Slashdot Mirror


GNOME 3 Released

Blacklaw writes "The GNOME Desktop team has sent its latest creation into the wild, officially launching GNOME 3.0 — the biggest redesign the project has enjoyed in around nine years. 'We've taken a pretty different approach in the GNOME 3 design that focuses on the desired experience and lets the interface design follow from that,' designer Jon McCann explained during the launch. 'With any luck you will feel more focused, aware, effective, capable, respected, delighted, and at ease.'"

59 of 353 comments (clear)

  1. Xfce by Moderator · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's always Xfce for those of you who still want a traditional, stable environment. Uses the same Gtk+ themes that Gnome used, and the panel is flexible enough to emulate Gnome 2.x, KDE/Windows, or CDE.

    I know, they turned their back on the *BSD's with Xfce 4.8, but it's still the only desktop environment worth using anymore.

    Oh yeah, and they plan on sticking with Gtk+ 2.2 for the next couple of years.

    --
    The World is Yours.
    1. Re:Xfce by arth1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm seriously considering switching from Gnome.
      The main reason is that I use remote logins and lots of VMware. Gnome shell won't even work unless you have hardware acceleration, so you can forget a consistent UI, and have to fall back to Gnome 2. So you now need both.
      Never mind getting the file manager to work remotely. I still remember with fondness how easy it was in IRIX to just enter "fm ." in a remote session, and get the file manager for whichever directory you were in. Try that with cutter or nautilus.

      So, yes, I expect I will be migrating. But not to Gnome 3. I'll migrate to something functional, and Gnome ain't it.

    2. Re:Xfce by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doesn't work as advertised. It's a horrible piece of shit, to bhe honest. Unless you have the exact same version of gnome on your local X server as the remote, and the remote also has a head, you get gdbus errors and lock-ups with gvfs, not to mention that the process never exits - you have to ctrl-c it or kill it from a shell.

      Is a file manager that works over a straight X tunnel to any X server too much to ask?

    3. Re:Xfce by Lennie · · Score: 2

      Xfce has Thunar, it is atleast a whole lot faster, haven't tried running it remotely though.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    4. Re:Xfce by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      Give it time. Gnome 2 was buggy as heck when it came out too, but things got fixed and compatibility increased as time went on.

      Its linux. Linux folks see software like wine. Give it some time, and you'll get something special, or just jump right in if you don't mind a few rough edges.

      I think Gnome 3 is welcome. Gnome 2 and XFCE are great environs, but they are showing their ages a little bit, and I think a lot of good UI useability thinkings gone into Gnome 3. But theres no rush. Give them time to get the wrinkles out, and for apps to start migrating to some of the new idioms, as well as improved support for remote logins (I wonder how this works with redhats spice) and you'll see a great environment.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    5. Re:Xfce by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh brother. Do you know how much flammage GNOME took for 2.0 from slashdot? Everything that was said in this thread was repeated 9 years ago with even more vitriol. Most of the people responding haven't tried it or even intending to try it. They still remember 9 years ago and are rehashing and recycling the same damn emotions back then. I can tell when people haven't even given GNOME 3 a test drive when they only complain about minimize and maximize. Give it a week with an open mind and see how it works. That's what GNOME asks.

  2. It works! by Locke2005 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I _do_ feel more focused, aware, effective, capable, respected, delighted, and at ease... of course, that might just be the Ritalin...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  3. Re:lol wut by slaxative · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    This is not the penguin you're looking for.
  4. Translated release notes by ReinoutS · · Score: 5, Informative

    Read the release notes in your favorite language here: http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.0/

  5. Press release URL broken by Greguar · · Score: 3, Informative
  6. Official site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's a link to the official GNOME 3 site.

    To me it looks more like a smartphone interface (nice for a tablet PC), but errrr.... quite a paradigm change for notebook and desktop users.

  7. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They ran out of features to remove from GNOME itself so they just took down the website.

  8. Sadly, I still find it ugly! by bogaboga · · Score: 2

    Now, before I get flamed for what I have written, let me remind everyone that what I have written reflects my personal opinion...and I am entitled to that.

    And remember...I am not alone. When will these GNOME folks produce a shell that is a beauty to look at by default?

    1. Re:Sadly, I still find it ugly! by intellitech · · Score: 2

      You're certainly not the only one, and your words were rather kind, considering some of the other criticism I've read.

