.

    37. Re:candy by spitzak · · Score: 1

      It would help if these things had discoverable names, and were actually used by these systems.

      I have a somewhat dated gnome, and there is no "gnome-open". And I certainly would not expect "zenity", which also does not exist on my machine.

      My expected names would be "open" and "ask" and/or "message" or "dialog". And it would be really nice if some programs actually called these things so that they are debugged. For instance I don't think it should be allowed to have the file chooser do anything other than call the "open" program when you double click, so that they are forced to put the necessary functionality into "open" and debug it.

    38. Re:candy by juhaz · · Score: 1

      Somewhat seems an understatement of the decade. Both went in in gnome 2.4, three years ago.

      As for the names, too generic is just as bad as cryptic. It's ambiguous, and just begging for conficting names, "dialog" for example is already taken by ncurses application of the same purpose, though granted zenity is rather undiscoverable.

      And I'd be pretty damn pissed if I couldn't open a html file in text editor because file chooser dialog was only allowed to call open, which in turn was only allowed to do "what double clicking in file manager does", eg. open in default application - web browser.

    39. Re:candy by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Yes, I meant that the "open" program should also accept a switch to say what program to actually use, and another switch to have it print to stdout the list of programs so that the caller can make a list of them.

    40. Re:candy by cowens · · Score: 1

      Eye candy (when done right) brings more than just neat looking stuff. On my machine running XGL and Compiz I no longer get a CPU spike when moving windows. The CPU doesn't even see the move; the GPU does. There is no reason in the world for me to have a GPU if it isn't going to get used. I say bring me more eye candy.

  5. Almost sounds like KDE 3... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know I'm going to get modded Troll for this, but looking over the feature list, it really sounds like it's gained a lot of KDE 3 features. The GNOME webbrowser can now spellcheck. (Big deal, Konqueror has done this for ages.) There's now a method for visually displaying disk use in GNOME. (Again, Konqueror has done this for ages.)

    You can now add items to the programs menu (this is NEW?!), you can now set file permissions on multiple files (again, this is NEW?!). All in all it sounds like stuff that should have been there for ages.

    And, as always, I can't help but wonder what options got removed and now are permentantly set to "sensible defaults" because, as everyone knows, customizability is "confusing". Really an underwhelming release based on the articles. (Yes, I did read them!)

    1. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by cloricus · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're not a troll. You are stating the clear to see and the only problem with your post that I can find is that you don't think it is a good thing. Note Gnome had perms and the ability to add to the menus beforehand, just no where near as easily/well. Out side of the childish flame wars between kde and gnome the devs and community are getting on with life and taking features off each other while implementing new ones independently. Also moving into line with freedesktops specs. I think this is great for Linux desktop interoperability and really does allow people to use what they want with little hassle and not missing the features and functionality they really need.
       
      For the record I use Gnome, Enligthenment (DR17), and Blackbox and I refuse to even touch the peice of bloated crap that is KDE. :)

      --
      I ate your fish.
    2. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by erlando · · Score: 1
      P.S. And before y'all think I'm just having a rant one thing I forgot to mention is how excellent the new keyboardable "Find filestore objects by pressing keys" function is in Nautilus.

      The fact it was missing in previous releases was a real usability problem. This new feature, where you can type the letters of a directory/file and the focus will move to the object "whose name starts with the letters you've just typed" is a truly splendid thing.

      This is not new in 2.16. My FC5 with Gnome 2.14 already does this.

      --
      Remember, there are no stupid questions. But there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
    3. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by bhalo05 · · Score: 1

      Yes. And now Gedit has a filelist sidebar (heh!). The things is, you can criticize MS for being late to the game, but if you say almost everything Gnome offers in their new releases has been in KDE for ages, you get a -1. Of course, KDE4 will enlarge the gap once again so Gnome despite all the support it receives is guaranteed to stay behind for a few years at least.

      And speaking of KDE4, if you take a look at some of the proposals for Gnome3 ( http://live.gnome.org/ThreePointZero/ObjectModelEn vironment ), you'll realize Gnome is not even at KDE2 level.

    4. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by a_karbon_devel_005 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Default KDE 3 takes up less memory and uses less resources to run than GNOME currently. Run them side by side and see for yourself. KDE is not bloated in comparison to GNOME.

    5. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Yup, KDE has loads more features the Gnome. But then again it has been developed for longer so you would expect this.

      The problem for me though with KDE is that the initial start point seemed to be making it as different from Windows as possible. Unfortunately though Windows is one of the easiest to use desktops around with an awful lot of useability testing behind it (some of it by Apple lets not forget) and most of its features are there for a reason.

      Ok - we all hate the fact that it can be unreliable, but then I dont particularly like the various bugs in Gnome either (gnome startup bug for instance).

      The other thing that I really like about windows is the shortcut keystrokes. It is actually possible to use windows without having to take your hands away from the keyboard. These are the sort of things that make it a far more polished OS than either KDE or Gnome.

      (I am actually a bit of a Linux zealot so the fact that I am posting a message detailing its few good points surprises me more than anybody.)

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    6. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by be-fan · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, KDE still has the massive overhaul and HIGification of its UI layout to do for version 4.0 (which GNOME did for 2.0). The two projects concentrated on different things. KDE has more features, but its UI layout is ass. GNOME's UI layout is good, but its now working on adding features.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    7. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 2, Informative

      On a modern machine none run bloated... but kde's interface sure takes a bit of work. I'm glad in KDE 4 they are cleaning up the "bloated" ui. KDE apps rarely feel streamlined rather they feel large and overwhelming. KDE feels very busy...

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    8. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by pherthyl · · Score: 1

      Correct. However, I would rather have the ability to do something, even if it takes a bit more figuring out, rather than not being able to do it at all. Thus, while KDE could be more intuitive, it is usable for me, while Gnome is not at all. Concentrating on usability before having basic features is a mistake.

      I believe as Gnome adds the features that everyone has taken for granted in other desktops, they will have trouble retaining their simple, efficient UI.

    9. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've done side by side comparisons. KDE uses more memory and runs like shit. But so does a basic GNOME desktop, but it's just a little more tolerable. I always end up going back to just a window manager with a small set of apps that can be launched from a menu.

    10. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Memory isn't really what matters once you have the memory to run either one of those two interfaces. KDE's interface is an order of magnitude more bloated than GNOME's. Right click on a file in Nautilus, and right click on a file in Konqueror. Compare the number of menu items. Admittedly it's been a while since I've used either but Nautilus had a menu half as long as Konqueror's. Long menues make it harder to find individual items.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    11. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Right click on a file in Nautilus, and right click on a file in Konqueror


      Is THAT your definite proof that "KDE is bloated!"? Couldn't that be used as a "proof" that "GNOME is crippled!"?
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  6. Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by khasim · · Score: 1

    So the question becomes ... when will this be an Ubuntu automatic upgrade and will it be for Drake or Eft or even later?

    1. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by telchine · · Score: 1

      I hope it'll be for Drake. I must say the last update was a step backwards in my opinion, but hey, I'm getting used to running Lynx.

    2. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by Hikaru79 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not a coincidence that Ubuntu's release cycle is the same as Gnome's -- six months. That's the defining feature of a new Ubuntu release: a new Gnome release. It was especially designed to be this way.

      So to answer your question, 2.16 will be in Edgy. And 2.18 will be in whatever comes after Edgy. And so on.

    3. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by SP33doh · · Score: 0

      new ubuntu release will basically be the next news post. xD

    4. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by ZakuSage · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, Ubuntu 6.10 "Edgy Eft" isn't coming out until October. However, right around the time the new GNOME gets released, each Ubuntu's pre-release set gets stable enough to be usable. I think I'll still wait for an RC to be released, but it is just about time to upgrade.

    5. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by Grey+Ninja · · Score: 1

      Well, you're partly right. Ubuntu was intended to be synched with the Gnome releases... but the versioning system works like this:

      date is in format: yy/mm/dd
      Ubuntu yy.mm

    6. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      I always wondered, how big of a PITA is it to do a "live update" from one release to the next with Ubuntu? Are you better off just re-installing from scratch or?

    7. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by cakoose · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've used Debian for around 5 years and while the GNOME/X11 upgrades do have problems, they work well enough that I'm content with the way it works.

      I've used Ubuntu for around 9 months and had no problems at all with the Hoary-to-Dapper upgrade.

      When I use Debian, I just select "testing" or "unstable" and continously update to the latest packages, which gets rid of the annoying version-lag that Ubuntu has. On the other hand, Ubuntu's big all-at-once upgrades makes quality assurance easier and so I expect Ubuntu upgrades to be smoother than Debian upgrades.

    8. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by squizzz · · Score: 1

      And 2.18 will be in whatever comes after Edgy .

      Must be that Farty Flounder I keep hearing about.

    9. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by JanneM · · Score: 0

      I've been doing live updates on this machine since the first Ubuntu release, and it's worked fine.

      I'll be doing a reinstall the next time, though - not because I suddenly have a problem with live updates or anything, but simply because I have a whole lot of cruft accumulated (bits and pieces from apps I compiled and tried but no longer use, that sort of thing) and doing a reinstall is a quick way to clean it all up.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    10. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by i_should_be_working · · Score: 1

      6.10 is later than the fall releases used to be. Ubuntu used to release a preview version, which was very nearly final quality, on the day of the GNOME release, with the final release only a few weeks later. I guess it's still behind because of the Dapper delay.

      It's a shame IMO that they haven't kept up with this. Not as many people want to grab the latest buggy daily CD image just to see new GNOME features. But the preview version was always stable enough.

    11. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should upgrade to Windows XP. It never builds up crust.

    12. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1
      I always wondered, how big of a PITA is it to do a "live update" from one release to the next with Ubuntu? Are you better off just re-installing from scratch or?
      When it goes well, it's very very easy. When it doesn't go well, well, make some backups beforehand, but you should know that. I've had some bad luck, but that was with upgrading from Hoary, they've probably fixed a lot of things since then. Try the live update first, if it doesn't work you can always install from CD.
      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    13. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by TravisWatkins · · Score: 1

      That's not true, the Fall release of Ubuntu has always been in October. 4.10, 5.10, and now 6.10 are all October releases. I believe they started out releasing in the beginning of October but now wait until toward the end so they can get GNOME 2.x.1 instead of 2.x.0.

      --

      "But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
    14. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by KURAAKU+Deibiddo · · Score: 1

      Would that be because it comes pre-built with crust, like computing on a thick-crust pizza?

      Somehow, I think you mean cruft, which is a standard feature in every copy of Windows XP (see 2, 4, and possibly 3 on that definition).

    15. Re:Probably that you're running Ubuntu, like me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used Ubuntu since this January, and upgrading from 5.10 to 6.06 was very easy. Basically, the update notification program said that there's a whole new version of Ubuntu available, I clicked a button, and that was pretty much the end of it. While it was downloading and installing the new packages, I was doing my stuff, then reboot, it's 6.06 now.

      Of course, it didn't quite work that well for everyone. Some users experienced problems after this live update, particularly those with hardware that is poorly supported by Ubuntu - such as WiFi cards.

  7. GNOME logo by youknowmewell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nice logo :)

  8. Does it work on Windows 95? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This all sounds very exciting!

    I use Windows 95 and I'm finding it quite difficult to use. Can somebody please instruct me on how to install this GNOME on Windows 95?

    1. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by htnprm · · Score: 1

      Ummm...I'm afraid I can't tell if this AC is serious or not...@_@

    2. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by i3iz · · Score: 5, Funny

      it's easy to install. Type Format C: at the command line. Then hit Y

    3. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thank you very much for your help i3iz,

      I followed your instructions. However, I got the following message:

      Drive C: is currently in use by another process.
      Aborting Format.

      Have you any ideas on how I should proceed from here?

    4. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by buey10 · · Score: 1

      I tried installing another linux on a windows 95 and the graphical user interface did not work on the vectra hp computer. The version was ubuntu and it did work on my newer windows xp computer that is an a500n hp computer. It worked as a dual boot.

    5. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by Shadyman · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm not sure I want to know. *is scared*

    6. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

      Let me answer that for you in a word: maybe.

    7. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by Al+Dimond · · Score: 1

      I know I'll sound humor-challenged, but... Cygwin works on Windows 95, and there are various projects trying to get various versions of Gnome running under Cygwin. UTFG and all will become clear.

    8. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Yes - just locate C:\WINDOWS\System32 and delete its contents.

    9. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by v912485 · · Score: 1

      Basterd, look what you made me do to my computer!

    10. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no! That command will simply erase your hard drive! This is the correct command: FORMAT C: /V:UBUNTU

    11. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by soliptic · · Score: 0

      By the sound of this post it would be a step backwards anyway. It looks like you can't even consistently launch apps by double-clicking files, or copy and paste files around your filesystem from within open/save dialogs!? I'm sure this must be incorrect, because if it was true, it would make all these recommendations of Ubuntu as a polished system ready to replace Windows seem a bit laughable. Strangely, though, the post has had +insightful moderation rather than the -1 I would expect for the factually incorrect, I don't know what's going on there.

    12. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      I've ran KDE 3 in cygwin before. It works, but it wasn't really usable.

    13. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by chroot_james · · Score: 1

      You can run gnome as your desktop using some cygwin wizardry. It's still windows, but you can hide most of that.

      --
      Reality is nothing but a collective hunch.
    14. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by be-fan · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can't launch/copy-paste files from within OPEN and SAVE dialogs.

      You can't do that in OS X either. It's not a design oversight, but rather a conscious design decision as to what the OPEN and SAVE dialogs should do. The GNOME and OS X folks decided that they should just open or save (duh), not be some mini file-browser.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    15. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by mpeg4codec · · Score: 1

      Hey thanks for the h%^%@13#^$3@#$*^&^NO CARRIER

    16. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by i3iz · · Score: 0

      Sure. ------- Using Windows 95, simply format a floppy drive with the system files on it. To do this you open MY COMPUTER on the Windows 95 desktop and right click on the 3-1/2" floppy icon. A dialogue box will come up and left click on FORMAT. Select QUICK FORMAT and COPY SYSTEM FILES then click START. Be sure to insert a blank floppy disk in your "A" drive. This will create a bootable floppy disk. Next copy a few files onto the floppy, as follows. Open Windows Explorer and use it to open the c:\windows\command directory. Across the menu bar at the top click VIEW, then OPTIONS, then the VIEW tab. Next click on SHOW ALL FILES, click OK. Look for the file "Format.com" in the command directory. Right click the mouse on "format" and a dialogue box will come up. Click on SEND TO and then 3-1/2" floppy icon. This will copy the file to the floppy drive. Do the same with FDISK.EXE, and MSCDEX.EXE. In the c:\windows directory there's a file called HIMEM.SYS. Copy it to the floppy as well. If the system was loaded using a pre-load there will be a directory called REALMODE in the C:\ directory (or root). Open this directory. Look for the CD-ROM driver. If it is one of Powercomp's systems it will be AOATAPI.SYS. Copy it to the floppy. If you're stumped about what the CD-ROM driver is, open NOTEPAD and open the CONFIG.SYS file. You'll find it in the c:\ directory of your computer. Inside this file, you'll find a line like: device=c:\realmode\aoatapi.sys /d:oemcd000. The .SYS file is your CD-ROM driver. If you have trouble, contact your computer vendor, they'll know which file it is. Or browse and download your CD-ROM driver from DriversHQ or any of these sites: The Driver Zone, WinDrivers.Com, WinFiles, or Frank Condron's World o' Windows. The last step is to create two files for the floppy: CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT. When you boot the computer with the floppy, the computer reads the instructions in these two files. Use NOTEPAD again and start a new file. Type in: DEVICE=A:\HIMEM.SYS DEVICE=A:\AOATAPI.SYS /D:CD01 Replace "AOATPI.SYS" in the line above with the name of your CD-ROM driver, if it's something else. Be sure your floppy disk is in the A: drive. Click on FILE, SAVE AS, and save this file as A:\CONFIG.SYS. Click on FILE, NEW and type in: A:\MSCDEX.EXE /D:CD01. Click on FILE, SAVE AS, and save the file as A:\AUTOEXEC.BAT. You now have a bootable floppy that will fire up the CD-ROM drive as well as be able to format the hard drive. Formatting the hard drive is quite simple. Make sure you have the boot disk that you just made in the floppy drive. Reboot the computer. This will do two things. It will ensure the floppy is going to work and will give you the A: prompt. When A:\ appears after boot, type in FORMAT C: /S and press enter, select "yes" when prompted. This command will format the hard drive and make it bootable. Everything on the C: drive will be destroyed. Once it is finished formatting, reboot the system using the boot disk. ---- credit: http://www.cyberwalker.com/columns/mar98/031298.ht ml

    17. Re:Does it work on Windows 95? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it's easy to install. Type Format C: at the command line. Then hit Y

      Okay. Dunnit! The thing keeps blinking at the end of the line so it must be working.

      Format C:Y

      Is there another step to it? It seems somehow even slower than usual...

  9. C# App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me, or does the default binding and replacement of standard apps with C# apps a concern? It feels as though we are providing marketing materials for the competition.

    1. Re:C# App by telchine · · Score: 3, Funny

      >Is it just me, or does the default binding and replacement of standard apps with C# apps a concern?

      Not at all. I think this is a good strategy for GNU. First they embrace c#, after that they should extend it and then extinguish it!

    2. Re:C# App by Almahtar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think it'd be wise to mess with it at all. If there's one thing Microsoft is good at it's treachery, not technology. Rather than attempting to beat them at their own game (treachery), it'd be best to overcome them with merit (technology). In terms of ease-of-use and speed, C++ with STL and BOOSt, Ruby, or Python have C# whipped -- and they're totally free.

    3. Re:C# App by eurleif · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but did you really just say that Python and Ruby run faster than C#?

    4. Re:C# App by Hast · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I used to think so too. Then I started looking at some C# projects for Mono. It's really a nice language and you get in CLR support for Boo (small scripting language) and Python, not sure about Ruby (yet).

      Seriously, there is no point in using C++ for UI driven programs anymore. If you really need to have minimal CPU and memory requirements then sure, but otherwise you're just making things hard for yourself.

      Possibly the most important thing about moving to C# is that the level of entry is a lot lower than for C++. OOTB you have a functional language with a bunch of libraries. GNOME is also moving towards being really i18n compatible. Unicode support is NOT FUN in most languages. You really need to have it built in from the start (like with C#/Mono).

      Personally I think most people that go on and on about how you need C++ for UI programs are either too comfy to learn a new (possibly better) language. Or they just repeat what other people say.

      For the record I think C++ is a kludgy language. But it has it's uses.

    5. Re:C# App by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C++ with STL and BOOST is easier to use than C#? What have you been smoking?

    6. Re:C# App by thrillseeker · · Score: 1

      Possibly the most important thing about moving to C# is that the level of entry is a lot lower

      Remind me why this is a good thing? ...

    7. Re:C# App by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      "OOTB you have a functional language with a bunch of libraries."

      Because everyone knows that after 30 years of being the industry's top dog, C++ doesn't have any libraries yet...

      "Personally I think most people that go on and on about how you need C++ for UI programs are either too comfy to learn a new (possibly better) language. Or they just repeat what other people say."

      Or they actually understand its power. Heaven forbid. But that's neither here or there: I'm talking to a person that actually advocates the use of a Microsoft standard (C#). Like they'll never abuse that power to further backstab competition. I mean, let's look at their track record here... Yeah, I've stopped expecting people to look at the long run anymore. Whatever.

    8. Re:C# App by Hast · · Score: 1

      Because everyone is a newbie in the beginning and some turn out allright?

      If you get someone submitting patches which suck either tell them what's wrong (so they get better faster) or just don't use the patches.

    9. Re:C# App by Hast · · Score: 1
      Because everyone knows that after 30 years of being the industry's top dog, C++ doesn't have any libraries yet...

      Of course C++ has libraries. It has a ton of them and a lot of them do the same things but slightly differently.

