Slashdot Mirror


Review of GNOME 2.26 and GTK+ 2.16

devg writes "The GNOME development community recently announced the official release GNOME 2.26, the latest version of the open source desktop environment for Linux. It adds the Brasero disc burning software, UPnP support in the Totem media player, and basic support for video chat in the Empathy instant messaging client. GNOME 2.26 will be shipped in upcoming Linux distributions, including Fedora 11 and Ubuntu 9.04. Some early reviews show that it is an incremental improvement with some good additions. GNOME 2.26 is accompanied by the release of GTK+ 2.16, a new version of the widget toolkit that is used to build the desktop environment. Ars Technica has published a detailed programming tutorial with code examples that demonstrate how developers can use the new features of GTK+ 2.16 in their own applications. Users can test GNOME 2.26 by downloading one of the official Foresight-based VM or ISO images via BitTorrent."

82 of 140 comments (clear)

  1. Exchange support? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the changelog:

    Second is support for Microsoft Exchange's MAPI protocol. This is the protocol that Microsoft Outlook uses to communicate with Exchange. Previously, Evolution only supported Exchange's SOAP protocol, which is not available on all Exchange servers. This support significantly improves Evolution's integration with Exchange servers.

    That sounds like a big deal. Anyone knows how well it actually works in practice?

    1. Re:Exchange support? by duguk · · Score: 1

      <snip>... Microsoft Outlook ...<snip>

      <snip>... Anyone knows how well it actually works in practice?

      I'll guess not very well? :o)

    2. Re:Exchange support? by romi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not well at all.

      The official 2.26.0 "release" of evolution-mapi had a small bug whereby it would crash immediately upon trying to connect to anything.

      2.26.0.1 fixes one of the various issues contributing to that, but there are other changes needed in other libraries and Ubuntu has yet to pick those changes up.

      It's quite amusing to see this trumpeted everywhere though given that anyone who actually tries to use it is in for a world of hurt.

    3. Re:Exchange support? by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      I think you are criticising the wrong component. Don't blame Outlook, blame MAPI! It's one of the most stupid, bonedead APIs I've ever seen. The underlying protocol apparently consists of a lot of proprietary binary blobs that the OpenExchange guys have had to capture over the wire and disassemble. Hardly a stable or neat mail protocol if you ask me.

      Also, people think that MAPI is inherently secure, which it isn't. I can't tell you the number of clients I've seen who've shut down POP3 or IMAP services on their Exchange server and have instead required MAPI because it is a "secure protocol", or it meets "security standards". And before anyone pings me on POP3 being insecure - yes, it's insecure by default but you can use some form secure authentication and run it over SSL or TLS as the transport mechanism.

      OK, rant over.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  2. Re:Wait... by erikina · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're nice. Especially as someone who use KDE, it allows me to easily see what's happening in that part of the world.

  3. Re:Wait... by gbarules2999 · · Score: 1

    There's not a whole lot to critically analyze here - I've been using Ubuntu 9.04 Alpha and haven't really noticed any major changes, and that's the entire point (Though the Exchange stuff is nice, I must admit, just not for me). Sure, you can list the features, I suppose, but I don't see how anyone's going to come up with a conclusion that's any different than what the summary stated.

  4. awesome bar by jeffstar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    the gnome file manager also has an awesome bar like firefox now!

    1. Re:awesome bar by RepugnantJohn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What exactly is wrong with the awesomebar? I'm a safari/webkit/chrome user, but I use Firefox to check website designs, and the bar doesn't seem that much different than the one in in Firefox 2.

    2. Re:awesome bar by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I don't want suggestions and search results in my address bar.

      It's there for me to type an address in to go to. For searching, there is a search bar, or even various search-focused websites.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:awesome bar by compro01 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You likely wouldn't notice it unless you use it as your fulltime browser. It searches the history and displays results, but in a more indepth manner (searches page titles AND urls and doesn't just search from the front) than a "normal" address bar. It also sorts said results "smartly" based on usage. (lots of people hate it for this reason).

      It really has a love-it-or-hate-it quality. I personally liked it once I got used to it (and vice versa).

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    4. Re:awesome bar by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Hrm, I must have confused myself or something.

      Pardon.

      But I still hate it. There's a place for browsing history to go, which is (shocking!) called "History".