      --
      vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
    2. Re:Sadly, I still find it ugly! by kat_skan · · Score: 2

      Hopefully sooner than later considering they took out even the ability to change the color scheme.

  9. Re:blah... by MrHanky · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually, the UI is fairly unique. Well, sure, it still uses windows, and it's entirely true that the window decorations are awful with far too wide grey title bars, but I'm pretty sure the menu system is different from any other desktop and tablet.

  10. How To Tweak GNOME 3 by supersloshy · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wrote a blog post all about how to tweak GNOME 3's hidden settings to be more like how you want it to be. You can read it at my blog, here. To summarize, I explain how to go back to GNOME 2, install extensions, change themes, and much more. However, I do want to note that I don't even use my own tips; GNOME 3 so far has been nearly perfect for me and I see very little need to change the settings I mention, or even use any extensions. In fact, I wrote another blog post detailing the 10 things that I love about GNOME 3 in a sort of mini-review.

    To summarize my latter post, I love how GNOME 3 "puts me in the driver's seat". There's no annoying, blinking lights, there's no "are you sure?" dialogs, the design is minimalist and takes up very little screen space, and it only gives me things like the window list, application list, and even notifications when I explicitly ask for them. If I don't want notifications I just mark myself as "busy" and check up on them at my leisure. If I want to switch a window I just tap the Windows key and click the one I want; fast and simple! Yes, that's "one more step", but it takes barely any more time than any persistent window list would take up (and less screen space, too). I love how easy and fast searching for applications and places in the Activities search bar is (you don't even need to click it; just start typing!), which gives it a GNOME Do vibe. Regardless of the search, I also love how easy it is to launch applications with the favorites list on the dashboard. GNOME 3 lets me add extensions as well just like any modern web browser so I can customize it or add features as I choose. No other desktop combines empowerment, distraction-free working, extensibility, and simplicity like GNOME 3 does and I have to say that it is the greatest desktop environment I've ever had the pleasure of working with so far. Even better, it looks like it will only get more awesome as time goes on!

    Congrats, GNOME team, for your amazing work! :)

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    1. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by supersloshy · · Score: 2

      Alt+Tab and the Activities overlay. If that's not enough, Alt+` lets you switch between windows in an application and the alternate-tab extension in my blog post restores the old Alt+Tab behavior for those who preferred it. Enjoy!

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    2. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by O(+inf) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To summarize my latter post, I love how GNOME 3 "puts me in the driver's seat".

      My problem with GNOME 3 is that it does put you into the driver's seat alright - that of a train on a single track.

    3. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by techno-vampire · · Score: 5, Interesting
      To summarize my latter post, I love how GNOME 3 "puts me in the driver's seat".

      That's not what I see in your review. What I see is a new interface that's designed with the assumption that there's One True Way to configure a desktop and that there's no reason to let mere users decide for themselves how they want things to work. As an example, that "feature" of showing the desktop when you move the mouse to the top right corner of the desktop is the first thing I got rid of when I started using Compiz because I personally find it obnoxious and repellent. If this is how you want your desktop to look and work, enjoy the new Gnome. Personally, I'm in the process of abandoning Gnome altogether and moving both my laptop and desktop to XFCE.

      That, I might add, is one of the reasons I use Linux, not Windows: when Microsoft comes out with a new "look and feel" for Windows, you have no choice but to learn how to use it; with Linux, if you don't like one DE, you're free to try a different one.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    4. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by Haeleth · · Score: 2

      Yes, a magical desktop that only allowed the most efficient ways to do things would be a truly wonderful thing.

      Unfortunately we live in the real world, where perfection is not quite so simple to attain. There's a reason why societies tend to propsper when they encourage diversity, and to stagnate when they enforce conformity -- and it's not because any committee has ever been able to identify the most efficient way to do everything.

      If GNOME 3 happens to coincide with the ways of working that you find most efficient, then congratulations: you are a very lucky person. Enjoy the productivity while it lasts -- you have about three years before they start the next ground-up rewrite that will replace the interface you love with something you will almost certainly consider an unwieldy abomination, and you will suddenly find yourself begging for that bunch of configuration options.

    5. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would much rather have a desktop that only allowed the most efficient ways to do things than one that gave me a bunch of configuration options and told me to "figure it out for myself", in a sense. *cough cough*.