      That makes it a daunting task for a newcomer as you have a lot of APIs to sort through. There is also a very real chance that you just can't find a library that's out there which you need.

      Or they actually understand its power. Heaven forbid. But that's neither here or there: I'm talking to a person that actually advocates the use of a Microsoft standard (C#). Like they'll never abuse that power to further backstab competition. I mean, let's look at their track record here... Yeah, I've stopped expecting people to look at the long run anymore. Whatever.

      No, it's not a "Microsoft standard" it's A standard. And let's look at their track record, how many of the things they have submitted to ECMA have they later tried to remove? Seriously, it's people like you that are spraying FUD all over the place in this case.

      Naturally C#/Mono will not be identical to C#/.Net as the .Net platform has some stuff that are not opened up. However that doesn't mean that C#/Mono is useless.
    10. Re:C# App by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      No, it means that people will use C# expecting it to be cross platform and find out otherwise. Just like the stuff Microsoft pulled with their JVM. It's the standard "embrace and extend" stuff all over again. "It's cross platform... but you can't do this unless it's on windows..."

      Hey, I have no problem spreading FUD about Microsoft as long as it's factual which this is. Microsoft's track record grants them no credibility when it comes to standards even if it's out of their control. Put a standard in their control (like C#... ) and it's completely nieve to believe they'll be trustworthy with it.

  10. Visual Improvements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't know, maybe it's because I'm a visual person, but those screenshots look kinda unimaginative and dull. I realize eye-candy wouldn't make it a better desktop, but it really looks a decade old and gray. But then, I don't use Gnome, so...

    1. Re:Visual Improvements? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      but it really looks a decade old and gray. But then, I don't use Gnome, so...

      Well, I guess a lot of themes do look a bit old and grey, especially if that's what is used by default with your distribution. However, you can always select a different theme...

      Although I've been a Gnome fan since ~1997, every so often I try KDE when some particular idiocy of the Gnome developers pisses me off, and I discovered it's perfectly possible to make either desktop environment look very much like the other. However, KDE always leaves me feeling irritable after a short time and I abandon it.

  11. GNOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    GNOME is my favorite GUI. My dream system is Linux + ARM-based notebook built by Sony + GNOME + AOL client.

    Is there any chance that Sony will build and sell such a dream system?

    1. Re:GNOME by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Funny

      Built by Sony? That'd be a blast!

    2. Re:GNOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You lost me at AOL.

    3. Re:GNOME by i3iz · · Score: 0

      i was more confused about the aol part. isn't AOL synonymous with spyware?

    4. Re:GNOME by montyzooooma · · Score: 1

      "You lost me at AOL." It's sarcasm. He doesn't like any of them including GNOME.

    5. Re:GNOME by Ilex · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Built by Sony? That'd be a blast!


      Especially if the battery explodes!
    6. Re:GNOME by idonthack · · Score: 1

      All right! Lawsuits all around!

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    7. Re:GNOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it were a Dell, it would be a sizzler.

  12. But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use gnome regularly, but am always momentarily confused by the file-save dialogue no matter how many times I see it. Gnome is very nice in a lot of ways, but I think in terms of decent interface design, it needs a lot of work.

    1. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by scotch · · Score: 0

      How is the parent post "Insightful"? Where are the specific complaints? What is confusing? Even the current version?

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    2. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by grumbel · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What is confusing?

      In its default look it doesn't show where it is going to save the document, but instead only the name of the very last folder (so if you have foo/images/ and bar/images/ you can't tell the difference), I'd call that pretty confusing, a click on "Browse for other folders" of course changes that, but fullpath somewhere visible would be quite usefull. Beside from that however I am very happy with the filedialog, simply, clean and effective.

    3. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by tulare · · Score: 1

      How about the idiotic part where you go to save a file with the picker, create a new folder, and then the moment you give this new folder a name, the 50-char filename of the .deb you were trying to save gets wiped? Not to mention the acres of wasted space in that picker. What a turd that thing is. At least they put back the location bar, sort of, in this release.

      --
      political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
    4. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by cloricus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This was basically taken wholesale from the way macs save files...I hated it to start with though using my mac daily along with gnome I really wouldn't trade it. It's just got this easyness to it that sucks you in and hey...even my mother likes it/can use it.

      --
      I ate your fish.
    5. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by terminateprocess · · Score: 1

      To specify on what I believe the grandparent was trying to say: Whenever you try to save something in a Gnome-based app, the Save As... dialog that pops up only gives you a few options for the folder to save in: your Home directory, the Desktop, or the root of a mounted partition. If you want to save it anywhere else, you have to click the "Browse for other folders..." option or click the dropdown button below the box, similarly named.

      --
      int cents = 0;
      cents += 2;
    6. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by darkmeridian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Gnome is very nice in a lot of ways, but I think in terms of decent interface design, it needs a lot of work."

      It's a windowing environment whose purpose is to provide a GUI. I don't use Gnome because I want my Graphical User Interface too have a decent interface design. Otherwise, I'm better off with a command line.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    7. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When I do a save-as in gnome, I get a window that asks for a name and a folder. So far so good. Unfortunately, the "folder" selector is not a filesystem browser, but a list of "shortcuts". These are named after the last part of the path name - unfortunatly, this gives absolutely no insight as to where in the filesystem tree this folder is. They could show the full path name, or have a tooltip pop up if the mouse hovers over, or something. There are also some default shortcuts with ambiguous names: Desktop and Filesystem. The former, I happen to know through corresponds to ~/Desktop (and no, I don't use nautilus*, so it doesn't show up on my actual desktop). The latter is a mystery, but apparently I don't have permission to save there, wherever it is.

      Now, if I haven't configured a shortcut for the folder I want (and this is done manually - for some reason gnome doesn't just remember my most recent folders), I have to click on "browse for other folders". Since this is usually what I want to do anyways, it's a little tedious to have to go looking for it every time. Here it gets downright confusing. On the left is a pane that looks like the contents of a current working directory, but is actually just the same list of shortcuts I had just a moment ago decided I wasn't interested in; double clicking one of these entries does, however, navigate the real filesystem browser to that shortcut. The real list-view filesystem browser is on the right. With this I don't have much complaint, except that there isn't an obvious way to paste a path in from somewhere else.

      The lack of full pathname plagues other parts of gnome as well - consider the "save screenshot" window, invoked with [printscreen]. It remembers where I last saved a screenshot, but where is the full path? I have to select "other" from the dropdown list to find out where it is.

      *An observation: if you disable nautilus, gnome won't set up your wallpaper when you log in. You can still set it *manually* from the preferences/desktop background dialogue, but it will revert to default after login out and back in.

    8. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by darkonc · · Score: 1, Troll
      Well, there are things like: If I already know that I want to open /usr/bin/gvim (e.g. in an open-as), there's no easy way to type that in ... I have to click my way to that directory -- and when it goes to open /usr/bin, I have to wait 30 seconds for it to stat the entire freaking directory then go hunting in that massive directory for a file who'se name I already knew a minute ago.
      so:
      1: let me type in the name of the file I want (including path name)(It looks like they may have done that)

      As somebody else mentioned, If I don't want to save in 'the usual places', I have to click on the 'I want some more' button to get dialogues which could have easily fit in all of that dead space... my other gripe is that the 'extra' directories don't give any indication of their path -- so if I have /tmp and ~/tmp as common saving places, there's no way to tell them apart, besides trial and error.
      2: a popup with the full path would be nice.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    9. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by thebluesgnr · · Score: 1

      What's funny is that GNOME pretty much ripped off the Mac OS X dialog (which is not a bad thing at all), and not once have I read a complaint against Apple on Slashdot about their version.

    10. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by nath_de · · Score: 1
      1: let me type in the name of the file I want (including path name)(It looks like they may have done that)
      2: a popup with the full path would be nice.
      This was always possible by pressing CTRL+L...
    11. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by mkro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As long as we are discussing file requesters... Getting to -- and browsing -- hidden (dot) directories is a nightmare.
      Try this:
      Make a .porn folder in your home directory (Hey, real life scenario). Make a pictures subdir, and inside that a few other dirs (teen, goth, whatever you fancy). Now populate those directories with pictures, then try getting to them with Eye of Gnome. Yes, yes, I know what you are thinking -- with the-oh-so-linux-for-humans "Ctrl-L" key combo you CAN enter the URL of .dirs -- but can you browse them? There will be a strange drop down menu with the different subdirs, but there seems to be no frickin' way to actually browse the file structure in the file requester.

      I wish I knew the Gnome devs' take on this problem, but I can't find the "hiding porn from your mom" section of the HIG.

      --
      I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    12. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by tulare · · Score: 1

      And where would the hinting be for that? Anyone besides gnome users are going to know that how? Typical Gnome cop-out. Hide features behind a shortcut key, but provide zero UI to tell people they exist.

      --
      political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
    13. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by baboonlogic · · Score: 1

      Filesystem refers to / in the GNOME Nautilus File Save window.

    14. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by nath_de · · Score: 1
      Well, if you open the folder view and right click on it you also get there through the context menu (right where "show hidden files" is also located). Don't ask me where I know it from, but CTRL+L has always and evereywhere opened the location dialog.

      But I guess your problem is the reason why they made it more obvious in the new version.

    15. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really a GNOME issue, a GTK issue.
      I personally love the dialog box

    16. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by rohan972 · · Score: 1

      Ctrl-L is what you are looking for. Full path, tab completion, no problem. Save as -> Ctrl-L

    17. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by say · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you are referring to the standard GTK File-open-dialog, try to press CTRL+H, as that will show hidden files. You could also right-click and choose "Show hidden files" from the pop-up menu.

      --
      Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF, all my base are belong to you
    18. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ville · · Score: 2, Informative

      Patch your GTK+ to open the save-dialog expanded. Patch that works with 2.8.6 and 2.8.19 at least:
      http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Beautify_GNOME#Save_d ialogs_expanded_by_default

      // ville

    19. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Lusa · · Score: 1

      Probably because Apple do not change it very often whereas GNOME do. The GNOME directory chooser was my personal hell for a while until it was fixed. Selecting a sibling directory from the currently selected one didn't work. It's fixed now so my hair is growing back :)

    20. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 4, Interesting
      [..]I have to wait 30 seconds for it to stat the entire freaking directory[..]
      This that's bad? Get this: over my many years of using Linux, my ~/ has quite a lot of dot files and entries in it. The file picker opens in my home dir, of course, so every bloody time I open it it stats all those hidden files. The punch line? It doesn't even show them! It's all for nothing!
      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    21. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Hooded+One · · Score: 1

      Yeah, then you get the joy of the "smart" autocomplete randomly deciding to fill in single matches while you're still typing (and not slowly, either) so that you get stuff like "pictures/ctures" before you can stop and backspace. Other times, you know there's only one autocomplete match, so you pause for it to fill in, but it only gives you the autocomplete dropdown (of one item). And if, by some gracious act of the gods, there is a pref to change this behavior somewhere, it's nowhere a human could find. After all, if you set your computer up the way you want it, the terrorists have won.

      This was all on whatever the latest GNOME for SuSE 10.1 was as of about two weeks ago. I've since switched to (k)ubuntu (nothing against SuSE, just got a new AMD64 system and decided to give something new a try) and the GTK filepicker (in the Edgy packages at least) is less broken, but still stupid.

    22. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by nath_de · · Score: 1
      Yeah, then you get the joy of the "smart" autocomplete randomly deciding to fill in single matches while you're still typing (and not slowly, either) so that you get stuff like "pictures/ctures" before you can stop and backspace. Other times, you know there's only one autocomplete match, so you pause for it to fill in, but it only gives you the autocomplete dropdown (of one item).
      Weird, I always get the dropdown which doesn't get in the way of typing the full name myself. PErhaps Suse has messed with the code somehow?
    23. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      This that's bad? Get this: over my many years of using Linux, my ~/ has quite a lot of dot files and entries in it. The file picker opens in my home dir, of course, so every bloody time I open it it stats all those hidden files. The punch line? It doesn't even show them! It's all for nothing!

      It's all for nothing anyway. For autocomplete to work, you only need file names, which you can get from simply reading the directory; there is no need to stat files at all. Now, the autocomplete does need to know if a given file is a directory or regular file, but only after it's obvious which file the user wants (that is, only when the list of possible matches has been narrowed down to 1), so the file can be statted then.

      But hey, optimization is hard, right ? It means you'll have to write the whole thing in assembler, since it's not like simply thinking a little what you're doing and why could possibly result in speed gains.

      Oh, and my pet peeve: the more Eye of Gnome windows you have open, the more time it takes to open new ones. There's plenty of memory free, processor is 90% idle, and yet EoG takes over 15 seconds to open - assuming it opens at all instead of crashing. Of course EoG has other problems (like opening too small when viewing large images) but that's the nastiest problem.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    24. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      2: a popup with the full path would be nice.

      Wish granted. Press Ctrl+L to get it. :)

      Peter.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
    25. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Hooded+One · · Score: 1

      It's definitely possible. I remember the behavior from 10.0 and 10.1, but can't remember if it did that as far back as 9.3.

      Ubuntu Edgy's GTK 2.10.3, which I just upgraded to, is a significant improvement. When it completes inline, the completion text is highlighted so it overwrites instead of adding to the end. It also appears to lack the bug where if I type a path with a filename at the end, instead of opening the file it opens the directory containing the file. No idea how much of this is upstream and how much is Ubuntu.

      I still think the design is ass-backwards, but it's not a total pain to use anymore.

    26. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by mavenguy · · Score: 1

      Boy, you exactly nailed this annoyance. I just faced this "feature" several times yesterday; it's one of those "little things" that gets a microburst of fury at the developers. I wonder what the thought was that lead to this functionality.

    27. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      Is that documented in any obvious way in the interface? It's not something I was aware of either...

    28. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Colin+Smith · · Score: 3, Funny

      "If you are referring to the standard GTK File-open-dialog, try to press CTRL+H, as that will show hidden files. You could also right-click and choose "Show hidden files" from the pop-up menu."

      Yeah, there was a moment of genius from the designers. "hahaah! we'll make viewing hidden files a HIDDEN feature!!!"

      --
      Deleted
    29. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by prockcore · · Score: 1
      Hide features behind a shortcut key, but provide zero UI to tell people they exist.


      Ironically, over on the front page of digg right now is a story about a little-known OSX shortcut that has no UI to tell people it exists.

      I find it strange that Gnome seems to be held to a completely different standard than OSX.
    30. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by rohan972 · · Score: 1

      not that I can find.

      I saw it on /.
      ;)

    31. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      For Loki's sake, why do we need a "mini-file browser" in the save (and even worse open) dialogue boxes. There already is a file browser on the system, why another one?

      Until we get away from using stupid dialogues (because Windows/Mac OS use them) you'll never improve the usage experience. We will stay in a file system oriented usage style.

      It's simple: migrate to drag and drop, don't give anti-usable dialogues to force people to use unintuitive interfaces. RISC OS had this in 1991, why can we not see this in 2006, when everything is "better".

    32. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by fatphil · · Score: 1

      I got to that dialog only using mouse events (clicking in a menu), I expect to perform the actual save itself using only mouse events (clicking on a button or file), and to leave the dialog using only mouse events (clicking on a button).

      Expecting the user to fart around with mystical magical hidden keyboard shortcuts is entirely out of place.

      However, it fits in perfectly with the rest of the whole abortion that calls itself the Gnome GUI. I do not believe anyone who's worked on it has ever had any UI design training at all. It's a step back 2 decades.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    33. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      Genius...

    34. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This clearly show that many Gnome developers are great programmers indeed, but they should learn how to do a correct psychological analisys of the user interface components before implementing something so braindead: you should never ever hide something that serves the purpose of unhiding something else.
      Why do people try to reinvent the wheel every time? These and other much worse mistakes were addressed ages ago by the Amiga community. (Those who started laughing as they saw the word "Amiga" could take a SAA/CUA papers by IBM and learn something studying it).

      Please someone between Gnome developers download this Or at least look at the screenshots.
      It contains tons of software and graphical applications plus examples of well designed and usable widgets. It will look '80ish because it's a rewrite of '80s software but my point was about usability, not about how buttons ot titlebars are drawn.

    35. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      "Filesystem" is / (the root folder). As for the lack of full pathname, one of the new (or rather, returning) features in 2.16 is the visible textbox which displays full path to where you are. Before that you could press Ctrl+L to show it on demand.

    36. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by erlando · · Score: 1

      In the menu: Go->Location. Pressing F1 before complaining also helps. ;-) FYI pressing '/' also brings up the location-bar.

      BTW, CTRL-L is also default shortcut for the location-bar in Firefox and it opens the "Open"-dialog in Internet Explorer.

      --
      Remember, there are no stupid questions. But there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
    37. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by erlando · · Score: 1

      In the menu: Go->Location ...

      --
      Remember, there are no stupid questions. But there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
    38. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by miro+f · · Score: 2, Funny

      what do you want, clippy popping up and asking "it looks like you're browsing for porn, would you like to show hidden files?"

      --
      being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
    39. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ardor · · Score: 1

      I always wondered why the Gnomes prefer EoG over GQview. The latter is so much better, its a shame they kicked it out.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    40. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by nadaou · · Score: 1
      An observation: if you disable nautilus, gnome won't set up your wallpaper when you log in. You can still set it *manually* from the preferences/desktop background dialogue, but it will revert to default after login out and back in.
      add a call to "xsetroot" in your .xsession file. apt-cache shows up: "chbg" http://chbg.sourceforge.net/

      I know there's another really good command line one, can't recall what it's called.

      --
      ~.~
      I'm a peripheral visionary.
    41. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ThePhilips · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Documentation is what always sucks in Linux desktop. Check out for once M$Windows one.

      I loved GNOME 1.x for it was lean and clean - with most of the little bits been documented. I hated KDE1 precisely because it had only dummy automatically generated documentations. Many years have passed and situation reversed 180 degrees: KDE is documented and GNOME documentation is dumb-down to complete unusability level.

      I'm given myself a word to not use GNOME until its developers would not document all the magic behind .gtkrc and .gnomerc files - and how the two are interconnected. It was safe bet - no documentation in last 3-4 years emerged and I do not use GNOME anymore ;)

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    42. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always wondered why the Gnomes prefer EoG over GQview. The latter is so much better, its a shame they kicked it out.

      Excuse me, when was it kicked out? Even more, when was it ever an official part of gnome? It has no integration beyond using gtk+.

    43. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by 14CharUsername · · Score: 1

      Not really hidden very well, its right there on the view menu in nautilus. You don't want you're open file dialog cluttered with options you use very rarely. And if you're creating hidden files and directories you're supposed to know what you're doing.

    44. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      I always thought that was a bug. Dammit. Annoying bastards!

    45. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The waiting 30 seconds has nothing to do with stat'ing. It has to do with the disgustingly slow GtkTreeView (or more specifically, the disgustingly slow GtkTreeModel that it uses to store its data.)

      This is supposedly a friendlier and more object-oriented replacement for the old (relatively fast, simple and reliable) GtkCList and GtkCTree. Which means, of course, that it's vastly more bloated. It may be prettier, but it doesn't scale past a few screenfuls...

    46. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by be-fan · · Score: 1

      If you're advanced enough to deal with raw pathnames, you're advanced enough to lookup the shortcut keys.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    47. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by be-fan · · Score: 1

      I think its because Windows people don't even try to use OS X, wheras some Windows people try GNOME, and hit the "OMG, it behaves differently from Windows!" problem.

