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."
Bring on the eye candy! There'll be heaps of complainers who say its unnecessary... but sorry, its necessary to bring linux gradually mainstream.
I think you mean "The same poeple who are apt-get to run linux"
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!)
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.
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.
Just emerging 2.14 now.
You know, I once heard a wise man tell a parable:
... are you religious or atheist?"
;)
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
"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?
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);
it's easy to install. Type Format C: at the command line. Then hit Y
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.
Built by Sony? That'd be a blast!
Circumcision is child abuse.
I sense a bad joke about to emerge...
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!
y .cgi?view=archive&id=0821200617613 at the bottom) and everybody knows the easyness of MacOSX.
5 .pdf).
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/surve
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_Nov200
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
Nothing says "sexy" like paragraph breaks.
Its not hard. No, no, that's not what I meant.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
Now with more KDE!
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.
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.
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!
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.)
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.
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?