      "Most efficient" is highly dependent on the user. For example:
      1) Do you have a strong spatial memory of where things are in menus, on the desktop or the taskbar? If so you'll hate all auto-intelligence that keeps adjusting your favorite functions. You'd rather have an ordered alt-tab list than an unordered expose function like OS X.
      2) Are you a person who remembers a great number of shortcuts and prefer the interface doesn't use much screen real estate to show you the buttons and toolbars? Or do you prefer most functionality to be visible to you?
      3) Do you prefer arranging windows or do you like maximized windows and easy switching? Is it important for you to group windows into virtual desktops?
      4) Can you recognize software by its icon? If not you'll hate Windows 7.

      The "One True Way" is an illusion which may be true for things like kernel benchmarks. But when it comes to what is best for the user that depends on his mental skills, familiarity with the interface and the software and sometimes simply preference. Sane defaults are important, but if you've built the "perfect desktop" the chances are very high you've built YOUR perfect desktop.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by theBully · · Score: 2

      I couldn't agree more. I stayed away from Windows and from Mac OS X as much as I could simply because I do want to have the option of customizing my work environment to fit my needs. Both Gnome 3 and Ubuntu Unity are now moving to the Mac OS X model with little to configure left to the user. On top of everything I found that both Gnome 3 shell and Ubuntu Unity feel utterly inappropriate for coding and system administration purposes. The overall feeling is that my laptop has been transformed from a useful tool into a consumer device.

      Having said that, it's time for me to part ways with Gnome after about 6-7 years and to move to something else. Not very decided what it's going to be. I'm looking for something fast, light, without acceleration requirements. KDE doesn't seem to fit the bill as it seems to be fairly crowded so I have XFCE and LXDE to look at. Any suggestions?

    7. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by epyT-R · · Score: 3, Insightful

      like kde 4, windows vista/7 and osx, it suffers from web 2.0 syndrome:
      1. useless extra borders, huge icons with lots of space between them. computers are tools, not art museums. no, not a false dichotomy as it's possible to make an efficient space look decent. the problems come when the artists and marketers get free reign over interface design and coherence.

      2. searching for everything? god I hate this garbage. It's a lot easier to just know where the icon is and click it. I don't want to search for every god damned thing on my computer when I want to use it. this 'feature' is just a crutch for a shitty launch interface. I always turn that indexing garbage off no matter what OS I use because it's always indexing when I'm trying to do something intensive that it's useless heuristics assume isn't 'that' intensive. please stop. just stop.. do things when I tell you to do them. if I want something automated, I'll automate it.. leave the feature in if you like just leave it off by default, thanks.

      3. useless animations.. Instant response is important and should be expected from computers clocking at microwave frequencies. if your bloated OS/app/desktop environment lags on a modern desktop, you're doing it wrong.

      4. the final thing. tons of extra clicks. why? every new desktop env seems to take longer to configure to a usable state, longer to get at the software and files I need, and more difficult to back up in such a way that I know I got my data and (here's the hard part) my custom configurations stored in a way so that when I have to format, I don't have to work that hard restoring everything. then there's the little bits of functionality spread all over the place syndrome. all modern interfaces suffer from this.. gnome 3 is no different.

    8. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by Kjella · · Score: 2

      It's one thing to have diversity, another to be an unwilling guinea pig to experimental desktops that seemingly do their best to remove any possibility of doing things the old way. The more "innovative" you get, the greater the chances that it will be a mistake. Give people the choice and if it's popular keep it, don't shove everyone on it and say "you'll learn to like it"..

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by Compaqt · · Score: 2

      How's the bar being raised? (Assuming we're talking about the highbar).

      Do you mean now it's easier for newbs to use it? One of the guiding principles of UI design had heretofore been not to hide things. You open a window, and it appears in the panel. Instant visual connection, and it's manifest.

      In Gnome3, you're supposed to tell newbs they need to hit a key to see where the windows are.

      Oh, you say, Gnome3 is for experienced users? Who was clamoring for this?

      Actually, experienced users were clamoring for basic usability fixes in things like file dialogs. Forsaking basic and useful fixes, they go for slick and shiny.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    10. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by fwarren · · Score: 2

      maybe file a bug report if they agree.

      That right there is what is wrong with Gnome. The minute I don't like something and would like to see the possibility to have some configuration options. I am screwed. Because the truth is, if the Gnome developers really like something and want to work on it, then filing a bug report will work. Otherwise you can talk, post, chat and file bug reports till you are blue in the face. It won't do you any Good.

      Even Linus Torvalds once had a debate with the Gnome folks about an option in the printer dialog box. They told him that it was not needed and if he thought it was needed, don't be part of the problem complaining, code a solution. So Linus takes 2 hours and codes it up and submits it to the Gnome developers. Where they immediately dismiss the patch and tell him that he was wrong and they are still right.

      All I am saying here is Gnome is not for me. I find it to inflexible and there is nothing I can do to change that. They expect me to live in the insane asylum with them and talk crazy like them for years on end for me to even have a chance to suggest a configuration option or be taken seriously when I submit a patch to "add" something back in. There are to many other decent desktops out there for me to waste my time like that.

      --
      vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
    11. Re:How To Tweak GNOME 3 by fwarren · · Score: 2

      Threatening me with jumping ship to XFCE is not a very effective method of getting a project to listen to your concerns

      Yes, it is. Since people are voting with their feet and NOT threatening, but ACTUALLY moving over to XFCE. As long as XFCE developers are listening and willing to at least add configuration options so people can tweak the desktop to work how they like it, XFCE is going to do quite well. The question is, will Gnome ever get those users back?

      The day people start going OMG! This desktop works just like my phone, I love it!!! Is the day Gnome 3 will really start picking up users. I think the defection rate will be quite high.

      I can also tell you from 10 years of experience exposing people to linux. 14 out of 15 people do not want a "new" desktop experience. They want a panel, with a menu button, a taskbar and a tray. You might be able to "add" to that. Like virtual desktops, or a 2nd panel, or even panel apps. But so far Fluxbox, XFCE configured like CDE and Enlightenment 16 have all been epic fails when it comes to desktop usability. Put a new user on one of those and they will HATE it, they will HATE linux and they can't get back to windows fast enough. Properly configured Gnome 1 & 2, KDE 1, 2, 3 and 4, XFCE, and a few others work enough like widnows that users are willing to try it.

      I think Gnome 3 will fail at attracting new users. New users will ask for something more like windows...or they will just use windows. Experienced Linux users will end up setting up Gnome 2, XFCE 4 or KDE 4 for there friends after they use Gnome 3 for 5 minutes. It does not matter how loud the developers shout or what usability studies they have in hand. It is just like the New Coke fiasco. Ask people if they like the flavor of this cola better than Coke, the answer was yes. As them if the liked it enough that the coke they grew up with and their grandparent drank should go away forever and be replaced with this new cola, and the answer was "YOU ARE FRICKEN CRAZY." There is a reason why Winodws, Mac, KDE, XFCE, and IceWM all have a panel, a tray, a menu and a taskbar and icons on the desktop. As long as you don't tell new users they HAVE to give that up, you have a shot. Gnome 3, without some serious reworking does not have a shot.

      --
      vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  11. I feel more respected already! by pushing-robot · · Score: 2

    "With any luck you will feel more focused, aware, effective, capable, respected, delighted, and at ease."

    So... they're outsourcing their marketing to Taiwan?

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  12. "with any luck"-- No such luck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Respected? Right. "The reason we take away all the UI for configuring options is because we respect you. It certainly wouldn't be because we feel you're too dumb to decide how you want your own desktop configured or because we worry that users, if left to themselves, might configure their software to work the mundane way they want it rather than the superior way we UI elite have envisioned."

  13. Perhaps they didn't release it by mangu · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe it just escaped.

  14. *yawn* by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 2

    Changing the user experience for the sake of "changing the user experience" doesn't do it for me. Gnome3 is a downgrade for me and a nudge to check out KDE.

    I guess you can't please all the people all the time, but this effort is headed in the wrong direction.

    Best,

    1. Re:*yawn* by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      just because lots of idiots use-curves peak the annoyance factors of bad guis below their conscious perceptions, doesn't mean new-guis are superior to what came before. change for the sake of change is not always better.

    2. Re:*yawn* by fwarren · · Score: 2

      The people at Coke had done extensive testing. In a blind taste test, New Coke beat Classic Coke hands down. Every time, by a wide margin. But "Which one tastes better" was the wrong question to ask. As it turns out the correct question was, "do you like the taste of this "new coke" so well that it would be ok with you if we made "classic coke" go away, forever, so that the Coke you grew up with as a kid and your parents, and grandparents and great grandparents loved was never to bee seen again?" While the answer to the first question was "yes" the answer to the second question was something like "NO WAY! WE WILL FIREBOMB YOUR OFFICES IF YOU DO THAT"

      Why do I need to read the design documents. Users are used to a desktop with icons and a panel with a menu, taskbar and tray. Sweeping all of that away is a bad idea. Who is this desktop for? Power users want options, and to tweak the desktop, they cant do that at all with Gnome 3. The average user wants the "classic" experience. Maybe tarted up a little bit, but still the classic experience.