      I use GNOME and OS X, and honestly I can't see what all the fuss is about. GNOME bears a non-trivial resemblance to OS X, and moving back and forth between the two is pretty easy.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    48. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      This was basically taken wholesale from the way macs save files...I hated it to start with though using my mac daily along with gnome I really wouldn't trade it. It's just got this easyness to it that sucks you in and hey...even my mother likes it/can use it.
      Sorry, but I'm not sure I understand why you actually prefer not being informed of the full file path. I can understand getting used to it, but getting to the point where you "wouldn't trade it"? Do you find the full file path irritating now? Is there some advantage to not knowing where you are?
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    49. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Ironically, over on the front page of digg right now is a story about a little-known OSX shortcut that has no UI to tell people it exists. I find it strange that Gnome seems to be held to a completely different standard than OSX.
      Here's a hint as to the difference:
      Secret key combo to bring up a handy little dictionary window = a bit of hidden candy
      Secret key combo to access critical information (i.e. current file path) = obfuscated core functionality
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    50. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Phleg · · Score: 1

      Make a .porn folder in your home directory (Hey, real life scenario). Make a pictures subdir, and inside that a few other dirs (teen, goth, whatever you fancy). Now populate those directories with pictures, then try getting to them with Eye of Gnome.
      So let me get this straight. You want a hidden .porn folder that...isn't hidden? What's the point of making it hidden if anyone viewing a directory tree can plainly see it?

      Hidden folders aren't intended to be some kind of spousal security measure, they're there so that configuration and system files can be placed somewhere without cluttering up the important files you made. If you want to hide your porn from a spouse, encrypt it or simply use a different user than she does and remove all permissions except for you.

      --
      No comment.
    51. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by mkro · · Score: 1

      Are you running the shareware version of Slashdot, where only the first 200 bytes of each post is shown unless you pay a fee? Entering the name of the hidden dir manually WORKS, as it should, but after typing the path you can not push enter or tab to BROWSE the inside of the hidden dir.

      --
      I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    52. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 1
      Documentation is what always sucks in Linux desktop. Check out for once M$Windows one.
      I don't think this is really a documentation issue. I think that if you need to read the docs to find out how to paste a full path into a file-save dialogue, that interface is poorly designed and should be fixed. (Of course, it should be well documented as well, but users should be able to regard the docs as a last resort if they can't figure something out, not required reading.)
    53. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      So your problem is that Nautilus hides hidden directories too well? Snarky comment aside, there is an option to show hidden files, and I daresay the option is less hidden than in windows. Given that hidden files are primarily used to remove uninteresting (96 percent of the time) files from view, I'd say this isn't so bad. Far more offensive is that the List view can easily make the right click context menu, the one for making things like new folders, unaccessible if the directory already has enough entries in it to remove all blank space. It's still possible to do everything, but habits from previous window environments leads me to try that right click menu first :(

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    54. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by joh · · Score: 1

      Do you know what the difference between MacOS X and Gnome is? Yeah, the save-dialogs are almost the same, but in OS X the dialog *remembers* its state (expanded or not) across apps. With GTK you have to patch the sources if you don't want to expand it over and over again.

      I mean, I have nothing against Gnome (running it on my FreeBSD-machine), but there are places where OS X just gets it right and Gnome doesn't. Don't get me started about Metacity not remembering position and size of windows.

    55. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Unfortunatly the marching morons from Windows INSIST that the directories must be first. Putting them in alphabetical order with the rest of the files is "not user friendly". This is in the modern world where "whatever Windows does" is equivalent to "user friendly".

      If it were not for that ordering problem, it would be possible to stat in the background after displaying the list.

    56. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by nuzak · · Score: 1

      You would also have the selector not even display a folder icon for folders? Great usability, why don't you go design the next killer GUI.

      The complaint was about the fact that the selector was statting DOTFILES that it never even shows by default.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    57. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ReinoutS · · Score: 1

      I've got two approaches for you:

      1. From Nautilus, press Ctrl+H (show hidden files). Right click .porn and select 'Open with other application'. Select EOG image viewer from the list. (Drawback: now every folder has 'Open with EOG' in the context menu)

      2. Launch EOG. File > Open. Right click the file pane, 'Show hidden files'. Select a file. Now press F9 to open the image collection view.

      Or you could simply install gqview and be done with it :)

    58. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Unfortunatly the marching morons from Windows INSIST that the directories must be first. Putting them in alphabetical order with the rest of the files is "not user friendly". This is in the modern world where "whatever Windows does" is equivalent to "user friendly".

      You don't need to display the list for autocomplete. Simply read the filenames, open the dialog, start reading keystrokes and stat the files in the background; if the user uses autocomplete and narrows the files to one, stat that file. If you move to another directory, stop statting the files from the previous ones in the background and start the process from the beginning in this new directory.

      In other words, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the displayed list or anyones demands, it is simple lazines from Gnome developers.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    59. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by spitzak · · Score: 1

      You both seem to have missed the fact that "is it a directory" changes the sort order. Thus determining whether a file is a directory would cause it to move in the list if that determination is done by a parallel thread in the background. Believe me, I tried this, and it is not user-friendly at all, in particular you can try to click on some name and get a different one because it rearranged at that moment. Fortunatly in my software I can ignore the whining and just sort by name and not put the directories first.

      As you suggest, changing the icon using a parallel thread is easy. The file displays the icon it would have if it was not a directory, and that changes when the determination is made. People do not seem to mind this.

    60. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      There is no menu bar in the file open dialog. There should be no reason to guess that certain key combinations make the dialog usable. I admit they are fairly obvious combinations, but it didn't occur to me to hit the keyboard in the hope something would work, maybe I should do that more often with OSS...

      Even pressing F1 isn't really reasonable, I found out how to do it by reading here... fine, but by reading documentation I have to speculate that a feature exists, in the case of that dialog it's a feature that should simply be obvious if the interface is properly designed.

    61. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ardor · · Score: 1

      Oh yes. Display the filename ONLY. Now THAT is user-friendly.
      What next? Omit filenames, use inodes only?

      If you had a clue, you knew that separating directories and files PRECEDES Windows. Heck, even AmigaOS 1.0 did it. And it has proven itself to be a smart thing to do.

      Hell, I can scan /usr/bin with readdir() and stat(), sort it, and display the results orders of magnitude faster than the GNOME/Gtk selectors do.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    62. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm given myself a word to not use GNOME until its developers would not document all the magic behind .gtkrc and .gnomerc files

      The GTK resource file format is described here. (Note that gtkrc files have existed - and been documented in the API docs - since the GNOME 1 days.)

      .gnomerc is something entirely unrelated - it's a shell script in the user's home directory that is simply sourced before the Gnome session is started. It doesn't exist on a standard Ubuntu installation, and I wouldn't know why I should create it, but it's hardly a magic thing. Now, I will not pretend I understand everything about XDM replacements and session management, but there actually is a large and up-to-date GDM reference manual in Gnome's online help system, and for session management GDM follows the freedesktop.org standard (with /etc/X11/Xsession.d) that KDM apparently follows as well.

      So it would, all in all, appear that you are extracting matter out of your rear end. Not that anybody wants to force you to use Gnome, but if it does indeed hinge on a promise you made to yourself, and that promise is essentially nonsense, I think fate may be giving you a strong hint here ;-)

    63. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by darkonc · · Score: 1

      You can still avoid stating the .dot files that will never be displayed. It would also be nice (as someone else mentioned) to have a radio button to not sort directories first -- That would allow the display of names first, and figuring out the icon (dir, picture whatever) later.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    64. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by erlando · · Score: 1
      Even pressing F1 isn't really reasonable

      Of course using the provided help isn't reasonable!! Everything should be dead obvious in the interface. Let's call Microsoft and Adobe at once! Let's get those undocumented shortcuts described right there in the UI..</sarcasm>

      There is no menu bar in the file open dialog.

      No, but every gnome-app has CTRL-L as shortcut to some sort of location-based action. Individual thought is not a crime yet.

      --
      Remember, there are no stupid questions. But there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
    65. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by spitzak · · Score: 1

      As another responder has mentioned, what I want is to not change the *order* of the list based on information returned by stat(). There is no problem with adding an icon or other indicator using a parallel thread, but there are problems with having the list rearrange itself after being drawn the first time.

      I agree with you that Gnome is probably *thousands* of times slower than necessary and that if they solved that (which looks hopeless) it would hide the problem in most cases. But doing stat() of every file on a remote file system can still take a significant amount of time.

      If putting directories first is an absolute requirement, then the best answer is to just display "reading..." or something like that, until the stat() is done and the display can be shown then. It should accept user input (ie typing) during this time, and if they go to another directory or close the file chooser, it should abort the current stat() pass and start over.

    66. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by ardor · · Score: 1

      If putting directories first is an absolute requirement, then the best answer is to just display "reading..." or something like that, until the stat() is done and the display can be shown then. It should accept user input (ie typing) during this time, and if they go to another directory or close the file chooser, it should abort the current stat() pass and start over.

      Correctly. Progressive display of the directory contents has too much disadvantages. The "Reading...." indicator might take a while to vanish, but considering the immense bottlenecks in Gnome stuff, I'd see this as rather irrelevant.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    67. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      As you brought up adobe, let me put it another way. If I'm using photoshop I might expect to use the help to find out how a tool works, how to apply certain filters and so on. I do not expect to have to use the help to find out how to make the toolbar appear on the screen. You see the difference between something that should be obvious in the interface and something that someone will expect to have to look up?

    68. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by juhaz · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I'd hazard a guess that vastly most common use case is that either the application already put you in the correct directory, or you're going to save it into one of the few common directories you tend use. Basically type filename and be done with it, which is the use case the file save dialog has been optimized for.

      But if you want to do bit more heavy duty navigating, and need to browse, ever thought about clicking the thing below strange dropdown that is talking about browsing?

      Then again, why would you be in save (instead of open) dialog if you're trying to open your pr0n is beyond me...

    69. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd think populating a treeview of exactly the same size yourself took as long, then, instead of half a second. And darn those gtk developers, figured out how to fill strace output with stat's although that's not what's really happening.

      Or maybe it's just some AC beating their mouth about something they don't know anything about.

    70. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's got to be the most stupid thing I've ever heard. If you don't want to touch keyboard, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU OPENING THE TEXT INPUT FIELD FOR?

      But whatever, be my guest: right click on the file list and then CLICK on the "open location" menu entry. Now you can copy/paste letters into it from other applications, or whoever you intend to enter the text without the abomination called keyboard.

    71. Re:But does it have a useable file-save dialogue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was he talking about saving anything? Please don't answer posts when under the influence of narcotics.

  13. The fonts look like ass... by kcbrown · · Score: 1

    ...at least in the first couple of screenshots in the "feature enhancements" section.

    That's probably because of regressions or other bugs in the Freetype library. See, for instance, Debian bug #367593.

    I've reverted back to 2.1.10-1 on my system for now, in order to avoid those issues. I can only hope that the API doesn't change before they fix the rendering issues...

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  14. Damnit! by suso · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just emerging 2.14 now.

    1. Re:Damnit! by CelestialWizard · · Score: 0

      if it moves, compile it :)

    2. Re:Damnit! by bunbuntheminilop · · Score: 1

      It won't take long to appear on ~x86, and about 2 months for x86. It seems it will be worth a little wait. I'll finially be able to edit the main menu. Its only taken 5 release cycles or so.

    3. Re:Damnit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My system hasn't finnished re-building from the GCC and GLibc changes Aug 30th.

    4. Re:Damnit! by zanderredux · · Score: 1

      You tell me! It took me 5 hours on a dual centrino 1.66ghz.

    5. Re:Damnit! by lyz · · Score: 1

      I brought this issue up to some of the gentoo people at Linux World in Boston. Gentoo took a very long time to stabilize 2.14. For the first time I could remember, they were beaten by Ubuntu and Fedora Core 5 to a Gnome release. Yes, I know when you have to compile everything from scratch and there's 2E34 ways to do it it can be a hard thing to test. Still, I would like gentoo to return to it's bleeding edge glory days of old and have 2.16 masked with ~x86 in a week.
      The kick in the pants was the response I got at the gentoo booth, "Use slackware". I couldn't believe it. I hope their thinking has changed since then. We'll see if they are beaten yet again by Ubuntu and Fedora Core. If they are beaten, I just may take their advice.

  15. Re:So? It still sucks. by dcapel · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know, I once heard a wise man tell a parable:

    I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off.
    I immediately ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!"
    "Why shouldn't I?" he said.
    I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
    "Like what?"
    "Well ... are you religious or atheist?"
    "Religious."
    "Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish?"
    "Christian."
    "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
    "Protestant."
    "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
    "Baptist."
    "Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
    "Baptist Church of God."
    "Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"
    "Reformed Baptist Church of God."
    "Wow! Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed
    Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?"
    "Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!"
    To which I said, "Die, heretic scum!" and pushed him off.

    Incidentally, I use KDE ;)

    --
    DYWYPI?
  16. Not bad, except by subxero37 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I really wish they wouldn't use JPEGs for computer screenshots -- the lossy compression makes straight lines and text look terrible. PNG (or possibly GIF, depending on the number of colors used) is much more reasonable.

    Other than that, I don't understand why the --enable-compositor compile-time option isn't included by default. Logically, if the support is there, but the hardware isn't up-to-par or the X composite extention is not loaded, then the compositor just won't do anything. If everything is A-OK, then the compositor works as expected. For example, I compile support for my sound card directly into my kernel. One day, if I suddenly remove the sound card, my kernel will still work. So why not just turn stuff on by default?

    On the other hand, I can understand why some things aren't compiled in sometimes, due to size, but a compositor can't be more than, what, 100k of actual code? Anyway, I'm sure someone's gonna fire back at me.

    1. Re:Not bad, except by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      I thought Gnome only ships source, while distributions ship binaries. So it's a distribution's job to enable that option at compile time.

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
    2. Re:Not bad, except by Rutulian · · Score: 1

      Other than that, I don't understand why the --enable-compositor compile-time option isn't included by default.

      Well, it will be eventually. This is currently experimental code, so they don't want it to be in Gnome by default yet.

    3. Re:Not bad, except by krmt · · Score: 1
      Other than that, I don't understand why the --enable-compositor compile-time option isn't included by default. Logically, if the support is there, but the hardware isn't up-to-par or the X composite extention is not loaded, then the compositor just won't do anything. If everything is A-OK, then the compositor works as expected. For example, I compile support for my sound card directly into my kernel. One day, if I suddenly remove the sound card, my kernel will still work. So why not just turn stuff on by default?
      I'd imagine it's because composite is extremely slow unless you're running a video driver with EXA, or running AIGLX or Xgl. The extension can still be loaded by the X server under these circumstances, and it would make metacity absolutely crawl. Ideally AIGLX and driver support will be improved to the point where this isnt an issue in the future, but for now I can see why they don't enable it. Ideally, I think it should be compiled in by default, but switched off by an option (most likely only in gconf while it's still experimental).
      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

  17. The important part: Mono by kestasjk · · Score: 5, Informative

    This release is very important because Mono is now a dependency! This single move pretty much moves Mono from an interesting project into mainstream OSS.

    As a C# fan, and knowing how much of a pain GTK was in C, I think this is a very good move. KDE has always had a better API, official Mono support with GTK reverses that! This could really clear up GNOME, and the Linux desktop generally.

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    1. Re:The important part: Mono by kcbrown · · Score: 0, Troll

      ...or it could kill it, depending on whether or not Mono is vulnerable to patent infringement lawsuits from Microsoft....

      Quite a few people are still nervous about Mono for that reason. I can't say I blame them.

      --
      Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
    2. Re:The important part: Mono by Almahtar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      GREAT! Now The most popular OSS desktop is tying itsself to a Microsoft controlled standard! Sweet! Let's persue that further!

      C++ with use of the STL and a few BOOST libraries is still more powerful than C# (let's see you do inline grammar parsing with C#!) - and it's not under the control of a corporation that's proven it can't be trusted.

    3. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The first thing I did after I installed GNOME 2.16 was to remove every C# app and Mono itself. Thank god they're not using it for any applications that really matter. The day it's used for anything that matters is the day I switch to something else permanently and never even consider using GNOME again. The fact that they even put it in as a dependency makes me want to go back to Xfce.

    4. Re:The important part: Mono by gradedcheese · · Score: 1

      I'm not fond of the standard-issue GTK C API but gtkmm provides a nice wrapper for C++ and, with Glade, it can be pretty painless to build GTK applications. pygtk is also very nice.

    5. Re:The important part: Mono by jeswin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not only C#, it could be just about any language which has a .Net compiler. Iron Python 1.0 just got released, which works with Mono as well. There are many others too, including Boo, Nemerle, an experimental Ruby.Net. Mono+Gnome might eventually be the reason for mainstream Linux desktop acceptance (with applications being compatible on Windows and Linux), as .Net apps get more popular. In the MS world, the .Net Framework is now the sole platform to build new apps.

      --
      Life is a conviction.
    6. Re:The important part: Mono by benplaut · · Score: 5, Informative

      Regardless, it is still an accepted standard (ISO/IEC 23270)

    7. Re:The important part: Mono by SandmanWAIX · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Despite your negativity, I myself (as a Windows lead developer) am really looking forward to developing for Linux. Our current client/server software is currently only compatible with Windows and MS SQL Server, however over the next couple of years I am hoping to slowly move our codebase to compile under Mono and support MySQL/PostgreSQL under Linux. We have already tendered a Mono alternative to a large company where a Microsoft solution wasnt an option. Mono is a good thing. It might not be perfect, but is definitely a step in the right direction and will help to bridge the gap between worlds.

    8. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's funny that KDE is now less ideologicaly objectionable than GNOME; after all, the GNOME project was started soley to satisfy ideological objections with KDE.

    9. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Why? Are you scared something is going to up and break just because Microsoft pulls some sneaky trick? Just don't use the software that is cross platform but leans more towards the Windows side of things and it should be fine. ....or are you really just that much of a biggot?

      I use Linux 100% of the time at home AND at work. I only develop on linux for linux.

      I could really give a shit less about Microsoft and what they do.

      I do enjoy Mono though.

    10. Re:The important part: Mono by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      I've yet to see a better cross-platform solution than Qt. It can be used with great languages like Ruby, Python, C++, and more... and it's worth every penny. Runs beautifully on Windows, Mac, and Linux with no modification to source.

      If you an truly cross-platform, go for a technology that is developed by a company that is actually committed to the idea. From everything Microsoft's done I have no reason to believe that they really want .net to ever be truly cross-platform.

      Oh, and I think of it less as negativity and more as a completely provable, objective analysis of Microsoft's track record. Challenge that one, because I can back it up for ages and ages.

    11. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As somebody who has written large programs in both Qt and Gtk+, I must respectfully disagree that "KDE has always had a better API". KDE/Qt's API was a complete mess to work with, prior to Qt4. (Qt4 is about on par with Gtk+ 2.0 -- such innovative new things as model-view separation.)

      Of course, if you only program in C and C++, I can maybe see how you would think that. Writing Gtk+ in C isn't the most efficient way to write code. Thankfully, and perhaps because it's C, it's easy to write bindings for lots of languages. The Python bindings for Gtk+, for example, are excellent. It feels like any other Python library, not like a C++ library shoehorned into Python (as PyQt and wxPython do). The bindings are also timely: the last few releases of Gtk+ have had releases of PyGTK follow within a month, while PyQt4 was only recently released, a full year after Qt4 was.

      I'm working on both Gtk+ and Qt apps right now. Qt has a few things in its favor, but being a pleasant API to work with is not one of them.

    12. Re:The important part: Mono by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      Just like Java is a standard. The Microsoft JVM absolutely killed Java... all the while adhering to its standards.

    13. Re:The important part: Mono by SpectreHiro · · Score: 1

      I once thought GNOME had mono for an entire year. It turned out the developers were just really bored.

      --
      You can't win, Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
    14. Re:The important part: Mono by RossyB · · Score: 1

      Where "every" is "Tomboy", right? There is only one Mono application in GNOME, which has no hard dependencies with other parts of the desktop. This was on purpose, so you can just not install it if you want.

    15. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This release is very important because Mono is now a dependency!

      You just gave me ANOTHER great reason not to use Gnome. Thank you.

    16. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now The most popular OSS desktop is tying itsself to a Microsoft controlled standard! Sweet! Let's persue that further!

      Sorry, Gnome is not the most popular OSS desktop.

      C++ with use of the STL and a few BOOST libraries is still more powerful than C# (let's see you do inline grammar parsing with C#!)