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    5. Re:awesome bar by jeffstar · · Score: 1

      I don't mind it either. I don't understand why some hate on it so much. Maybe they don't like their browsing history to be so apparent.

    6. Re:awesome bar by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Good thing there aren't suggestions or search results in it, only browsing history...

      And bookmarks.

    7. Re:awesome bar by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      It also sorts said results "smartly" based on usage.

      This feature allows me to circumvent /.'s new system for reaching one's comment history. It's the first on the list for a typed 'c', although occasionally it will forget and I need to go to the page manually again.

    8. Re:awesome bar by DavoMan · · Score: 1

      And your old socks from 3 weeks ago.

      --
      Whats the harm in yelling 'Computer, end program!'? You could be living in Star Trek! Go on.. give it a try.
    9. Re:awesome bar by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Google indexed those?

    10. Re:awesome bar by DavoMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And that pron that all your friends find when using your computer.

      --
      Whats the harm in yelling 'Computer, end program!'? You could be living in Star Trek! Go on.. give it a try.
    11. Re:awesome bar by chammy · · Score: 1

      Awesomebar absolutely chugs on my linux box. It will almost lock up the browser while it loads junk out of the database. I'm on a 3ghz cpu w/ 4 gigs of ram and I think that it's unacceptable. I'm using Opera in linux atm just so I dont have to mess with it.

    12. Re:awesome bar by beleriand · · Score: 1

      I hate it as well. The main reason is that it is slow. When i type in that bar i wan't the choices displayed immediately, not with delay while that stupid bar does a internet search based on what i am typing.

      Fortunately there is still a way out with ff:

      Install the oldbar Extension (does away with the !awesome bar and gives back the ff 2 bar)
      Change these prefs from their defaults to:
      accessibility.typeaheadfind.flashBar 0
      browser.urlbar.matchOnlyTyped true

      But thanks for the tip with seamonkey, will have a look that too.

    13. Re:awesome bar by ciderVisor · · Score: 1

      That's f***ed up. SRSLY. First multiple tabs and now an Awesome Bar in the file manager ? Sounds like a solution looking for a problem, if you ask me.

      --
      Squirrel!
    14. Re:awesome bar by Coryoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the gnome file manager also has an awesome bar like firefox now!

      Since this was modded Interesting/Informative instead of funny, let's be clear: the GNOME web browser (Epiphany) now has an "awesome bar" like firefox -- which isn't a huge change since the old version of the epiphany address bar searched bookmarks etc., mostly it just means more advanced history searches. The GNOME file manager (Nautilus) does not have an "awesome bar".

    15. Re:awesome bar by KeyserDK · · Score: 1

      the gnome file manager also has an awesome bar like firefox now!

      That's wrong correct. It's epiphany - the gnome browser.

      --
      still reading?
    16. Re:awesome bar by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Then install the "oldbar" addon.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    17. Re:awesome bar by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Private browsing mode.
      Or you can clear history from the last hour/2 hours/4 hours/day

    18. Re:awesome bar by Simetrical · · Score: 1

      Awesomebar absolutely chugs on my linux box. It will almost lock up the browser while it loads junk out of the database. I'm on a 3ghz cpu w/ 4 gigs of ram and I think that it's unacceptable. I'm using Opera in linux atm just so I dont have to mess with it.

      I've heard this is due to problems with poor fsync() implementation on ext3. It will probably work better in Firefox 3.5, or ext4, or ext3 with data=writeback (but don't quote me on any of that).

      --
      MediaWiki developer, Total War Center sysadmin
    19. Re:awesome bar by compro01 · · Score: 1

      No, as in it got used to me. Like any smart system, it requires a bit of training time.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    20. Re:awesome bar by oji-sama · · Score: 1

      I'm using Firefox 3.1 beta 3, and I have a feeling that I'm no longer annoyed about the slowness. I'm pretty sure it's because this one is faster and not because I'm used to it...

      --
      It is what it is.
  5. Just not interested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I left gnome when they removed all the options from the screen-savers because they decided that configuring the screen-savers was to complicated for users. Surely not all gnome users are retards!