      I have shown off Enlightenemnt 16, and Fluxbox to people, for the most part, If it does not have a panel that runs 100% the width of the bottom of the screen with a start button on the left and a tray on the right, they don't want to use it.

      --
      vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  15. Re:Mac OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    That’d be “its”.

  16. What problem does Gnome 3 solve? by Duncan+J+Murray · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am all for rethinking the desktop paradigm, but I'm not sure whether Gnome 3 is a complete rethink or a desperate attempt to break out of the Windows 95 mould (which I think most linux users, given the popularity of mint and pclinuxos, would grudgingly admit is a sensible way of organising a desktop).

    When I moved from Win XP to Gnome 2, I appreciated the rapid access the upper and lower bars gave me to applications, places, open applications, control of access, desktop, shortcuts, other panels and a full calendar - something that greatly improved productivity. Gone were the days of clicking on the same spot in the lower left, and then trying to manoeuvre your mouse around the nested menu upon menu just to find the setting or application you were after, which often led to the mouse losing focus and frustration all round. I feel like Gnome 3 is a step back in this regard, channelling almost all operations through the same spot in the corner could create exactly the same sort of inefficiency and bottleneck.

    When I can get Gnome 3 to work properly on my setup, and give it a go for a decent period of time, maybe I'll change my mind. But I think it's more likely I'll find the answer to my own question, and realise that the problem is Linux struggling to clearly define it's niche and uniqueness between Mac OS X and Windows 7.

    1. Re:What problem does Gnome 3 solve? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Complacency. Gnome users haven't had to re-learn their desktop in a while, and the devs are helpfully breaking those users out of their rut.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    2. Re:What problem does Gnome 3 solve? by Haeleth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      the Windows 95 mould (which I think most linux users, given the popularity of mint and pclinuxos, would grudgingly admit is a sensible way of organising a desktop).

      No, it's a dreadful way of organising a desktop. The "start button" design buries applications deep in menus miles away from wherever your mouse is. The task bar view of running programs manages to display minimal information while also lacking any spatial element that might help you find the window you're looking for. The icons-on-desktop design puts all your files and shortcuts in the single least accessible place on your screen. Etc.

      In all honesty, Windows 95's interface was terrible. It managed to be a step back from Windows 3 in many respects. It caught on because Windows 95 was so much better in every other way. It has stuck around because Windows acquired a monopoly and the entire business world would scream blue murder if Microsoft tried anything radical. And Linux distributions that copy it are only popular because it is familiar. People really do prefer the devil they know.

      I'm not claiming GNOME 3 is the solution. I haven't tried it yet, and what I've read has not sounded very appealing. But I will give them credit for trying, just like I gave KDE credit for trying even though I'm not a great fan of their interface either.

      Shakeups like this are essential. If you only ever go for incremental improvements, you will at best find a local maximum. Your chance of finding the best solution increases if you try radically new ideas. And putting them out as concepts that nobody every really uses won't get us anywhere either -- interfaces can only be evaluated properly if they are forced into mainstream distributions and real people actually make an effort to use them for real things. It has to be this way. This is a good thing. Honest.

    3. Re:What problem does Gnome 3 solve? by supersloshy · · Score: 2

      Here is the GNOME 3 Design History page. In short, they wanted to get rid of the hacked-together nature of GNOME 2 while innovating at the same time. They wanted a more integrated desktop that didn't get in your way, and for the most part it succeeds :)

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    4. Re:What problem does Gnome 3 solve? by lennier · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In all honesty, Windows 95's interface was terrible. It managed to be a step back from Windows 3 in many respects.

      Interesting. I have a contrary opinion: to me, Windows 95 was the high-water mark of Microsoft's interface design and got some things right which everyone else - 2000s-era Microsoft included - have been strugging to even understand since.

      Granted, the cascading Start Menu was horrible. But that can be fixed. The underlying "a shortcut on the menu is just a desktop shortcut inside a Menu folder" architecture was a stroke of utter genius, one GNOME completely failed to get. They had to create two incompatible kinds of launchers, and make it near-impossible to edit menus, or to drag one to the other. Why? The Win 95 way was so perfect.

      The taskbar, too, is something that was brilliant compared to the Dock or anything else: an area that could show you at a glance where all your currently running stuff is. Yes, it's simplistic, and needs to be expanded - but the basic idea of dividing the screen into separate permanently-there areas, one which gives you an overview, one which gives you a closeup, was awesome. The big win of the Start Button is that (unless you really mess with things) it's always there in a known location. Same principle as Apple's menu (possibly they couldn't just do that because of look-and-feel patents? they were still a big deal in the mid-90s).

      What I'd like is an interface which lets me extend this principle, to let me create user-defined fixed 'trays' in various parts of my desktop where I can guarantee that windows can't spill out of. For a while I thought Gnome's panels were going to be this, and I loved having one at the top and one at the bottom, one for menu and one for taskbar, but knowing that under the hood they were just identical instances of Panel.

      I think the ultimate desktop still will be document-oriented - something like a Zoomable User Interface - rather than application-oriented, but we seem to have abandoned the quest for this and keep iterating on tiny visual variations of a half-finished underlying architecture, but now with the added pain that the user can't change the visual look and feel anymore. This seems like going in precisely the wrong direction. I'm at a loss to understand why this is. If we'd invested half the effort that's gone into force-feeding rigid visual look-and-feels onto an unwilling userbase, instead into creating an underlying architecture that seriously splits the look and feel from the underlying data and lets the userbase create and remix their own 'look' while the application developers can focus on the data processing - wouldn't we be a lot further ahead?

      tldr: I don't want application designers telling me how to organise my desktop. I want them to give me the tools that let me organise my desktop however I want. But they're not. Why?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    5. Re:What problem does Gnome 3 solve? by thaig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I see, so it's for the lords and masters of Gnome to decide the the peasants are "in a rut" and make them run about adapting to some new aritrary "order"?

      --
      This is all just my personal opinion.
  17. You've got to ask yourself one question: by hduff · · Score: 3, Funny

    'With any luck you will feel more focused, aware, effective, capable, respected, delighted, and at ease.'" ... "Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk? " -- Dirty Harry

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  18. Re:lol wut by homey+of+my+owney · · Score: 2

    "more focused, aware, effective, capable, respected, delighted, and at ease." Wow! If it also made me more continent, gas free, fresh, and leave me with cleaner hair, it would be perfect!

  19. Re:lol wut by mmj638 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why can't I click any links in slashdot comments anymore? I'm using Firefox 4. Can't even right click.

    Any why is that yellow box overlapping everything when I'm previewing a message? Slashdot seems a bit messed up

  20. Re:lol wut by Noitatsidem · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I actually emailed the press team. Here's what I wrote:
    "I think a thank you is in order from the XFCE team, as the release of GNOME3 has urged me (and many others) to switch to XFCE. With XFCE 4.8 released, the featuresessentiallymirror those found in GNOME2. With that being said, I think you can confidently send the XFCE team a "you're welcome" message for addingnumerousnumbers of people to their user base. Remind them that without the GNOME team ignoring the myriads of complaints about thedirectionof the GNOME project, none of this would of happened.

    Thank you very much for reading"
    Anyone here should feel more than welcome to use this message, no credit needed. Spread the word, the XFCE team NEEDS to thank the gnome team for all of their hard work removing everything we needed, and giving us everything we didn't.

    --
    Feel free to mod me down, just know that unlike some Anonymous Cowards I'm not afraid to express my views as myself.
  21. Re:"Hosted by Canonical" by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2

    I just noticed that on gnome.org it says "Hosted by Canonical" at the bottom. Isn't it great how they're getting along, what with all the drama? :)

    Yes, it is. Of course, I notice that there's no Ubuntu release on their download page ...

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  22. Re:Gnomes by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2

    At least they have decided on a Gnomenclature.

    Yes, you can read all about it in the Necrognomicon.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  23. Re:Apple OS X clone by diegocg · · Score: 2

    I'm afraid you are wrong. I wish Gnome 3 would look and feel like OS X.

    Compared to Gnome 3, OS X is a OS for geeks that love to change settings and personalize their desktops.

  24. Re:Mac OS X by melikamp · · Score: 2

    You do realize that you are probably replying to a bot?

  25. Re:lol wut by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

    Not that I doubt you're right, but out of curiosity, what did they take out now?