      Simplicity is more important than power when it comes to doing desktop apps. And if you want power, use Java. ;-)

      Apart from that, I agree with you.

    17. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft doesn't even follow the standards they themselves have created, whenever it suits them, so how is this supposed to be a comfort?

    18. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're missing the boat on what a standard means...

      It does not mean that it's free. Linux, for example, does not strictly adhere to the POSIX standard because that costs money. Vendors can submit their work to me ratified as a standard at any time. Then others can (usually) pay money to claim that they adhere to that standard. But standards can still, and mostly are, corporately controlled as the original post mentioned.

      Standards, so many to choose from.

    19. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Gnome went wrong with version 2 and a dependency on Mono is the projects death knell. I used to be a Gnome user but I was estatic when Pat removed the bloated crud that it has become from Slackware. Early this year, Abiword revamped their printing system to depend on libgnomeprint which I admit is a very useful lib. Pat also removed Abiword from slackware, despite it just requiring a couple of Gnome libs. Gnome may be dead as a desktop but we all run software that depends on Gnome libraries. The burning question is, at what stage does Mono begin infecting core Gnome libs (eg: libxml)?

      It's not all bad, Gnome makes a better advert for using XFCE (or just fluxbox) with every release.

    20. Re:The important part: Mono by killjoe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not all of it. Actually not most of the useful parts.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    21. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Just like Java is a standard.

      Java isn't standardized by anyone other than Sun. C#, on the other hand, is standardized by ECMA and ISO, not Microsoft.

      Could you explain why grammar parsing is not possible in C#? There isn't any kind of magic that C++ can do with strings that other languages can't. Sure, there might be libraries to do grammar parsing for you that are written in C++, but there isn't any reason these libraries couldn't be written in another language or that bindings for other languages couldn't be written.

      I love and use C++; I just don't like this "anything but Microsoft" criticism of C# just because a Microsoft employee created it. If you're going to discuss a language, let's talk about its technical merits, not the employer of its creator. The advantages that C++ has over higher-level languages are primarily (A) it's C compatible, and (B) it allows really low-level control (like C does). (A) is a non-issue once bindings have been written for a C library. (B) is a valid advantage, but it's really only important in things like operating systems or applications where performance is really critical. This applies to only a small minority of software nowadays.

      It is true that C++ has gained a lot of the features that other languages have with the Boost libraries. However, the nature of C++ makes it so that, even with Boost, code is more cumbersome than in high-level languages. Take, for example, passing a function as an argument to another function. Let's say I need to pass a function called "clickHandler", which is a member of the class window, whose prototype looks like: void clickHandler(Event ev); I want to pass this function to another function called registerHandler (which makes it so when the user clicks on the window, clickHandler gets called). Using boost, my function call looks like:
      registerHandler(boost::bind(&window::clickHandler, this, _1));
      and registerHandler's prototype has to look like:
      void registerHandler(boost::function<void (Event)> func);

      Now, let's say you try to do the same thing in Python. Your function call will look like:
      registerHandler(self.clickHandler)
      and registerHandler's definition will look like:
      def registerHandler(handler):

      I don't know the language well enough to know what this looks like in C#, but my point here is that yes, you can do things in C++ that you can do in higher level languages, but it's often much more unwieldly and difficult. It took me a really long time to figure out how all that syntax for Boost and C++ works the first time I learned it; if you look at the C++ code above, you certainly can't say it's blindingly obvious that that's how it should work. When I learned how to do this in Python, all I had to learn was "Functions in Python are objects." and that's enough information to write the code. Not only that, the Python code is much more flexible; if I change clickHandler's interface, I also have to change registerHandler's interface and the (potentially) function call, whereas I don't have to do anything if I change registerHandler's interface in Python (beyond any necessary changes to the logic (not syntax) of the code). The idea of higher-level languages is that you don't have to micromanage tasks like how a function is passed as an object; you can focus on the bigger picture, which is that you simply want to pass the function.

      Sure, C++ is more powerful in that you can micromanage things like this if you want to, but usually you won't want to, and with languages like C#, Java, Python and others, you don't. Processors have gotten a lot faster and memory has become much more abundant since C++ was created in the 1980s, and the tradeoff between the computer clock cycles and programmer "cycles" has shifted. This is why GNOME and other software projects are making increased use of higher level languages.

    22. Re:The important part: Mono by camcorder · · Score: 1

      If GNOME is not the most popular OSS desktop which one is? KDE? This is not a troll post but just a post to express a fact. KDE (might be) cool but that does not make it popular. Most popular distos use GNOME as their standard desktop and so does that make it popular as well. To name few, Fedora Core, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE and enterprise level RHEL and SLED. Popularity is a fact, and coolness is relative. To improve this notion Firefox and IE can be given as an example. Firefox is way better than IE in most of areas (security, expandibity, usability etc.) but IE is way more popular than Firefox (85% against 12~13% for Firefox).

      Having said that I think GNOME is cooler than KDE and that's of course my opinion.

    23. Re:The important part: Mono by ardor · · Score: 1

      I absolutely prefer the Qt API to the Gtk one. Gtk has a very unintuitive, messy API (just think of the GtkTreeView horror). But Qt's greatest advantage is the vastly superior documentation (entire sections of Gtk are simply NOT DOCUMENTED). Gtkmm is not bad, but in C++ land, Qt is superior. Can't say the same in other languages, though. (I also imagine that Qt bindings are harder to write than Gtk ones.)

      What I don't like about Qt is moc. Not because it "pollutes C++", but because its cumbersome to include in build scripts.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    24. Re:The important part: Mono by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful
      C++ with use of the STL and a few BOOST libraries is still more powerful than C# (let's see you do inline grammar parsing with C#!)
      Let's see you do a remote method invocation on any object of a non-specialized template class (which is what most of STL and Boost are) in C++. Or even simply dynamically load a template class from a shared library (you know, plugins and all). Heck, if you promise to not cheat, and not rely on everyone using a single C++ implementation (read: GCC), let's see how you're going to dynamically load even non-template classes portably...
    25. Re:The important part: Mono by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1
      Qt is okay, but basically it's because it is essentially a "I wish C++ was Java" (or C# - there's hardly a difference) framework. It extends the language with rather foreign concepts (signals/slots, RTTI) while at the same time limiting it (multiple inheritance etc), producing a language which is semantically very similar to what C# is. It then provides a set of classes, mostly modelled after Java and C# standard libraries, which aims, among other things to completely replace the classes provided by the C++ standard library (to name a few: strings, collections, I/O streams & files).

      About the only thing missing from Qt but present in Java & C# currently is a full-fledged garbage collector (even though it still tries automate memory management somewhat by requiring containers to manage their children), and I think even that is bound to appear there sooner of later.

      Not to say Qt is bad. It is still one of the fastest UI toolkits around. But that is quality of its implementation; its philosophy is not fundamentally different from that of Java or C#, so I find it strange when people praise Qt and then criticize those languages.

    26. Re:The important part: Mono by DennisZeMenace · · Score: 1

      GTK has a very good C++ interface as well (http://www.gtkmm.org/).

    27. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If GNOME is not the most popular OSS desktop which one is? KDE?

      Yep.

      Most popular distos use GNOME as their standard desktop and so does that make it popular as well.

      Not if most people pick KDE during install. Online quizzes are of course not very reliable, but KDE tend to beat GNOME in every one I've seen.

    28. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      C++ with use of the STL and a few BOOST libraries is still more powerful than C#
      Heh, funny. Once you include all that, you might as well use Common Lisp.
    29. Re:The important part: Mono by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      C++ doesn't need Qt's help for that stuff, for the most part. The RTTI things are almost irrelevent anymore now that C++ has dynamic_cast, the use of std::auto_ptr eliminates the need for garbage collection if used correctly, and it's probably best not to use non-std containers. Those were probably part of Qt for historical reasons like poor implemetation of the standard containers in many compilers over previous years.

      Qt has a lot of attractive features, but its attempt to morph C++ into Java really isn't what does it for me.

      mostly modelled after Java and C# standard libraries
      Whoa... careful there. When did Qt come out? When did C# come out? Let's not attribute anything as being modelled after C#. C# might be nice but the last thing it is is innovative.

    30. Re:The important part: Mono by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      a question that comes to my mind though is why do we want to bridge worlds? most portability problems would be solved if windows had proper posix compliance, so why use such a more high level language just for portability?
      Rapid application development I see the point, but final solutions imho should be designed to be multiple platform from the beginning.
      currently as it stands the majority of major OSS software has linux and windows ports without a problem, and is mostly written in c/c++.
      the only side that seems to have an issue are the windows developers who decide to write for windows specific API's without portability in mind.
      sorry if I may sound disgruntled, I just fail to see why being portable on the most common os's is deemed so difficult

    31. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gtk has a very unintuitive, messy API (just think of the GtkTreeView horror).

      Actually, that's the primary widget I was thinking about when I said that Qt is a PITA to work with. Up through Qt3 (last year!), you couldn't have a tree ("list", in Qt terms, even though it *is* a tree) with items unless you created QListViewItems for each one. In order to write a tree that doesn't need to be filled on startup (like the files in a filesystem), you need to go through a funky dance of adding dummy nodes, and removing them on expansion events ... it's a big mess. Gtk+ has, since 2.0, supported custom tree models.

      Qt generally has funny names for things. I don't see why that's "intuitive". Button -> "QPushButton", Window -> "QMainWindow", Tree View -> "QListView". WTF?

      GTK+ binds events by a string: their event name. Qt binds by a string also: the C++ signature. There are a few memory-management issues that bindings inherit from C++ as well. This means, even if you're using bindings for Qt, you're seeing C++ all day. I've never gotten PyGTK to segfault, but it's a common occurrence with PyQt.

      But Qt's greatest advantage is the vastly superior documentation (entire sections of Gtk are simply NOT DOCUMENTED).

      As somebody who writes Qt code several hours a day, this would be nice if it was true, but in my experience, it's exactly backwards.

      First of all, GTK+ seems fully documented to me. If there's any part that isn't documented, I haven't run across it, nor can I seem to find it today.

      Second, Qt is horribly documented. The C++ docs are bad enough: they omit all sorts of really important things that you need to know, and can only learn the hard way. (Remove an item from a QTree^H^H^H^HListView and the selection changes, but selectionChanged() does not fire, for example. That would be nice to know.) But worse, the specific bindings don't have docs. PyQt, for example, only has an (incomplete, incorrect) list of diffs from the C++ version. With GTK+, each binding (Python, C#, etc.) has its own complete documentation, in the vocabulary of that language.

      (I also imagine that Qt bindings are harder to write than Gtk ones.)

      That seems to be their excuse for a lot of things. And their answer to a lot of things is "well just use C++ like us".

    32. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong.
      Mono is not compatible with the MS .Net desktop framework. It's not in the ECMA std but it's heavily patented to discourage any open source implementation? The ECMA std is already "very old", MS spotted many defficiencies and corrected them in .Net 2.0. So, you won't be compatible with the MS .Net Desktop and you will lag behing MS... that is what MS sales people will say when you will want to take a bit of their desktop market share.

    33. Re:The important part: Mono by nuzak · · Score: 1

      Let's see you do a remote method invocation on any object of a non-specialized template class

      You're forgetting the value system of language/platform zealots/bigots: if he personally has no use for or understanding of the feature you're talking about, it has no intrinsic worth whatsoever, and therefore doesn't enter into the equation. Only feelings matter, especially the everlasting burning hate of The Eternal Enemy.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    34. Re:The important part: Mono by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1
      The RTTI things are almost irrelevent anymore now that C++ has dynamic_cast
      dynamic_cast and typeid let you determine the class of object dynamically, sure, but there's no equivalent to more advanced RTTI as seen in Delphi, Java and C# (and what is often called "reflection" these days). Qt, as many other C++ toolkits before it, has to provide a workaround.

      the use of std::auto_ptr eliminates the need for garbage collection if used correctly
      While I personally prefer deterministic destruction over the uncertainness of mark&sweep GC, and can certainly share your sentiment, smart pointers are not a complete replacement for GC, nowhere even close. You most likely won't get away with just std::auto_ptr, either (especially if you strive for exception-safe code) - you'll need std::tr1::smart_ptr as well, if only for containers of pointers.

      it's probably best not to use non-std containers.
      Once again I agree, but that is what Qt itself does. And it practically forces you to use QString over std::string as well, since that's what all its functions deal with, and the overhead of constant conversions back and forth would be just too great.

      Whoa... careful there. When did Qt come out? When did C# come out? Let's not attribute anything as being modelled after C#. C# might be nice but the last thing it is is innovative.
      Of course I didn't mean to say that Qt was modelled after C#. I was rather saying that Qt was modelled after Java and, maybe even to a greater extent, Delphi, to both of which C# also owns a lot. End result is that Qt and C#/WinForms can be surprisingly similar.

    35. Re:The important part: Mono by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I'm a language zealot myself, but I think that all features ever invented are worthy and important. That's why I push for Common Lisp... ;)

    36. Re:The important part: Mono by ardor · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's the primary widget I was thinking about when I said that Qt is a PITA to work with. Up through Qt3 (last year!), you couldn't have a tree ("list", in Qt terms, even though it *is* a tree) with items unless you created QListViewItems for each one. In order to write a tree that doesn't need to be filled on startup (like the files in a filesystem), you need to go through a funky dance of adding dummy nodes, and removing them on expansion events ... it's a big mess. Gtk+ has, since 2.0, supported custom tree models.

      Well, then you did something wrong. I used Qt3 Treeviews for a long time, and I found them MUCH easier to use than the Gtk thing. Simply add Listviewitems to other Listviewitems, and you have your subnodes of the tree. Makes SENSE, doesn't it? Also, I don't have to remove nodes for expanding/contracting....

      GtkTreeView, OTOH, is a HUGE mess. I have to write TONS of code just for a simple listview, it is bloated, error-prone, and as unintuitive as a treeview can get (the docs didn't help much in this regard).

      GTK+ binds events by a string: their event name. Qt binds by a string also: the C++ signature. There are a few memory-management issues that bindings inherit from C++ as well. This means, even if you're using bindings for Qt, you're seeing C++ all day. I've never gotten PyGTK to segfault, but it's a common occurrence with PyQt.

      Again, I don't know about the Python ports, BUT in C++ I never managed to crash Qt (and sometimes I made mistakes I was amazed that they didn't caused Qt to crash). Gtk+, however, crashed often.

      First of all, GTK+ seems fully documented to me. If there's any part that isn't documented, I haven't run across it, nor can I seem to find it today.

      Perfect example: try to write a textview with autoscroll enabled (for example, for a chat client). This turns out to be quite difficult, because there is NO documentation as how to achieve this. There are Cursors, Markers, nothing makes sense (what whas that about Gtk being intuitive again?). I got away with a strange hack that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. Ah, and the Gtk folks at GIMPnet didn't know a solution either.

      While searching for a solution, I stumbled upon many functions that are present in the reference, but have NO description whatsoever. Kinda bad, isn't it? In the Qt docs I have example usages for many widgets at the beginning of the widget documentation page (example: http://doc.trolltech.com/4.0/qtabwidget.html ). I have yet to find something comparable in the Gtk docs.

      That seems to be their excuse for a lot of things. And their answer to a lot of things is "well just use C++ like us".

      Yeah, well, I would like to see them frop moc and use either Glib signals, libsigc++ ones or (preferably) the boost ones.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    37. Re:The important part: Mono by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you talking about the partial version of C# frozen in the standard or the full live version that Microsoft actively maintains and extends? Do you see how advocating use of the the former can encourage use of the latter?

  18. Re:So? It still sucks. by subxero37 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    KDE has many things going well for it. This'll sound weird, I'm sure, but I like Gnome better because it feels better. KDE has a weird feel to it that I can't get over. It's the same feeling I get when I use Opera, I don't quite like it.

    KDE also seems very thrown-together, and there are icons for almost every single menu item in almost every single menu -- it makes the entire desktop look extremely cluttered. Some lines and shapes (in some dialogs, some programs) are off by just a single pixel from where they should be, but because of that small error, it makes the desktop look slightly askew, and adds to the screen clutter appearance.

    Other than appearance and "feel" I have no problem using KDE.

  19. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And then there are people like me who have used both but always return to Gnome. *shrug* I use heaps of KDE apps, but the KDE desktop itself I just can't live with.

  20. reasons to use gnome by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 1, Informative

    I may be incorrect about either of these points, so someone please say so if I am wrong, but I can think of two reasons to prefer gnome over kde:

    1) gtk is written in C, whereas QT is C++, making it less easy to use from C programs.

    2) gtk is licensed as lgpl, whereas qt is gpl. This means that a non-gpled program (such as a commercial application) can be linked with gtk with no problems, but with qt the developers must pay licensing fees.

    1. Re:reasons to use gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Qt has many language bindings, including C, Perl, and Python, just to name a few.

    2. Re:reasons to use gnome by Almahtar · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're correct about licensing, first off. Honestly I think that's a good thing - if someone wants to make money off their app they should kick back money to those whose work on which they are capitalizing.

      As far as C vs. C++: Qt is C++, yes. GTK is C, yes. But there's also GTKMM, the C++ bindings for GTK. So this makes Gnome more flexible because it has both C and C++ bindings. I'm not sure if this is a win for Gnome or not, because I don't think any GUI C app could be more maintainable, flexible, and stable than a GUI C++ app, so I find it best to discourage the use of C in a GUI app. I have no grounds to back that except experience, and I admit it.

    3. Re:reasons to use gnome by IpalindromeI · · Score: 1

      You're correct about licensing, first off. Honestly I think that's a good thing - if someone wants to make money off their app they should kick back money to those whose work on which they are capitalizing.

      Wow, the GPL forces people to pay some kind of royalty fee? That's news to me. People sure have strange ideas about the GPL. I'm glad people use it, though. If someone wants to use someone else's code, they should have to run a marathon every few months. Make them do some work for using someone else's work, right? Even if they choose the cow-licking option instead of the marathon-running option, at least it's funny. Thank heaven for the GPL.

      --

      --
      Promoting critical thinking since 1994.
    4. Re:reasons to use gnome by cerelib · · Score: 1

      What the parent was refering to was Qt's dual licensing scheme. Anybody can use Qt as a GPL library, but if you want to distribute a closed source app then you need to pay Trolltech(makers of Qt) for a commercial license. So, as the parent was saying, if you really want to sell a piece of Qt software you might need to kick back some money to Trolltech.

    5. Re:reasons to use gnome by IpalindromeI · · Score: 1

      Or you can just sell the GPL version.

      --

      --
      Promoting critical thinking since 1994.
  21. Re:So? It still sucks. by cool_arrow · · Score: 1

    While I prefer KDE it seems Gnome could be gaining ground as it has recently become the default desktop for SUSE 10.1. Many new users go with the defaults and people tend to stick with what they know.

  22. Windows risks becoming less relevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally I think that having all the bindings and support at the OS level for .NET helps drive for a more neutral base. If done quickly and well enough, it makes Windows less relevant because the same App will Just Work(TM) no matter if it's on *nix+GNOME/KDE/whatever or MS Windows.

    1. Re:Windows risks becoming less relevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...]it makes Windows less relevant because the same App will Just Work(TM) no matter if it's on *nix+GNOME/KDE/whatever or MS Windows.

      Didn't the Mono guys take all the Windows compatibility stuff out because they were afraid of getting sued?

  23. Re:So? It still sucks. by tulare · · Score: 1

    Like Windows, for example. It's just another case of "Shit wins not because it smells nice, but because everyone sees it." So much for the meritocracy of geekhood...

    --
    political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
  24. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will be modded down for this

    Holy crap, this man speaks prophecy!

    by the GnomePolice

    Ah, nevermind, it's just ordinary crazy. Everyone knows there's no such thing as the GnomePolice. ... They're named the GPolice, and they're quite nice. It's the GGestapo you have to watch out for. *adjusts tinfoil hat*

  25. Re: So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup. It's all the license extremists fault. Nothing at all to do with personal preferences. Certainly no merit to that story that Gnome's base technology (written in plain C) is much much easier to integrate into other projects than KDE's stuff (written in something mostly like C++, but with an extra "meta-object compiler" pass to turn it into code that g++ can deal with) and that's why it's so popular...