    1. Re:Just not interested by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having used both KDE and GNOME (along with Xfce and fvwm-crystal) I don't really feel like GNOME is lacking in customization options. While it obviously has less than KDE does, it doesn't feel like it, and everything I felt like customizing either had a pre-made theme or I could do it with the GUI. People always seem to criticize GNOME on its customization, but I don't feel like it is any less configurable than KDE, Xfce, fvwm and even Windows. What features did the old screen saver menu have that the new one does not? Because having just taken a look on it (Using Ubuntu 8.10) I can't find an option that isn't there that I would use.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Just not interested by MrEricSir · · Score: 1

      You could also just turn off your monitor and quit wasting power with bouncing cows.

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    3. Re:Just not interested by X0563511 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wrong.

      That was done because the old way is a security risk.

      http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=316654

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    4. Re:Just not interested by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I don't say I agree with it, but clearly the parent has no idea what he/she/it is talking about.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    5. Re:Just not interested by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      What features did the old screen saver menu have that the new one does not? Because having just taken a look on it (Using Ubuntu 8.10) I can't find an option that isn't there that I would use.

      Here's one that annoys me a bit: if you select the image gallery screensaver, it was possible before to specify which image directories to use. Now, you can't; it uses the F-Spot gallery and nothing else. I don't even have F-Spot installed, as it cannot handle large collections of images (too big to fit on any single volume). Also, I would prefer the screensaver to access only a small subset of my images, not the entire image collection (which includes some naughty stuff). As I said, it's a minor annoyance for me, but it is an annoyance.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    6. Re:Just not interested by jejones · · Score: 1

      Same here (KDE 4 is getting there, and I'm immensely impressed by the look of MoonOS using E17), but you don't have it quite right. Strangely enough, while the "it should just work" is part of the rationalization, the major reason given is that you, the user, can't be trusted.

      The justification for taking essentially all customization away from the user is that if you're given that ability, you're going to put obscene or insulting messages in GLText, or make the screensaver display your pr0n collection.

      To quote the FAQ: "If they didn't want someone to put 'The CEO is a bastard' in rotating, 3D text on a publicly available computer the only option was to remove it form [sic] the system."

      I look forward to a future GNOME release in which the user cannot adjust the volume because someone could turn it all the way up in a library, or that denies you the ability to set the wallpaper lest you put up something offensive.

      If anyone other than the developer of gnome-screensaver had a say in this high-handed, arrogant decision, which, like DRM, considers the user the enemy, I'm not aware of it.

    7. Re:Just not interested by jejones · · Score: 1

      Wrong, with the sole exception of those xscreensaver hacks that display the window and hence could display sensitive information.

      The FAQ gives the developer's justification for denying the user all configurability. It's worth a look.

    8. Re:Just not interested by beleriand · · Score: 1

      Ok i read that whole bug thread, and the only "security risk" i could see was the following:

      On a public computer someone could change the screensaver settings to display offensive text. "the CEO is a bastard" O noes!! Can't have that.

      It seems config functionality wasn't added to gnome-screensaver for years, no idea if it's in by now. My opinion of gnome project just went down a notch.

    9. Re:Just not interested by camcorder · · Score: 1

      If you don't have F-Spot installed, then use "Pictures folder" theme. That would show slideshow of your xdg standard Pictures folder. And if you're power user enough, you can easily change the /usr/share/application/screensavers/personal-slideshow.desktop file and add --location=/your/picture/folder to 'Exec' line. You can even set background-color or sort-images options. If you're not poweruser, then your Pictures folder would be more than fine.

    10. Re:Just not interested by KeyserDK · · Score: 1

      That's two diffent screensavers.

      The f-spot one shows the pictures markes as favorites. Which is a bit limited :/.

      The pictures one shows all pictures from whatever XDG_PICTURES_DIR is set to.
      Default is XDG_PICTURES_DIR="$HOME/Pictures".

      Also, f-spot does have a 'hidden' tag that hides any pictures marked as such unless you explicitly choose them.

      --
      still reading?
    11. Re:Just not interested by jejones · · Score: 1

      It's not in now, never was. As the FAQ says--it was thought to be a bug. (Not only is the user the enemy, the POV is that any configurable screensaver is by definition broken.)

