Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu 11.10 To Switch From GDM To LightDM

dkd903 writes "Earlier, during the Natty development cycle we reported that LightDM is being considered as a replacement for GDM. That did not happen for Ubuntu 11.04, but today it has been confirmed at the Ubuntu Developer Summit at Budapest that LightDM is finally replacing GDM in Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric."

236 comments

  1. Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unity Vista(tm) is Canonical’s response to the GNOME 3 shell, which uses 1 gigabyte of RAM and four processor cores to exquisitely render a single button in the centre of the screen in beautifully anti-aliased text; when pressed, GNOME tells the user to switch off the computer and do something useful with their life, such as showering.

    “This was just not up to the user expectations of Canonical’s vision of the desktop,” said Mark Shuttleworth, from his castle high on a crag in West London. “So we added a ‘minimise’ button too.”

    Design is at the centre of Shuttleworth’s roadmap for Unity Vista. “I woke up one day and thought, ‘Gosh, I’d really like to make using my universal general-purpose computer that I can do ANYTHING with feel like I’m using a locked-down three-year-old half-smart phone through the clunky mechanism some l33t h@xx0r used to jailbreak it, I can’t think of a better user experience.’ We’re not quite there yet, but this gets Unity a lot of the way.”

    Shuttleworth foresees an exciting future for Linux for the general Internet user. “It’ll be a whole world of Linux devices, which millions of people will use all the time, everywhere! Of course, at the moment those are called ‘phones’ and run Android.”

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
    1. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Funny

      when pressed, GNOME tells the user to switch off the computer and do something useful with their life, such as showering.

      But does not actually provide a shut down option, because that might confuse users too much.

    2. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      I really like the Ubuntu Unity shell. I am a 20 year plus unix programmer and also like OSX. Their approach is excellent. Keep it up ubuntu! and never mind these "developers" who have an extreme dislike of anything new. You'd think computer experts would be up to realizing evolution happens, but alas, are as stuck in their ways as their windows counterparts. Alas.

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    3. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like Unity in principle, but it's way too buggy to be usable currently, and more customization would really help too. It's also much slower than both Gnome and KDE (on GTX460 with binary nvidia drivers).

    4. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ridiculous!

      Everyone knows there aren't even hills in London, let alone a crag.

    5. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Eh - I have a few less years than you - been programming IN GENERAL for 20 years but only on Unix for about 12 now. I like the Mac OS X interface pretty good. Unfortunately Unity is NOTHING like the OS X interface. Blending the title bar of maximized windows into the top pane is DUMB. The new "overlay scrollbars" are DUMB. The unity dock needs to have the ability to switch to the bottom of the screen rather than the side (where on widescreen monitors we have the least amount of space).

      Overall, a single Gnome 2 panel a the top of the screen combined with Docky and Compiz was ALL I EVER NEEDED. It was a paradigm that was never broken to need fixing. I'm still using that thanks to Classic mode (though they did manage to finally break my Pulseaudio setup in 11.04), but its days are numbered.

      Overall, I think Ubuntu finally just decided to give up reaching parity with the mainstream OS's in the areas that count. Instead they went back to the areas of the system that they actually had FINALLY gotten right, and decided to start all over.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    6. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Luyseyal · · Score: 2

      I can see how it might work if you only need one desktop and don't have any weird monitor configuration. Unity was sucky on my two monitor system with the secondary on the left, rotated 90 degrees. I couldn't figure out how to move the bar and its interaction with the Gnome panel was odd. I just gave up because I was busy and didn't have time to screw with it.

      It's hard to make everyone happy. I'm still irritated that there is no easy way to put a different picture on different virtual desktops anymore. I use 5 because I hate minimizing and unminimizing. It's easier to just hit Alt+F5 and get my email desktop, Alt+F3, browser desktop, Alt+F1, terminal desktop, etc.

      So, while I am accustomed to certain ways, if Unity had made more sense to me in the first 10 minutes I might've given it more of a shot. As it is, it was vastly different from my usual workflow and I went back to Classic.

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    7. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. There are too many bugs and little quirks (which may actually be bugs but I fear are by design) which make it quite annoying to use at the moment. I really want to be able to turn off the Universal Menu on non-maximized windows, and for there to be a better way to manage programs with more than one window open. Those are my main gripes at the moment, and if they are fixed, and the general performance made a bit better, then I think I'd really like it. At the moment I'm torn; I like it enough that I haven't switched back to the old way, but at times it really feels unfinished, and perhaps a bit flawed too. If I still feel like that when 11.10 comes out I'll probably try out the GNOME Shell and see if that's any better.

    8. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Homburg · · Score: 1

      Blending the title bar of maximized windows into the top pane is DUMB. The new "overlay scrollbars" are DUMB.

      Why?

    9. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      We'll have to agree to disagree. I might agree that Docky could sub for their launcher, but that's about it. I like the other paradigm changes and really like the spotlight-esque approach and unified menu system.

      I don't use multiple monitors so I can't speak to those problems, but i'm running it on VirtualBox (3D turned on of course) on a NVIDIA IGP 320M, and it's usable as much as the first few versions of OSX and will only get better. I DID have to turn off (replaced the graphic with nothing) the shadow on the top pane, this was essential and a "bug" IMHO. It just didn't work.

      After that though, it's been a real pleasure, so much that i'm using it to post this and have spent as much time in it as I have in OSX.. Ubuntu under VM is a much tidier place to store my development work (as it's not intermingled with personal stuff) and with the new UI, I am actually coding in it (under eclipse) WITHOUT using ExpanDrive to "reach" into the VM and edit using TextMate. I gotta say, it's not DUMB. It's an excellent opening salvo to making Linux stand up to the big boys. That's how I feel!

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    10. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by splict · · Score: 1

      [...] The unity dock needs to have the ability to switch to the bottom of the screen rather than the side (where on widescreen monitors we have the least amount of space). [...]

      Are you saying that on a widescreen monitor there is less width? That doesn't seem right... or am I misunderstanding you?

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo.-Enoch Root
    11. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by splict · · Score: 1

      Okay, I guess you are saying that there is less height for icons. That is true, though it seems to be the exact opposite thing that I usually hear people complaining about. More configurability would definately be better.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo.-Enoch Root
    12. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      I come from Cambridge, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    13. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by MBGMorden · · Score: 2

      Because it breaks the consistency of the workflow. When a window isn't maximized it looks one way. It's a trivial adjustment when maximizing to assume that it will look and behave identically when maximized, just that it will takeup the entirety of the open screen. Now, they instead cause the window to adopt two different control schemes between the two modes, AND mingle the window's controls with a distinctly different element of the UI (the base Ubuntu launcher menu).

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    14. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Correct. Using a widescreen monitor you have more room to store a bar horizontally. Placing a menu bar on the side of the screen like that necessitates scrolling through the bar to get to many icons, whereas they'd all be immediately accessible if laid out on the bottom (or even top, though that's not what I'm used to) of the screen.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    15. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by celle · · Score: 1

      "I really like the Ubuntu Unity shell. ...You'd think computer experts would be up to realizing evolution happens, but alas, are as stuck in their ways as their windows counterparts. Alas."

      A heretic.
      Kill the heretic!!! Kill the heretic!!!

      "Boiling people in oil. Those were the days weren't they?" -- Carlin

      commentary/
          Come on guys!(and girls) (on slashdot--ah!!) It's just one Gnu/Linux distro(distro?-ick, ah well). How many others are out there? Ubuntu is largely controlled by Mark Shuttleworth so it will implemented as he sees fit, get over it. There is no such thing as something that works for everyone but he's trying. Don't like what Mark is doing to your favorite distro, make your own or switch to one of the scores of other ones or Ubuntu derivatives (Debian, Slackware, Fedora, Mint, ...). Or even maybe one of the desktop BSD versions (PC-BSD, GnoBSD, ...) or even shell BSD versions (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, ...) or even Plan9 or Inferno. It's not like you don't have a selection.

          I know people don't like change, I'm one of them, but I don't believe in the lack of change to the point of complacency is any better. Change is good as it cuts down on the brain rot and looking around we've unfortunately got more than enough in every endeavor. I'm not saying that change should be constantly happening as some consistency is also needed just for stability and comfort(ok, sanity) reasons. Every one has their own individual balance, to each his/her/its own.
      commentary/

    16. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by kbielefe · · Score: 2

      I really like the unity shell too, for casual computing. Trying to do serious work on it actually pushed me back to KDE for the first time in ten years.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    17. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by nschubach · · Score: 1

      I happen to like being able to look over at a glance and see where the scroll bar is without having to find that tiny thread. I also hate themes that make the scroller "hide" on the bar by making the colors match. Horizontal screen resolution is not a concern. Not sure who thought it was. There's plenty of room for a slider bar.

      I'm also not a fan of the menu items up top. It breaks the flow of an app. When you have multiple windows open and you have to go to the top of the screen every time to operate the applications, it feels like there's something broken there. Not sure what it is. I want my menus on the window that they are associated with.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    18. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by nschubach · · Score: 1

      Uh... Ubuntu is a Debian derivative, not vice versa...

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    19. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by gclef · · Score: 1

      To disable the global Menu bar, you do two things:
      1) in /etc/X11/Xsessions.d/ move 80appmenu to another location (I created a "disabled" subdirectory and put it there)
      2) disable the "global menu bar integration" plugins in Firefox and Thunderbird.

      Yes, this is a shitty way to manage that setting.

    20. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by supersloshy · · Score: 1

      You're joking, right? Just hold down the Alt key or log out first. Shutting down is a really superficial thing to do and rarely needs to be done (relative to other computer functions), so complaining about a couple milliseconds difference is rather pointless.

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    21. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by mldi · · Score: 1

      Just hold down the Alt key or log out first.

      So I suppose there's something wrong with wanting a convenient discoverable (keyword) button to do all that in one shot, huh? Then let's just get rid of all GUI elements on the desktop screen and resort to nothing besides keyboard shortcuts. The mouse is really just a superficial input device that has no point.

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    22. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Hatta · · Score: 2

      The mouse is really just a superficial input device that has no point.

      This is true. Mouse free environments suck less.

