Slashdot Mirror
Shuttleworth's Take On GNOME 3.0, Coordination with Debian
suka writes "In a fresh interview with derStandard.at, Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth talks about GNOME 3.0 — its strengths, but also about what he thinks is missing. He also mentions ongoing talks for a common meta-release-cycle with Debian which could delay the next LTS."
The only things I really got out of reading TFA were "We have a release coming up" and "Files and folders confuse people". Oh, and "Jaunty was broken but it was Intel's fault and they fixed it." And "Kubuntu will have the same release schedule" which isn't really about Gnome.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
I'm not worried about X breakages, personally. I even have an Intel 945G and I can live with the problems its causing. What I can't live with is the extreme instability of Pulse Audio. It crashes my apps contstantly from broken pipes. OK, people should be checking their pipes. But Pulse Audio itself crashes very frequently (about every hour or so on my machine). Rhythmbox won't go for more than 10 minutes without either crashing or audio failing. This is incredibly bad for me.
I realize that it's probably due to older, underpowered hardware (3 year old cheap laptop), but this should not be happening. I've yanked Pulse Audio from my machine altogether now and it's a lot more stable. I was also getting lock ups in Firefox every hour or so. Now that I've dumped Pulse Audio, I've only had one lock up in the past 3 days (still can't figure that one out -- related to video drivers???).
So, I plead with Ubuntu developers: either fix Pulse Audio, or punt it. The extra features it has is *not* worth the massive pain that some people experience.
I only hope they will follow a different path than KDE team.
They rushed to release 4.0 and since then I'm still struggling to have all the features I used to have in KDE v3.5.
And, more important, I hope that Ubuntu people won't trash GNOME v2 from night to day like they did with KDE v3.5.
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
So, it finally happened! A major effort by a distro to fix one hundred really small but irritating bugs. Also known as polish. This is what Ubuntu needs, and to be fair has been quite good at. Just fixing more and more of the tiny annoyances is what creates a well-rounded desktop. On the other hand, they are introducing Gnome Shell, which while probably cool, will certainly introduce a couple of hundred new paper cuts!
https://launchpad.net/hundredpapercuts
The "where is my stuff?" problem is not trivial. My work desktop is an Ubuntu installation where I do my actual work with Windows XP running in Virtualbox to let me get to corporate legacy things (like my email). At home I have a Linux desktop main machine. I carry around a Linux netbook and an Android phone. There are a handful of servers lurking in datacentres around the world on which I have shell accounts and on which I have some of my 'stuff'. I have code hosted in various places. My stuff is diverse. It's photos, blog posts, documents, music, videos, administrivia, code, email etc. I have no idea just 'where' all of my stuff is.
I'm not a Ubuntu advocate (more of a Fedora/RHEL person really) but if the well documented problems with KDE 4 are anything to go by then including Gnome 3 in the next LTS release of Ubuntu would be IMHO a big mistake.
An LTS release deserves to be of the highest quality from Day 1. To me it would be madness to base an LTS release on anything Gnome 3.0.
IMHO an Ubuntu LTS release whould be the desktop equivalent to RHEL or SLED in terms of stability. If it is not then you have shot yourselves in the foot. If this means being conservative in package selection then so be it.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
Well, GTK+ is due for an overhaul. Fix the damn file picker. Get rid of all that excessive padding, maybe by making it themeable. Some consistency in menuitem dimensions would be nice.
Also, either give Metacity some features, at least the bare essentials, or switch to another window manager. That non-optional minimize effect is cringe worthy.
TFA:
Not sure if GNOME3 will make the next LTS
Interestingly, Shuttleworth didn't indicate in any way that Gnome 3 could have even a remote shot at getting into the LTS. Luckily, putting it in just after the release would be a suicide move.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
I cannot find any discussions that Shuttleworth would have had with the Debian release team on the release or project lists. I hope he's not just talking to himself or only with those people who are members of the Debian release team and on his payroll.
echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
I'm suprised Shuttleworth didn't mention Zeitgeist, which is a solution to the difficulty of manually managing files and folders and is, as I understand it, being considered for inclusion in GNOME 3. The basic idea is to group files (and other activities, like web bookmarks and email contents) automatically according to human-relevant criteria, like "edited last week" or "related to this document I'm writing." It's still very much a work in progress, but it looks like it could be pretty great.
Well... I for one look forward to Gnome 3.0 with just the same fondness that
I now look back to that spatial file management episode they had a while back.
Clearly, when these gentlemen of the Gnome Foundation advocate
sweeping user interface changes, they for sure know what the user wants.
And having all the support of Mark, they don't have to just restrain themselves to
what users want, they can actually afford to know better than them. Zooming out
of the desktop with an OpenGL effect every time you want to run an application
is just what the doctor ordered...
I just can't wait for Ubuntu to embrace it ASAP.
I admire spectacular failures.
Feeding the troll, I know, but Google Chrome is not using Gnome or KDE because GC is designed to be a minimum functionality netbook distro, not a fully functional desktop. It may *become* a fully functional desktop, if Google is able/willing to take development that far, but whether Google's sprawling managerial structure will be able to concentrate the resources on that one project given their entrenched resource allocation tradition of "spread wide, spread thin" is something I don't think will happen in the near future.
I hate printers.
To most people, hierarchies are confusing. They work for programmers and technical people (the people who visit /. obviously understand hierarchies, otherwise they would be confused by /.'s comment system), but most people don't get hierarchies. My parents store all of their files into a single folder. Most people do that. Humans look at their environment in terms of spatial and temporal aspects. Humans understand where things are in space, and when things are in time. I've written a letter yesterday. I've put the printout next to the phone. Those are things people get.
But they don't get hierarchies, because hierarchies don't exist in nature.
There's no need to be catty or insulting about this. You're not like everybody else, and the fact that other people have different strengths doesn't make them idiots.
Nice troll, but chromeOS is also ditching fluxbox! and i bet you can't justify your hatred of X either! I'll give you PulseAudio, expanding/improving alsa would have been a better call, but AFAIK neither you nor I are good enough to do the actual development of audiosubsystems, those that are got to make the call.
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
As far as I know Gnome 3.x, and GTK3.x that it should be built on, are complete vapourware. I don't know why Shuttleworth is being asked about them.
You login, which you don't actually have to do anymore because it was too complicated, and you're presented with a fullscreen dialog box that says:
"You are too fucking stupid to use this computer. You don't understand files and folders and things. Click OK to shutdown your computer. Your computer will shutdown in 28 seconds anyway, because you're probably too stupid to work the mouse. That's the thing underneath your hand. What? That's the thing attached to your arm. Ah, fuck it. 20 seconds."
That's pretty much the entire GNOME 3.0 experience. The dialog box has been in development for the last 18 months, but obviously there's still a lot of usability testing left to do, mostly by Redhat and Canonical "engineers". The OK button logic was originally written in C but they've redone that in C# running on Mono, and Miguel de Icaza is already calling the work "superb".
Meanwhile, the KDE people have been busy readying the next batch of widgets that you will never add to your exciting K desktop experience.
Future plans for GNOME involve reducing the 3.0 dialog box down to a single pixel, then translating the status of that pixel into the power LED on your computer. This will remove the need for a display, further simplying the desktop experience and reducing enterprise costs. KDE plans to turn its entire desktop into a widget of itself, allowing you to remove it entirely with a single right-click.
Yes, my friends: the future of the Linux desktop is no more fucking Linux desktop. What a relief.
you might enjoy this article (or perhaps you've already read it?): http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/wolfram-alpha-and-hubristic-user.html
I know I did.
I use that version on OS X, thanks to Fink project. While they don't promise any kind of 'final' version at this state, I can easily keep KDE 4 applications in my OS X Dock, using them instead of iTunes for example.
They are linked to actual OS X frameworks, down to Quicktime and very interestingly they use far less CPU and resources than regular OS X apps.
There are similar reports from Windows users who binary installed it and using Amarok 2 etc. right now. While on it, is there any reason why KDE 3.5 given up when KDE 4 installed? I keep using KDE 3.5 suite on OS X too. It doesn't conflict with anything at all including KDE 4.
I think what KDE 4 is and what a huge revolution it is will be understood in 1-2 years. For example when Nokia and other members of open source Symbian foundation starts using it in some form in their smart phones.
IT WILL ABSOLUTELY HAPPEN IN THE NEAR FUTURE
Sorry for yelling, but Chrome OS is a major strategic move originating from the highest executive ranks of the Googleplex. There is no way that it is going to go the way of your regular 20%-rule pet project.
It starts with calling design "art." Art is what you find in the Louvre, not the consistency of visual messaging on the desktop. Every once in a while they decide they're going to reinvent how desktops work. Well, we've all been dealing with their half baked reinventions for a long time. Things that mostly work but have strange bugs preventing you from doing essential stuff. Incomplete components, like the horrible default music players and photo viewers (you can't even view pictures by date). Companies like Apple and even Microsoft do a much better job of at least pushing out products that have all the essential features, and if they have some brilliant new idea it's there in full. I hate to say it, but these guys should stick to copying. Flatter away. Because sticking to good designs is a much better choice for the end user. If they could really get the basic ideas, they might even be able to take them farther sometimes. But I'm not holding my breath.