  6. New Audio - Major Win by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Informative

    Per application volume control is a MAJOR feature. Listening to music, while not having web pages blast out your ear drums is a major win. This is my favorite feature of Vista, and I am happy to see it integrated into Gnome.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    1. Re:New Audio - Major Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Nice feature in theory, but so far like all the other features of the Pulseaudio sound server, it's a bitch to get working right. Pulse eats up a shitload of CPU cycles, and I've not yet been able to configure it to eliminate the ridiculous latency and the ever present snap crackle pop during playback and recording. Whoever had the audacity (pun intended) to describe this software as "glitch free" with the requisite "Perfect Setup" should be subjected to a nut punch. Sound support in linux has always been problematic, but the state of Pulseaudio is just huge regression in that area.

    2. Re:New Audio - Major Win by pembo13 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Windows has this. It's a cool feature. But this one is not provided by Gnome as far as I know, but by PulseAudio, correct me if I am wrong.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    3. Re:New Audio - Major Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a cool feature. But this one is not provided by Gnome as far as I know, but by PulseAudio, correct me if I am wrong.

      It's a PulseAudio feature, but this latest version of GNOME integrates support for it. So, you can set the volumes using the standard GNOME volume control applet.

    4. Re:New Audio - Major Win by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Section 2.5 of the release notes implies controlling such a thing is easy in the new sound prefs.

      See Figure 4.

      Allegedly KDE 4 can do this too, but I have searched and searched, but the handbook is for KDE 3 still. Googling for it simply turns up press releases bragging that it can be done by application, or application group.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    5. Re:New Audio - Major Win by X0563511 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Pulse only eats up a 'shitload' of CPU if you have it set up to resample (hint... use your card's native rate and don't resample)... especially if you use a CPU intensive resample algorithm.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:New Audio - Major Win by chammy · · Score: 1

      Also, at least in Pulse you don't have to restart the application to reassign an output like in some other operating system out there.

    7. Re:New Audio - Major Win by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      There was a time when you were rightly called an idiot if your web page automatically started playing sounds when loaded. That campaign was so effective that it drove the web page sound idiots underground.

      So now we have a generation of people who aren't even aware that putting sound on their pages makes them idiots and some of them have weaseled their way into professional web developer jobs. I ran into one of them when I made a hotel reservation recently. Idiot.

      Per application volume is exactly what is needed for people like this.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    8. Re:New Audio - Major Win by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Pulse only eats up a 'shitload' of CPU if you have it set up to resample (hint... use your card's native rate and don't resample)... especially if you use a CPU intensive resample algorithm.

      If only this was true. Puzzle Pirates will cause Pulseaudio to eat 50% CPU (more than the game itself!) even though the sample rate of the card and of Puzzle Pirates are the same and there are no other sounds playing. Also, just for kicks, the resampling algorithm is set to trivial. This happens on two different computers.

      I guess it's nice to have found something more wasteful of resources than Java. I just didn't expect it to be a sound server.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    9. Re:New Audio - Major Win by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Interesting, because I can have 5 different applications outputting to my puselaudio server and I barely see a 2% usage from that.

      What kind of card do you have? I know mine has hardware mixing etc.

      (SB Live Audigy 2 ZS... last of the Audigy line with hardware DSP, and the first that dropped that crappy AC97 for I2C stuff. The sweet spot in the line.)

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    10. Re:New Audio - Major Win by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Random onboard sound. One is a notebook, the other a Shuttle. Other applications don't seem to cause the problem, but then I hardly need the sound in other applications.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  7. Re:Wait... by lordtoran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And I'm anticipating similar functionality appearing in Kontact really soon... this sort of friendly competition makes Open Source progress so fast.

    --
    Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat /boot/vmlinuz > /dev/dsp
  8. Re:Why brasero? by MrHanky · · Score: 1

    Porting K3b to KDE 4.x is difficult enough, apparently. They even had to modify Qt. It's a very nice app, though; fast, reliable, no configuration needed, and with a good GUI.

  9. different wallpaper on different desktops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can I put a different wallpaper on different desktops yet? That's the main feature I miss from KDE when I use Gnome (I tend to have different versions of the same code open on different desktops, so a visual queue as to which one I'm looking at really helps).

    1. Re:different wallpaper on different desktops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You mean cue.

    2. Re:different wallpaper on different desktops by InfiniteLoopCounter · · Score: 1

      Can I put a different wallpaper on different desktops yet? That's the main feature I miss from KDE when I use Gnome (I tend to have different versions of the same code open on different desktops, so a visual queue as to which one I'm looking at really helps).