      I still can't figure out what's wrong with using 'login' as a login manager.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    23. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      I don't think you got what he meant, he wants to turn off the global menu just for non-maximized windows. So that all windows have menus right on top of them, but you still save some space with maximized ones. That's something a lot of people (including me) would like to see, but I don't think it will happen in the foreseeable future.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    24. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by JonJ · · Score: 1

      And Slackware certainly isn't a 'derivative' of anything besides SLS. I think it's just poorly placed. The sentence should have been something like this: "make your own or switch to one of the scores of other ones(Slackware, Fedora, Debian) or Ubuntu derivatives(Mint etc.)".

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    25. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "different picture on different virtual desktops anymore"

      It's still possible with KDE, to have different wallpapers for each virtual desktop / cube side. It's slightly cumbersome to set up, but not TOO bad, and it works well enough.

      KDE 4.6 is kinda nice. Sorta like gnome with all the configuration potential added back in :)

    26. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Compaqt · · Score: 2

      Sorry, what? "Just hold down Alt"? Or log out first?

      All this, and also the blather about how they're making it easier for newbs? Too rich.

      Why do you call shutting down superficial? Most people have their own computers, and they don't log out so someone can log in. The common use scenario is not a public library computer. People want to turn their computers off, hopefully in the "approved" manner that we geeks have been drilling into them.

      It's not a couple ms to log out. It takes many seconds, often fractions of a minute.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    27. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod up. Come on. At least 3. + use mint.

    28. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by wordsnyc · · Score: 1

      Blending the title bar of maximized windows into the top pane is DUMB. The new "overlay scrollbars" are DUMB. The unity dock needs to have the ability to switch to the bottom of the screen rather than the side (where on widescreen monitors we have the least amount of space).

      Overall, a single Gnome 2 panel a the top of the screen combined with Docky and Compiz was ALL I EVER NEEDED. It was a paradigm that was never broken to need fixing.

      Amen. I installed 11.04 (upgraded from 10.10, actually), tried to work with Unity for a few hours, hated it, switched to "Classic" mode, noticed the stupid scroll things were still there, nuked it and installed 10.04 LTS. I think Ubuntu just seriously jumped the shark.

      --
      Sent from the iPad I found in your car.
    29. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by alexandre_ganso · · Score: 1

      you have a shut down button. It's on the computer itself!! Even the tablets keep this button, at least. Do you shut down a mobile phone, a tablet, via gui?

    30. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      none of this explains couching others' opinions as a result of their inability to accept 'evolution.' evolution doesn't always produce better results than what was there before.. just better adapted.. in this case, idiots love idiot interfaces, more at 11....

    31. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by steveha · · Score: 1

      I'm still irritated that there is no easy way to put a different picture on different virtual desktops anymore.

      Whoa, I never knew you could do this and I have wanted it for 15 years. How did you do this?

      I use 5 because I hate minimizing and unminimizing. It's easier to just hit Alt+F5 and get my email desktop, Alt+F3, browser desktop, Alt+F1, terminal desktop, etc.

      I haven't tried GNOME 3 yet, but I saw a couple of demos. They really tried to make it really easy to set up as many workspaces as you want. You can just grab some stuff and drag it and suddenly there is a new workspace with that stuff in it. (This is why they got rid of the minimize button; they want you to use workspaces instead of minimize.) I wonder if you would be happy in GNOME 3.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    32. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      This after legions of geeks have lectured normal people on the fact that they shouldn't press the buttons to turn off a computer, they should use Shut Down, and that using the button would be like suddenly shifting to reverse when you're going 60mph (assuming your car would let you do that).

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    33. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Compaqt · · Score: 2

      >discoverable

      This.

      I mean, Ubuntu (and Gnome) have really jumped over the deep end on this:
      -menus that are hidden until you move your mouse all the way to the top of the screen
      -scrollbars that are hidden until you move to a specific position near the side of a window (what happened to Fitts Law there?)
      -typing and searching for applications that you don't know are there
      -removal of the window control menu (used to be non the left side). Now you're supposed to know to do Alt+Space, if that'll even work in the latest/upcoming versions
      -hold down Alt or log out in order to be able to shut down the computer?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    34. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by node+3 · · Score: 1

      And this is why the Year of Linux on the Desktop has never come. Any time someone even *considers* making a non-nerd version of Linux, the pitchforks come out. People don't want complex. They want simple, and simple is exactly what Shuttleworth is striving for. I'm not certain he'll succeed, but I am *quite* certain that no other Linux distro is even trying, so none of them even can succeed.

      At least he's trying. So I guess that means he needs to be mocked?

    35. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      > >I'm still irritated that there is no easy way to put a different picture on different virtual desktops anymore.
      > Whoa, I never knew you could do this and I have wanted it for 15 years. How did you do this?

      Well, it used to work under Enlightenment DR16 (and fvwm before that). I gave up on E awhile back due to the nicer Gnome integration you got with metacity. But, I did recently try out E17. It's OK, though it kept crashing on me, complaining about my startup applications. Couldn't get a good enough bug report to them to narrow it down.

      The only way I know how to do multiple images is to have a shell app that changes it for you. Super crappy vs what was possible in E16. There were a lot of requests for it in swordfish and metacity back in the day, but the Gnome guys were dead against it. I understand their logic. It just sucks not to have a viable alternative like Enlightenment anymore.

      Maybe when I get some time, I'll try E17 again.

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    36. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      I just don't like the KDE look and feel. Nothing personal, just don't like it. <shrugs>

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    37. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by zig43 · · Score: 1

      If only we could prevent them from unplugging it too. That should make technical support jobs much easier.

    38. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Sepodati · · Score: 1

      > -scrollbars that are hidden until you move to a specific position near the side of a window

      Depends on the application or maybe they're just not "updated" to use the new scrollbars. Firefox and Thunderbird show old style scrollbars. Even in the new style, the scroll position is still shown, it's just much thinner.

      > -typing and searching for applications that you don't know are there

      Or click on the Applications icon on the launch bar and see everything that's installed. You can choose application types to show, too, like Games, Internet Apps, etc. in the dropdown. Or right-click on the Applications icon in the launcher to choose a category.

      > -hold down Alt or log out in order to be able to shut down the computer?

      Is this LightDM specific? I just choose the "power button" icon in the top right and choose Shutdown. Am I missing something?

    39. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      Precisely! My favourite rant about Unity is people complaining that it's not as customisable as gnome2/docky, etc. My question to those people is: if you're using docky and customizing gnome, why are you complaining about the DEFAULT desktop in Ubuntu. If you know how to install/configure docky, and how to configure/remove gnome panels, you should probably find it no problem to switch from unity back to gnome2. It's literally a 1 minute change. And I AM one of those people who like to customize (I have 6 household computers; two mediacenter PCs run custom compiz with no gnome panels, two laptops run fluxbox with nomachine clients, one audio computer runs classic gnome, and only my one main development machine runs stock ubuntu). Why would I complain about the fact that the default isn't MY default? Because that would be DUMB!!!! The reasons Ubuntu rules the desktop linux world are: 1) it just works 2) software center/apt kicks ass. 3) available software via official repos/ppas is unbeatable 4) I CAN customize. If the DEFAULT DE/WM make you feel like switching to a different distro, fine, but don't think for one second that your user experience will ever get easier by going that route.

    40. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that was correct with AT power supplies. Hitting the button simply cut the power.

      Nowadays, we use ATX, and the power button is handled by software, through ACPI. My Linux machine is set up to start the shut down process when I hit the power button.

      I don't have a shutdown option anywhere in the GUI. The only options are firing up a root shell, or hitting the button.

    41. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by MancunianMaskMan · · Score: 1

      I, too, think that's an excellent idea. I'm sure Mark Shuttleworth reads this thread, so please Mark, listen. We want this. Maybe the /. community still is slightly biased towards the "power user".

    42. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by tehcyder · · Score: 0

      And that was correct with AT power supplies. Hitting the button simply cut the power.

      Nowadays, we use ATX, and the power button is handled by software, through ACPI. My Linux machine is set up to start the shut down process when I hit the power button.

      I don't have a shutdown option anywhere in the GUI. The only options are firing up a root shell, or hitting the button.

      I want a fucking on/off button to turn on/off a fucking machine when I fucking press it. If it's controlled by fucking software, I want the fucking software to fucking emulate turning a fucking button on or off.
      I feel quite strongly about this.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    43. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Even the ten old Windows XP I'm using at work lets you have different wallpapers on different virtual desktops.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    44. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by goarilla · · Score: 1

      I prefer the opposite: menu (dock) in the side bar.
      I dont have many icons so it all fits, plus if your dock is at the side
      your maximised applications get more vertical space, which on a widescreen 13.1 inch laptop
      matters a lot

    45. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "from his castle high on a crack in West London"

      there, fixed it for you....

    46. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      And that's fine - I have no opposition to you having that option. It's things like Ubuntu deciding that on the side is the ONLY way you can set it up that annoy me. Just make an option to flip it between the top and bottom and screen and we can both be happy.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    47. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      ... is DUMB.

      Why?

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    48. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by cynyr · · Score: 1

      My button is disconnected. Why? because i have small children that like pressing buttons with lights.... So i have the gui button(xfce here), root term, or the PSU switch on the back of the computer if I move it far enough away from the wall to reach it.

      My reset button and HDD/power lights are all disconnected as well. My most recent buildis quiet enough that I need to put my hand on the fan grill and feel for the air to figure out if it is on or off.

      TL:DR, not everyone has working power buttons, or wants to use them the same way.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    49. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BIG PENIS

    50. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Depends on the application

      Better yet!

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    51. Re:Ubuntu Vista defies expectations by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      No one is talking about mobile phones or tablets.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  2. What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really... they are joking, right? LightDM isn't light at all

    1. Re:What by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      *cough* LDAP *cough*

  3. Why is this news? by Ex+Machina · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I understand "big changes" in Linux distributions that have a day to day impact on all users like switching to X.org or Unity are important events. But most people spend about 10 seconds tops interacting with Gdm every day. It's just not that important for most users.

    1. Re:Why is this news? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I'll have you know I do all my work in GDM!!!!!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Why is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can be. For those of us using a lot of linux desktops in an enterprise environment this could be a big deal for things like LDAP auth. For the home user, no it's not, but looking at the bigger picture, it very well could be a problem.

    3. Re:Why is this news? by hedwards · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait, GDM has minesweeper _and_ solitaire?

    4. Re:Why is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even that - since I send all my computers to sleep. I only use Xdm on reboot - over all computers maybe once a month or so.

    5. Re:Why is this news? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      All it needs to be a functional desktop environment is pr0n!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:Why is this news? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why it would be a problem for you. It's not like Ubuntu doesn't let you change the default graphical login manager if you want to.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    7. Re:Why is this news? by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      My guess is that they still want to improve the boot time by introducing this, while simultaneously try to improve the log in experience (even if it doesn't really need that at this point).

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
  4. GDM by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Considering the number of things that get broken in GDM in every new Ubuntu release, this may not be a bad thing. For example, going from 10.04 to 11.04 gdm started displaying every single user in the /etc/passwd file, except when it randomly only displays the last one who logged in.

    1. Re:GDM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thankyou.

      My response to Ubuntu - Do whatever the fuck you want to do as long as Ubuntu:

      1. Doesn't crash.

      2. And I can still run my favorite apps: Open Office and everything Mozilla. Everything else I can live without.

    2. Re:GDM by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      3) When you change the defaults, it needs to seamlessly migrate to the new one.
      4) If an update fails, the update should roll-back (config files aren't versioned by default? still no sane "diff3" option when updating? wtf?)

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    3. Re:GDM by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      One problem is that they actually change the underlying packages enough they introduce more bugs. Or unwanted functionality which is just the same.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    4. Re:GDM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's due to poor programmers. These are the people that think they are superior to every other programmer before them. They exist in high numbers. They are unable to read documentation, META comments, or anything relating to WHY something was done a certain way. They believe comments are for describing HOW something is done. Although this is true only in rare circumstances, they believe it is the only reason; hence, they do not need to understand, they are all-knowing.

      Since they are so elite they can write code that is perfect, in their minds at least. Ubuntu = poor programming practices. It's across the board. It's almost as if every release is an attempt to prove they can make it worse.

      In all honesty it's so bad that it reeks of premeditation. Make something look so bad with shitty programming, make it so broken that is there is only one other choice, namely, use MY solution. MY superior solution which is exactly the same as the last one, doesn't offer anything new, but it's mine, has a new name, and I am in control. Like a cheap Chinese researcher that can't develop anything on his own but wants all the credit.

      There are reasons things are done a certain way. Change for the sake of change is just a whiny boy's way of getting his way. Some people never grow up.

      Fuck Ubuntu, if for nothing else than just the name. Africa, really, that was your inspiration for the name? Really? Nothing has ever been developed in the entire continent of Africa other than a unified way to plunder, rape, pillage, and destroy. Oh wait! That's what these shitty programmers are doing. Maybe it is a perfectly good name to describe their shitty programming and attempts to be in the spotlight.

  5. woohoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    orifice ostrich will be the best ubuntu ever!! year of the desktop linux? MORE LIKE DECADE OF THE DESKTOP LINUX!!!

    1. Re:woohoo! by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      I'll wait for anal aardvark, or perhaps penile porpoise.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:woohoo! by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      Wanking Walrus will rule them all!

    3. Re:woohoo! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Just wait until you see what you have to do to log onto a Homo Hippopotamus desktop session...

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  6. That the hell is GDM/lightDM... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and does this change actually fix anything? or does it just break stuff as usual?

    1. Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... by jank1887 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      why did i have to get this far down to find this question, and why is there no answer yet. is it that hard to spend 3 words in the summary telling me me what a DM is in this case, and whether G or light will matter to me?

    2. Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... by TheCycoONE · · Score: 2

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_display_manager_(program_type)

      Specifically it's the spot where you type your username and password before logging in. Since most Ubuntu users run their computers as single users on a desktop box, and only ever access one session profile (gnome) I doubt this will make any impact on anyone's life.

      I run slim on my mediacenter because it was easy to configure kiosk mode (auto login), and also I could launch other programs in it without learning to write proper session files; but it has some problems and I may look into lightDM.

    3. Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Specifically it's the spot where you type your username and password before logging in.

      No, it's the place where you click your username out of a list (unless you run a little gconf-fu on the command line su'd as the gdm user). Does LightDM allow configuration or are users just stuck with the GUI user selection screen?

    4. Re:That the hell is GDM/lightDM... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      No, it's the place where you click your username out of a list (unless you run a little gconf-fu on the command line su'd as the gdm user). Does LightDM allow configuration or are users just stuck with the GUI user selection screen?

      That's entirely up to the theme you're using. The default KDM theme in Debian has it typed. I think Ubuntu's default GDM theme has you select from a list.

  7. the real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real question is whether they will switch from Unity as the default to something else. Anything else.

    1. Re:the real question by Tarlus · · Score: 2

      We need a new fork. Gubuntu, for everybody who was perfectly fine with GNOME. Then their flagship Ubuntu releases can sport whatever hot new thing they want to roll out every six months.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    2. Re:the real question by udippel · · Score: 1

      You guys don't seem to grok it:
      There is no more Gnome 2 available, except in maintenance and soon to be deprecated to be followed by abandoned. You had better proposed Aubuntu; for 'Abandonware Ubuntu'!
      And the same applies for Slackware, Gentoo, you name them. Sooner or later everyone will have to decide on either of: Gnome 3, Unity, KDE as default desktop environment.

    3. Re:the real question by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      Nobody mentioned GNOME 2 specifically till you did.

      I know what you mean, and I for one miss having KDE 3 in a modern distro.

      But the fact is that GNOME is still out there, so I would hope that Ubuntu will continue to have a gnome-desktop metapackage for those who would prefer to run it, 2.x or 3.x. They continue provide numerous other environments (Fluxbox, LXDE, XFCE, just to name a few) and undoubtedly somebody will make an unofficial GNOME-only offshoot of Ubuntu (similar to Lubuntu) whether Canonical sanctions it or not.

      I'm personally happy with XFCE so as long as that never gets axed, I'll be sound as a pound.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    4. Re:the real question by KugelKurt · · Score: 1

      I know what you mean, and I for one miss having KDE 3 in a modern distro.

      openSUSE 11.4. KDE 3 is still in the repos.

  8. Extinction-level event by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Natty goes from Gnome to Unity
    Oneiric goes from GDM to LightDM, Firefox to Chromium and X to Wayland.

    While it's not quite on the level of OS9 to OSX and definitely not without losses, 2011's Ubuntu releases will change the landscape of Linux for the better.

    --
    I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    1. Re:Extinction-level event by Sodki · · Score: 0

      I prefer GNOME over Unity, I prefer GDM over LightDM, I prefer Firefox over Chromium and Wayland is nowhere near ready for mainstream. And I still prefer Gentoo over Ubuntu.

    2. Re:Extinction-level event by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Dunno about LightDM or wayland, but Unity and Chromium are a massive step backwards rather than an improvement. Unity is buggy and a pain to use, and Chromium has shit for extensions and still won't work right with adblock. No thanks. You want a better experience, install XFCE and XDM with Compiz Fusion for the eye-candy. You want bloated garbage that makes your computer completely unsable, install the new default Ubuntu or Kubuntu distros.

    3. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I guess you are free to use Gentoo..!

    4. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      chrome and chromium are way better than firefox (thats right, I said it). i was loyal to firefox for almost a decade, tried chrome for two days, and made the switch.

      unity blows ass though. I went back to 10.4 (or 10.10, can't remember) because of it. if I wanted a mac-like interface (except worse), i'd go hump steve jobs like the rest of the "it just works" users.

    5. Re:Extinction-level event by OverlordQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      2011's Ubuntu releases will change the landscape of Linux for the better.

      I'm not sure everybody would consider those changes better.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    6. Re:Extinction-level event by iceaxe · · Score: 1

      I went back to 10.4 (or 10.10, can't remember) because of it.

      You do realize that you can use many different window managers or 'desktop frameworks' or whatever without having to install an older release.. right?

      I'm running Natty with Unity, Gnome, and Xfce installed, currently defaulting to Xfce. It's just a drop-down widget at log in. Srsly.

      --
      WALSTIB!
    7. Re:Extinction-level event by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 1

      Oneiric goes from Firefox to Chromium and X to Wayland

      No, it doesn't. Would be really stupid.

    8. Re:Extinction-level event by LordLimecat · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Chromium works fine with adblock and has for the last year or so. It is also significantly faster than Firefox.

    9. Re:Extinction-level event by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While I like the idea behind LightDM & prefer Chromium over Firefox, that wasn't why I said it would change Linux for the better.

      I think there is a lot of dogma within the Linux universe which needs to be shaken up once in a while. Survival of the fittest and all of that. We've seen recently where LibreOffice forked away from OpenOffice in a move that was almost universally welcomed and which has breathed an incredablt amount of new life into the project. Ubuntu's move to Unity, while much less warmly received, caused a large amount of navel gazing within the Gnome ranks and I believe it will pay a lot of dividends in the near future especially with interoperability.

      Is Wayland ready for primetime? Nobody thinks so yet. Is Chromium better than Firefox? Depends on your opinion. But with the major trend setting distro making these changes, it forces everyone to re-evaluate and that is the best thing that can happen.

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    10. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would be quite surprised if Canonical actually has the developer muscle to make Wayland usable for them in that timeframe. Awesome if they do...

      Changing the login manager or default browser just aren't "landscape-changing" things.

    11. Re:Extinction-level event by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Evolution is better than revolution, at least if you're doing anything well and have any user base. The whole move to Unity by Ubuntu was a colossal embarrassment. It was pretty clearly rushed to meet an arbitrary release schedule and looks really amateurish compared to what they had. I'm not really sure that it made any sense to default to using Unity rather than making users install it or manually switch to it if they were interested in trying it out.

      I can only imagine how they'll screw this one up. Personally, I think it would be better to fix the mess they've got presently before opening up more places for screw ups.

    12. Re:Extinction-level event by idontgno · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it forces everyone to re-evaluate and that is the best thing that can happen.

      Disputable.

      What, precisely, are we re-evaluating? Novelty for novelty's sake is a disease. Stability can be important, even overridingly so.

      Please provide a concrete example of an actual problem that these "innovations" purport to solve.

      Ubuntu is in danger of rendering itself irrelevant to any but the "Oooh, shiny" crowd, and Apple already has a lock on that.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    13. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Is Wayland ready for primetime? Nobody thinks so yet.

      In particular, Wayland breaks THE killer feature of X: remoting an app over ssh -X. The answer to this is hemming and hawing and pointing out that you can run an X server as a window in Wayland just like you can on Win7, and display a remote app on that. Which of course completely misses the point that it's the seamless integration of apps from multiple networked machines on a single display that is what many people depend on on a daily basis. Having to run a separate X server in a window defeats the purpose, and makes Wayland yet another reduced-functionality replacement.

    14. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... or just install Ubuntu and install the Firefox and XFCE packages. That's what I do.

    15. Re:Extinction-level event by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wayland is a massive step backwards too. Everyone's just going to run an X server on top of Wayland, so it will do nothing but add another layer to slow things down and break.

      If people start writing native Wayland apps, that's another massive step back since Wayland doesn't have network transparency, forces clients to provide their own window decorations, etc.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    16. Re:Extinction-level event by c6gunner · · Score: 0

      Nope, and nope. And, even if it happened to be true in 1% of cases, firefox still wins out in extensions alone. Chrome is ok for the average user, just like IE, but you won't catch me using either one of them except for compatibility-testing my sites.

    17. Re:Extinction-level event by JonJ · · Score: 1

      I would be quite surprised if Canonical actually has the developer muscle to make Wayland usable for them in that timeframe.

      You mean to tell me that no-contributions-upstream-Canonical actually has developers?

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    18. Re:Extinction-level event by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Chromium works well enough, I agree. But I use Chromium and Firefox in parallel (long story) and I just don't notice any speed difference at all. As far as using them, they seem all but identical to me.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    19. Re:Extinction-level event by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Er what? Chromium is _slightly_ faster if at all than Firefox if you don't adblock anything or almost anything. Once you get rid of hidden junk, Firefox becomes a whole deal faster.

      Sample numbers, from loading CNN's main page on a slow machine with no memory pressure, the page was visited just before closing the browser and starting it anew:
      * empty adblock: Firefox 37 seconds, Chromium 35
      * configured adblock: Firefox 8, Chromium 35

      And then, Chromium has a number of deficiencies that make it pretty useless: no notion of restricting cookies to a session (you may at most delete ALL cookies on exit), no way to reliably block tracking beacons, no way to fix the intentional crash to desktop on closing the last tab, and so on.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    20. Re:Extinction-level event by Compaqt · · Score: 2

      >But with the major trend setting distro making these changes, it forces everyone to re-evaluate and that is the best thing that can happen.

      OK. Whatever. Trend-setting, fancy, etc. Great.

      But explain this:
      "Ubuntu for business: Secure, reliable and with no licence fees, businesses everywhere are using Ubuntu to reduce costs and boost performance."

      "Perfect for business use, Ubuntu is safe, intuitive and stable. Easy to integrate, you'll be able to create documents, spreadsheets and presentations and share them with Windows users stress-free."

      How is it stable when it's changing major stuff left and right every version with huge bugs. How is it intuitive when it hides the menus, hides the scrollbar (!), and possibly even Shut Down? How is it stress-free when it forces you to learn yet another interface to be able to accomplish the same stuff you were doing just fine before?

      And reliable? Haha.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    21. Re:Extinction-level event by RobbieThe1st · · Score: 1

      Chrome better? Hah!
      I've had Chrome 11 installed for a while now, and won't use it for a variety of reasons:
      1. It doesn't follow my system font configuration: I want hinted, aliased fonts(XP style). Every other program follows my settings. Not Chrome!
      2. It's slow. Seriously. My firefox nightly is way faster, has hardware acceleration(I've got a Nvidia card), and doed a way better job with extensions.
      3. Ugly user interface: Sorry, I don't like the "minimal" interface - Perhaps on a 1024x768 laptop it makes sense, but not with a full 1920x1080 desktop. I /like/ the good old file/edit/view menues, having my own "favorites" bar etc... Just like ff3.6(made my nightly look like FF 3.6 with tabs on the bottom etc.)
      4. Not compatible with my FF extensions. Sure, I know it'd be near impossible to do it, but I have FF extensions without equal in the Chrome world(Like Sqlite Manager for one)

    22. Re:Extinction-level event by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that they have 58 "artists" on Macs and 2 developers.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    23. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wayland is a massive step backwards too. Everyone's just going to run an X server on top of Wayland, so it will do nothing but add another layer to slow things down and break.

      If people start writing native Wayland apps, that's another massive step back since Wayland doesn't have network transparency, forces clients to provide their own window decorations, etc.



      You're talking out of your ass. Wayland is a huge step forward, it does run straight from KMS and there's no need to configure anything to start the compositor, unlike X which won't even start sometimes thus alienating new users who try Linux for first time.
    24. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. I appreciate that Canonical is smashing up the status quo, but there are lots of folks who want to opt for a more stable setup with some more continuity.

    25. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I suppose if you're a business and you want a long-term, stable environment, you use the Ubuntu version that's very clearly marked as "long term support", rather than the ones that are very clearly marked that they'll be out of support in 6 months...

    26. Re:Extinction-level event by udippel · · Score: 1

      Ooops, Insightful 3?
      You are theoretical right with the network transparency of X. Though your post implies that you need X for network transparency; like remote desktops. Nothing could be further from the truth. I see a lot of installations over the year, but nobody uses X for this purpose any longer. Nobody. It has even been disabled one way or another over the years, for security purposes.
      All sorts of your desktop viewers like vncviewer have nothing to make with the native network transparency of X.

    27. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What it doesn't work with is NoScript, and its 100% async design ensures that it can't ever do so without some major design work on the core. The existing alternatives to NoScript suck so awfully as to be unusable. I do not care that chrome's design makes scripts safer -- I want the annoyances gone, and a one-click whitelist for sites I trust.

    28. Re:Extinction-level event by DEmmons · · Score: 1

      sorry, i don't have mod points today. this si the problem right here - people are trying to do serious stuff with Linux. Ubuntu brands itself as the Linux that's not just for geeks tinkering with it at home anymore - and that's why they have such a huge user base. I find it annoying myself and stick to Fedora, but we're having growing pains there too - Gnome 3 with its gnome shell is clearly designed for touchscreen tablets, and it should stay there. it's not a bad option for that, but i find it completely worthless for my proper-sized notebook, or anything without a touchscreen. after testing everything out, including KDE, I'm pretty set on going to XFCE with the official release of Fedora 15 - but i'd be happier keeping my Gnome 2 desktop. i'm about to open a Linux-based computer lab and I can't have the entire desktop constantly changing on me for that. not to mention that even in fallback mode, Gnome 3 has severely reduced functionality. It's really disappointing to see that they've scrapped everything that I liked about Gnome, like the very simple idea of a panel that i can set wherever i want and then populate with whichever widgets i want. and all to force us all onto a new interface that won't run without hardware acceleration (reducing my gaming performance and crashing stuff), requires several extra clicks just to start something from a menu, and in general is only suitable for touchscreens. I suppose if I got a new computer i'd be considering KDE but i need to stick with simple stuff until then. oh well, at least we have a choice.

    29. Re:Extinction-level event by Bitsy+Boffin · · Score: 1

      With "Wayland" can you do something like:
          ssh -X user@server xcommandhere

      I'm pretty sure when I first read about Wayland, this was not a happening thing. I don't know about other Slashdotians, but I use X11 forwarding all the time.

      --
      NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
    30. Re:Extinction-level event by jouassou · · Score: 1

      This. I too use X11 forwarding over ssh all the time, and that's a feature I'm not ready to give up.

    31. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen to that.
      For me, this is so obvious, that i'd really like to hear about all those "business users", and how they deal with those mandatory breaking update. I mean, it's a legitimate and highly obvious question, so why does nobody talk about it ? Is it some "the king is naked" stuff ?

    32. Re:Extinction-level event by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      ssh -X user@server xcommandhere

      Why are you using -X instead of -Y ?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    33. Re:Extinction-level event by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Chromium works fine with adblock and has for the last year or so. It is also significantly faster than Firefox.

      Yes, but it's still a fucking Google product.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    34. Re:Extinction-level event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something that will bring us a modern display stack while remaining compatible with the current one in a _simple_ way is a massive step backwards ?

    35. Re:Extinction-level event by theCoder · · Score: 1

      Stop calling me nobody! I use remote X all the time, almost always through ssh. Just because most people don't know it's possible doesn't mean that no one uses it!

      I know it's popular to take away features in OSS tools, but please stop. So many nice features have been lost in desktop Linux over tha past decade, mostly due to half done "re-writes" that no one seems to finish. Per-workspace wallpapers (Gnome 2.0), screen saver preferences, session management (having the same terminals pop up when you log in), even GDM isn't very configurable anymore. You used to be able to set lots of things, now it's almost nothing. Just Google for the procedure to change the background image for GDM. It's embarrassing. And most other things cannot be configured at all.

      Compiz is one of the few bright spots. Without it, I definitely would have left Gnome a while ago. I see other posts talking about getting compiz working in XFCE. I ought to give that a shot.

      --
      "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
    36. Re:Extinction-level event by udippel · · Score: 1

      At least I can agree on this!
      The desktop has been dumbed down. To me, the first time, seriously, by RedHat, from 7.3 to 8, when many a good thing disappeared, like workspaces. I complained as loud as I could, but was told, "nobody uses them". 10 years later, they are resurrected by activities.
      May I was just wrong, having seen no remote X for years, and me myself preferring vncviewer, I thought transparent client-server for X was outdated.
      I stand corrected.

      And take care about compiz, KDE and Gnome 3 and Unity are also taking away some of its features. Gnome 2 is still my preferred Compiz-desktop, while KDE has become my preferred one for working, of course composited.

    37. Re:Extinction-level event by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      I go back and forth, but Chrome out-of-box seems just "better", with its extension, autofill, prefs, etc sync built in-- Adblock and IeTab prefs on one computer are synced to everywhere. I am unaware of similar capabilities in firefox.

      As for speed, firefox startup and tab-tearing seem slower, which are major factors for me. FF4 IS much closer to chrome all-around, though.

    38. Re:Extinction-level event by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      ANd THAT, folks, is what we call rabid fanatacism.

      Im not even clear who you would prefer to Google. Apple? Microsoft? Or Mozilla, who is constantly inking deals with (and receiving their funding from) Google?

    39. Re:Extinction-level event by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      I have to say, I refuse to use Unity, I spit on Chromium in disgust, I've never even heard of LightDM, and I wouldn't install Ubuntu on one of my own machines if you paid me money...but you have made the best and most profound point on these topics that I have yet seen. +6 to you.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    40. Re:Extinction-level event by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      What, precisely, are we re-evaluating? Novelty for novelty's sake is a disease. Stability can be important, even overridingly so.

      Gnome 2 has for years been the standard in the Linux desktop, despite the fact that it is widely reviled even by many of its own users. It is an albatross around the neck of the Linux desktop. It has to die.

      I agree with (what I assume is) your position that Unity is not the right direction to take away from that mess. But it's a direction. As is Gnome 3. I don't like Gnome 3 either, but at least we're trying again, at least we're talking about it again. And even if the lessons we take from this experience are all "things not to do," we're learning something.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    41. Re:Extinction-level event by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Because everyone loves three year old software. STFU about LTS already.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  9. Smart Move by nssy · · Score: 1

    This decision seems logical, especially for interfaces that might be used on netbooks. No need for fancy stuff before you even login to your desktop

    --
    Some of us learn from other people's mistakes and the rest of us have to be other people. -- Zig Ziglar
  10. FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

    Need I say more?

  11. GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport by jmorris42 · · Score: 4, Funny

    > But does not actually provide a shut down option, because that might confuse users too much.

    Ah, but if you are one of the advanced users (who GNOME wishes would just take the hint and switch to another desktop) who insist on a shutdown option, you can go read the arcane lore on a blog that describes in perfect detail how to download a non-supported third party plugin that will add a shutdown option. Of course the blog post isn't easy to find on Google and documents a procedure that doesn't quite work right with the current release and the link to the actual download is now a 404 error with herbal viagra adverts on it.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
    1. Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly. You just edit the configuration XML directly in gconf. Nothing could be simpler!

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    2. Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      > Don't be silly. You just edit the configuration XML directly in gconf.

      Neener, it is you who are silly, didn't you know gconf is toast and dconf is the new hotness. This week at least.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    3. Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport by Pricetx · · Score: 1

      Or, there is the rumoured black art of holding the alt key before clicking on the menu. It is said a shutdown option magically appears.

    4. Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport by xaositects · · Score: 2

      up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, b, a, start will get you the shutdown option

    5. Re:GNOME3 slagging, todays new bloodsport by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konami_Code for those who don't get it.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  12. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by jmorris42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > Need I say more?

    In a sane world I'd disagree. But I know we live in an insane one and it won't take long for the idiots who thought using an HTML rendering library to render the login screen will start adding net based content as plugins to the login screen. Why not put a weatherbug up? Or a news ticker. Or the phase of the moon, and getting it locally is just too much trouble. Stock tickers? Why not. Until an exploit.

    Bet WebKit's squalid bulk didn't go into the 5KLoC vs 50KLoC size difference.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  13. Why not SLiM? by lolcutusofbong · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a normal X login manager without all the extra crap from gdm and kdm, and since it's in the Ubuntu repos already, all it needs is a good theme.

    1. Re:Why not SLiM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a user list, and buttons for shutdown/suspend/reboot

    2. Re:Why not SLiM? by lolcutusofbong · · Score: 2

      A user list? If people are too stupid to remember their username, they don't deserve to log in. Also, unless you're running some sort of ancient pre-ACPI system (in which case you're likely running Puppy, not Ubuntu), you can just press the power button to shut down.

    3. Re:Why not SLiM? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If people are too stupid to remember their username, they don't deserve to log in.

      We are not all teenagers. Our family computer has logins for more than 20 family members. How does Auntie Gladys remember whether her login is "Gladys", "gladyce", "glad", or "auntieg"? (She only uses it alternate Christmasses)

      I do not want family members to login as "guest" because that would (a) leave them insecure, and (b) set a bad example.

      Incidentally, most have been able to use Ubuntu/OpenOffice with no instructions at all, some without even being told its not Windows. (Quite a few of my family use OpenOffice on Windows, following problems opening old Word files with new versions of Word). Most seem to prefer it, and ask "why is your computer better than mine?" - the computer in question is a P4 with 512M!

      Now get off my lawn.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    4. Re:Why not SLiM? by silanea · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I am too lazy to type my username. Why should I, really, when I can just press enter instead? I thought computers were there to make our lives easier, not even more annoying.

      --
      Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
    5. Re:Why not SLiM? by grumbel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not only that, the username field is also the only field in which you can type clear text, thus the only field where you can actually see when you have capslock on or loaded a wrong keymap. It always drives me nuts when I have to enter my password and can't even verify that the keys I am hitting are really the keys I think they are.

    6. Re:Why not SLiM? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

      >> It always drives me nuts when I have to enter my password and can't even verify that the keys I am hitting are really the keys I think they are

      Holy shit! Apple just patented the idea and you already have got the keyboard??!?
      http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/05/12/162208/Apple-Patents-Keyboard-That-Knows-What-Youll-Type

    7. Re:Why not SLiM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried slim for a while. It wasn't so great and I changed back to gdm. I can't remember why. The old memory and all that.

    8. Re:Why not SLiM? by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One reason: Why broadcast your login ID's to someone ? Make them work for it.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    9. Re:Why not SLiM? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Not supporting remote logins is one good reason.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    10. Re:Why not SLiM? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Because that wouldn't fuck shit up enough.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    11. Re:Why not SLiM? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      It's a normal X login manager without all the extra crap from gdm and kdm, and since it's in the Ubuntu repos already, all it needs is a good theme.

      I agree 100%. The needing a good theme, that is. The default webkit and gtk themes really suck.

    12. Re:Why not SLiM? by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 2

      Strictly speaking putting "John Smith" on the login screen isn't giving away a login name at all: the actual username might j.smith jsmith, smith, JSmith, or any one of dozens of combinations.

      There's also the issue that like, 90% of all uses of that login screen aren't for internet accessible PCs via that path. Which means it's strictly local, which means someone already has physical access to the box and thus it's pretty much game-over security wise in the first place.

    13. Re:Why not SLiM? by allo · · Score: 0

      you haven't thought this to the end ...

      if you can click on "John Smith", you can try every password you can think of without even the need of knowing his login-name.

    14. Re:Why not SLiM? by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      What do your "normal" friends/family think of the new Gnome/buntu interfaces (Gnome3/Unity)?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    15. Re:Why not SLiM? by Compaqt · · Score: 2

      No kidding. It's not like we're talking about printing the contents /etc/passwd when someone so much as knocks on port 22.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    16. Re:Why not SLiM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If someone can't even remember their username, then they probably won't remember their password either, unless it's the same as username, or something that can be broken with easy dictionary attack...

    17. Re:Why not SLiM? by Sepodati · · Score: 1

      My kids never blinked an eye after I upgraded all of our machines to 11.04. Most "normal" friends/family are just hitting an icon on the launcher anyhow, versus hitting an icon on Docky, the desktop or a panel.

    18. Re:Why not SLiM? by Sepodati · · Score: 1

      There is a warning icon if you have capslock on. I think previous versions of the OS or login manager put actual text under the password portion warning you if the capslock key was on.

    19. Re:Why not SLiM? by silanea · · Score: 1

      Sure. Three times. Then you will have to wait until I come home. And reset the lock on my computer. Which stands in my living-room.

      --
      Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
    20. Re:Why not SLiM? by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      A user list? If people are too stupid to remember their username, they don't deserve to log in.

      Shut the fuck up.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  14. The good news by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you like GDM, you can use it. This is free software (in both senses), and just because Ubuntu's main branch is going a particular direction doesn't mean you have to. If you want to be based off of Ubuntu, you could do a kubuntu-like fork. If you want to do something completely different, you can switch distros (e.g. I switched to ArchLinux because I didn't want all the eye candy and complexity of what Ubuntu was doing).

    And if you're really not seeing the choices you like out there, you can always roll your own. I've done that too, it's time-consuming but not particularly difficult. And if you really like doing that, you can fairly easily set up your installs with a package manager, set up a repository, and all of a sudden you're well on your way to having your own distro.

    As it stands, I'm interested to see what Ubuntu comes up with, but I don't equate them to desktop Linux. There are just too many good options out there for that.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:The good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could just use the commercial OSes that have sane defaults that fit what 95% or more of users want rather than dicking around with distro hopping or building your own distro because a group of asshats think that changing things to change them is sane development policies.

    2. Re:The good news by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      Variety is good but the most important thing is interoperability.

      Having multiple login managers means for instance that your favorite KDM theme won't work in GDM or LightDM etc. It's not like they support some common theming standard.

      This kind of fragmentation is hurting linux desktop a lot.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    3. Re:The good news by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      People criticising new things. News at 11.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    4. Re:The good news by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

      Exactly my point. And I was replying to parent's suggestion to try commercial OSes to avoid this exact 'problem', that all OSes - commercial or 'free' go through the same cycles.

    5. Re:The good news by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Having multiple login managers means for instance that your favorite KDM theme won't work in GDM or LightDM etc. It's not like they support some common theming standard.

      If you really cared that much about your favorite KDM theme, though, you could do any of these things, in order of improvements to future interoperability:
      1. Write a compatibility library to read any of the theme formats and provide the info KDM and GDM looks for in its themes, and then hook your DM of choice into it.
      2. Write a conversion program to turn KDM themes into GDM themes (and possibly vice versa)
      3. Use the artwork from your favorite KDM theme to create a GDM theme to your liking.
      4. Run KDM and use it to log into Gnome or whatever your preferred desktop environment is.

      In any of these scenarios, you could make your system do exactly what you wanted it to do. In some of these scenarios, if you give your code away you can give the same abilities to the rest of the world.

      Compare that to Windows, where Microsoft designs its login screen for you and makes it difficult-to-impossible to change.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  15. Some disagree with the decision: by Yfrwlf · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.advogato.org/person/mjg59/diary.html?start=296

    To summarise, their argument is that LightDM is light on code because it can't do as much as GDM and the others, and if you removed those features from the others they would be light as well.

    If that's true and that is the main difference, maybe it'd be easier to strip out, or turn off, parts of GDM if Canonical wants to dispose of certain features to achieve a faster boot time.

    11.04 is SO SLOW to boot in comparison to 10.10.

    --
    Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    1. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like Ubuntu gives a shit about what a former Ubuntu contributor (and now Redhat employee), who left Ubuntu because he got into a spat with another Ubuntu developer, thinks about the decision to go with LightDm. He trashed Debian after he left it for Ubuntu. Now that he's with Redhat, he concern trolls about Ubuntu. Pathetic.

    2. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

      http://www.advogato.org/person/mjg59/diary.html?start=296

      To summarise, their argument is that LightDM is light on code because it can't do as much as GDM and the others, and if you removed those features from the others they would be light as well.

      If that's true and that is the main difference, maybe it'd be easier to strip out, or turn off, parts of GDM if Canonical wants to dispose of certain features to achieve a faster boot time.

      11.04 is SO SLOW to boot in comparison to 10.10.

      I don't think stripping out parts from GDM would be a good idea, no matter how much it needs to be done. They've already caught a lot of flack about stripping out parts from gnome3 (by using Unity instead of gnome-shell).

      As for 11.04 being slow to boot. I believe that is a kernel regression. A lot of other distros are having similar issues with boot time and also ath5k and 9k wireless. Once it is fixed upstream it will resolve itself in all the distros.

    3. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I hadn't heard about that. I wonder if it will be fixed in that main kernel version or if it's too big of a change and will have to be fixed in .39 or something.

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    4. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by pinkushun · · Score: 1

      Excellent link, thanks!

      Boot times don't worry me (for the desktop), what does concern me is system stability, something universal in the *nix world anyways.
      For the netbook I'd opt for a lighter distro anyway, making boot time moot once again.

      I'm still on 10.10, considering a new distro this weekend.

    5. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      Come back and let us know what you choose. :D

      I'd consider any Linux distro that had picked up adoption of universal packaging standards. Maybe that will happen soon though? Oh please oh please oh please...

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    6. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by jejones · · Score: 1

      Actually, it seems that his argument is that gdm has to start up a GNOME session so it can have power management consistent with GNOME... because surely nobody would ever use anything other than GNOME, right?

    7. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by Yfrwlf · · Score: 1

      Well I can understand keeping power settings all in one place. Users define their power settings inside of Gnome, so unless this configuration is placed in a standardised format somewhere so that all other programs will always know how to access it, the login manager won't have any knowledge of the user's settings which would be bad. Of course, there should be standardised ways to access ALL information and configurations on a Linux system, so I'd love for that to happen regardless.

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
    8. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by pinkushun · · Score: 1

      Since I ran #! on the netbook, I chose it for my desktop as well! I partitioned for 2 others, so I'm looking at openSuse and CentOS to play around in. My first tri-boot!

    9. Re:Some disagree with the decision: by jejones · · Score: 1

      Me too--just do it in a window manager-independent way.

  16. Does it have user switching? by doti · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Many a time I searched for a replacement for GDM, but none of the alternatives provide the switch-user feature that I need (that is, the ability to have multiple users logged in at once, with an option to switch from one to another; useful for when there are more users than machines at home).

    --
    factor 966971: 966971
    1. Re:Does it have user switching? by korgitser · · Score: 1

      Kde has user swithching, dunno if it's in the DM or the DE..

      --
      FCKGW 09F9 42
    2. Re:Does it have user switching? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try KDE (Kubuntu) - it supports this quite nicely.

      KDE is sort of Gnome without being so dumbed down.

    3. Re:Does it have user switching? by Jon.Burgin · · Score: 1

      +1 very important for me as well.

    4. Re:Does it have user switching? by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 1

      User switching is implemented in both Gnome and KDE. Maybe you mean user switching without having multiple X servers though? I don't know much about X, but I can't see why that couldn't be implemented somehow.. Maybe there are security issues though.

    5. Re:Does it have user switching? by massysett · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Any display manager can do this on Linux. Using good ol' xdm on Debian, just edit /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers and have xdm start an X server on multiple virtual terminals. Typically :1 will be ctrl-alt-F8; :2 will be F9, etc. If you start an xdm on multiple terminals and just switch to a new one when someone new needs to log in, you'll be covered. (What I don't know offhand is if there is a way to arbitrarily start a new X server by hitting a key, rather than having to configure a set number of servers ahead of time.)

      In your home, if you have, say, 4 users, you can agree that each user has a particular vt.

      On my desktop I have ctrl-alt-F12 load up a "guest" account with xfce. Once the guest logs out, root removes the home directory and drops in a clean new one. The guest automatically loads up firefox. It's great for visitors who get rather confused when they saw my old xmonad desktop. (my current awesome is a bit less confusing, at least.)

      Often it seems that newer programs implement newer functionality, when really the old Unix programs were doing the same thing twenty years ago.

    6. Re:Does it have user switching? by Crispy+Critters · · Score: 1

      That's the easier part. The harder part is to switch permissions to the new user so they have access to audio devices, so automounted file systems have the right owner, and so on. If that isn't needed, then a simpler solution is good enough.

    7. Re:Does it have user switching? by KWTm · · Score: 1

      Many a time I searched for a replacement for GDM, but none of the alternatives provide the switch-user feature that I need (that is, the ability to have multiple users logged in at once, with an option to switch from one to another; useful for when there are more users than machines at home).

      Not sure what you mean. I have been using KDE on Kubuntu (sticking with 10.04 Long-Term Support edition; I don't want to fritter my time on learning to handle a new user interface every 6 months) and they have user switching, either through the main menu, or as I've learned to do it, the KRunner interface (Alt-F2 by default --I redefined mine to be Meta-Space; then type "switch " and hit Enter). It is also an option on the login screen, or, as described in a sibling post, you can just hit Ctrl-Alt-F8, Ctrl-Alt-F9, etc.

      In fact, I routinely do this on the "public" guest computer at home so any visitor can use the computer, and yet I can easily switch to a private account for managing finances, etc. to which I don't want our visitors to have access.

      Perhaps you find that user switching for the GNOME Display Manager is easier to use, or more intuitive for you, which is fine, but it would be incorrect to say that KDE does not have "the ability to have multiple users logged in at once, with an option to switch from one to another".

      --
      404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
      [GPG key in journal]
  17. The best part of Unity by iceaxe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I really like Unity, too. It got me to finally try Xfce, and I'm very happy with the change. (I've been meaning to try it out for ages, but never got around to it.)

    After switching back to 'classic' I just fired up synaptic, installed Xfce and whatever recommended additions I thought looked good, logged out and back in using Xfce, and I haven't had an urge to go back yet. Granted, it's only been a few days, but the things I do every day work as well or better.

    I liked it so much that I installed Xubuntu on another system, and really like the defaults they put in place there.

    I think the next time I reinstall the OS on my 'regular' computer (as opposed to just upgrading Ubuntu) I'll be grabbing Xubuntu.

    --
    WALSTIB!
    1. Re:The best part of Unity by icebraining · · Score: 3, Funny

      I really like Unity, too. It got me to finally try Xfce, and I'm very happy with the change.

      As said by Groucho Marx:

      "I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book."

    2. Re:The best part of Unity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen. I didn't even bother with Ubuntu or Kubuntu I went straight to Xubuntu; already using Zenwalk (Slack-based + XFCE) on my lappy & torrenting Salix 13.37 (also Slack-based + XFCE). I'm tired of well-meaning folks who insist on "fixing" things that aren't broken ... till they get "fixed". Next "upgrade cycle I'm going back to Debian testing (or Sid) and possibly Slackware proper. Enough is enough!

    3. Re:The best part of Unity by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I really like Unity, too. It got me to finally try Xfce, and I'm very happy with the change.

      As said by Groucho Marx:

      "I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book."

      LOL so that's what Edubuntu is all about, I always wondered...

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  18. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by MBCook · · Score: 1

    Why in the world are you allowing unprivileged users to set the theme for something that runs as root?

    It's not like you're on the internet browsing random sites, it's pulling a few things from disk you have to be a privileged user to set.

    If the user has the privileges to change the theme, they had the privileges to corrupt/delete important files.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  19. 11.10 will be Gnome-free for me, then. by Bloodwine77 · · Score: 1

    I have been planning to make XFCE my default session in 11.10 since Gnome 2.32 will no longer be an option. Combine that with the news that GDM will be replaced with LightDM, my system will be relatively Gnome-free. I can't find too much information on LightDM, but I hope it is easily customizable and that it isn't ugly-as-sin or too-basic out of the box. I have been disappointed in 11.04 on the lack of easy customization/configuration of GDM. I know I can always edit the raw conf files, but I'd like a nice GUI to manage it like I would other aspects of the theme.

  20. mjg weighs in by Knuckles · · Score: 1

    Haven't made up my mind yet, but I often find Matthew Garrett's blog posts insightful, and he doesn't like it: http://mjg59.livejournal.com/136274.html

    --
    "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    1. Re:mjg weighs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who? Anyway, I found the comments disagreeing with him much more insightful.

    2. Re:mjg weighs in by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      Who? Anyway, I found the comments disagreeing with him much more insightful.

      On the internet you can search for names, and the site I linked is a so-called blog that lets you read, for example, previous articles.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    3. Re:mjg weighs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh looky. Matthew Garrett, former Debian contributor until he got pissed with them, then left to contribute to Ubuntu until he got into a spat with Scott James Remnant, and then left and got a job with Canonical competitor, Redhat, is concern trolling about Ubuntu again.

      YAWN.

    4. Re:mjg weighs in by JonJ · · Score: 1

      Maybe he felt like getting some of his contributions upstream, unlike Canonical. YAWN.

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    5. Re:mjg weighs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, mjg is a prima donna like most Redhat devs. Canonical could have easily gotten some, if not all their contributions accepted upstream if Gnome wasn't dominated by Redhat fuckers protecting their turf and the useful idiots like Dave Neary who enable them. I wish the hell Linux users would figure out that Redhat has become the Microsoft of the OSS world. NIHism runs rampant through their corporate structure. There's not a single non-Redhat technology in linuxland out there that Redhat doesn't want to replace. If they had their way, all distros would be just different flavors of fedora.

    6. Re:mjg weighs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Redhat has become the Microsoft of the OSS world

      You're an idiot. Don't be so jealous that Fedora has more users than Ubuntu.

    7. Re:mjg weighs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only in your masturbatory dreams fedoro fanboi... Just like every evil machination that Microsoft performs is exposed and has lead to their slow decline, so that will too happen to Redhat when linux users start getting smart and cataloging the myriad of code regressions made by RH commits to the kernel and gnome core modules. I think that Linux users will be surprised at what they find.

    8. Re:mjg weighs in by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      Or, novel concept, we could look at the merits of what he has to say.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    9. Re:mjg weighs in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listening to mjg discussing the merits about Ubuntu switching to LightDM is like listening to Steve Ballmer giving advice to Steve Jobs on the finer points of mobile phone design. He's only shitting on LightDM in order to keep it from becoming included in Gnome instead of GDM (a Redhat bloated, buggy POS technology). Assuming you're a neutral party and not some RH fanboi or flunky, go read for your edification the desktop-devel-list at gnome.org starting with the Gnome Backup thread and the LightDm proposal. You'll quickly notice the usual Redhat Gnome flunkys arguing against an inclusion of non-Redhat technology and openness in Gnome' API for gnome-control-center. It's weird that all have essentially identical philosophical positions regarding all things Gnome. I'm sure the fact that they have a common employer has no influence at all on their opinions. What's really funny about the thread is Dave Neary must be shitting his pants because some of Gnome's dirty laundry and obvious bias against anything non-Redhat are being aired out by the Redhat devs themselves. I found a couple of Matthias Clasen's posts especially precious.

  21. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

    Bet WebKit's squalid bulk didn't go into the 5KLoC vs 50KLoC size difference.

    From the docs it looks like WebKit might be optional in LightDM. But if WebKit is used on Ubuntu, then I don't see why loading a 25MB HTML engine (+ it's dependencies!) is a good thing. WebKit is pretty bulky. And this is a login manager we're talking about!

    And it's not like WebKit will be loaded later anyhow. Even if you do use a WebKit based browser, that is most likely Chrome, which bundles it's own copy of WebKit - so no sharing with apps that use the system WebKit like LightDM.

  22. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by icebraining · · Score: 1

    You could let root install the themes, and just let an unprivileged user choose between them.

    You could also run the GUI as an unprivileged user and the core as root, similar to xscreensaver.

  23. Linux is ready for the Desktop... by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

    You know... I've finally adopted the 'use linux as much
    as possible' mindset... settled on a distro and now they
    are trying to fuck it up as much as they can.

    Bravo.

    -AI

    --
    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    1. Re:Linux is ready for the Desktop... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      You know... I've finally adopted the 'use linux as much
      as possible' mindset... settled on a distro and now they
      are trying to fuck it up as much as they can.

      Bravo.

      -AI

      Not sure what you are referring to. But, if the distro you settled on is Ubuntu and the desktop is gnome. The old classic gnome is still there and you can login and use it. Gnome itself is changing and the old desktop is going away, but that is happening with or without Ubuntu's involvement. Changing to lightdm from gdm shouldn't make a difference to your use. It is simple the portion where you type your user id and password.

    2. Re:Linux is ready for the Desktop... by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      So you settled on the "let's fuck everything up every six months" distro and now you're shocked - SHOCKED - that that's exactly what they're doing? Broaden your horizons, man.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  24. You miss the point by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    You are missing the point. While I do not care for the Unity interface, you are missing the point. Unity was rushed, because gnome3 and gnome-shell were so, so late. Then, because of the delay, Ubuntu, look at what they found problematic with gnome-shell (both functional and political) and made their own shell. Again, while I don't care for Unity, it is pretty usable and was made so in a relatively short period of time. From that perspective, the developers should get recognition. Again, if gnome3 had shipped on time, there probably wouldn't be unity.

    As for Unity not being ready. I think most people, including Ubuntu would admit that, or at least that it isn't completed yet. For new users, they usually direct them to their LTS releases which Unity is not even an issue. For advanced users, they can easily switch to the old gnome interface. I do think, the old interface should have been the default with Unity being optional, but they didn't ask me. What having Unity in 11.04 provides Ubuntu a very large usability and testing population to perfect it for 11.10.

    As for moving to lightdm, they aren't the only ones. While KDE has KDM, all the other environments have to use XDM or GDM. XDM works, but it isn't very pretty. GDM makes a lot of gnome load and run in the background, even though you aren't running gnome for a desktop. Switching to lightdm will mean that if you want to run XFCE or openbox or E17 or whatever, you don't have to have a gnome session running just to provide login/logout capabilities.

    1. Re:You miss the point by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Not another post about LTS!

      First, LTS are no better than so-called "normal" releases in the area of bugs or refraining from adding stuff that breaks (PulseAudio).

      Second, who directs them to their LTS releases? "Their" must refer to Ubuntu, and they certainly don't direct anybody to an LTS release.

      re: LightDM- this actually seems like a sensible move, like the old Ubuntu would make (things that improve functionality without sacrificing compatibility, like Upstart).

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    2. Re:You miss the point by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      On the download page:

      Our long-term support (LTS) releases are supported for three years on the desktop. Perfect for organisations that need more stability for larger deployments

      Seems directed to me?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  25. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Webkit is most definitely not required for lightdm. It is just one of several presentation layers. However, if used on something like a netbook or tablet, it would make a lot of sense, since the browser would be one of the first things opened on the device. As for exploits, again, if the user is going to be doing pretty much everything in the cloud, which seems to be Ubuntu's opinion (and many others), then a webkit exploit is just as exploitive at the login screen vs the actual desktop. However, since access can be restricted at the login screen, the danger should be minimized.

  26. almost by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Almost gnome free. Xubuntu has a number of apps that still have gnome-dependencies, like the administrative tools, the package manager (both their own and synaptic), evince (although a gnome free version is in the repository), etc. That said, these would only run a gnome session when actually used, whereas gdm runs all the time. LightDM doesn't have a configuration tool, but it is easy to configure. I would expect themes to become available without much delay. The lack of GDM customization is not Ubuntu's fault. The Gnome developers took that ability away and nobody has taken it upon themself to write a new app to do it.

  27. Bah to GUI logins. by antdude · · Score: 1

    I still prefer text mode and typing startx command to start my X. Am I the only who still does this in Linux? :P

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      You can't even do this the way Ubuntu is configured. Kill X, and it restarts.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    2. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by antdude · · Score: 1

      Debian was like that too, but I forgot how to force it in text mode. I remember having to uninstall that graphic login package.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    3. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      I still prefer text mode and typing startx command to start my X

      We used to love people like you at work, since we could simply switch to the login VT, press ctrl-Z, mess with their system as much as we wanted, neatly passing any xlock protection, then type "cls; fg" when we were done. We had several people convinced that their machines were haunted, since "linux is secure". :)

    4. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      Yes you can, but killing X is not the way you do it. Shutting down the *DM and then reconfiguring is the way you do it. Or, since you're not using it, simply remove the package—it's definitely not going to restart if its not there!

    5. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by fikx · · Score: 1

      So, is it just Slack that still keeps VT 6 open even when using *DM or do they all still do that? Unless I'm spoiled by my slack, you can pull that trick you're talking about regardless of the run level (i.e. the normal run level for most is the graphical login...)
      so, chances are someone can pull the same trick on people like you too...

      --
      AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM
    6. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      VTs 1-6 all have login screens on Debian and RH. (Not sure about the others.) A login prompt won't really help you that much--not like having a nice, already-logged-in console session with startx sitting in the foreground.

    7. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by fikx · · Score: 1

      I fail in reading comprehension....wasn't until I had clicked "Submit' that the control-Z part sunk in...
      good trick to keep in the back of my mind :) I would have assumed that suspending X itself would have caused all the apps in the session to freak, if I'd thought about it. Now I know better ;)

      --
      AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM
    8. Re:Bah to GUI logins. by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

      You can't even do this the way Ubuntu is configured. Kill X, and it restarts.

      user@host:~$ sudo /etc/init.d/gdm stop

      And to make it permanent:

      user@host:~$ sudo update-rc.d -f gdm remove

      Problem solved

  28. Yay, I think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I run quite a few Ubuntu servers and workstations. My use of gdm seems to leave me feeling rather annoyed. It seems to have a number of painful memory leaks or something as it gets heavier and heavier over weeks of continued use - restarting it seems to resolve the issue, until a few more weeks pass.

    I don't really care if LightDM is really lighter than GDM in general, I care far more about how usable it is over weeks of constant use.. Hopefully we'll see a massive improvement here. I'm glad Ubuntu continues to work on bringing in some innovation. Nice to see, even though it can be a bit disrupting. Rad.

  29. IT'S A CONSPIRACY!! by TheDarkener · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So I have this theory that Mark Shuttleworth is actually an undercover Micro$oft operative that is being funded to create a huge community around Ubuntu and it's "sponsor", Canonical. Over time, when so many people are using it, loving it, promoting it....things start to break. Things break in Ubuntu that don't break in other distributions.

    But it's not only the things that break, but Ubuntu starts changing things - not too much change all at once, but little things here and there. Not too much to move distros (at first), but things to slowly start to eat at your sanity.

    More and more, Ubuntu breaks things, changes things...just enough for people to get very annoyed at "Linux". After all, Ubuntu is Linux for human beings (AKA n00bs?). People slowly start to complain to anyone who will listen that "Linux sucks".

    And Ballmer does the penguin dance yet again.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:IT'S A CONSPIRACY!! by nssy · · Score: 1

      Yes. This will happen in 2111. Its sad we won't be around to witness.

      --
      Some of us learn from other people's mistakes and the rest of us have to be other people. -- Zig Ziglar
  30. e17 is out by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    i'm not a fan of the pim/osx interface gnome has become any more then most people i've talked to. now that enlightenment has reached its goal e17 i thought i'd give it a shot. it is really nice. i like ubuntu. they are doing good things for people that are not just fed up with microsoft. that being said, i think making the desktop more like os/x is worse. but hey. it isn't my project and it is a free distro so it isn't my place to bitch.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:e17 is out by lennier · · Score: 1

      but hey. it isn't my project and it is a free distro so it isn't my place to bitch.

      Er, what? Whyever would it be "not our place" to talk to others about our experience using a particular piece of software and why they might choose to use or not use it?

      Are free software developers some kind of new aristocracy who are somehow immune from all criticism by virtue of it being their project, while we the mere users must silently obey and revere all their decisions?

      Surely one of the first freedoms of Free Software must be the freedom to talk about the software?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    2. Re:e17 is out by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      i didn't say talk, or even comment, i said bitch. if someone writes an application, gives its use away for free and provides the source code so people can improve upon it, it isn't my place to expect them to improve upon it in the way i want them to. it is up to me to improve upon it or accept it as it is. also, it isn't aristocratic to create something and it belong to you.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  31. Not a 'butu fan anymore by devphaeton · · Score: 1

    Around 06 or so Ubuntu was pretty cool. I had high hopes for it, and expected it to become the "linux on the desktop" that we've been ranting about for years.

    But slowly, yet methodically it just got more sluggish, buggier, dumbed down and overcomplicated. It seemed like every release had a different set of apps for everything, and things like network configuration kept jumping between the "preferences" menu and the "system administration" menu. Not a huge deal, but having to relearn the layouts ever time wasn't enjoyable. Finally, it got where the standard gnome interface of ubuntu was nearly unuseable on my hardware (too slow). I switched to Xubuntu, and found NO change in performance. It felt like it was just an XFCE theme on top of gnome.

    I tried gold old Debian for a bit (it was my main squeeze for years and years) but finally just went back to Slackware (what I started with back in the 90s)

    Linux is linux again :-)

    --


    do() || do_not(); // try();
    1. Re:Not a 'butu fan anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Xubuntu 11.04 is slooooooooooooooooooooooooow. Like you, I'm going to go back to debian 1st. If it don't work out, move to Slackware, which I've toyed with from time to time the last 5 or 6 years.

    2. Re:Not a 'butu fan anymore by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Arch Linux: Slackware For Human Beings.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  32. Slackware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still prefer text mode and typing startx command to start my X. Am I the only who still does this in Linux? :P

    Last time I had Slackware installed (13.0 I think) it booted to a cli login. I'd be using it now if I'd figured out how to make BOINC work.

  33. Progress? by steveha · · Score: 1

    I am about to abandon Chromium and switch back to Firefox.

    I am sort of a power user of web browsers. I like to open lots of windows. When I read my web comics, I just open every link in a subfolder, then close each page as I read each comic. I expect my web browser to be able to have dozens of windows open at once.

    Using Chromium under Ubuntu 11.04 (with the "Ubuntu Classic" desktop if it matters), my computer is slow and unusable. The problem is that Chromium just sucks up all my RAM and the system starts swapping. That computer has 4GB of RAM... 4GB, and it's not enough for Chromium.

    I now have to shut down Chromium twice a day, and reopen it, to free up leaked memory. I'm not happy about this.

    I think the internals of Chromium can get into some sort of bad state, and if I close all my current open windows and start opening new ones, it might mitigate the situation somewhat (by getting rid of all state and starting over fresh). I'm very annoyed that the browser doesn't Just Work and I even have to think about this stuff.

    And the surprising thing: there isn't any setting, anywhere, to tell Chromium to limit how much history it collects. I want history on the open pages, and that's pretty much it. If the history expires after two days, that's pretty ideal. There is no way to make the history expire. From time to time I manually nuke the history, and whenever I do so, the disk grinds away for a long time, I'm sure at least ten seconds.

    So, in theory, Chromium is nice and fast because it caches the heck out of everything. In practice, it consumes gigabytes of RAM and starts my whole system swapping, which makes the whole system slower than a 486 running Windows 98.

    I am willing to entertain the theory that Flash is partly to blame for the leaks. But somehow Firefox has never been as bad as Chromium, and it's the same Flash on both.

    I am not a fan of Unity, and I am not a fan of the UI regressions that go along with it. And I have several computers upgraded to Ubuntu 11.04, and my desktop just freezes up sometimes, forcing a reboot. (Probably I could get by with just stopping and restarting GDM, thus slaughtering the X server and everything running under it. But at that point I might as well just reboot.) And on the laptop I upgraded to 11.04, the WiFi stopped working at all. (The good news: that laptop now wakes from sleep mode, which it never did before. Closing the lid used to force a cold boot. There is some actual progress in 11.04.)

    I am cautiously optimistic about Wayland. We'll see.

    But I am seriously considering moving to Xubuntu, because I really don't want to run Unity. And I am not happy that I need to reboot 11.04 more often than I need to reboot Windows on my work computer.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  34. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

    However, if used on something like a netbook or tablet, it would make a lot of sense, since the browser would be one of the first things opened on the device.

    I don't get it, why does loading a copy of WebKit in the login manager make sense? That you open a browser soon later doesn't matter, since the by far most common browsers, Firefox and Chrome, would not benefit from that in any way: Firefox since it doesn't use WebKit, Chrome since it has its own copy - you will have 2 copies of WebKit in memory at that point, each taking >25MB!

  35. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by aiht · · Score: 1

    However, if used on something like a netbook or tablet, it would make a lot of sense, since the browser would be one of the first things opened on the device.

    I don't get it, why does loading a copy of WebKit in the login manager make sense? That you open a browser soon later doesn't matter, since the by far most common browsers, Firefox and Chrome, would not benefit from that in any way: Firefox since it doesn't use WebKit, Chrome since it has its own copy - you will have 2 copies of WebKit in memory at that point, each taking >25MB!

    The distro would be bundling LightDM and the browser. Why would they build them against two different copies of WebKit?

  36. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

    It is very awkward for a distro that bundles Chrome to use the system WebKit, since Chrome's entire approach is opposed to that. Chrome updates silently and often and if it used the system WebKit, Chrome could not update itself at all. You would be frozen with an older version of Chrome, and Google stops supporting them very quickly - Google's goal is update every one to the new versions.

  37. it still sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pros:
    -great for cheap-skates who wont upgrade their hardware
    -super for surfing the net
    -excellent for typing your term papers
    -wow I can spin my desktop

    cons:
    -Don't go beyond the pre-installed apps, do not try to add more stuff its masochism without the sex.
    -old MS-DOSesque prompt commands, feels like 1985 in terminal, makes one say aloud, "oh goodie!"
    -geek oriented
    -a labyrinth of out-of date and incompetent forums for help - oh that is the "community" sounds important but it sucks
    -obscure repositories, with crappy descriptions of what will and wont work and what they are supposed to do
    -forget about installing shit from terminal unless you have had linux/unix in college or waste a year with Linux For Dummies
    -don't go shopping for games at Walmart or other interesting apps online, they wont work
    -don't go down to Walmart and buy a printer, it wont work
    -no real "plug and play", its more like "plug and play simple things" or "plug and hope" or "plug and search for drivers" "plug and omg i have to use terminal"

    1. Re:it still sucks by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      I'm not experiencing these cons mentioned. Maybe you should try a release in the past five years or something?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  38. Remember KDE 4? by NoGenius · · Score: 1

    It was the end of the world as we knew it. The devs messed up our beloved KDE!! Game over, switch to Gnome. But then came several subsequent point releases and a year later KDE rocks and most everyone is very happy. Lesson? Sometimes you have to go backwards a little to go forwards. Hang in there, it'll get better...

  39. While its nice to know about the changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While its nice to know about the changes: after booting a new kernel I have to install new (Nvidia) graphics drivers, and at the end, instead of typing service gdm start, now it will be service lightdm start. My real peeve about the article is the illiterate being who wrote the article. Code is a non-count noun. That is to say, that you never get a 'hairs cut' because hair is the plural of hair. Likewise, you don't go on a 'roads trip', you go on a road trip. Source code is 'code'. To describe one line, you say one line of code. To describe the whole body, you also say code. Much like you don't go on a 'roads trip', even though there was more than one road, when talking about the collection, you say 'code'. I don't care if some marketing bunny or illiterate is trying to get you to say codes. When talking about codes, they are describing a very specific set of numbers needed to disarm the bomb, or decrypt the enigma cypher. When talking about computer software, its a non-countable noun. The correct use is 'code'. I hate beating people over the head with this, all they have to do is become literate. When I was in university, I had to study natural language processing for an artificial intelligence course, and had to get very intimate with parts of speech (dammit!). Please don't make me beat you with a dictionary!

  40. Been there, done that by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    Your post is theoretically "right on the ball", but as Yogi Berra is attributed to say "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice; in practice, there is".

    The amount of people who use your particular setup is going to be much smaller if it is very customized. This means two things: the amount of bugs in your setup which others are going to report will be smaller, and secondly, the projects bug-fixing efforts will discriminate against fixing those bugs compared to bugs in the default setup.

    Without facts that I don't have, however, I cannot compare any particular customized setup under Ubuntu with a particular (almost certainly less popular) different distribution. And people who stick with Ubuntu will still gain benefit from the popularity of Ubuntu for fixing "core" bugs.

    After reading this discussion, I also will probably end up sticking with Ubuntu, but customizing the UI (so in some ways, I suppose my gut feeling agrees with you). However, I certainly will look to download live versions of Mint and other distros to check out whether I think it might be worth my while to switch.

  41. Re:FUCK YES! BROWSER EXPLOITS AT LOGIN! by qbwiz · · Score: 1

    Chrome's port of WebKit can only work inside chrome; it's designed to be connected up to a shim which talks using IPC to a browser process, which handles a lot of the work. Chrome and its browser process are not designed to be embedded, so using that in LightDM won't work. LightDM would probably have to use the Gtk+ port, which shares a lot of code, but has to be built separately due to all the ifdefs.

    --
    Ewige Blumenkraft.
  42. gdm alternatives have always been here by Mozai · · Score: 1

    Why all the butthurt? There's always been alternatives; if you do more with your login screen than "name/password", you can always replace what they gave you out of the box with something else.

    moses@deunan:~$ apt-cache search x-display-manager
    lightdm - Display Manager
    lxdm - GUI login manager for LXDE
    slim - desktop-independent graphical login manager for X11
    wdm - WINGs Display Manager - an xdm replacement with a WindowMaker look
    xdm - X display manager
    gdm - GNOME Display Manager
    kdm - KDE Display Manager for X11

  43. After reading the buglists for LightDM.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... https://bugs.launchpad.net/lightdm/+bugs?orderby=-heat&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.omit_dupes=on

    The Ubuntu Team must be braindead to even consider this move.

    1. Re:After reading the buglists for LightDM.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's peanuts in comparison to the outstanding bugs GDM has. GDM is bloated holy mess with incompetent coders. Though now that there's a competitor on the horizon, maybe they'll get off their fat lazy asses and fix GDM.