Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GNOME 2.16 Released

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the upgrade dept.

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."

80 of 473 comments (clear)

  1. 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 Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I sense a bad joke about to emerge...

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

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

    5. Re:Sourceforge? by creepynut · · Score: 3, Funny
      Bare feet do not smell.
      You obviously haven't met my feet.
    6. 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.

  2. 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 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 !
    3. 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
    4. 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?

    5. 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.

    6. 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.
    7. 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.

    8. 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
  3. 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 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.

    3. 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!
  4. GNOME logo by youknowmewell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nice logo :)

  5. 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 i3iz · · Score: 5, Funny

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

    2. 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?

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

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

  6. 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.

  7. 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!

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
  8. 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 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.

    2. 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.
    3. 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.

    4. 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.
    5. 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
    6. 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

    7. 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
    8. 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
    9. 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...
    10. 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.
  9. Damnit! by suso · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just emerging 2.14 now.

  10. 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?
  11. 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.

  12. 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!

  13. 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 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.

    2. 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.
    3. Re:The important part: Mono by benplaut · · Score: 5, Informative

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

    4. 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.

    5. 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
    6. 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...
  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. 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 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.

    2. 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...

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

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

  17. 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 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.
    2. 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.
  18. 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).

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

  21. 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
  22. 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.

    --
    Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
  23. Gnome! by SQLz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now with more KDE!

  24. 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.
  25. 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.

  26. 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
  27. 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!
  28. 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
  29. 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 !
  30. 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
  31. 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.) ;-)

  32. 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.

  33. 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.

  34. 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 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.

  35. 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.

  36. 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.