      What I've done (just yesterday) is concatenate 2 pictures together using GIMP. To do this I doubled the horizontal canvas size, offset the 1st picture to the right and pasted in the picture on the left. Takes about half a minute, although I do see why it would be better to have it done properly.

      As a related aside -- shouldn't GNOME support transparent backgrounds by now for wallpaper with icons, so that other programs can make use of the background as well?

    3. Re:different wallpaper on different desktops by InfiniteLoopCounter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Can I put a different wallpaper on different desktops yet? That's the main feature I miss from KDE when I use Gnome (I tend to have different versions of the same code open on different desktops, so a visual queue as to which one I'm looking at really helps).

      What I've done (just yesterday) is concatenate 2 pictures together using GIMP. To do this I doubled the horizontal canvas size, offset the 1st picture to the right and pasted in the picture on the left. Takes about half a minute, although I do see why it would be better to have it done properly.

      As a related aside -- shouldn't GNOME support transparent backgrounds by now for wallpaper with icons, so that other programs can make use of the background as well?

      I'll try not to make a habit of replying to my own posts, but I was talking about a multi-monitor setup whilst the GP was probably refering to virtual desktops.

      Compiz's wallpaper plugin can put different wallpapers on different virtual desktops, but currently needs nautilus to not draw the background. However, this means that you won't have any icons on the desktop! All that need be done by GNOME developers (specifically nautilus/eel people) is add an alpha channel to the background wallpaper pixmap -- which they may one day do.

    4. Re:different wallpaper on different desktops by coaxial · · Score: 1

      I have a program that does that. I haven't used it in years since I now have a mac, but it used to work. gtk and imlib.

      I don't remember what the diff is between the versions, so here they both are.

      http://jonathankorensucks.com/imlibsetroot-10.tar.gz
      http://jonathankorensucks.com/imlibsetroot-11.tar.gz

    5. Re:different wallpaper on different desktops by mugenjou · · Score: 1

      I'll try not to make a habit of replying to my own posts, but I was talking about a multi-monitor setup whilst the GP was probably refering to virtual desktops.

      Compiz's wallpaper plugin can put different wallpapers on different virtual desktops, but currently needs nautilus to not draw the background. However, this means that you won't have any icons on the desktop! All that need be done by GNOME developers (specifically nautilus/eel people) is add an alpha channel to the background wallpaper pixmap -- which they may one day do.

      once, for the nautilus/eel version as used by ubuntu gutsy i think, there was a not-really-big patch for this(actually 2, for both packages). however in ubuntu hardy that one did not apply anymore..
      I think it *might* have caused a graphical redraw glitch with the screen-outgraying for gksudo and co, but I wonder could there any other reason for not including this for over a year? I want my desktop icons back...

      --
      DualBrain - Level Up Your Brain! - now available on your iPhone!
  10. sound support not always problematic in Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Things went downhill the moment the first sound server became common. The first popular one was "esd" or "esound", the Enlightenment Sound Daemon.

    With that came sound libraries by the dozen, because sound was no longer simple for app programmers. This in turn was an enabler for the evils of ALSA, which is totally unusable without the ALSA library. As the years went by, everybody and their dog wrote a sound server. We got sound servers feeding into sound servers. You could even connect them to each other in a loop, something easy to do with all the confusing config problems. We lost the "Just Works" feature long ago.

    And for what? I certainly don't want sounds from different apps mixed into an ear-assaulting mess. I want one thing at a time. I'm totally fine with having one thing monopolize the hardware, with my audio stream unmolested by mixers of dubious quality and high latency. If you want to be fancy, a stack-based design that plays the most recent app (going back to the previous one when the recent one finishes) would be kind of nice. That assumes I want stuff interrupted, which is a big maybe.

    1. Re:sound support not always problematic in Linux by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      And for what? I certainly don't want sounds from different apps mixed into an ear-assaulting mess. I want one thing at a time.

      I don't. Most apps assume they can just open() the sound device, but actually that doesn't work. You might have a music player running in the background, and then start up some VOIP software. Or have the music player running while your messenger program needs to play a sound when you receive a message or something.