  26. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by timeOday · · Score: 0

    Some "designy" people think the simpler the better, but I'm with you... it's frustrating when expected functionality is lacking. I can't stand the more recent link target save as dialogs for firefox... they don't let you type in a path, and in one version you can't even specify a location! It just saves everything to ~/Desktop. But it changes so frequently, I don't know how long it was like that. (Or maybe it adapts to the Gnome / KDE environment?)

  27. God help Nautilus by postmortem · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Looks as bad as ever. Is there a single 'power' user that likes Nautilus?

    It is not customizeable -can't change single thing on the toolbar.

    Default view is useful for home directory only.

    Location bar (can be changed) is annoying with buttons instead of link.

    1. Re:God help Nautilus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there a single 'power' user that even uses a GUI file manager?

    2. Re:God help Nautilus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Is there a single 'power' user that likes Nautilus?
      Yes, quite a few I'd guess with scripts and actions there is quite a lot of hidden power inside of Nautilus for those who can use it.

      It is not customizeable -can't change single thing on the toolbar.
      Are we talking about power users or power mousers here?

      Default view is useful for home directory only.
      Don't confuse opinion with fact.

      Location bar (can be changed) is annoying with buttons instead of link.
      Ctrl+L is a power users best friend, you save space by not having a location bar open (it's my hard drive, not the net, I know where I am).
    3. Re:God help Nautilus by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nautilus is not for Power Users. Not even Konqueror which is designed for Power Users is used by them. Power Users use the text shell.

    4. Re:God help Nautilus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/text/bash

    5. Re:God help Nautilus by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      Sure? I am definetly "Power User" (Linux for some 8 years already, desktop for 4 years everyday home and job), and you would be surprised that I use
      GNOME-VFS for connection to ssh, Gedit for editing things, Nautilus for finding files and launching them...

      Yes, there are lot of things which I do in shell, but calling yourself a "power user" just because you use text shell for anything is...well...very shortsighted.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
    6. Re:God help Nautilus by Oestergaard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not for everything.
      Konq. actually does a decent job of showing directories with loads of images (8+ Mpixel jpegs/tiffs) as thumbnails. Something bash doesn't (yet) do well.

      The much cooler feature is, that the *same* file browser component is used in every KDE app - so when you want to burn a CD or whatever, K3B shows you the *same* thumbnail-view of your image catalogue as you used in Konq before when sorting the images. This may sound simple but it is such a basic necessity that it is beyond me why neither windows nor gnome seems to have even thought of it.

      It's the little things in everyday usage...

    7. Re:God help Nautilus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there a single 'power' user that likes Nautilus?

      What's a power user? There are people so proficient at the command line that they don't like graphical file managers - obviously Nautilus is not intended for them. (Though they would probably be offended if you called them "power users".) Then there's the rest, who like graphical file managers - they use Nautilus by the thousands.

    8. Re:God help Nautilus by bhalo05 · · Score: 2

      Sure. A terminal embedded in Konqueror for me, please.

    9. Re:God help Nautilus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever dude, 'power users' can use whatever file manager they want. That's why they call them power users.

    10. Re:God help Nautilus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a 'power user' and I use the ROX filer (rox.sf.net). I agree that nautilus and konqueror are hopelessly crap.

    11. Re:God help Nautilus by nuzak · · Score: 1

      > Power Users use the text shell.

      Which konqueror integrates quite nicely and synchronizes with your current window. The only thing missing is getting "ls" to affect the GUI display.

      I have a hard time browsing thumbnails with bash.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
  28. Re:Dell Notebook Batteries by shellbeach · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Anyone know how to revive these batteries?

    (I'm assuming that they don't charge under Windows either? i.e. it's nothing to do with software ...)

    In which case, it sounds like either the batteries have been discharged too much in the past, so that there's not enough power to activate the protection circuit (yep, I'm serious: never fully discharge a laptop battery!) ... or alternatively, the charging circuitry has died. There's nothing you can do in either case.(*) I've had both situations happen to me in the past - but thankfully in the latter situation my battery just scraped in under the 1 year warranty and I was able to get it replaced for free.

    http://www.google.com/search?q=laptop%20battery%20 charge%20protection-circuit should direct you to some more useful information ...

    (*) well, for the first instance you can in theory recharge the battery using some types of battery analysers, which are able to reactivate the circuit, but it's recommended not to do this if the battery's been dead for more than a month or two (as the battery could explode!). You'd also have to have access to one of these battery analysers, which are quite expensive. I've never tried it myself ...
  29. Re:Dell Notebook Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hack a Day suggests putting the battery in the freezer as a resurrection method.

  30. Technically great by NMerriam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember years ago when Gnome was the eye-candy window manager all the kids were showing off. In looking through the screenshots, the most surprising thing is to see that nobody involved with the Tango interface has ever seen what an actual shadow looks like.

    If you want to do flat shadows, cool, do them, they're easy and effective. If you want to do three-dimensional shadows, cool, they look even better but take a bit more work. But don't drop the same blurry ellipse at the bottom of every object and think that you're making a three-dimensional shadow, you just make everything look like it's standing on a blurry gray oval, and users really do recognize the less professional look, consciously or not.

    --
    Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    1. Re:Technically great by caseih · · Score: 1

      Tango is just an icon set, done with SVG. They use an elipse as a shadow instead of a "real" shadow. Big deal. The icons still are a cut above XP's icon set. I dont't know much about the workings of SVG, but I'd say real shadows would be difficult but doable. In any case, it's just an icon! It's not even 3D. At 128x128 it's not going to matter that much. I think you're just being pedantic. You're welcome to submit better icon shadows to the project rather than complain about things being unprofessional. Your professional help would be greatly appreciated if you feel inclined.

    2. Re:Technically great by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tango is not just an icon set, it's (theoretically) a whole set of guidelines for interface design, including icons.

      I wouldn't waste time critiquing an icon set, but if Gnome really is planning on following these guidelines and the Tango crew really intend for them to be comprehensive and used by all the major open source interface developers, it would be a good idea for their flagship example to be as professional as possible. The lousy shadows were literally the first thing I noticed when I opened the page.

      In any case, it's just an icon! It's not even 3D. At 128x128 it's not going to matter that much. I think you're just being pedantic.

      I'm sure the Tango folks will be thrilled to learn you really don't care about any of their work. They built a whole group, an extensive web site and extensive guidelines along with the hundreds of icons in the set, I should think they care about the work they're doing and want it to be more than just "good enough". If they want to produce results that are comparable to professional software, then they have to hold themselves to the same pedantic standard that professionals do. It's like building a house and not having the corners be square -- one of the subtle differences that separates most $100k homes from most $500k homes. The average person doesn't consciously notice all the little fit and finish details as they walk throught the house, but they do recognize that there is a difference in quality.

      Your professional help would be greatly appreciated if you feel inclined.

      These comments are my professional help, I charge for this stuff in real life. Shadows have shapes that relate to the shape of the object. A sphere, a file folder, and a box don't all produce the same shadow shape when illuminated. Shadows are darker at the center and where they meet the object, and then lose density and definition as they reach the outside edges. You can make a pretty good flat shadow by just shading two sides of an icon, but if you want to do a projected floor shadow then you have to represent the silhouette of the object as transformed through space.

      Doing a bad floor shadow is more work for worse results than doing a flat shadow. So my professional advice would be that if they are low on time, they should just do flat shadows, but if they want to spend the time, they should think more about how to achieve good projected shadows.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    3. Re:Technically great by damaki · · Score: 1

      I prefer those simple shadows that are less ressource-consuming than cuter ones. I mean, it is just a damn shadow on an icon. It does not matter if it is not perfect because I will not look at it, people will not pay attention.
      Old games and small games have used such shadows for decades. Did people complain?

      --
      Stupidity is the root of all evil.
    4. Re:Technically great by Hast · · Score: 1

      These comments are my professional help, I charge for this stuff in real life.
      Why are you making the comments on Slashdot then?

      Do you tend to complain about the poor service of a restaurant on the bulletin boards in your laundry room as well?

    5. Re:Technically great by IpalindromeI · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I dont't know much about the workings of SVG, but I'd say real shadows would be difficult but doable.

      Pretty easy, actually. Using Inkscape, for example, if you already have the main icon drawn:
      1. Make a copy of the drawing, and select every object and path in the copy.
      2. Use the Path -> Union option to generate an "outline" object.
      3. Turn off stroke if it's on, and change the fill color to a light grey.
      4. Skew and squash the outline so it looks like a shadow.
      5. Make sure the shadow is behind the main drawing.
      6. You can get fancy by using a radial gradient on the shadow to give that "lighter at the edges" look.


      Takes less than a minute. Sure it would take a bit more work than just copying and pasting the same grey oval, but not much, and it's literally the same process for every icon, once the main part is drawn.
      --

      --
      Promoting critical thinking since 1994.
    6. Re:Technically great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they complained, that's why game engines evolved and don't use those shadows anymore. ;-) Since we are talking about icons and not realtime 3D rendering, the choice of shadow would have no significant effect on performance (the SVG rendering would be slightly more complex, but that's it). I'm not a big fan of these blob shadows in Tango either, but on the upside they are much easier to create and I'd rather have consistent shadows on all icons than beautiful shadows on just a few.

      -Daniel

    7. Re:Technically great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Why is he doing it? Because it is helpful. Btw I would forward the comments more directly to the developers, but otherwise...good stuff.

      Why are you complaining about him making valid and constructive criticism?

    8. Re:Technically great by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Why are you making the comments on Slashdot then?

      because people are talking about it here? And I read slashdot and like to comment on things?

      Do you tend to complain about the poor service of a restaurant on the bulletin boards in your laundry room as well?

      If the bulletin board in my laundry room was read by thousands of people who worked in restaurants, yeah, that would be a pretty good place to comment on solvable problems in their industry.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    9. Re:Technically great by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Why are you making the comments on Slashdot then? Do you tend to complain about the poor service of a restaurant on the bulletin boards in your laundry room as well?
      If the bulletin board contains an ongoing discussion of the restaurant, why shouldn't he? What do you think the subject of this /. discussion is here? Tennis?
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    10. Re:Technically great by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Tango might want to work a bit on there web site security! (it's been hacked, apparently by somebodying editing all the lead wiki pages to say "HA HA").

    11. Re:Technically great by DrinkDr.Pepper · · Score: 1

      I always thought the only difference between a 100k house and a 500k house is that the 500k house is in California.

      --
      0xfeedface
    12. Re:Technically great by thebluesgnr · · Score: 1

      For the meantime we avoided talking about shadows as the free software
      tools lack in that area and we are still using workarounds, rather than
      proper solutions to provide object shadows. Once the free software stack
      catches up (Inkscape mainly, coming real soon), I'll add a section on
      shadows.


      http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/tango-artist s/2006-September/000664.html

    13. Re:Technically great by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      They aren't talking about what I'm talking about there -- there is no spec fo shadows in the Tango docs, and they are saying they left it out because inkscape doesn't support drop shadows yet. But drop shadows (flat shadows), as they say, are easy to fake and use workarounds. I'm talking about cast shadows projected in 3 dimensions. You'd need a full 3D rendering engine to do them computationally -- you pretty much have to do them by eye and just imagining what shadow shape the object would create.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    14. Re:Technically great by Hast · · Score: 1

      So basically, what you are saying is that you don't really want them to do better. (In that case you'd just mail them directly.) You just want to sound clever?

      Did it work?

    15. Re:Technically great by Hast · · Score: 1

      I though the discussion was about Gnome 2.16. Then it turned to a rant about how much a icon set made by a third party (which is available in Gnome) sucks because they use elliptical shadows instead of more realistic ones.

      Who cares about that? Well I guess the op does, so that one. Personally I had never noticed if he hadn't said so. And I imagine most users are like that.

      Hence comlaining about it here isn't going to help. If he wants it fixed then complain about it on their forums.

    16. Re:Technically great by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      I'm sharing my views on a discussion board where people discuss things. If nobody from Tango read this, other people form other UI teams will. And pointing out professional details to non-professionals can make them understand where all that time goes, why just knowing which buttons to click in Photoshop is not enough. While I like educating people about what I do for a living and giving feedback on people's work, I don't see it as my responsibility to hunt down everyone doing it incorrectly and give them a personal seminar for free or fix their stuff pro bono.

      It's funny, when programmers comment on slashdot and say "Have you seen the code in this app? It's got all sorts of redundant nested loops and inelegant layount, real spaghetti code, no wonder they have trouble getting it to work!", people take it for what its worth. There's no expectation that by making a comment they should just shut up and fix the whole app themselves, or ignore slashdot altogether and privately share their criticism with the app developers in private.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    17. Re:Technically great by Hast · · Score: 1

      Oh I believe that you are correct regarding the shadows. But I'm not a graphic designer and I never noticed something like that. And I'm willing to bet that most people here on Slashdot are the same. So while your comments are valid I don't think anyone here cares. To find someone that cares you'd need to go to, you guessed it, forums for projects like Tango.

      And when coders comment on code (which I rarely see here on Slashdot) or someone comments on inaccuracies in Wikipedia or someone finds a bug in a program what do everyone here inevitably say? "Did you fix it or file a bug report?"

      Personally I find people who complain and then don't do anything about it just plain arrogant. Nobody is expecting that you give a free seminar to them. But perhaps you should consider that many working on OSS projects actually have high-paying jobs. Personally I find it rewarding enough to share what I know with other people. And since I don't know everything (yet) it gives me an opportunity to learn new stuff from other people at the same time.

      BTW if you had contacted them or looked at their mailing-list you would have found that they already know. The reason they are not doing it right now (and that there is no shadow policy in their guidelines) is that the OSS toolkit doesn't support a good way of making them.

    18. Re:Technically great by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      I've already seen that message (someone else posted it), and they're not talking about what I'm talking about in regards to shadows. They're talking about the lack of a straightforward "drop shadow" tool or effect in Inkscape, but it's easy to fake a drop shadow as they say. But I wasn't commenting on drop shadows, I was commenting on the projected shadows they did poorly, which require imagining how the shape will transform when projected through space (or using a full 3D app to render).

      I wasn't complaining, I was commenting. I don't use Gnome on a daily basis, I don't follow the Tango guidelines for my own work, so it makes no difference whatsoever to me if they fix the problems or not. I have a generally positive hope for OSS projects, so I'm glad to comment in my field of expertise when the opportunity arises on Slashdot. Since many OSS developers hang out here, hopefully they learn something and can compete better with commercial systems. I like learning about the developer side of things, so I figure the good developers like learning about the UI and graphics side. There's no way to know unless I post, and I've had lots of great conversations on here over the years.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
  31. 5 Year Old 3D features... by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ok, considering the 3D features require 5 year old video cards, does this mean we can officially give GNOME the 'boot' and move on to projects that are at least working with respectible interfaces and approaching 3D with modern hardware?

    I read this release several times thinking it was a joke post...

    1. Re:5 Year Old 3D features... by Nadir · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, we just have to wait for the AIGLX and DRI project to complete adding the required bits to the drivers. It's not GNOME's fault.

      --
      --
      The world is divided in two categories:
      those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.
    2. Re:5 Year Old 3D features... by Flame0001 · · Score: 1

      I read your post several times thinking it was a joke post...

      --
      Slashdot, the only place where intellectuals can act like idiots... and still sound intellectual.
    3. Re:5 Year Old 3D features... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you are looking for is Vista. It will be so current as to have the next year's video accelerators as its requirement.

    4. Re:5 Year Old 3D features... by Stalyn · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's not really true, considering the nvidia open source drivers do not even support 3d acceleration. The ati open source drivers are alot further along but only support older cards.

      If you have a newer card or a nvidia card, the only option is XGL/compiz which has the same effects (and more) than the new Metacity. If you still want to use Metacity you will have to wait until Nvidia/ATI releases their drivers with texture from pixmap support which could be 6 months to a year from now. XGL has tfp already built into its server which allows one to use accelerated 3d effects even if their driver does not support it.

      Also I should note that one could use compiz with AIGLX (not sure if you can right out of the box or requires a patch).

      --
      The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
    5. Re:5 Year Old 3D features... by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      What you are looking for is Vista. It will be so current as to have the next year's video accelerators as its requirement.


      Ya, if next year's cards are AGP 4x and have 64mb of RAM and support the 3 year old Pixel Shader 2.0, then sure, that is a next year video card, and we are only talking about the high end Glass.(sic)

      Or you can use your old 1Mb Video Card from 1995 and run Vista just like you would WindowsXP, themes and all...

      Either way, not really a 'requirement' nor something requiring next year's Video Cards.

      I will say though, when ATI and NVidia move to multi-processing concepts and cores, Vista will already be able to utilize this technology with the WDDM specifications. Just like it can already mutli-process 3D applications and even virtualize GPU RAM on the 3 year old cards.

      (BTW I think a lot of the 3D rendering concepts in development in the open source world are quite good, it is just strange the one GNOME is playing around with at this stage is a 'dated' concept to give 'wiggle' to windows.)

    6. Re:5 Year Old 3D features... by xerxesdaphat · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can use AIGLX with Compiz. I'm using it right now on a laptop with an Intel i855GM graphics chip, with excellent speed. Feels snappier than normal GNOME, actually, and with nice things like Exposé clone. As for the Metacity stuff, if you're using Quinn's CVS, which has the latest and nicest and fastest bits of Compiz, it comes with a nice window decorator called cgwd (compiz-generic-window-decorator?) which is light-years ahead of Metacity. Quinn has also produced a properly transparent gnome-terminal, which is very handy for coding (i.e., text stays fully opaque, but the black background becomes transparent (on a sliding scale of opacity), so you can look at a PDF file with whatever in it and keep typing without alt-tabbing all the time).

      Despite the effects being built-in, I can't really see the Metacity compositing effects becoming too popular, because of said driver issues, and Compiz seems to be getting a good head of steam up (the amount of development, and the pace of it, is truly astonishing). Compiz also happens to be portable -- you can use it in KDE too if you swing that way. And isn't Compiz included by default (or at least AIGLX) with Edgy Eft?

      --
      The Shoes of the Fisherman's Wife Are Some Jive Ass Slippers
  32. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by shellbeach · · Score: 1
    So, in other words, Gnome put back what they idiotically took out in the first place - for the sake of "usability" naturally - and then have the balls to call this fix an "improvement."

    Well, to be fair, it's a GTK thing not a GNOME thing. (If it was only a GNOME problem we could have happily ignored it ...) But yes, that's pretty funny - I recall the bitter argument a few years ago about the removal of the path from the chooser, and more than that, the ability to use tab completion when navigating paths in the file chooser.

    It was a shockingly stupid omission in the first place - I'm glad it's back! Let's hope real tab completion is back too (but I bet it won't be - I mean, who uses tab completion in these heady GUI days?? *sarcastic grimace*)
  33. The menu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it still take five seconds to see the content of the menu after you've clicked the foot?

    1. Re:The menu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That depends. Are you still running a = 800mhz box with = 256mb of ram?

    2. Re:The menu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make that <= and yes I am stupid enough not to use the preview button. I'm use to having my symbols converted to HTML for me. Oh well.

    3. Re:The menu by arose · · Score: 1

      The menu opens fine on a 450MHz Celeron with 256MB of RAM.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  34. For the PNGurists, rejoice!!! by Browzer · · Score: 1

    On arstechnica, in the thread http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f /174096756/m/298008880831?r=298008880831 segphault is your hero... (post Posted September 06, 2006 13:16)

    http://www.cixar.com/~segphault/tmp/drafts/img/ -> contains PNG screenshots.

  35. Gnome looks great... by cjkeeme · · Score: 0

    Gnome looks great, but for some reason I can never get used to the interface. I'm so much more productive using KDE. Maybe it's just me.

    1. Re:Gnome looks great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe it's just me.


      No, it is not just you. Gnome does in fact suck.