The RTS is supported 3 years on the desktop,so if they make the next RTS 10.10, it will mean that the orgs that are running RTS will have just 6 months to upgrade to next RTS before the previous is EOLed. I know most people don't really care about that, but for large deployments, to force that kind of change schedule is not really nice.
Wouldn't surprise me if it goes back to xerox alto.
That doesn't mean that it's ultimately helpful, but it's so entrenched it seems harder tho change it than to fix it.
Not necessarily related to the Ubuntu + Gnome topic, but in TFA, Shuttleworth makes a good point in noting that the developers hold the most sway in terms of release management. Also, developers aren't necessarily in touch with how their code is functional across all potential systems. Double-edged sword that I see quite often.
It starts with calling design "art." Art is what you find in the Louvre, not the consistency of visual messaging on the desktop. Every once in a while they decide they're going to reinvent how desktops work. Well, we've all been dealing with their half baked reinventions for a long time. Things that mostly work but have strange bugs preventing you from doing essential stuff. Incomplete components, like the horrible default music players and photo viewers (you can't even view pictures by date). Companies like Apple and even Microsoft do a much better job of at least pushing out products that have all the essential features, and if they have some brilliant new idea it's there in full. I hate to say it, but these guys should stick to copying. Religiously copy the best features and low level functioning of Windows and Mac OS, including the best ideas of Linux predecessors. Because sticking to good designs is a much better choice for the end user, and when your brilliant journal mode break down, nobody wants to go into a creaky half functioning file browser. If they could really get the basic ideas, they might even be able to take them farther sometimes. But I'm not holding my breath.
I prefer 'directory'. At least then it doesn't push a false analogy on an already confused mind
IS Directory really a good word though? A Directory could mean like a yellow pages, a dictionary, etc, its an entire system of managing things and the most appropriate use of the word directory really is -file system-, not an individual folder.
This is my sig.
If you actually went through, every little single thing the file dialog in Windows 7 does, it might actually take 18 months to replicate all of that functionality, especially if it was in C.
But be that as it may, if Gnome decides to go and give me a bunch of b.s. about metaphorical problems and then ultimately clone the Windows 7 dialog but with some twist to make it somehow different, then, honestly, it would be an improvement over what they have now.
This is my sig.
makes a good point in noting that the developers hold the most sway in terms of release management.
Obviously you've never written financial software.... deadline... uh, ship it!!! I saw one guy release something that he never even ran...
This is my sig.
MS-DOS has DIR command, not FOL. Can't blame the early DOS jockeys for this though, cause they just borrowed the convention from VMS.
At least this is one thing that MS, DEC and Unix can all agree on: "directory" is correct, and "folder" is dumb.
The classic "executive" did not worry about files & docs. He produced them: numbers, text, images, sound ... his secretary managed that data transparently from the execs POV. That's why she got paid. Should be the same with a computer lusr. He 'pays' the computer; he's the exec! It's the COMPUTERS job to manage where-stuff-goes and to manage how-to-retrieve it. Transparently.
May I repeat .. it's NEVER the lusrs fault when previous stored input cannot be accessed. It is ALWAYS the computers responsibility to know what/when/where/how previous input should be re-presented.
should be "even the most rudimentary computer concepts" and now I'm off to get more coffee
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Linus did.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Yay. So we get rid of one hegemonic monopoly (Microsoft) only to face another (Google).
I for one would like to tell our overlords who are tag-team-raping society to FUCK THE HELL OFF.
Yes, but the secretary has a measure of intelligence, a computer does not. She is able to adapt her methodology on-the-fly as the executive requires, a computer is not. That's why the secretary costs tens of thousands per year, and the computer costs only a thousand or so (plus electricity, Internet, etc). Until technology advances to a point where the computer is able to intuit the user's preferred methodology (instead of having a default and a number of possible alternatives buried in some option panel somewhere), we're going to have to learn to use a computer IT'S way. Which I don't think is such a bad thing. Just like a car, a modern computer is a very powerful tool, and should be used responsibly. And just like a car, that doesn't always pan out in real life, but that doesn't mean we should abandon an ethos of responsibility.
That seems correct to me.
Mark Shuttleworth has been wonderful for Linux, but he has not shown the kind of intense leadership necessary to get the job done. You can see that even in the interview. Somehow he has allowed an interview to be published that has numerous grammatical and typing mistakes.
Also, the interview doesn't provide the expected information that would give an impression of sufficient leadership. Quote: "We delivered a couple of interesting things in Ubuntu 9.04, some of them are controversial, like the notification piece and the messaging menu. But I think in principle it's going well."
Notice also the poor use of language. "Couple" means two and doesn't fit with "some".