      This is appropriate, modern usage.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    2. Re:sound support not always problematic in Linux by pizzach · · Score: 1
      I think the modern poster mostly lamenting a haphazard implementation for a feature he wasn't even sure he wanted in the first place.
      • Alsa mixer has dmix which needlessly duplicates the functionality that is is esound and pulseaudio.
      • Alsa has become bloated. If pulseaudio actually takes off, Alsa should most likely be gutted back to being ultra simple and actually be reworked to be linux style again. (devices are a simple file)
      • Many people will be just using pulseaudio as an esound replacement in programs that don't support the new APIs which makes he mental jumble of what is doing what more complicated.
      • I am sure there is a fear that pulseaudio will be the buggy zombie mess that esound ended up being. Pulseaudio was a buggy mess itself for a long long time (when it was polypaudio).
      • I'm sure there are still a fair enough people who don't care about audio settings per app because most important apps include their own volume bar. It's not totally dissimilar to the argument whether an IME/keyboard layout settings should be global to all windows/applications ore just restricted to to the current window. Mac OS X has flip-flopped on that one but has a preference.

      In conclusion: It would be nice if every part of the chain wasn't trying to duplicate the same functionality complicating an already convoluted pipeline. One zombie daemon is better than two.

      --
      Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    3. Re:sound support not always problematic in Linux by moonbender · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are still a fair enough people who don't care about audio settings per app because most important apps include their own volume bar.

      That's true enough, a good solution would be for current applications to simply control the PA per-app setting. Future apps wouldn't need to spend time on developing an internal volume setting -- unless they intend to work with other sound servers, of course. I still want a widget within the app to control the sound level, though, using the PA per-app volume control to adjust volume in Smplayer is really awkward.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    4. Re:sound support not always problematic in Linux by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, on Windows, I'm playing World of Warcraft, using VOIP (with fellow WOW players), "watching" a movie, and receiving/sending IMs (with associated sound effects) all at the same time. Vista lets me control the relative volume of every program easily, and it's certainly not a "ear-assaulting mess." (Well, as long as you turn off the music in WOW.)

      I don't know what era of computing you come from, but the situation described above is perfectly normal and expected in today's world. And it will be moreso in the near future as TVs move online.

      I think you're just being grumpy.

    5. Re:sound support not always problematic in Linux by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I don't. Most apps assume they can just open() the sound device, but actually that doesn't work. You might have a music player running in the background, and then start up some VOIP software

      Which was fine when you had a decent sound card with a sound mixer in hardware. Then sound card manufacturers figured out they could save a few cents (literally, that's how much these mixers cost) by not including them and forcing the user to rely on a "sound server" in userspace or in the sound driver. It's one reason why I never bothered with the shoddy-quality on-board integrated sound in motherboards.

    6. Re:sound support not always problematic in Linux by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      It's one reason why I never bothered with the shoddy-quality on-board integrated sound in motherboards.

      Yeah, I can see where you're going. Also, try to listen to soft music and enjoy the noise that other stuff on the motherboard creates. But with 50% of sales consisting of laptops or similar, on-board is the way we're going :-/

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  11. Cheese by LingNoi · · Score: 1

    I find using cheese annoying because when you record a video it's REALLY compressed and looks crap. It also saves it as OGG which makes sending videos a pain to the uncoverted.

    Oh and as usual no obvious way to change the format or quality.

    The way it is now I don't see how Cheese would be usable to someone who isn't computer savy and knows how to change the video format so those on windows can watch it. I'm not saying you can't watch OGGs on windows just that it doesn't come default so to the laymen it doesn't work.

  12. Re:Why brasero? by X0563511 · · Score: 1

    Why not just have libqt4 laying around and use K3b as is?

    It's all the other KDE nonsense and arts that it wants, that is the issue.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  13. Re:Why brasero? by TheDreadedGMan · · Score: 1

    yep my thoughts exactly, I've tried to use Brasero to burn data discs and after arranging and moving files around a bit it almost always crashed on me... kinda like using an old version of Nero... although the nero drag-and-drop-into-random-folder bug is not there there are enough unique bugs that I'm unimpressed... I'll have to try the latest version and see if it's any better...

  14. Could some elaborate on the multimon fix? by melted · · Score: 2, Informative

    I had to edit config files to get my laptop to recognize and bring up the second screen after docking. Editing config files should not be required for one of the core mobility scenarios.