      KDE isn't much better, although it's got heaps more and better apps.

      My desktop environment needs to do 2 things, and 2 things only:

      1. Give me some desktops to run my apps on.

      2. Stay the fuck out of my way.

      This is why I use WindowMaker.
  36. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ffs make up your mind..
    is it an improvement or not in your opinion?

  37. Goddamnit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It just took me a week to compile 2.14 :(

  38. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Dude... you can turn off the icons! You can configure most of the defaults away and end up with quite an uncluttered look and feel. Try it out, run KDE and play a couple of hours with the settings. I'm sure something interesting to you will emerge.

  39. Brownies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like brownies and I ate a chicken once.

  40. Re:Sourceforge? (ugh) by darkonc · · Score: 1

    Somewhere, in Texas, A moderator is missing it's funnybone.

    --
    Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
  41. Usability improvements on the application level by wysiwia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Usability improvements on the desktop are nice but when do people realize that usability improvements are desperately needed on the application level and only marginally on the desktop. What does it help if you have a perfect desktop but many of the applications one uses have a rather rubbish usability!

    Usability is always measured in a greater context, a context which goes far beyond the Gnome desktop but spans any desktop used. Just think how an American driver feels when he drives in England or vice versa. You might interrupt that's rather seldom the case but not with computer desktops. Almost each Gnome users uses a KDE application and even 60% use a Windows application (http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/survey/survey .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613 at the bottom) and everybody knows the easyness of MacOSX.

    Sure application developers don't want to lose much time with usability they want to concentrate on functionality. So they can't follow multiple separate usability guidelines they simply don't have the time. Yet usability is a very important part in the acceptance of an application. To circumvent this, application developers should follow cross-desktop or cross-platform guidelines (http://wyoguide.sf.net/).

    Yet Gnome might still follow the MacOSX way sticking to there own perfect way and be happy with a rather insignificant market share. Or they help working on fighting off the first "Top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption" (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf).

    O. Wyss

    --
    See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
    1. Re:Usability improvements on the application level by Pecisk · · Score: 1

      I am GNOME user for 5 years and I can easily say that thanks God for HIG. Seriously. Because of it GNOME desktop looks so convinient, so "together". Maybe you have different opinion, and maybe you should take understand that GNOME target is not precisely world domination, yes there are dream to get something 10% (which is very hard to measure anyway), but it is still dream.

      I personally love everything in GUI level at GNOME. It is so easy to get into and easy to work with that I seriously doubt those who claim that GNOME is not understandable. Maybe for those who don't want to learn.

      --
      user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
    2. Re:Usability improvements on the application level by DennisZeMenace · · Score: 1

      Heh. Windows/KDE for the masses and MacOS/Gnome for the elite...

  42. Re:Chicken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *phew* glad i'm not a chicken holding a brownie.

  43. Re:So? It still sucks. by advocate_one · · Score: 1
    Dude... you can turn off the icons! You can configure most of the defaults away and end up with quite an uncluttered look and feel. Try it out, run KDE and play a couple of hours with the settings. I'm sure something interesting to you will emerge.

    GP is trolling...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  44. Memo to text-porn writers: by patio11 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nothing says "sexy" like paragraph breaks.
        Its not hard. No, no, that's not what I meant.

    1. Re:Memo to text-porn writers: by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Paragraph breaks? From the dude who wrote Molly Bloom's soliloquy? Surely you jest.

  45. Gnome! by SQLz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now with more KDE!

    1. Re:Gnome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it KGnome? Knome? GKnomDE?

  46. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by thebluesgnr · · Score: 1

    You've always been able to type a location with the Ctrl+L shortcut. With this new version you can have a location bar always enabled (check the release notes for a screenshot). I'm not sure about the always saving to ~/Desktop thing, as I never had that problem. It's completely application specific though, not GTK+ related.

  47. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by thebluesgnr · · Score: 1

    Let's hope real tab completion is back too (but I bet it won't be - I mean, who uses tab completion in these heady GUI days?? *sarcastic grimace*) You don't need tab completion to provide completion, which is what you want after all. Accessibility is very important to GNOME, and a consistent use of the tab key is an important part of that.

  48. Re:So? It still sucks. by domc · · Score: 1

    No he's not; I feel the same way. There is something odd about the way Opera & KDE feel.

  49. The GTK+ theme engine is lacking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You are correct. The main problem is with the GTK+ theme engine. Put simply, it doesn't offer the features nor functionality necessary to easily and effectively render crisp, aesthetic GUIs.

    One of the main causes is their use of C. It doesn't promote a solid rendering class hierary, as is offered by GUI toolkits that are written a language like C++ (eg. Qt, wxWidgets), Objective-C (eg. Cocoa), Java (eg. Swing, SWT), or Smalltalk (eg. Squeak). This in turn makes it quite difficult for anyone who wants to develop a theme of any complexity.

    Like you mention, just changing the colors (which is easy enough) is not enough. You need to be able to render button and text fields with shadows. You need to have certain corners be sharp, while others rounded. The toolkit engine of GTK+ allows for both, but doens't easily allow for both to be used concurrently.

    That's just a small example of the problems that exist when writing a GTK+ theme engine. What needs to be done is an analysis of what successful GUI toolkits, like Qt, have done. Adopting the techniques of their engine is perhaps the best thing that the GTK+ developers can do at this point.

    1. Re:The GTK+ theme engine is lacking. by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Or to keep it simple for the less technically inclined : graphics are ugly in C.

      Or did I miss something ?

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    2. Re:The GTK+ theme engine is lacking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the biggest bunch of nonsense I've read in a while, I can't believe someone modded it interesting. There is no single "GTK+ Theme Engine", theme engines are shared objects and limited only by the ability of the programmer.

      "You need to be able to render button and text fields with shadows."

      We use many shadows in Ubuntulooks, they are subtile but that's a design choice, not a technical limitation. Even shadows on text can be done: http://www.gnome-look.org/content/pre1/43793-1.png (on the menubar).

      "You need to have certain corners be sharp, while others rounded. The toolkit engine of GTK+ allows for both, but doens't easily allow for both to be used concurrently."

      I'm not sure what you're talking about. I can make every corner as sharp or rounded as I want, based on the type of widget, its detail string (additional information provided to the theme engine), the widget's properties or its hierarchy (this is how we make the combo boxes look "connected" in Clearlooks and Ubuntulooks, its not a unique widget).

      I can assure you that the choice of C has nothing to do with deficiencies found in common Gtk+ engines. The problem is rather that there are few programmers who actually care about GUI design (or have any sense for the matter). Things have gotten dramatically better during the last months and there is still a lot of room for improvement. Ubuntulooks (Human) is what you should consider the current state of affairs.

      Gtk+ theming is far from perfect, but I've yet to see a better solution. I'd like to know specifically what you think is impossible with Gtk+ themes (but possible with Qt and others), so I can prove you wrong. :-)

      -Daniel

    3. Re:The GTK+ theme engine is lacking. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      It has nothing to do with C. GTK+ can do class heirarchies quite easily because it uses glib which is basically OO for C.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  50. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by tulare · · Score: 1

    So you would say then, for the sake of usability, that people accustomed to using the Tab key for completion should suddenly retrain themselves? Tell me again how this makes Gnome any more usable? If the question is accessability, then by golly make it a pref that's enabled by default. Don't expect people to be happy with this, or button re-ordering, "spatial" browsing(implemented totally half-assed, just to add insult to injury), or any of the myriad of other changes Gnome UI has jammed down the throats of the unwilling. Expect us to use something else, and publicly deride Gnome for what they've become.

    Amazing how many replies a -1:Troll post can generate, neh? I suspect I've got the Gnome fanbois in a big lather. Well, let 'em mod me down. They need something to do in between emerging this update and putting new taillight inserts on their yugos.

    --
    political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
  51. Re:So? It still sucks. by rasjani · · Score: 1

    Indeed, im also one of those that thinks "kde feels funny". Ofcourse i know i can tweak the shit out of it but, mm. why should i ?

    I'll just use gnome or instal xfce (gtk widgets just do look better to me)

    --
    yush
  52. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by shellbeach · · Score: 1
    You don't need tab completion to provide completion

    That sounds fine, but if you're used to using a shell for most of your work and very rarely branching into GUI filemanagers, you'd realise just how ineffective the GNOME implementation of filename completion is. The sad thing is that GTK 2.4 and below had a fantastic implementation of tab completion, and it was a joy to use ...

    I do realise that accessibility is important, but consider how much more accessible the following setup would be: keyboard enters the path, tab auto-completes, [return] accepts, [esc] cancels. That's the smart way of doing things - there's absolutely no need to tab and shift-tab to focus different widgets, because there's no need to even use the widgets. I don't think the file chooser in GTK >= 2.6 is very accessible at all.

    Don't get me wrong - I think GTK is a great toolkit for the most part, and I enjoy writing for it. Certainly, the file chooser dialogue needed updating from the 2.4 implementation ... but what upset me and many other users was that the update removed functionality and made it more difficult to navigate directory trees.
  53. But does it feature... by MaineCoon · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... left-handed scrollbars?

    *ducks*

    --
    Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000
    1. Re:But does it feature... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Gnome Terminal can be configured to have left-handed scrollbars.

  54. Re:Give old one back. by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

    I think the old Gnome's file save dialog (plain and simple) was much better. The worst part, is that I can't write the full path anywhere! This also applies to Nautilus.

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
  55. Re:So? It still sucks. by injury0314 · · Score: 1

    Same here. For me it's more of a feeling that everything has a function, or that every glyph or image is clickable. (or in the case of Opera an AD, although it was removed in newer versions i still have that fear of clicking on ADs) This leads me to be very uncomfortable when clicking around, especially dragging windows. Probably not enough visual cues for what is and what is not clickable. It's just that kind of feeling. But on the other hand, KDE still does it for me. The icons aren't too big. (A 1024x768 screen in Gnome has has as much useful real estate as a 640x480 KDE screen. Even windows apps make better use of real estate.) Yeah, it's kind of a Windowsy philosophy on screen real estate, but i think everyone needs all the screen real-estate they can get. I guess the only thing going for GNOME for me i guess is Ubuntu. I'm a KDE fanboy, but I still think Ubuntu on GNOME rocks.

  56. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Emo is a wise man.

  57. Re:Give old one back. by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

    To be precise, it is GTK's file dialog, and you can either type ctrl-l or just start typing. Why, yes, it is completely non-discoverable. Actually, I think that GTK 2.10 (used in Gnome 1.16) adds a button for this.

  58. Congratulations by lamikr · · Score: 1

    This release in time schedule has really rocket in gnome.

  59. New GNOME, even more easier! by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Funny

    FTFA : "Menu editing just got even more easier."

    Woot! Sounds like a lot! I also heard it was even more betterly eye-candier!

    --
    You just got troll'd!
    1. Re:New GNOME, even more easier! by fatphil · · Score: 1

      I happy that it's gotting more easier. Are not you too?

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  60. credit where credit's due by cliveholloway · · Score: 2, Informative

    Emo Phillips.

    "My parents told me never to go through the cellar door because horrible things lay on the other side. But one day, curiosity got the better of me, and I went through the cellar door. On the other side, I saw strange and wonderful things, things I'd never seen before, like trees... and clouds..."

    --
    -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
  61. Gnome is dead, Patrick Volkerding confirms by muftak · · Score: 0, Troll

    Even slackware doesn't ship with it anymore.

    1. Re:Gnome is dead, Patrick Volkerding confirms by MiKom · · Score: 1

      BSD is dead!

  62. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by TractorBarry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Mod parent insightful. This is absolutely not a troll. I, for one, whole heartedly agree with these comments.

    Why has it taken this long to be able to set recursieve file permissions ?

    Why has it taken until now to be able to edit the menu (smeg notwithstanding) ?

    These features should have been in from release 1.0

    Sorry but GNOME really does suffer from some pretty basic usability problem which, as the parent posints out, could mostly be fixed by taking note of some of the good aspects of GUI design that have been put into place over the last 20 years, and especially by allowing users to set options as they want - not what the designers think is "best for them".

    The "we know best" attitude is condescending and hinders usability. The "proper" way to do it is to have everytthing come "out of the box" with basic defaults but let the user "open up" the interface as they learn it. If you're really worried about your poor users provide a "reset to defaults" option.

    The parent post simply points out some obvious problems with GNOME, the fact it got modded Troll points out some problems with blinkered moderation.

    And yes I am a GNOME user - I have an Ubuntu desktop at home. I mostly like GNOME but it always, always sends me into a swearing frenzy due to basic usability problems.

    --
    Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
  63. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by TractorBarry · · Score: 1

    P.S. And before y'all think I'm just having a rant one thing I forgot to mention is how excellent the new keyboardable "Find filestore objects by pressing keys" function is in Nautilus.

    The fact it was missing in previous releases was a real usability problem. This new feature, where you can type the letters of a directory/file and the focus will move to the object "whose name starts with the letters you've just typed" is a truly splendid thing.

    Much better than the simple "move to next object whose name starts with the letter you've just pressed" in Windows Explorer. This is one area that the GNOME devs have got round to adding a feature that really should have been in from day one but have at least done so in a new and superior manner.

    I just wish the GNOME developers would put more effort into this sort of thing and less into eye candy...

    --
    Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
  64. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by arose · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Why has it taken this long to be able to set recursieve file permissions ?
    What have you done to accelerate it?
    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  65. gnome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  66. Sure it looks great by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    But how fast is it? How fast over a LAN, snappy or sluggish?

    --
    Deleted
  67. Re:So? It still sucks. by value_added · · Score: 1

    KDE has many things going well for it. This'll sound weird, I'm sure, but I like Gnome better because it feels better. KDE has a weird feel to it that I can't get over.

    Is it that same feeling you get when you see two men kissing?

    My opinion has always been that between the feature-rich and overly-colourful KDE approach, and dumbed-down (almost to the point of stupidity) but subdued Gnome approach, there should be a compromise of some sort. I don't think it exists, but for those relying on a graphical interface to use their computers, it shouldn't be surprising to see such contradictory opinions.

  68. Is it again usable by geeks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I tried Gnome it was a pain in the ass: they removed tons of configuration options from the desktop apps, forcing me to open the shell more often than I had to. Not that I don't like the shell (I actually love it), but being forced to use it for something that every decent GUI can address graphically sounds not good to me. Even the file selector functionality was almost destroyed hiding the option to unhide files (pun intended).
    Therefore my question is: should I take a look at this new Gnome, or it's still a Bob-style underpowered interface only granmas would use, so I'm still better to stick to Xfce or even Kde?

  69. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Gnome 2 is dumbed down to the point of absolute contempt for the user. There are so many valid critisisms of the project that modding the parent troll gives neither Gnome, the parent comment or internet trolls the justice they deserve. I've not used Gnome for over a year, and I've not used it seriously since the comedic nature of the 2.x branch became evident. Here's my lingering impression of Gnome with the addition of a concern about a recent addition.

    • Nautilus - The filemanager that makes you long for Windows Explorer
    • Evolution - Without a doubt, the worst email client I've ever used.
    • GConf - Nothing can convey the horror of a windows registry clone
    • GStreamer - Amazingly I can listen to, edit and stream digital media without this dependency
    • Mono - Try and get a patent license from MS for this turd


    Fuck Gnome, it sucks.
  70. Re:Dell Notebook Batteries by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    You see? That's why open-vented lead-acid batteries are still the best battery technology bar none. They're damn nigh indestructible in normal use. A lead-acid battery will burn out a short-circuit with almost no noticeable voltage drop. Try to overcharge them, and they gas a bit ..... but no worries, you can just top them up with air conditioner runoff. In an emergency, if they're not holding a charge as well as they used to, you can actually physically scrape the shite off the plates with a knife. And what with containing so much lead, they're (1) hard to steal and (2) well worth recycling.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  71. Re:So? It still sucks. by teslar · · Score: 1
    (...) there should be a compromise of some sort. I don't think it exists (...)

    Well, you could turn off the over-the-top settings in KDE, anything that's too much for you. Or you could try XFCE, maybe that's what you're looking for...
  72. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    P.S. And before y'all think I'm just having a rant one thing I forgot to mention is how excellent the new keyboardable "Find filestore objects by pressing keys" function is in Nautilus.

    That's a GTK feature. It works in most widgets like the filestore one.

  73. Off topic: Dell Notebook Batteries by Secrity · · Score: 1

    Maybe you'll luck out and your batteries are included in the recall. I lucked out that way with the tires on my pickup - they were recalled just as they wore out.

  74. Re:So? It still sucks. by SpinJaunt · · Score: 1

    What is the one thing both Opera[*] & KDE have in common?

    QT.

    [*] Not sure about the Windows version though.

    --
    /. is good for you.
  75. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Mod parent insightful. This is absolutely not a troll.

    Mod parent insightful, huh? Hey, everybody! "Tractor" Barry wants us to mod the parent insightful!

    Why don't YOU mod it insightful yourself? Maybe you don't have mod points because you keep modding shit up?

  76. Re:So? It still sucks. by domc · · Score: 1

    I was actually going to mention that, but I didn't want to start a QT/GTK flamewar. I do think QT/KDE has some cool features, but GTK/GNOME feels cleaner and more elegant.

    FWIW, I think that Opera on win32 feels weird too.

  77. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by cortana · · Score: 1
    Why has it taken until now to be able to edit the menu (smeg notwithstanding) ?
    It's funny you should say this since alacarte is just smeg renamed!
  78. Yet STILL... by DeathAndTaxes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    STILL we gnome faithful are saddled with having only one desktop picture for all workspaces. This became ridiculous at gnome 2.10, IMO. Gnome devs still say they are all for the spatial paradigm (which I like, btw), yet they miss the opportunity to use different desktop pics for each workspace, which would make each workspace...different (wait for it) spatially.

    (I still use gnome every day.) ;-)

    1. Re:Yet STILL... by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      KDE has awful multiple wallpaper support though. When you switch workspaces there is sometimes a delay (about one second) before the wallpaper gets updated, which completely ruins the illusion that every workspace has its own wallpaper. I really hate that.

    2. Re:Yet STILL... by teh*fink · · Score: 1

      man i feel you. there is so much i LIKE about gnome, but so many pervicaciously braindead and frustrating decisions made by the developers that it just drives me (and a lot of other people) crazy. so what i want to know is, why doesn't somebody just fork the goddamn code and put in the changes that we the users actually want??

      mods: +1 for using the word of the day?

      --
      "I DARE you to make less sense!"
    3. Re:Yet STILL... by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      I think the reason here is that spatially, if you have some stuff on top of your desktop (icons), it doesn't make sense when the wallpaper changes. It's like each wallpaper is a "room", but the icons fly around to whatever room you're looking at.

      Or maybe they just don't support it. I dunno.

    4. Re:Yet STILL... by xeno-cat · · Score: 1

      Yes, funny that no one has forked the code, isn't it? Probably becasue it's easier to complain about what someone else does than do anything yourself.

      Kind Regards

      --
      "A few great minds are enough to endow humanity with monstrous power, but a few great hearts are not enough to make us w
    5. Re:Yet STILL... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      STILL we gnome faithful are saddled with having only one desktop picture for all workspaces.

      Funny, I was using different desktop pictures back in GNOME 1.x, when Enlightenment was the common/default WM (before Sawfish).

      Is there something I don't know about, these days, that prevents GNOME users from using other window managers?
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    6. Re:Yet STILL... by ReinoutS · · Score: 1
      so what i want to know is, why doesn't somebody just fork the goddamn code
      Guess what. Somebody did. I'm surprised you haven't heard of this hugely successful project yet.
    7. Re:Yet STILL... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      STILL we gnome faithful are saddled with having only one desktop picture for all workspaces.
      You don't have to use the window manager that comes with gnome - even the version of enlightenment from before 2000 has been patched to behave itself with current versions of gnome.
  79. Ubuntu by Stephen+Chadfield · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear Ubuntu researchers are hard at work trying find the most depressing shades of brown to use in the default themes for their Gnome 2.16 based release.

  80. I mostly like 2.16, by temcat · · Score: 1

    but Alacarte is horrible. I mean, the interface is okayish, but the app is slow as molasses! (I presume that's because it's written using PyGTK.) I've had about two second delay while typing on Celeron 2.6GHz with 512M of memory with no other apps open!

  81. Troll? Try Informative or "no shit batman" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    A sizable number of people are very worried about the Microsoft patents, the mono project even has a FAQ where they attempt to downplay the issue. It's important that (despite the efforts of Miguel, Novell and the Mono faithful) everyone be aware of the unacceptable risk. I don't consider the criticism section of Mono's wikipedia entry to be NPOV when pretty much everyone outside the project thinks Microsoft will at some point attempt to monetize the situation.

    Just because a single moderator knows about the patent issue someone browsing at +3 may now go uninformed. Not everybody being sold on the .NET cross platform lie understands how the rug can be pulled from under them at any time. It's a genuine concern and it needs to be addressed by Microsoft themselves, Novell are in no position to be offering assurances concerning 3rd party IP.

  82. From the inner circles of Ubuntu devs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rumor has it that this release of GNOME will be packaged in the next iteration of Ubuntu, called Furry F*cker

  83. True OpenSource sample code by wysiwia · · Score: 1

    I've yet to see a better cross-platform solution than Qt. It can be used with great languages like Ruby, Python, C++, and more... and it's worth every penny. Runs beautifully on Windows, Mac, and Linux with no modification to source.

    I don't criticize QT since I haven't developed any code with it. Yet I really like to see an OSS sample code written with QT, building and running unchanged on all the mentioned platforms.

    If you want to look at OSS cross-platform code which truly builds and runs unchanged, go to wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) and try out the demo sample. It works out of the box on Linux and Windows and as others tell on MacOSX albeit it uses wxWidgets instead of QT. Besides this sample is a fully featured application which can be used as a starting base code for your own project. And there are may more OSS cross-platform applications listed which easily fulfill the cross-platform requirement.

    O. Wyss

    --
    See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
    1. Re:True OpenSource sample code by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      I've used both Qt and wxWidgets. wxWidgets is... minimal. That's for sure. If you want an example of something written in Qt that works on Windows, Mac, and Linux, try Skype, Google Earth, or the Perforce clients suite. A far less interesting example was my senior project in college: I used Qt because I spend most of my time in Linux but the project had to run natively in Windows. I can furnish the source if you want, but I really doubt it'd interest you that much :-)

    2. Re:True OpenSource sample code by wysiwia · · Score: 1

      ...try Skype, Google Earth, or the Perforce clients suite...

      Neither Skype nor Google Earth is OpenSource as probably neither is Perforce. No questions these are good applications but I can't look into the code. IMO it's rather difficult to find OpenSource QT code except for KDE which isn't cross-platform. So if you are an OpenSource developer and want to find out how to code something cross-platform, there's no sensible alternative to wxWidgets. I don't know if wxWidgets is minimal yet it is definitely sufficient for any task I can think of.

      Google Earth is a QT application which is cross-platform but it took Google a full year to port it from Windows to Linux. Sorry I can't imagine why. If you code like I propose in wyoGuide it won't need a full day to port between any port.

      O. Wyss

      --
      See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
    3. Re:True OpenSource sample code by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      The only open source example I know of is my senior project then, and I wrote it when I knew very little of OO, so while my code isn't that impressive, Qt's magic still shines with it. If you're bored you can get it at this location. In all the programming I've done with Qt, though, I've never had to change a single line for compatibility purposes.

  84. Here's another problem with Gnome branding by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tomboy, Notes application
    Alacarte, Menu Editor
    Baobab, Disk usage analyzer
    Totem, Video player

    WTF???

    Why not call the Notes application "Gnome Notes", the menu editor "Gnome Menu Editor", the Disk usage analyzer "Gnome Disk Usage Analyzer" and the video player, you've guessed it, "Gnome Video Player".
    I know developers like to give their applications noteworthy and unique names, but to a user this is only confusing and unnecessary. Especially considering all these are part of Gnome and will most likely not be used outside the Gnome environment.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by Medieval_Gnome · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not quite that bad. When accessing these programs from the menu they *do* have the simple names you were hoping for.

      Totem is 'Movie Player'
      Baobab is 'Disk Usage Analyzer'
      Alacarte seems to be 'Menu Layout', although Ubuntu might have changed something here.
      Tomboy is unfortunately 'Tomboy notes'

      So overall they've managed to use fairly clear and simple names for these programs, much as you were hoping for.

      --

      :wq

    2. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those names are mostly internal. Tomboy is called "Tomboy Notes" in the applets dialog, there is also the old "Sticky Notes" and "Tomboy Notes" is hardly worse than "GNOME Notes" (considering that even the "GNOME" name isn't exposed on the default GUI). Alacarte is accessed as "Edit Menus" and reads "Menu Layout" in the title. Baobab is called "Disk Usage Analyzer" both in the menu and the window title. Totem is called "Movie Player" in the menu and "Totem Movie Player" in the title. Now I'd prefer no application names at all in the window titles too, but that's hardly an extreme case of application name branding.

      The unique names are useful for developers and identification, that is all. Don't forget that in the Open Source world, there can be plenty of movie players and you don't want to change names everytime another one becomes the default. What really matters is what the user is exposed to and GNOME isn't doing badly in this regard (e.g. compare "Music Player" to "iTunes").

      -Daniel

    3. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by g2devi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's absolutely necessary.

      Think about it. If you run GNOME on a distro that uses the default GNOME applications, you'll see this on your menu item:

      Epiphany Web Browser

      but if you run Ubuntu, you'll see:

      Firefox Web Browser

      These are *different* apps with different features and limitations so they should not be given the same name (i.e. GNOME Web Browser) even if the naming convention is consistent within a distribution. By force-fitting the branding, you're eliminating the possibility that GNOME can change its mind about web browsers and you're making it difficult to support GNOME. And it confuses novices who buy "GNOME for dummies" books and expect one thing to work and has a different result because they're getting another app.

      Let's extend this a bit further. Suppose I want to run Firefox, Epiphany, Opera, and Konqueror. My menu would look like:

      Epiphany Web Browser
      Firefox Web Browser
      Opera Web Browser
      Konqueror Web Browser

      All these options are available and even a new user on my machine that only knew one of these browsers would see that they are all web browsers.

      What's wrong with unique names anyway? Is Excel any more descriptive than iLife or OpenOffice? None make sense, but all are well known. People like unique names since they're easy to remember. And for people who don't know what these apps mean, the old "OpenOffice Word Processor"/"OpenOffice Spreadsheet"/... menu items should give them all the information they need to know.

    4. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      I think the point to remember is that these are project names, not what will be appearing in menus. Having distinctive project names does make sense. Tomboy is replacing a previous note taking application in GNOME: GNOME tends to pick and choose from various applications developed for the environment, and if something better comes along they'll move to that. If you have to be called "GNOME Notes" then what do you call the new note taking application you want to develop? Instead the projects have distinctive interesting names and include descriptions of what they are (Notes application, Menu editor, etc.) that are used to populate the menus. Besides, many of these names are no worse than names used for other applications. Why call it Safari instead of "Apple Web Browser"? If you say that Safari still connotes browsing/searching then you should note that Baobab is a distinctive type of tree (thus the natural association with disk usage trees etc.).

    5. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by escay · · Score: 1
      Thank God they aren't as krazy as KDE, prefixing everything with a K. imagine the names then -

      Gnotes (notes)
      Gnomenu (menu editor)
      Gnomemory (disk usage analyzer)
      Gnomedia (media player)

      maybe it's just me, but i kind of like the short funky not-even-remotely-related-to-their-actual-applicat ion names.

    6. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by alveraan · · Score: 1

      Because first, many of those applications already existed and had their names before becoming part of the gnome project. And second, because often, an application is replaced by a another one. For example, in the 2.16 release, Gnopernicus has been replaced by Orca. If you would have named Gnopernicus "Gnome Screen Reader", then "Gnome Screen Reader" would have been replaced by "Gnome Screen Reader" - but the other "Gnome Screen Reader", if you see what I mean. Also why not having some unique names, it makes the desktop more interesting and colourful.

      --
      Everytime you kill a kitten, god masturbates.
    7. Re:Here's another problem with Gnome branding by butterwise · · Score: 1, Funny

      Actually, the real problem is finding an iron small enough to brand the little suckers without burning them to a crisp. That and getting your hands on a Gnome in the first place.

      --
      If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
  85. someone has to sort out his priorities by dmitri83 · · Score: 1

    On a machine with 256 Mb RAM and GNOME loaded there is almost no free RAM left. Almost any application that you launch is going to use swap space. Amiga (whose Workbench would run OK on a 256 Kb machine) would turn in its grave! Seriously, I think that user interfaces we have on Linux are sucking more and more resources in the course of time and I still don't see a real breakthrough in usability. And if there is no difference in usability I prefer a user interface that runs faster and consumes less memory. I think it is more important than eyecandy. Maybe the developers of widgetsets/window managers/... should stop running for eyecandy and launch a profiler?

    1. Re:someone has to sort out his priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it is more important than eyecandy. Maybe the developers of widgetsets/window managers/... should stop running for eyecandy and launch a profiler?

      Maybe it's time you looked at gnome development to notice heavy performance work has been done since before the 2.14 release:

      http://mail.gnome.org/archives/performance-list/

      Including, of course, use of profilers like sysprof, massif and the like.

    2. Re: someone has to sort out his priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I prefer a user interface that runs faster and consumes less memory

      Amen. I'm a former Gnome user who ditched the desktop paradigm all together and moved to stock fluxbox; life is good.

    3. Re:someone has to sort out his priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you have a point here, but things are getting better.
      I'm reading this using gnome 2.14 and firefox on Debian Etch. Current amount of memory used is 208,2 MiB. Xorg using most 73,8 MiB, Firefox 61,1 MiB, while the rest (~74MiBs) is used by different gnome apps and applets.

    4. Re:someone has to sort out his priorities by dmitri83 · · Score: 1

      It is good to hear that, but I must admit they are not yet there. It is fun to play with top and see how resource-greedy applications can be. gedit takes 13M ram right after the start against 9m of gvim and 11m of emacs-x11. Apparently there is not so much functionality in gedit that is not present in gvim , so what's the problem? Where did my 4M go? And gedit does not seem to have so much user interface, so it should consume *less* memory than gvim/emacs. But it does not! Why use it then? Of course, a couple of megabytes does not really matter, but the pattern is common: with modern GUIs you get bigger resource consumption and less functionality, and often WITHOUT really getting a better user interface. To consider also: totem vs. mplayer Eye of gnome vs. gqview Ghostview vs. GNOME ghostview evince vs. gv/xpdf each time you have to pay speed and memory for not so much usability. P.S. It's a pity GNOME/GTK was created so late, computers are just too fast for developers to care about optimization :)

    5. Re:someone has to sort out his priorities by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Of course, a couple of megabytes does not really matter, but the pattern is common
      It means you have to junk that 256MB machine that is fussy about what brands of memory you can upgrade it with after you put FC4 on it.
  86. Re:Dell Notebook Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone know how to revive these batteries?

    yes...

    www.ebay.com

    or

    www.dell.com

    quit being a cheap bastard and buy new ones. cripes your laptop is older than hell.

  87. GNOME makes things mainstream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For example, the "expat" XML reader. There are about 100 XML readers and expat it not the best (too much recursion!!). But expat is in every linux distribution because it is needed by GNOME. And other people then use expat because they know that it's a standard program in linux distributions. Same for pango, xrenderer, and other crapware.

    So you want your program to become mainstream and be famous? Persuade Migule de Icaza to make it a GNOME dep.

    I really think that RMS should do the right thing and step up and say that GNOME is not the *GNU* desktop. It's a MS backdoor into promoting .NET (which would otherwise die to java for the reason of not running to anything else besides windows).

  88. Re:Dell Notebook Batteries by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0

    Thank you for your generous offer. Please ship them overnight express - this laptop isn't getting any younger.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  89. Ackbar was a friend of mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Expat is a common dependency (used for parsing config files etc) for hundreds of programs (eg: Apache), I wasn't even aware Gnome used it? Otherwise I agree, we should start thinking about rewriting or forking common libs before we're all dragged into the .TRAP

  90. Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by Medievalist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Gnome drags an absurd number of dependencies into the distributions I use. It seems like you can't load Gnome without also loading several development libraries, a panoply of sound and video support (for hardware you don't physically have and software you have no desire to use) and various other fooferaw. I realize some of this is because of inept packaging on the part of certain distributions, but even when you take that into account Gnome's still a dependency nightmare reminiscient of Windows "DLL hell".

    When the number of dependencies required to run Gnome on mainstream distributions DECREASES, that'll impress me. Until then I am unlikely to care what new eye-candy it's sporting.

    1. Re:Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The graph is missing pango, cairo, mono and freetype.

      It's impossible to build gnome from the sources on, say LFS.
      You have to use some tool like RPM which downloads trojan^H^H^H^H^H^binaries
      from Novell and you get Mono. Whether you want it or not.

    2. Re:Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only "DLL Hell" if you have multiple different versions and it can't pick the right one automatically. Any distro from the past 10 years will set that up for you.

      Does anybody really care if something is implemented in one library or two? I don't, and unless you're developing it or building a distro from it, I don't see why you would.

      Sure, maybe you don't need all the code from some of those nodes. Big whoop. I'm sure that in *any* program there are code sections I'll never exercise. The GNOME developers could spend ages trimming every last byte (which they seem to be working on, BTW), but is it really worth it? So GNOME takes 300 MB. You can't *buy* a hard disk that small today. You can barely buy a *thumbdrive* that small.

      I just bought a new 320 GB SATA disk for under $100. That's 3 GB / $, or about 10c for all of the GNOME dependencies. If they worked their butts off and cut size by half, that'd save 5c of disk space (price still falling) that would almost certainly have gone unused, anyway.

      Caring about the dependency graph is kind of an absurd thing to care about. Did you decide what car to buy by reading their schematics, and choosing the simplest? Use it, be happy. If you can't deal with abstractions, you shouldn't be using computers.

    3. Re:Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      RTFA:

      GNOME 2.16 now depends on GTK+ 2.10, making use of many improvements that were made available by Project Ridley; an effort to consolidate a number of GNOME libraries into GTK+.
    4. Re:Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Caring about the dependency graph is kind of an absurd thing to care about. Did you decide what car to buy by reading their schematics, and choosing the simplest?

      Mechanics (not part-swappers but real mechanics) would make a decision based on those criteria, so do many bikers. I'm a programmer and my home machines run LFS, perhaps you have nothing better to do than build gnome or perhaps you just install vendor binaries? I'll tell you this, Gnome wasn't pulled from slackware because dependencies don't matter!

    5. Re:Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link, which in turn links to LibgnomeMustDie... I'm still unclear on whether the dependencies are growing, shrinking, or staying reasonably stable, but it's nice to see some action on this front.

      Proud Member of the Clam Shill Alliance

    6. Re:Are the dependencies still growing like topsy? by Medievalist · · Score: 1
      Caring about the dependency graph is kind of an absurd thing to care about. Did you decide what car to buy by reading their schematics, and choosing the simplest? Use it, be happy. If you can't deal with abstractions, you shouldn't be using computers.

      Um, although I certainly don't care about the dependency graph (I care about the dependencies, and I linked the graph in case anyone needed further explanation of what I was talking about) I actually did decide what car to buy by reading schematics. And no, I didn't choose the simplest; I chose the one that provided the best value to me based on my personal criteria, which include efficiency and reliability, as well as some socio-economic and political considerations.

      Abstractions are great when you come up against something that's beyond your mental capacities. Perhaps for you that includes program structure, but I personally don't need to see my computer as a magical black box, I actually understand it pretty well and can make it do everything I need it to do without using any Gnome software at all.

      Complexity is the enemy of reliability -- Alan Robertson
  91. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KDE has a weird feel to it that I can't get over. It's the same feeling I get when I use Opera, I don't quite like it.

    that feeling is cleanliness. and your aversion to is is because you have been exposed to microsoft products so long that feeling dirty is normal to you.

  92. Re:Dell Notebook Batteries by Orange+Crush · · Score: 1

    I couldn't agree with you more. Lead acid batteries rock for every conceivable purpose. When my iPod nano's battery needed replacement, I just cracked that puppy open and slipped in a 12v deep discharge. Works like a dream and I never leave home without it.

    Which is great because I can transfer iPod tunes with SWiK in GNOME . . . which can also run on a lead acid battery . . .

  93. Toggle by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

    So are they going to put vertical and horizontal toggling back in?

    Or was it never gone?

  94. Re:So? It still sucks. by Tony · · Score: 1

    It would be helpful if the desktop authors simply wrote for KDE instead of having all this duplication of effort.

    Two things:

    C++ sucks in all ways imaginable. It is an abomination. Even Jesus hates it. I don't like being forced to write in C++ just to write a GUI-based app. Makes me angry. You wouldn't like to see me when I'm angry.

    Second: having more than one desktop is known as "competition." It's probably the most important thing about capitalism (and the one thing that is most often circumvented in capitalist economies). I believe it is a good thing. It is good for KDE, and it is good for GNOME, and it is good for Enlightenment, and all the other window managers / desktops.

    Plus, and even more importantly, KDE and GNOME take different approaches to things. That is *very* good, as it allows two different things to be tried, and compared against each other (SEE: competition). GNOME borrowing from KDE, and KDE from GNOME, is a good thing, as we all win.

    I don't like KDE that much. I fire it up every few months just to see if it is better than last time, and it usually is (the KDE folks are doing a great job), but I don't really care for the PlayMobile feel of it.

    That's a matter of taste, though. To each his own. I prefer GNOME. You may prefer KDE. Either is a good choice. It's a matter of taste.

    C++ sucking? That's a matter of fact. It sucks. Sucks, sucks, sucks.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  95. Re:So? It still sucks. by be-fan · · Score: 1

    I used KDE for years, and while the power was nice, and the code was clean, the UI sucked. I'd spend days getting rid of all the brain-damage in the UI (20-line context menus, 3-toolbar windows, etc), and eventually just gave up and switched to GNOME.

    The KDE interface needs to be burned, and redone by someone sane.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  96. Just I was wating for! by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 1

    Just what I need. Another GUI based system that works differently than all other GUI base systems and creates more confusion for my users. This is one thing that M$ does do consistantly and right.

    --

    Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
  97. What eye candy??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am guessing that GNOME's goal is to compete for market share of win/mac users. Looking at screen shots, it still looks like crap compared to either Win or OS X. I am sure GNOME's developers are top notch software engineers, but looks like they are lacking a lot in designing dept. It's time to take a step outside of the geek world and meet some designers who know their stuff.

  98. Re:Well, doesn't Gnome have some nerve? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

    I prefer the simplicity, I dont like KDE because I dont want to mess with a dozen different settings to get it to feel simple. I have personally outgrown my days of fiddling with everything to get it to work just right. Simple interface with a few annoyances is better than wasting my time trying to get it 100% right instead of 90%

    --
    The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
  99. gnome 2.16 already in Fedora by spevack · · Score: 1

    We've got gnome 2.16 in the latest nightly buildes (rawhide) of Fedora Core 6, and it will ship in the final FC6 bits when we release in October

  100. Not much on the surface, but lays the groundwork by reed · · Score: 1


    This release does not really have many interesting user-visible features, but parts of Gnome are starting to utilize some of the new infrastructure like mono, compositing, cairo, etc. So I think we'll see some much more interesting visible features using that stuff in the next release or maybe the one after that.

    Reed

  101. Usability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I alter the size of icons on the desktop and toolbars (and having those settings enforced across all applications) without resorting to hacking text files in a terminal now?

  102. So if Gnome is using Mono... by bhunachchicken · · Score: 1

    ... and Trolltech are currently previewing Java binding for Qt (with work going towards making them gcj compatible) would this mean that KDE would end up embrasing Java?

    Now that would be interesting...

  103. Whilst were on the subject of Mono and Gnome... by bhunachchicken · · Score: 1

    From what I've gathered (and I admit I may be wrong here), Miguel de Icaza started the Gnome project because he had concerns about licensing with the KDE desktop's use of Qt's widgets. That's fine but what the bloody hell I do not understand is why he has now chosen to integrate the .NET API in to the GNOME desktop and thereby leading everyone in to a potential patent mine field..?!

    Little bit of hypocrisy there maybe..?

    1. Re:Whilst were on the subject of Mono and Gnome... by nuzak · · Score: 1

      > leading everyone in to a potential patent mine field.

      We work in an environment where bottom feeders patent double-clicking and hyperlinks. You may as well just code and assume that if you are successful, you will be attacked, and that it has nothing to do with any actual features of your product. That it's Microsoft holding the patents and not some two-bit patent troll with vague concept patents and no other revenue stream is probably better for the future of Mono. How many patent suits has Microsoft launched? Now how about Apple?

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    2. Re:Whilst were on the subject of Mono and Gnome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I've gathered (and I admit I may be wrong here), Miguel de Icaza started the Gnome project because he had concerns about licensing with the KDE desktop's use of Qt's widgets.

      Yes, Qt was a proprietary library at the time. For a long time, you couldn't even legally redistribute GPL apps that used Qt. Needless to say, this was a big problem.

      That's fine but what the bloody hell I do not understand is why he has now chosen to integrate the .NET API in to the GNOME desktop and thereby leading everyone in to a potential patent mine field..?!

      He has chosen to integrate with *Mono*, which is a free reimplementation of Microsoft's .NET API. You know, like how GNU libc is a free reimplementation of those proprietary C libraries -- or how pretty much any of the early GNU projects is a free reimplementations of an existing program.

      If GNOME had the policy of not using any free reimplementations of proprietary programs, there'd be virtually nothing left.

      Patents have nothing to do with it, and never did. They can be a troubling issue for anybody writing software, but it was never the motivation for GNOME. Microsoft could try to use patents against Mono, but then somebody could pop up with a patent on something dumb (like XOR!) and do the same.

    3. Re:Whilst were on the subject of Mono and Gnome... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      I sense a bit of "let's have our own version of MS Windows on linux and have it free for everyone" in what I've read from Miguel de Icaza so I don't see any hypocracy. I also don't entirely agree with this (I think something more like other flavours of *nix than MS Windows is more useful on a *nix platform, make it look too close and people go looking for the "C:" drive - but it's still a good idea for some), and thought the initial licence arguments were silly and not really the main reason because I had actually bothered to read the licence for Qt unlike some who argued about it.

      Gnome has since progressed to be multiplatform and usually takes advantage of features of the platform. We still have a single user non-networked approach inherant in some early bits left over like gconf (exporting panel settings from one user to another - forget about it) which I see as a MS Windows registry fanboy's flawed copy, but as a whole it has progressed to be much greater due to the contribution of many. The panel still looks good but it still sucks in implementation (and creeping memory consumption).

    4. Re:Whilst were on the subject of Mono and Gnome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. Qt was not free; it was proprietary software. Building a free desktop on top of a proprietary library is not something he was interested in. Mono is completely free software, it doesn't require non-free bits to work. The patents issues with Mono were a possible problem until the Open Invention Network. Now, Mono is protected by it and even Red Hat ships it (before the OIN Red Hat would not ship Mono). Unfortunately, all free software we use today has a problem with patents. Linux, KDE, GNOME, I'm sure they all touch on a patent.

  104. Why is it important? by physicsphairy · · Score: 1

    I don't see what good having different desktop backgrounds does. I for one never really see my desktop background except for maybe when I first login.

    The workspace switcher is far more useful because it shows me immediately the content (in an abbreviated form) of all of all the workspaces without my having to switch. And I can even *manage* the content without having to switch. Perhaps it's changed, but not being able to drag-and-drop windows between workspaces from the workspace-switcher was one of the reasons I went with gnome over kde.

    And as far as "categorizing" the workspaces (web browsing / programming / music /etc.) associating them with hotkeys is better both in terms of efficiency and mental identification.

    Not that it isn't cool to have different desktops available, but in my mind it mostly just amounts to a clever gimmick.

  105. An Even Better idea! by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    Be like that other desktop and call them

    Notes application: Gnotes
    Menu editor: Megnu editor
    Disk usage analyzer: Disk Gnusage Analyzer
    video player: Gnideo Player

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  106. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

    Used KDE.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  107. At least one cock up per release by MoogMan · · Score: 1

    I hate and love Gnome in equal parts. For example - http://www.gnome.org/start/2.16/notes/C/rnusabilit y.html - how the hell can the new permissions dialog be seen as an improvement. It's been made much worse, and I now take more clicks and thought to change permissions. This is plain wrong.

    To be fair though, this is probably an isolated case, but they do make at least one blatant cock up per release.

  108. But is there a right way to do this ? by Macka · · Score: 1


    You can either have different wallpapers loading as you switch workspaces (as KDE does) and suffer the delay as it loads. Or you can have them all loaded at login time and watch your memory usage go through the roof if you have more than a handful of workspaces. Seriously, is there a way to implement this that doesn't suck ?

    A single wallpaper might be a bit boring. But it's loads more efficient than the alternative.

  109. Adios, GNOME by metamatic · · Score: 1

    I just finally gave in and switched from KDE to GNOME.

    If Mono is really going to be a requirement for GNOME in the future, I'll switch back to KDE.

    And no, I'm not joking.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  110. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    D00d there is a bug in your sig!!
    you are using the typename instead of the parameter name as an argument to your cast.
    May be the real Jesus could get away with it, but i seriously suspect if any mortal compiler worth its salt would let you get away with it.
    chagne it before some one calls you a heretic !!

  111. Edge flipping and window matching. by tjwhaynes · · Score: 1
    Every time I have complained about Metacity not being able to do edge flipping and window matching I'm told to go get such and such projects (i forget the names) and that they do that just fine for metacity and its better designed. Uhm...well the window matching one requires overly complex text configurations to do anything, when Sawfish has a nice point and click setup for window matching (to include window information grabbing with a click). And I searched for 3 damned days for the source for the stupid edge flipping thing for Metacity...apparently its a dead project and has vanished. I did manage to find it tucked away on some archive from another distro's sources, but by that time I gave up and just went back to Sawfish.

    For edge flipping and other "positional" controls at the corners of the screen, I assume you are talking about Brightside. It works alongside GNOME 2.14. What more did you need it to do?

    For window matching, I assume you are referring to the curiously named Devil's Pie. I did laugh when you mentioned the "overly complex text configurations ... I gave up and just went back to Sawfish." because the configuration files for Devil's Pie are a lisp syntax and Sawfish is entirely configurable with, ummm, oh yes, LISP!

    Maybe it's just me but I'd rather be given a full featured language to configure things with first and hope for a neat GUI later. The configs for Devil's Pie aren't really cryptic - here's an example that pins every GAIM window (makes it appear on every workspace) and hides the GAIM windows from the pager to avoid clutter.

    (if (matches (application_name) "^[Gg]aim")
    (begin pin
    skip_pager
    ))

    Stick that in a file - say ~/.devilspie/matchGaim.ds - and start devilspie. It's that hard :-)

    Cheers,
    Toby Haynes

    --
    Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
    1. Re:Edge flipping and window matching. by db32 · · Score: 1

      Brightside...thats the one...I only found it by digging through old debian source repositories...every search elsewhere lead nowhere. Maybe that is fixed now, but that wasn't the case then...in Sawfish all it takes is uncommenting a few lines.

      And yes Devil's Pie is the other...so...let me get this straight...yes...Devil's Pie is a terribly intuitive configuration *cough*. I agree that generally I prefer text configs to GUI configs...however I prefer GUI configs to configure GUIs, it just makes more sense.

      I will also point out that I never said it was 'hard', I said it was overly complex. Since Sawfish has far better implementations of both edge flipping and window matching, overly complex pretty much kills it. Additionally, I want my WM to manage my windows...I don't want to have to go get a bunch of 3rd party crap to alter the behavior of my WM to add the features I want.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    2. Re:Edge flipping and window matching. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      "For edge flipping and other "positional" controls at the corners of the screen, I assume you are talking about Brightside. It works alongside GNOME 2.14. What more did you need it to do?"

      The most recent version of Brightside (1.3.0) compiled fine against GNOME 2.12, but it doesn't even compile against 2.14. Even after 2.14 became marked as stable in Gentoo, Brightside still would not work. (BTW, ecatmur is a Gentoo user that has written many useful Gentoo utils. He obviously has stopped maintaining Brightside though.)

      Take a guess when I finally gave up and switched over to KDE. :)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    3. Re:Edge flipping and window matching. by tjwhaynes · · Score: 1
      The most recent version of Brightside (1.3.0)

      Stop right there. The most recent version is 1.4.0

      rpm -q brightside
      brightside-1.4.0-11.fc5
      In case you are wondering what I'm running it against:

      rpm -q gtk2 gnome-desktop
      gtk2-2.8.20-1
      gnome-desktop-2.14.3 -1.fc5

      This is on a FC5 box with various extra repositories (freshrpms, etc.) available.

      Cheers,
      Toby Haynes

      --
      Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
  112. Post censored by /. of Halvy on Gnome 2.16 :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /. is now, OFFICIALLY censoring members who's Karma rating is rated: 'Terrible'.


    I'm sure they don't advertise this yet.


    I am VERY GLAD I am hitting a nerve with the Jew Mafia, M$ run /. for them to bury my posts now so NOONE can read them-- LITERALLY. I need to go into my personal /. home page and look at all my previous posts in order to find my postings.



    I am sure /. management does not consider it illegal censoring when NOONE can decide on whether someone like me, with a 'Terrible' Karma rating has anything worth while to contribute to the community, or even deserves to be labled a 'Terrible' member of /. and the OSS community.


    I guess they think they personally 'own' the Net now!!



    Well anyway here is the post that I made this morning that I hoped some would find informative. :)



            *
                Here's A Great LiveCD To Check Out Compiz :)
                (Score:-1)
                by Halvy (748070) on Thursday September 07, @09:44AM (#16060207)

                Sabayonlinux [ http://www.lxnaydesign.net/ [lxnaydesign.net] ]

                It's Gentoo based (but not by Gentoo)-- both 32/64bit.

                It can be installed as well as used as a LiveCD.

                My favorite part (so far) is the LED Glass lighting that is used for the maximize, reduce and close switches for windows :]

                There are tons of switches and knobs to adjust your 'set' toooo!!

                -- Firmely entrenched at the very depths of 'Terrible Karma'.. now I can FINNNALLY speak my mind..

            *
                Here's A Great LiveCD To Check Out Compiz :)
                (Score:-1)
                by Halvy (748070) on Thursday September 07, @09:44AM (#16060207)

                Sabayonlinux [ http://www.lxnaydesign.net/ [lxnaydesign.net] ]

                It's Gentoo based (but not by Gentoo)-- both 32/64bit.

                It can be installed as well as used as a LiveCD.

                My favorite part (so far) is the LED Glass lighting that is used for the maximize, reduce and close switches for windows :]

                There are tons of switches and knobs to adjust your 'set' toooo!!

                -- Firmely entrenched at the very depths of 'Terrible Karma'.. now I can FINNNALLY speak my mind..

               

  113. is nautilus by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

    still completely dumbed down unusable...

  114. Usability improvements? by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Disclaimer: I used to *heart* gnome and hate KDE. Now, I find Gnome to be more of a PITA than it is worth. I despise Gnome because they have dumbed it down more and more over the years, to the point where it's annoying. I'm surprised they haven't stated "we will now support only one-button mice"

    Does Nautilus still suck? (Windows Explorer sucks. Copying Explorer functionality leads to an Explorer clone that also sucks. Ergo, Nautilus sucks.) I *heart* konqueror because of the zillion extensions I can install, I can tab AND split views, change the view as desired, etc. - in other words, if you need simple, you don't have to worry about it, but if you need advanced functionality to get work done quickly (in other words, your IQ is higher than 70 and you dislike dumbed-down interfaces) you can simply load a different view profile and expose the functionality.

    File properties: "simplification" of permissions = hiding advanced permissions? Idiots. The KDE folks got it right a LONG time ago. A Simple view is presented initially, but, if you have half a clue and aren't totally frightened of more options, you can click "Advanced Permissions" and actually get to the advanced view. In their infinite(simal) wisdom, the Gnome folks have decided that everyone is a novice and NO one should have access to a view which is not dumbed down.

    File open dialog: Are we still stuck with one single view, along PAINFUL navigation? Can I still not view size and sort by size? No, because having configurable views can confuse some people, so exposing alternate views is made available to NO one. It's like liberal's "tolerance" - promote tolerance by bringing everyone to the LCD, rather than admitting that "tolerance" really just means being mature enough to agree to disagree. Same thing here - Gnome folks are "simplifying" the environment by removing functionality and providing no advanced views.

    And Metacity? It is the MacOS of the new millennium. You can have it any way you like, so long as it's dumbed-down, grey and not customizable. OK, you can skin it, but it'll still be dumbed-down and not very configurable.

    Of course, some Gnome fanboi will mod this post down anyway so I'll just summarize here: Gnome Sucks (that's sucks with a capital S). :-p

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  115. Re:So? It still sucks. by domc · · Score: 1

    I don't know how anybody could ever say that KDE is cleaner than GNOME; it's simply not true. I try KDE every 6 months or so, to see if is usuable, but I always end up going back to something else.

    GNOME may not have as many features, but I like that. I would be using Xfce, but I like the level of integration the GNOME gives me.

  116. Two reasons I still use Gnome by jiawen · · Score: 1

    There are two reasons I still use Gnome (2.10 currently):

    • Themes are easy to handle. Installing a theme in KDE requires actual installation: ./configure, make, make install -- the whole mess. And it frequently doesn't work. In Gnome, it's true drag-and-drop.

      To then actually use a theme is also a pain in KDE. There are a million different places to change all the different things, and it's quite difficult to find what I actually want to change.

      It's also far, far easier to edit themes myself in Gnome. I just go into the file, find the appropriate image file and change it in GIMP or whatever. In KDE, this is again a huge pain. I don't want to have to recompile a theme in order to change the scroll bar colors!

    • Non-English fonts are handled far better in Gnome. I run Linux in Traditional Chinese, so this is quite important to me. No matter which font settings I try in KDE, some characters show up as little black circles. This means I can't even read all my menu selections. In Gnome, they all show up quite nicely.

      There may be a place to change these fonts in KDE, but I've never seen it, and so I'm stuck with poor Chinese handling. This problem also seems to spill over into the Mandriva menus, where some titles are completely illegible, but at least I don't have to deal with those all the time.

  117. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by nuzak · · Score: 1

    > Much better than the simple "move to next object whose name starts with the letter you've just pressed" in Windows Explorer.

    I use select-by-typing all the time in Windows Explorer, and it simply does not behave like this at all, at least in Windows XP. When I type the first several letters of a filename, it in fact selects that file. Only after a timeout has passed does it revert to treating the next key as the first letter. This seems like sensible behavior.

    I for one would like Nautilus to be able to actually narrow the displayed files as I type or select a pattern of files, perhaps based on a prefix key ... but since Explorer doesn't do it, I don't expect to see it in Gnome either. God forbid a preference is offered to change between behaviors (selecting vs narrowing), as that would give the user a choice.

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
  118. Re:Post censored by /. of Halvy..[OK my BAD..]... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Ok my partial mistake... things have changed recently, and I was thrown off.


    It USED to be until recently that you could access ALL post below your 'Threshhold' by simply entering the link provided.


    NOW everyone needs to 'study up' on /.'s new way of 'burrying' threads which are under a certain level.


    This is deceptive and WRONG.


    - People should not have to become experts in learning a web sites manner of 'hidding' reading material.


    - /. should also OBVIOUSLY announce when such major changes occur.


    - /. SHOULD be helping to get information out, REGARDLESS of how /. management may feel about certain members or their opinions...NOT trying to supress it as much as they can.


    After all, isn't that what they USED to pride themselves on?


    Regardless.. it does not appear /. is 'totally' censoring information...


    HOWEVER they are doing EVERYTHING in their power to bury members posts in an unscrupulous manner.. which walks the fine line of censorship.


    signed, Halvy :)

  119. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by arose · · Score: 1

    Did I ask what you did to circumvent the problem?

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  120. Please, the features. by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

    Please let discuss the features.

    I see some improovments and drawbacks, but not too much.

    Looking forward to:
    - Alt+3 shortcut for Deskbar (much needed)
    - Improved virtual desktop features (good enough already)
    - The new evolution
    - And totem.

    Dispointed by:
    - The new permissions change interface:
      This is GNOME using a BAAAD idea just to copycat apple. Although KDE had this layout since before OS X, i always prefered GNOME's permision grid, it was sooo much more intuitive *because* it provided all the information there and you could change it with a single click. Now it takes the whole screen to fit this huge dialog where the permissions are spread and is difficult to quickly guess (abd later change) what permission should the file have.

    - C# tainting core GNOME:
      Correct me if I'm wrong but, MS has yet to publicy declare that it will never use C# pattents to hurt free sofware. What's a compromised framework doing in the official GNOME distribution?

    With news of a MS guy getting into Mozilla, Mozilla guys gettion into MS offices, and C# getting into GNOME, the possibility that we are seeing an organized trojan operation is becoming more and more plausible.

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  121. Re:Almost sounds like KDE 3... MOD INSIGHTFUL by David+Gerard · · Score: 1
    I circumvented the problem with GNOME by entering sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop and now I'm much happier ;-)

    This is entirely personal preference, of course - many people hate KDE and prefer GNOME. But I find it easier to tolerate sKillions of irritatinK shiny rotatingK iKons (in SVG of course) than GNOME's attitude of "We know where you're going today. Stop trying to reach the straps."

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  122. Huh? by warrax_666 · · Score: 1
    My own pet peeve is Metacity's refusal to remember the size or positioning of windows. I know the developers claim it's the application's job to do this, but I don't agree. Seems obvious to me, but who am I to insist that a window manager's job is to manage windows?

    An X window manager does not have enough information to do this sensibly and reliably. Yes, you can do crude stuff like matching on window titles, but then what happens if you start multiple instances, or if windows have the same titles, or what if the app contains "embedded" windows (MDI style)? Hell, IIRC it's even impossible for a window manager to reliably determine if a window that has just popped up belongs to an application which has other open windows.

    --
    HAND.
  123. Parsing and C++ by warrax_666 · · Score: 1

    The difference between C# and C++ with respect to parsing is that in C++ you can generate the full parser code at compile time (see Boost.Spirit) and have that code be optimized by the compiler; in C# the best you can hope for is to generate parsing tables at runtime and using a small static parser kernel for actually interpreting those tables. That is, in C++ you can get static guarantees whereas you cannot in C#. Furthermore, performance is likely better if you generate parser code instead of generating tables and using a small kernel of code to traverse/interpret those tables. (Disclaimer: I'm not familiar enough with C# to know whether one could generate 'custom' parser code at runtime using reflection. However, that would definitely not be for the faint of heart.)

    That's not say C++ doesn't have problems: The template syntax is horrible, the standard library is... lacking if you "just want to get things done". However, the generic programming approach used by the STL is pure genius. Yes, it's verbose, but if you use iterators properly you can make all your code almost completely container-agnostic -- thus making tuning much easier. Unless you have _very_ tight constraints, Boost is also a must for any serious C++ project. In particular, shared_ptr, weak_ptr, function, bind() and boost::variant make C++ programming much more painless and safe. In my experience generic programming is also far superior to the OOP approach so blindly accepted by Java/C# users. And who knows, maybe we'll finally even get sane error messages for generic programs with C++0x ;).

    --
    HAND.
  124. Gnome Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that the only place you shall be finding Gnome is in the garden. It'll be a lot more useful too! And at least they're not so hideously ugly that you can't look even at them.

  125. Last Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last Post

  126. Re:So? It still sucks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was that man schizophrenic?