From the inside, participating in KDE, GNOME, and X.org may seem like a lot of fascinating fun to developers and technology enthusiasts. Frankly, from the outside Linux desktop development seems like it's moving very slowly. Linux has been a 6-step process for a lot of people: 1) Want to install Linux. 2) Get involved in a lot of time-consuming, self- and other-defeating debate over KDE and GNOME. 3) Make a choice. 4) Install Linux and discover that you can't set the proper resolution for your monitor. 5) Spend a lot of time learning the reasons why. 6) Decide to wait until the Linux desktop is more mature.
Years of that has been very bad publicity for Linux as a desktop OS.
In my opinion, finding some way to work around the present Linux desktop self-defeat is in the best interest of Google.
Does anyone know if this is going to be optional, or is it completely replacing the current design?
As you didn't enter valid HTML and, more importantly, didn't verify with preview, I don't think this can be called a malfunction, at least not on HTML's part, sorry.
Anyone doubting that the Linux desktop discussion is still very primitive can read the many, many comments below. Here are some:
... let's be honest, there is no such things as productivity
when developing on GNOME. Quote: "The guys of KDE need to admit when an
idea was wrong and just drop the code."
GNOME 3.0 sneak preview (Score:5, Funny)
Gnome is hopeless with leaders like this. Quote: "Every once in a while they decide they're going to reinvent how desktops work. Well, we've all been dealing with their half baked reinventions for a long time. Things that mostly work but have strange bugs preventing you from doing essential stuff. Incomplete components, like the horrible default music players and photo viewers (you can't even view pictures by date)."
Until the main Ubununtu drops gnome and its ms fan boi miguel to the curb I will continue to look for and use alternatives that are KDE based, and no thats not the disaster that is kubunutu... I use Linux Mint KDE Version Elyssa (they've since drank the KDE4 koolaid, so I am looking for a replacement).
Also you need to drop the mono/moonlight crap from the distro too.
1311393600 - Back to Black
I think I get your point about hierarchies being a human cognitive construct, but a branch is a _part_ of a tree...?
I would argue a slightly different angle. I think most folks do actually "get" the idea of hierarchies; I think the problem is more what you describe later in the paragraph: people are not sure how to properly categorize things ... there's no naturally correct way of categorizing files. There's no obvious taxonomy. And, for that matter, which hierarchy makes more sense depends on the context, further complicating the issue.
This is where systems closer to what we see with iTunes come to the fore -- you get different hierarchies as different contexts, all at the click of a button: by year, by album, by artist, alphabetically, what have you. Part of the difficulty in expanding this to be usable for a full filesystem, rather than just for media files, is that doing so expands the number of relevant contexts -- who created the file, who modified the file, versions, perms, file type, usage frequency, yada yada.
I agree that tagging is infinitely easier -- but I would also argue that it doesn't remove the idea of hierarchies, but rather that it allows for more specific and flexible hierarchies -- which is still a good thing.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Will I be able to stop having to explain to my users what a 'hit-box' is when their drag-and-drop attempts result in two icons piled on top of each-other on the desktop?
>> KDE plans to turn its entire desktop into a widget of itself
They already did. In KDE4.
Much of the problem is that the whole thing is BS. Microsoft, and Apple, and everyone except Commodore Amiga messed it up. On an Amiga, your desktop was the root of your file system. If you created a directory it showed up on your 'desktop'. If you opened a file browser the file was exactly where you put it! People are confused because their desktop makes no sense. If the analogy worked, people would not be confused. If a user opened a file browser and found the file right where they put it, there would be no confusion. Sadly ... and as an old school guy, this makes me cringe .. most of the world would have all kinds of garbage in their 'root' , but at least the analogy would work and would not be complete nonsense.
My father is pretty good with computers, but can never find anything because his desktop is in lost a bunch of directories south of 'C:\Documents and Settings'. As a technical guy, I would NEVER think to look for my desktop in a place called 'Documents and Settings'! So naturally my father has problems wrapping his brain around a concept that is completely arbitrary.
There are other problems with X that I think they wanted to solve as well. I read a list of these somewhere but I can't remember what they were. I do know that JavaFX has been delayed on Linux and Solaris for the same reasons.
Well, KDE turned into a clusterfuck with KDE 4. Even using 4.3 I want to kill somebody with a hammer.
GNOME's not quite to "cluster-fuck" level yet. Give it another major release or two, when Mono infects the whole thing, thanks to everybody's favorite Microsoft shill Miguel de Icaza, THEN it'll be a clusterfuck.
I prefer Xfce, but I haven't quite seen it get to "yay" level. Lxde still needs a lot of work, and I'm still not sure how far a DE can go using BlackBox for a WM.
I'll grant Pulse Audio. I've seen scant few systems that Pulse Audio runs on that it doesn't break sound on.