    The maximize and minimize buttons, and the window menu which contained those and other actions. Only the close button remains as a common to all windows (although an application can make window-specific action buttons). Maximize and minimize functions are available still, in a non-intuitive way. This is one of the most irksome changes which has rubbed many people the wrong way. I'm delaying any decision on embracing/rejecting Gnome 3 until I've tried it out for a while.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  26. Re:lol wut by swalve · · Score: 2

    What genius decided to fuck with that convention? What do you have to do now, go into a shell?

  27. Re:lol wut by dslbrian · · Score: 2

    Maximize and minimize functions are available still, in a non-intuitive way. This is one of the most irksome changes which has rubbed many people the wrong way.

    Seriously, when I read this in the heading:

    'With any luck you will feel more focused, aware, effective, capable, respected, delighted, and at ease.'

    I almost laughed. I don't think I've ever used a massively changed GUI and ever felt "delighted, and at ease". I expect if I tried using GNOME 3 I would be frustrated, irritated, and cursing out loud. Just looking at the screenshots on the GNOME site gets me irritated, much less actually using the thing. And I like at the bottom of the page they include this:

    Our system settings have been completely redesigned for GNOME 3.

    Oh fun, the hide-the-system-settings-game, everyone enjoys playing that. I still haven't found the setting that controls the right-click menu in GNOME 2...

  28. Re:lol wut by Requiem18th · · Score: 2

    I'm specially insulted by the

    you will feel [...] respected

    You will, you must, it's imperative that you feel respected.

    That's the most disrespectful thing they could say, I love how they speak with their feet in their mouth like that.

    Gnome 3 will have you do our way. You have no configuration. Start feeling respected now.

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  29. Re:lol wut by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2

    Yes you may never ever change the current paradigm! Evil!

    Seriously. If min/max buttons are what pisses you off, GNOME3 is a success.

    If you have ever used Mylyn for example, you will notice that some, more focussed UIs make you much more productive. I think it is good that the GNOME team tries to go down this road.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  30. Re:lol wut by silanea · · Score: 2

    More focused UIs make you much more productive when doing focused tasks. How do you "focus" a general-purpose desktop environment?

    --
    Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
  31. Re:Mac OS X by Compaqt · · Score: 2

    Its' the Slashdot jinx: every post correcting somebody's grammar has to have a grammar mistake of its own (including this one).

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  32. Of course, they project desires unto you by jonaskoelker · · Score: 2

    it does put you into the driver's seat alright - that of a train on a single track.

    Hint: the passive voice was used in the summary.

    We've taken a pretty different approach in the GNOME 3 design that focuses on the desired experience and lets the interface design follow from that

    Well, the experience desired by whom? Me? Well, no GNOME developer ever asked me. I bet they didn't ask you either. I think they just sat around and discussed among themselves what users should want, and then created whatever they decided people should want.

    FVWM FTW :-)

  33. Re:lol wut by bregmata · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I actually emailed the press team.

    Don't bother. They only read the email messages they've written themselves.

  34. Re:Xfce vs Gnome by fwarren · · Score: 2

    A few questions:

    1. 1. How well does nautilus work in Xfce? Doesn't launching nautilus also launch the Gnome DE?
    2. 2. Is it compatible with Gnome applets (the ones you put on the panel)? I don't know if there's a FreeDesktop standard for that which is implemented by Xfce. I'm particularly interested in the Tracker applet.
    3. 3. Does Thunar performance degrade over time? Nautilus is fast in opening a folder with a lot of files in it when you first launch it. But after a few days, it gets more and more sluggish and then takes a few seconds to show you a folder.
    4. 4. Does Xfce have a UI panel thing for virtual desktops?
    1. 1. Nautilus works fine as long as it has been set up to launch with the --no-desktop --browser options. That of course is left up the the distros to take care of. You can always create a bash alias and/or modify the nautilus.desktop file. I am sure there are more ways to fix it as well.
    2. 2. No, Gnome applets are not compatible with XFCE. However it can run any application designed to minimize to the tray. You can also load wmdock into a panel so that it is possible to run dock apps like afterstep, fluxbox and openbox do. As well as XFCE panel applets
    3. 3. There is good news and bad. The good news, the performance does not decrease over time. The bad news, it is always slow opening up a folder with more than about 15 subfolders in it.
    4. 4. Yes there is a virtual panel applet, it s called the Workspace Switcher.
    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.