    Does this release fix the issue? I.e. if I just connect the monitor, will it get recognized automatically?

  15. Re:Can someone tell me why Gnome has such huge ico by Mprx · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can disable the labels from the "Interface" tab of the "Appearance Preferences".

  16. Not Citadel!!! :( by Sp4c3+C4d3t · · Score: 1

    Citadel is obviously a modified BBS program. I tried it on a company server, and it just wouldn't work out. Configuring it is a pain in the ass, and nothing really makes sense. It doesn't integrate well with OpenLDAP either. I suggest using SOGo with postfix and dovecot. Makes a very nice Exchange replacement.

    --
    Happy New Year, it's 1984!
  17. Re:Wait... by Yamamato · · Score: 1

    You expected a minor version change to have revolutionary changes?

  18. Re:Where'd he come from? by DavoMan · · Score: 1

    This is the best off-topic thread I've seen all week.

    --
    Whats the harm in yelling 'Computer, end program!'? You could be living in Star Trek! Go on.. give it a try.
  19. Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report by DavoMan · · Score: 1

    I don't get it. What the hell does this thread have to do with me clipping my toe nails on a speedboat while an old lady sits behind me listening to Megadeth?

    --
    Whats the harm in yelling 'Computer, end program!'? You could be living in Star Trek! Go on.. give it a try.
  20. Re:Huh? by DavoMan · · Score: 1

    Oh NOES! Quick MPAA save us from teh bad peeple.

    --
    Whats the harm in yelling 'Computer, end program!'? You could be living in Star Trek! Go on.. give it a try.
  21. Re:Why brasero? by Too+Much+Noise · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you had read T linked FA - fat chance on /., but still - or even if you knew a thing or two about Qt, it would have saved you from making a lame comment.

    First: Qt is not just a widget library. It's a full framework that goes well beyond putting things on screens.

    Second: What he did modify had nothing to do with widgets. K3b used a KProcess class that employed piping of I/O. In KDE4, that wraps QProcess, which is too high-level for the kind of data-passing throughput required by dvd burning, so he had the class re-written. Yes, the article title is lame (as is its rehashing by the GP post) - forking a class is nothing nearly like forking a framework - but its absurdity should have triggered curiosity instead of look-at-me-I'm-smart comments missing the point.

  22. Re:File Dialog by KeyserDK · · Score: 1

    It sucks a bit yes..

    'Just' change your workflow.

    Find the file in nautilus and drag it wherever you need the file. Often it's faster, sometimes it isn't. But it's a bug if it doesn't work.

    Not the best solution - but try do it if you can.
    Me? My brain is still stuck going for the filepicker first.

    --
    still reading?
  23. Re:Wait... by gbarules2999 · · Score: 1

    No. I didn't. Read my comment again.

  24. Did they fix session management? by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

    My biggest question: Did they fix session management? On my Ubuntu 8.10 box, sessions and session saving is completely hosed. I have been eagerly awaiting a fix for this severe regression.

    -l

    --
    Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
  25. Re:Wait... by danieltdp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Friendly!? Haven't you seen any KDE-gnome flame war? Ok, ok, just kidding. It's lively discussion, but I guess it could be tagged as friendly

    --
    -- dnl
  26. Not exactly. by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    (Not only is the user the enemy, the POV is that any configurable screensaver is by definition broken.)

    Not exactly. The idea is that screensavers which require configuration are broken, which doesn't really relate to the problem in question.

    gnome-screensaver doesn't operate on hacks like xscreensaver does; it operates on "themes", which are a hack combined with a set of configuration options. Why there's no options to duplicate a theme and edit its options, now that is confusing. I think that's what the developer wanted someone to write for him.

    He sucked at explaining this, and succeeded only in pissing off the users. That part is the developer's fault.

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
  27. File a bug. by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    That can't possibly be expected behavior. File a bug with your distribution if it's not already known (see the following; I don't know what distro you're using).

    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pulseaudio/+bug/207135
    http://bugs.debian.org/505097
    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/474745
    http://pulseaudio.org/wiki/BrokenSoundDrivers

    The developers can't possibly have all of the relevant hardware; they need users who run into problems to help them out. Please try to help if you can; it might help the bug get fixed quicker.

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca