GNOME 3.2 Released

supersloshy writes "Today marks the release of the latest edition of the GNOME Desktop for Linux-based operating systems. There are numerous fixes and improvements in this release such as smaller title bars (for small screens), the integration of GNOME Contacts and GNOME Documents for easy data management, web application integration, many more configurable settings, and other updates such as a more unified appearance and better chat integration."

Comments

For those of us who prefer a video

[Superken7]

Quick search reveals an 8 minute overview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnxvRr-3MSA

Thought it might come in handy; TFA only contains a few shots.

I think overall it looks better, it's great. But there is still something about the icons that needs to be improved. Maybe too colorful? The shape? It becomes more apparent when compared to an OSX desktop (or other simpler desktops, if you like that kind of style)

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Anonymous Coward]

there is still something about the icons that needs to be improved. Maybe too colorful? The shape?

As they say: "There is no accounting for taste".
That's what themes were invented for by the way ...

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Superken7]

And "pluggable" desktops, too :) That's the power of Linux!

I am/was a fan of fluxbox + gdesklets and that kind of mods. Most beautiful desktops I have ever customized :)

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Windwraith]

I see no taskbar in that video...you need to zoom out to pick up windows in the same workspace?

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[blai]

Yeah. If your left hand is free, you can also use alt+tab.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[0123456]

I see no taskbar in that video...you need to zoom out to pick up windows in the same workspace?

But it's so much cooler than just clicking on the taskbar.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweet! For so long, I've suffered the inconvenience of clicking once on the taskbar. Now that tedious click is replaced by the much simpler (hold ALT)-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab [fuck, I missed it, keep going] -tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab(release ALT). This makes my life so much easier. What pure unadulterated genius. Thank you, oh GUIcrafters of Gnome. Your legendary names shall ring down the halls of history for all time.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[HJED]

Avant Window Navigator, work very well as a taskbar for GNOME. I strongly suggest you try it if you are using GNOME 3.x. It's described as a 'dock', but it is easy to setup like a taskbar.
I have to agree with you though, I find a desktop environment close to unusable without a task bar.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[jvrodrigues]

Learn to (hold ALT)-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab-tab [fuck, I missed it]-(hold SHIFT too)-tab

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[mfearby]

That video just demonstrates why I'm sticking with 2.30.2. No traditional taskbar method of switching between applications is a deal breaker. Oh, and that video seems to be 20% visits to "Help > About" windows... quite boring indeed!

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[gehrehmee]

You can have a task with an extension if you really want one.

That said, you really have to try the overview-style. Whack the windows-key, and you very quickly have almost the entire screen used to select windows, meaning you can see which one you're interested very easily and go to it. It takes some getting used to.... but the added bonus of the zoom-out view being live updates means you get the ability to monitor many windows simultaneously for interesting updates, without needing to throw in a different user-interface to clutter things up.

Try it.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Anonymous Coward]

That video just demonstrates why I'm sticking with 2.30.2. No traditional taskbar method of switching between applications is a deal breaker. Oh, and that video seems to be 20% visits to "Help > About" windows... quite boring indeed!

Taskbar is a microsoft relic. In gome, that always only was an optional applet. The first thing i do with a new install is removing it. Even microsoft is moving away from that useless and so ugly taskbar.

Also, the video so something picture can't; motion. It give a better idea of the look and feel. In that regard, i find the first few seconds to be helpful. Nobody force you to watch it.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[TheEyes]

For really large alt-tab lists, it's better to (hold)ALT-tab, then while holding ALT you click on the desired window.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[macshit]

Also "cairodock" is a great taskbar replacement; I've used it for a while instead of the gnome2 taskbar.

It can be easily configured to be more "OSX like" or more "taskbar like", though it tends towards the former.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[pmontra]

Please allow me to disagree. The taskbar is useless if you have two or three of windows open: just alt-tab or click on the windows to switch among them. When you have 20 windows and you know where they are (which desktop, which position, just buried under other windows) the compiz cube and the taskbar are handy. I get seasick with the screen zooming in and out and all the windows moving, and I don't get seasick at sea. Furthermore, the gnome way of switching between windows is a plain loss of time. It's a very cool way of impressing the friends when using your pc as a home theater but a very annoying one to get some real work done. Obviously this is subjective but my desktop effectiveness ranking is Gnome Classic > Unity > Gnome Shell. I'll hold on Gnome Classic as long as I can and then switch to something else. Furthermore I don't care about all the integrations the Gnome devs are proud about.

However I understand that leaving Gnome as it was two years ago would probably mean killing the project. Those devs are not paid to do some boring minor maintenance for the next ten years, they'd rather leave to start something new. They didn't, so they invented this new Gnome Shell to keep up their interest in the project and add the features they like. There was probably no alternative, I don't have the money to hire them and keep my desktop working as it is :-)

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[hairyfeet]

Uhhh...don't you guys have the cool flippin 3d windows like we do in Win 7? One of the few bling bling tricks that is actually useful that, just winkey+tab and use the mousewheel.

That said I have a question: why is it that all the DEs gotta rip off OSX or Windows? One is 2 decades old, the other a decade. With Linux you basically have a blank slate so why not do something new? Something different? Hell you could make the DE the killer app. Maybe instead of office desk you could think office building, having everything contextual based on things we humans are used to using. Like for office apps you have a whiteboard that data can be brought from one app to another in, images text math all being able to be mixed like on a whiteboard. Instead of audio sliders you have knobs like on a radio, low mid high eq and volume, or for multimedia even have a plug-able mixing board where you can just drop modules in or yank things out the board so it could be as simple or complex as you need. Oh and while you are at it get rid of files and folders, make everything metadata. That way the user don't have to play tree hunt, just type a keyword or even the start of a keyword and boom! there is their stuff. you could also have all the apps automatically know about and be able to pass data to each other based on the metadata by having the OS pipe it to the appropriate input.

This is one area where Linux could have a huge advantage, as both Apple and Windows have too much history and radical changes to the DE would be greeted with pitchforks. Hell you watch Win 8 will bomb hard because it is too different (not to mention fugly and unwieldy) and the users will hate it. with Linux radical ideas can flourish because it has the rep of an outsider OS anyway. We have been pretty much stuck on the office desk metaphor since the mid 80s, maybe Linux could usher in the next new thing?

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Anonymous Coward]

However I understand that leaving Gnome as it was two years ago would probably mean killing the project. Those devs are not paid to do some boring minor maintenance for the next ten years, they'd rather leave to start something new. They didn't, so they invented this new Gnome Shell to keep up their interest in the project and add the features they like. There was probably no alternative, I don't have the money to hire them and keep my desktop working as it is :-)

Don't worry, see it this way : at least will the gnome devs are busy hacking on gnome 3, they won't contaminate and run into the ground other more productive window managers and desktop environments. So its not bad at all. Just keep the devs isolated from the rest and all is good. Keep the infection quarantined.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[KugelKurt]

That video just demonstrates why I'm sticking with 2.30.2. No traditional taskbar method of switching between applications is a deal breaker.

The classic GNOME Panel is still part of GNOME 3. If the GPU allows it, GNOME Shell is just default. It can be reverted to Panel at any time.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Lisandro]

Yep. Window handling in GNOME 3 is plain retarded - i highly reccomend Docky if you need something more usable.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[rilles]

That will show those windows7 simpletons the way its to be done. While they click on the task bar, your using the keyboard and tabbing into paradise... hey wait.. [no carrier]

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[BrokenHalo]

Those devs are not paid to do some boring minor maintenance for the next ten years... I don't have the money to hire them and keep my desktop working as it is :-)

Neither do I. The net result is that I have now left Gnome to go along its merry way. I have been a loyal supporter of the project since before version 1.0, since I quite liked it, even when alternatives sometimes "just worked" better.

I put up with occasional craniorectal dumbing-down of the interface when there were sufficient positive improvements, but my attempts to use Gnome 3 failed utterly. I have to use my machines to do actual work, and the new interface just got in my way. I am now alternating between XFCE and KDE in combination with compiz-fusion. In the past, I really hated KDE, but it's now quite smooth and uncluttered, while much more configurable.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[Anonymous Coward]

compiz fusion

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[monkyyy]

ive been liking gnome 2 + xmonad

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[ancienthart]

Yes hairyfeet.

Microsoft announced an intent to develop 3D desktops somewhere at the start of the 21st century. Linux developers said "That sounds good" and released a from-the-ground implementation of XGL and compiz in 2006 (after having a mostly stable downloadable beta for a bit more than a year). At the start of 2008, XGL was replaced with AIGLX and compiz fusion was pretty much the default STABLE window system in Linux distributions since 2007.

Windows 7 was released in at the end of 2009 and STABLE? Windows 8 is hopefully due to be released at the end of 2012.

So we've had the "cool flipping 3d windows" for 3-4 years longer than Windows if we're being generous about stability, and a stable version for 4-5 years longer (If Microsoft releases Windows 8 in 2012.) :P
Don't get me started about how long Linux has had multiple virtual desktops.

That's why a lot of Linux users (Including Linus Torvalds) are getting their knickers in a knot about KDE and GNOME throwing stable, advanced, flexible and TESTED desktop systems away and developing new "desktop experiences". Bleaghhhh.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[ancienthart]

What happens if you want to read one screen (say containing information from a web page) and type into another screen (say a document)? Copy-Paste works if you want a word-for-word copy, but if you're interpreting and rewriting the information on the fly, not being able to stack and organise multiple applications on the same desktop means you have to copy-paste-rewrite-delete. Bleagh.

Re:For those of us who prefer a video

[ancienthart]

Until they decide to stop supporting this "legacy interface" and kill it in the next release. :(

Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Alex Belits]

And, of course, user-defined window manager. Seriously, how do those people expect anyone to use this?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Marc_Hawke]

Isn't Gnome the window manager already? So picking Gnome is the user defining the window manager? Or did you mean something else?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where the hell is proper grammar? And, of course, coherent thought. Seriously, how do you expect us to understand you?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Hatta]

Gnome is a desktop environment, of which a window manager is only a small part.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[sarhjinian]

If you need a user-defined window manager there are lots of other DEs out there since you probably won't use GNOME3 anyway. It's a design decision, and not a bad one when you consider where GNOME is trying to go. Mutter isn't awesome or Compiz, but it does what it needs to do well.

On that note, Mutter is the *first* compositing WM I've seen that didn't cause video tearing on nVidia. I've been jacking with Compiz/nvidia-settings for years and I still see tearing, and KWin is only a little better. Mutter got this in one go.

All in all, GNOME3 works well for me. I find myself slapping the Windows/Super key in Win7 all the time to switch between open windows. I'd personally like to see them dump the hard requirement for Evolution, and it's such a shame that there's no polished Ubuntu derivative with it (I find myself typing aptitude search ____ on Fedora all the time, and yumex doesn't hold a candle to Synaptic let alone Ubuntu Software Centre).

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[X0563511]

OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)

In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[daemonc]

Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

The same place it's been since 3.0 was first released: choose the "GNOME Classic" session when logging in.

Where the hell have you been?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[armanox]

Have you tried apt on Fedora?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[DShard]

Gnome is a tablet environment. Without the touch.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried, but Fedora would always crash before I finished typing out the comm

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Anonymous Coward]

forking hell, its complicated!

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[X0563511]

A bit, yes. That's one of the prices of modularity - one of the chief benefits in turn being that you can (for the most part) swap parts out at will.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Smallpond]

OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)

In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.

Incorrect. Metacity was the Window manager in Gnome 2. In Gnome 3 the developers just stabs you in the eye. Can you tell I switched to KDE?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[X0563511]

Hmm. Metacity -> Metastasize. Interesting how close they are, no?

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[V!NCENT]

Mutter is the Gnome 3's EGL accelerated window manager.

Metacity with Intel's Clutter EGL library.

Fun fact: Mutter is German for Mother.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[snaggen]

Why is the thing rendering the borders on the windows so important to people... I never get that?! Did you really run another window manager than Metacity in Gnome2? And how is it different when the Desktop environment handles the window management, from when fwvm2 or windowmaker that was window managers tried to be desktop environment with launchers and stuff?

For 10-20 years (depending where you draw the line) developers have tried to separate the desktop environment and window managers, and still Gimp is unusable due to window management issues (to the extent that they are now going single window). So I do not see this as a set back but a step forward, that the desktop environment learns more about the windows and application and can to the right thing.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck, now we're saying "aptitude"-based distros are "Ubuntu" derivatives? Ever heard of Debian, man? It's an Apt-based distro with Gnome 3.0. Try it, you might like it. Shuttleworth liked it so much he used the distro to create his derivative.

*Sigh* Kids these days...

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[sarhjinian]

I could, but all the useful, well-tested stuff is found in yum repositories.

I don't mind the technology (yum/rpm), and yum itself isn't too bad once you get used to it, but it is a little slower, doesn't seem to handle dependencies quite as well. Mostly I dearly miss synaptic.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Chibi Merrow]

Don't ask me. I just know that in the latest Fedora release, even our die-hard Gnome zealots are abandoning Gnome 3 for KDE 4 due to it being unusable and destroying performance.

Serious deja vu for me, considering how angry I was for the first few revisions of KDE 4.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[BrokenHalo]

Where the hell have you been?

On a planet that doesn't use Ubuntu.

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[ancienthart]

I'm staying with Ubuntu Lucid until the next Long Service Release comes out. Then I'll try Xubuntu and if that doesn't work, I'll try KDE. *sigh*

Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?

[Dr. Blue]

OK, so lots of comments coming down from this, but is there an answer? Is there a panel available for Gnome 3.2? I have a list of about 3 things that went so far into unusability as far as my workflow went that I kept all my systems at Fedora 14 after some initial tests of F15 with Gnome 3. One of those was the ability to have an always-visible panel with a list of active windows. Seriously, that's not too much to ask, right? I don't even require that it be on by default, just something that I could add or an option I could turn on. And no, the backward compatibility mode (or whatever they call it) is not sufficient.

And some people rejoice

[jellomizer]

GNOME has lost some steam over the time.
From 2001 - 2010 when Microsoft was stuck with XP (dont count vista it was an early beta for windows 7) GNOME had a wonderful opportunity to surpass Windows with a good set of new UI functions. But it laggard and let Apple come up and take the place.

Re:And some people rejoice

[somersault]

Apple didn't get ahead by being a better desktop though, they've got ahead through "synergy"/halo effect with iPod/iPhone/iTunes. So much so that my flatmate who loves his iDevices has been considering buying an iMac despite not wanting to touch any other OS than Windows in the past..

Re:And some people rejoice

[loufoque]

Mac OS X has the most terrible UI in the world.

The GNOME 2.x UI is pretty decent though.
GNOME 3 looks like GNOME for tablets.

Re:And some people rejoice

[LingNoi]

I agree that it is a terrible for you and me however not for the general public. If you think about it from a typical users perspective where they don't interact much with the OS, all their programs are available at the bottom of the screen. That's very convenient for them compared to other DEs where applications are hidden within menus.

Most users simply want to use their programs for some simple basic computing and that's why OSX is in some ways a good UI for their target market. I don't think the same holds true for linux. We don't want to sacrifice ability for simplicity hence why the UIs are typically more complicated.

Multiple Monitor Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have there been any fixes to how it handles multiple desktop setups? I've been using Gnome 3 for a while and applications like libreOffice still show the splash screen split across both, and the second monitor limited to a 'sticky' surface common to every desktop is irritating.

It would be really nice if the second desktop darkened like the primary in the overview, displayed a similar thumbnail view as the primary but on the left side (when the secondary monitor is on the right it would look cool, and when its on the right it wouldn't be pixels away from the app launcher), and if the 'sticky' functionality was preserved with a second button displayed as an overlay like the close button is.

Re:Multiple Monitor Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you unset /desktop/gnome/shell/windows/workspaces_only_on_primary in gconf-editor, you get multiple workspaces on the second monitor too (but not the thumbnail view IIRC).

Re:Multiple Monitor Support?

[dbIII]

Or use a different window manager under gnome with Compiz - there's a "compiz button" package that lets you pick from a list on the fly so you can try a few window managers out without even logging out.
Alternatively run the two screens under different copies of X instead of twinview (or similar) - on nvidia you tick boxes to do it, elsewhere cut and paste bits from a HOWTO into your config file. That has the advantage/disadvantage that keeps apps on the screen they were started from. That's good for keeping WoW fullscreen on the left monitor and web browser etc on the right. Even though they are seperate copies of X you get from one to the other just by moving your mouse pointer onto the display you want to use - they switch control when you go over an edge.

Re:Multiple Monitor Support?

[goarilla]

Can that work reliably well with apps that grab the mouse eg: when you're gaming
when does it decide it has to switch to another X instead of going in that direction ?

Re:Multiple Monitor Support?

[dbIII]

Can that work reliably well with apps that grab the mouse eg: when you're gaming

Yes, I did it that way to run full screen WoW.
It switches when you go off the edge of the screen into the space occupied by the other screen and keyboard focus switches at exactly the same time and not any other time because it ignores anything on a different X session that tries to grab the mouse on it's own. There are "edge resistance" settings you can turn on in just about every window manager made since 1994 as well which can make it a bit harder to switch screens for when you don't want to accidentally change screens when you are doing something close to the edge - it slows the mouse down in those areas so you need a large movement to change screens if that's what you want.
The default for multi-monitors on X in the 1990s was seperate X sessions and it still works well for specific cases like that (trap full screen games on a single monitor) with nice side effects (easy to configure one screen horizontal and the other vertical).
It will probably work on every single window manager apart from gnome's metacity - and I am including fvwm and other old stuff that metacity is supposed to be an improvement on.

I don't understand... more configurable settings?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I heard, configurable settings were bad -- they scare, confuse, and intimidate users, and they open the possibility that someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong, which is antithetical to the GNOME way.

Seriously, is this a new direction? Did they make a public announcement or something? Or is this just a one-time concession to reduce the GNOME 3 backlash, perhaps as an experiment so 3.4 can replace all the new options with a selector amongst the most popular configuration for each of desktop|netbook|tablet?

Login screen?

[tirnacopu]

I don't get this. Why was work and detailing involved in such a feature? Was I able to login before? Yes. Am I still able to login? Hope so, unless they botched something.
3 years ago, I had to patch and rebuild GDM to allow fingerprint authentication, with code from an IBM developer (awfully sorry for not remembering the name). Today - do I have fingerprint by default? Hell no, but it is "integrated with the rest of the user experience". Quite disappointing.

Re:Login screen?

[neiras]

Today - do I have fingerprint by default? Hell no, but it is "integrated with the rest of the user experience". Quite disappointing.

Fedora 15 has fingerprint authentication by default, and I've had it for years with a bit of work (fingerprint readers weren't so common 6 years ago). This kind of integration is usually a distro-specific thing.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I heard, configurable settings were bad -- they scare, confuse, and intimidate users, and they open the possibility that someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong, which is antithetical to the GNOME way.

Seriously, is this a new direction? Did they make a public announcement or something? Or is this just a one-time concession to reduce the GNOME 3 backlash, perhaps as an experiment so 3.4 can replace all the new options with a selector amongst the most popular configuration for each of desktop|netbook|tablet?

Its a bait and switch approach. They did it during the 1.x era and then again during the 2.x era.
There is not going to be a 3rd time. Ditch gnome. The whole project has jumped the shark, all they they care about are non existant users.

Gubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

If only one day we could get a solid install of this on Debian/Ubuntu. Debian seems reluctant to go beyond Gnome 2.3. Ubuntu main is off playing in Unity land and despite offering Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Lubuntu, Gnome has simply disappeared as a supported official platform.

I played a bit with Gnome 3.0's ppa, and despite essentially destroying my Linux install and being horribly glitchy with my ATI card, I quite liked where the interface was going. It reminded me very much of my experience with WebOS - just start typing for whatever you want. Get rid of all of the stupid buttons you don't really need. It is a big paradigm change, but it seems they actually thought through it.

Re:Gubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

why "typing" when "point and click exist"??

Seriously, any desktop manager that requires doing so, should be considered a failure.

Oh wait! this is linux...

Re:Gubuntu

[0123456]

Oh wait! this is linux...

Linus said that Gnome 3 sucks and he's switching to a sane UI. So don't blame him.

Re:Gubuntu

[rasmusbr]

...I quite liked where the interface was going. It reminded me very much of my experience with WebOS - just start typing for whatever you want. Get rid of all of the stupid buttons you don't really need. It is a big paradigm change, but it seems they actually thought through it.

Yeah, I like where it's supposedly going, but that's nothing new and it's not nearly there yet.

My Gnome 2 desktop has worked like that for years thanks to applications like Gnome Do. Gnome 3 is nowhere near Gnome Do in ease of use or features. Especially not in ease of use since it doesn't learn which applications I open the most. With Gnome Do I can just hit Super T and get a terminal running. Someone who doesn't use the terminal might hit Super T and get the text editor. In Gnome 3 the application that opens when you type Super T is set in stone.

Gnome 3 seems to me like a promising tech demo that needs a couple of more years of work before it's ready for general use.

Re:Gubuntu

[aix tom]

"Just start typing for whatever you want?"

That's what I have been doing in my little terminal window for 15 years already with tab completion.

It pretty much seems Gnome is trying to combine the shortfalls from the command line with the shortfalls of the GUI. Make a GUI that is supposedly "optimized for touch" and then you have to "type" to get to stuff?

Good thing I already fled to LXDE.

Re:Gubuntu

[interval1066]

So don't blame him.

I didn't know Torvalds was on the gnome development team.

Re:Gubuntu

[HJED]

I'm running GNOME 3 on ubuntu using the ppa and it feels very stable. However the lack of a taskbar is annoying (I had to install one).

Re:Gubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

if you have to add a search bar for your dialogs, you've failed in the basic point of having them.

Re:Gubuntu

[MaskedSlacker]

Because point and click is slow. Hell, I'd already long since switch to launchers like quicksilver on mac, and gnome-do in previous versions of gnome. Even Unity is better--super key+three letters+enter almost always gets me the right program faster than I could even move the cursor to the menu with my touchpad.

Any desktop manager that forces me to do every task the slowest possible way should be considered a failure. I use my computer to get work done, not to waste my time dragging my finger across the touchpad.

Re:Gubuntu

[udippel]

See, this is the misery of the Gnome developers (pun intended). They can't understand - worse: they can't accept - that different people have different concepts. I for one feel that a taskbar was the worst invention in UI-land since ... MS-DOS. So I don't want one. Point taken. But now, I want anything but Gnome. It is plain crap, though it does not have / need a taskbar. And the nail in the Gnome coffin should and will be that the developers still know exactly what I want.I have tried and Gnome 3 is about the worst taskbar-less UI that one can imagine; yes, that's just my opinion. But since they don't want to allow me to configure their interface to make it suit my needs, I have to go elsewhere; and that currently is KDE that I was able to tweak into a taskbar-less UI. It could be better, still, but at least they allow me to configure my own desktop as I so like.

Yep, the very very sad story is that while MS was stuck in panel/taskbar-land since W95, we could have developed a totally free and useful interface. Instead, we felt we had to duplicate either Windows or OSX.

Re:Gubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

Debian seems reluctant to go beyond Gnome 2.3

Not true. GNOME 3 is in experimental already, and currently on the way to unstable.

If you want it right now: 'apt-get -t experimental install gnome' works fine in unstable if you have the experimental repos configured

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Knuckles]

Last I heard, configurable settings were bad

Someone lied to you or you misheard. Go read the original article by Havoc Pennington.

Gnome is ambivalent in design

[ripdajacker]

The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.

KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[Anonymous Coward]

The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.

KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.

This is all that is wrong with KDE and Gnome projects. Trying to rip off OSX or Windows.
Why don't they embrace 100% the unix/linux philosophy. No mainstream application (except for Gimp) nowadays uses multiple windows on linux (why ? because of trying to copy Windows).
No shit, they even want to do away with focus follows mouse.
Damn, if I wanted the windows or osx experience I would be using a damn windows pc or a mac.
Can't we throw away these designers in a fire and get some people that know what they're doing ?

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[Anonymous Coward]

Or just stop supporting gnome/kde.....

personally I'd love to see xfce/flux and all the others get more attention (hell, if anything xfce4 is more like gnome2 or kde3 than gnome3 and kde4 are, so this would be the perfect time for people to jump over). It's amazing how the major distros got so focused on using nothing but gnome or kde that even when the majority of users don't like it they keep on using it....

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[Anonymous Coward]

GNOME 3 is not like Windows or OSX... here is a project using their own ideas and doing something new, and everyone complains about it not being enough like the old Windows-like versions. WTH?

And for the parent's-parent poster... merging KDE and GNOME is a terrible idea. If you think both projects are bad, why would you think getting both groups together would be a good idea? You obviously don't care for any of their ideas, so what makes you think you'll like what they create together?

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[zixxt]

The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.

KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.

I find KDE 4.7.1 to be quite stable and IMHO a better desktop than Gnome 3 or Win7, However I do think Mac OS X is still the best but not but a wide margin. AA YMMV

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[LingNoi]

The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck.

What you'd get is a DE with ugly icons and no polish.

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[elashish14]

I don't see much that these DEs can do that XFCE can't. Maybe a few eye-candy tricks during window switching like Expose or zooming out on your desktop wall. Of course there are a few more eye candy hacks that you can't do. XFCE even has its own compositor, though it's not hugely useful. And in my experience, xfpanel is the most stable and full-featured panel out there (it's not a dock, but you could certainly add one).

But I guess, since it hasn't been endorsed by a major distro, it's always gonna be the perennial third-place competitor. Maybe it's time a big name picked it up and started making a distro that's by default simple, lightweight, stable and full-featured?

Re:Gnome is ambivalent in design

[Anonymous Coward]

Or just stop supporting gnome/kde.....

personally I'd love to see xfce/flux and all the others get more attention (hell, if anything xfce4 is more like gnome2 or kde3 than gnome3 and kde4 are, so this would be the perfect time for people to jump over). It's amazing how the major distros got so focused on using nothing but gnome or kde that even when the majority of users don't like it they keep on using it....

Somehow the GNOME project feels entitled to having the spotlight in the major distributions (Ubuntu excepted). And that justifies in their minds doing whatever they want irrespective of the consequences. What about declassing GNOME from Fedora, Debian and other important distributions ? Give the project a wake up call. In the mean time start adopting XFCE or E16/17 or Fluxbox as default DE/WM.
Productivity trumps "eye candy" every day of the week. And you just can't be productive with GNOME 3.
I get it, GNOME chases the touch friendly interface, ok so be it. But we desktop computer users shouldn't be make to suffer because of such stupid decisions.

Real linux users use...

[Synerg1y]

http://fluxbox.org/

If you need a windows replacement, that looks exactly like and functions exactly like windows, you can go to...
a. the store
b. the piratebay

Seriously, fluxbox has everything under right click, and it's easily and fully customizable, and it's pretty lightweight, those are my big 2 arguments for it, besides its had transparency for like a decade lol.

Re:Real linux users use...

[vlm]

I thought you were gonna say ratpoison or xfce.

I do like ratpoison on my development box... I need a nice terminal prog to attach to my screen sessions, and a way to toggle to web browser occasionally. Thats about it.

Re:Real linux users use...

[Synerg1y]

I started using fluxbox such a long time ago, back when you had to compile Gentoo from source.

I don't code in linux though, I tend to enjoy the networking apps and some of the "unretard" windows systems functionality such as fdisk, gparted, and DD programs / commands.

So much about these lightweight window managers is dependent on how the user sets their stuff up though through config files and stuff, as you said you made yours work for you :)

I'd like to try them out, but am reluctant to switch as I made fluxbox work for me :)

On that note, ratpoison looks very close.

Re:Real linux users use...

[Daimanta]

"I thought you were gonna say ratpoison or xfce."

That's funny, I'd rather swallow ratpoison than use GNOME3.

Re:Real linux users use...

[debiankicksass]

Does anyone still use gnome??

Re:Real linux users use...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone still use gnome??

The gnome devs still think so.

Re:Real linux users use...

[Raenex]

As a Debian user, of course I do. When they decide to migrate to Gnome 3 then I'll make the switch to something else.

Re:Real linux users use...

[Trogre]

I moved to GNOME 2.x after the KDE 4 disaster (okay, I stuck around until 4.6 to give them a chance). Once 2.x (or "classic" mode) stops being supported I will move to something else. Possibly XFCE or LXDE *sigh*

Re:Real linux users use...

[hcs_$reboot]

Does anyone still use gnome?

Depends. Did they change the annoying menus behavior? Meaning, even after the gtk-menu-popup-delay=0 custom, sub-menus that were never opened take 1~3 seconds to appear when the mouse goes over the main expendable menu.

Re:Real linux users use...

[sqldr]

How is gnome 3 anything even remotely like windows? Windows has a taskbar. Gnome has zooming/search + the alt-` behavior. Windows has it all in a pop-up menu like fluxbox. Gnome-3 bravely got rid of the taskbar. If you're looking for a window, try the meta key and start typing. 3 letters is usually sufficient and a lot quicker than grabbing the mouse, a-la pop-up menus. Windows and fluxbox have desktop icons. Gnome 3 got rid of them (never used them anyway.. the desktop is where I put my windows. They're a waste of time).

It's just different. The amount of time I save being able to find stuff, especially since making much more use of multiple desktops than I used to is significant. If you want something that behaves exactly like the old days, go to the store, get windows, etc.

I guess you use your mouse more than I do.

Re:Real linux users use...

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the gnome3 packages have been available for quite a while, in experimental. Many of them are currently appearing in unstable, so start switching (unless you're on Squeeze, then you have another year or two to decide).

Re:Real linux users use...

[A12m0v]

xfce is bloated. I use LXDE not as bloated but more featured than fluxbox.

Re:Real linux users use...

[unixisc]

Do any Linux distros offer GNOME3 as one of the optional DEs? So far?

external monitor only on laptops?

[hazem]

I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached? With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.

I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).

I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.

Re:external monitor only on laptops?

[ludwigf]

I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached?

I read this one quite often and no it does not suspend if an external monitor is attached. 3.0 didn't either.

With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.

I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).

You know, you can just select which one is the primary display in the settings. Not sure what's wrong with your setup but all you describe works fine fore me. (using: Fedora 14, sandy bridge cpu/gpu 24" external monitor with desktop spawning both displays or built-in one deactivated; suspend on lid close - if no external monitor attached as well)

I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.

It's not like the intel driver developers are writing chat programs instead of doing there work or is it? If you like to complain, complain at the right topic, I don't see how any of your described problems is related to GNOME.

Re:external monitor only on laptops?

[hazem]

I complain about Gnome because it's the one that doesn't work.

I don't have any problems with Kubuntu or Fedora's KDE spin. I use xrandr to get the setup the way I want, but doing that under gnome locks the whole system up tight. I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well.

The sad thing is, I actually find the Gnome 3 interface appealing in a lot of ways, even though it's pretty different from what I'm used to. It's really innovative and I think it could do interesting things with my workflow. But that I can't get it working right with an external monitor is really frustrating.

Maybe I'm the only one with this problem.

Re:external monitor only on laptops?

[mikehunt]

No, you are not the only one.

When the first release of Fedora with Gnome 3 came out, I discovered the same problems. It was a shame to have to dump Fedora, but I switched to Linux Mint so that I could still use my laptop with dual, independent X screens.

Until the Gnome developers fix this, I'll be staying with whatever distro still supports Gnome 2. Proper functionality with two screens is basic stuff and the excuses for not fixing it that I have heard just don't cut it.

Re:external monitor only on laptops?

[ludwigf]

I don't have any problems with Kubuntu or Fedora's KDE spin. I use xrandr to get the setup the way I want, but doing that under gnome locks the whole system up tight. I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well.

The sad thing is, I actually find the Gnome 3 interface appealing in a lot of ways, even though it's pretty different from what I'm used to. It's really innovative and I think it could do interesting things with my workflow. But that I can't get it working right with an external monitor is really frustrating.

Its seems I've got a similar setup to yours and no such problems and wondering why. Changing display configuration with xrandr works fine for me too. But anyway, did you try using the gui from gnome? The preview there shows where the panel will be and if its on the wrong monitor you can just drag it to the right one.

Re:external monitor only on laptops?

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well

.
This is an extremely simplistic view and basically not true. Hardware, kernel, X display driver -- all these problems can may show up only in one desktop environment.

This is not a cop-out -- I realise the problems can be severe and should absolutely be fixed -- I'm just letting you know that if your system locks up under GNOME, there's very little evidence to support the idea that the problem must be in GNOME... About the only thing you can say is that KDE probably isn't to blame ;)

Do they have the basics down yet?

[Rix]

Like a working desktop pager?

Re:Do they have the basics down yet?

[amirulbahr]

Yes. If you'd read TFA you would have seen this:

The workspace switcher in the overview remains expanded by keeping its full width displayed when you are using more than one workspace.

Re:Do they have the basics down yet?

[FreakyGreenLeaky]

...and universal cross-application copy/paste (currently, depending on what application you're in, different key-combos are required (or mouse-menus)). Apologists will whimper about this and that, but other systems get it right, so why not gnome?

Re:Do they have the basics down yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or a screensaver that can actually be disabled, instead of configured between 1 and 60 minutes (I'm looking at you, Fedora 15)?

Re:GNOME sucks

[interval1066]

Well, that's what Linus says about gnome 3 anyway.

Looks interesting

[dasherjan]

The wow factor is nice, but I still haven't seen anything that makes want to switch over.

Re:Looks interesting

[Flammon]

The wow factor is nice, but I still haven't seen anything that makes want to switch over.

You won't see anything because it's an experience. You need to try it to realize how good it is.

move along, nothing to see here

[Anonymous Coward]

session support still broken, and desktop still stuck with the asstastic "gnome shell"? i'll pass, thanks.
wake me up when gnome actually goes back to producing a *D*E instead of mindlessly copying the ui from whatever consumer-only TOUCH device is hot this month.

Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Magnus Pym]

Gnome 3.0 does not even start up on most systems with nVidia-based graphics cards. I've been trying to get it started to no avail. Nobody seems to know or care about the problem. I've had to switch to xfce.

Makes no sense to me; KDE4.x works fine, so does Gnome 2.x. X itself has no problem either for 2D, 3D or sound. Hope they have fixed this in 3.2.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Anonymous Coward]

That's xorg and gnome devs guilt: Gnome for force an xorg update, and xorg for breaking again the ABI/API...

That's what you get for using propietary drivers anyways... (lol freetard!!!)

And that's what you get for using gnome 3 in the first place (lol retard!!!)

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[msevior]

Works fine on this machine. F15 with gnome-3 and NVIDIA. This is a really nice workstation.
*shrugs*

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Flammon]

Sadly, you'll need to install the hardware vendor drivers for best performance. Nouveau isn't quite ready yet.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Anonymous Coward]

Works fine with both Nouveau and proprietary drivers here.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[SurfMan]

What about the Livna drivers for NVidia? They are a breeze to install (guides are everywhere). My Fedora 15/Gnome 3/NVidia 8800GT is running fine and fast with this.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Flammon]

Livna is Nvidia's binary driver packaged for Fedora//RH.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[SurfMan]

Ah ok, I thought it was a project from some developer who loved NVidia doing something nice for the Fedora community :) Learned something today.

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Anonymous Coward]

I am just getting depressed about the Nvidia driver situation, running Linux on company laptops will not be done in my office since there is no driver support for connecting additional monitors, beamers etc in linux for our graphic cards

Re:Does not work on nVidia-based machines

[Anonymous Coward]

It runs fine out-of-the-box for me.

Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

Its a bait and switch approach. They did it during the 1.x era and then again during the 2.x era.
There is not going to be a 3rd time. Ditch gnome. The whole project has jumped the shark, all they they care about are non existant users.

GNOME is the only major Linux desktop for which all of the following points are true.

  o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord
  o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns
  o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

KDE fails the non-geek user test - it's both obtuse and verbose. XFCE is like a crappy, featureless GNOME 2/Windows mashup with a hint of SharpE. GNOME 2 is like a weird Windows/OS X mashup - functional, but nothing new there. Unity is slick and crufty at the same time (quite the feat), and its direction is dictated by Canonical. Blackbox, Fvwm et al aren't desktop environments.

All you people criticizing GNOME 3 are doing exactly what your parents did when you tried to get them to use Linux years ago - holding on to what you know, fighting change, refusing to let old habits die or to see the good in a *different* way of working.

The GNOME team is actually trying something new, and that seems rare in the open source world. With the amount of vitriol being thrown at GNOME's developers, it's not really surprising that we seem doomed to keep cloning commercial software so that we can have it for free or tweak it for our piddling little edge-case requirements.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

Re:Go away, geezers

[0123456]

it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

Most people don't want 'bleeding-edge', they want something that works. If you're pushing something new, then we want something that's, you know, better than what we already have.

When the best thing most Gnome fanboys can say is 'yeah, I know that starting an application from the UI sucks but if you press CTRL+ALT+SYSREQ+BACKSPACE+G and type the name of the application then it's much faster' you know that it's neither of those things.

it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

Gnome 2, yes. Gnome 3 is a tablet UI being pushed onto a desktop mostly used by technical users. It's a disaster even worse than Mozilla's random version upgrades.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

Presumably that includes Linus Torvalds, who's already publically abandoned Gnome because Gnome 3 sucks so bad?

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord

What is Red Hat again?

o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

So you like being treated like a Guinea Pig??

o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

non-geeks already have choosen the apple or microsoft way, because these have something gnome 3.2 still doesn't have: IT WORKS and the desktop IS INVISIBLE (Read: designed to help you, not get in your way)

KDE fails the non-geek user test - it's both obtuse and verbose.

True

XFCE is like a crappy, featureless GNOME 2/Windows mashup with a hint of SharpE.

Is minimalist, true, but at least you look at this and you already know where to go from it.

GNOME 2 is like a weird Windows/OS X mashup - functional, but nothing new there.

And that's was their beauty: It was _FUNCTIONAL_, and at the same time, well balanced for non-geeks users.

Unity is slick and crufty at the same time (quite the feat), and its direction is dictated by Canonical.

But is still more functional than gnome-shell and quite clear for non-geeks users. Probably is what gnome shell should 've been instead of the crap nowadays is.

Blackbox, Fvwm et al aren't desktop environments.

They are, but they are minimalist and require the user be a true geek to configure them to the user liking.

All you people criticizing GNOME 3 are doing exactly what your parents did when you tried to get them to use Linux years ago - holding on to what you know, fighting change, refusing to let old habits die or to see the good in a *different* way of working.

When the 9X% of your users says something is wrong, then something must be wrong... The problem is that the Gnome guys aren't known to hear anyone that don't praise their viewpoint of things. Kinda Ulrich Dreppers but more polite.

The GNOME team is actually trying something new, and that seems rare in the open source world. With the amount of vitriol being thrown at GNOME's developers, it's not really surprising that we seem doomed to keep cloning commercial software so that we can have it for free or tweak it for our piddling little edge-case requirements.

Then again, is not something _NEW_ they are doing, what these guys are trying to do is pushing the "smartphone" paradigm onto PC's. That is. Their ideas are not new: they were invented some years ago and introduced with the iphone. The problem is that our PC's aren't I-devices, but i think they don't want to hear that.

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

So you're and oldfag huh? well... I'm not that old, but at least i know the difference between a phone, a computer and a console.... I think that's way more than the gnome guys know about these nowadays... and maybe neither you, given what you wrote.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because they are doing something new doesn't.mean it's something good.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

Word. While I'm very happy with my fully supported (in Debian 6) Gnome 2 desktop for the time being, I happily await a nice and mature Gnome 3 as will be delivered by Debian 7. Long live Gnome!

Re:Go away, geezers

[lee1]

Can someone explain to me, preferably by giving me a link to an excellent write-up, why Gnome or any other desktop environment would be better than what I have been happy with for five years now - the dwm window manager with no desktop environment at all? For example, I can start a GUI application by typing alt-p and hitting the first letters of any executable; I don't seem to need any task bars or icons; I can move windows around at will and tile them in different ways without taking my hands away from the keyboard. And my old Thinkpad x31 seems plenty snappy, for some reason. I'm sure there are some real advantages to using a desktop environment that I'm just not getting, so please educate me.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord

What is Red Hat again?

One of several corporate sponsors. Unity has *one*. That's bad.

o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

So you like being treated like a Guinea Pig??

I'm not being treated like anything, loser. I put the effort in, learned about what GNOME 3 was trying to do, altered my working patterns to give it a fair shake, and now I don't want to go back. I finally have a desktop that surpasses Windows and Mac OSX, and it's open source! Phenomenal.

And for new non-technical users without an established workflow, it'll be even easier to make the transition.

You don't have to like GNOME 3, but you're missing out. And the least you can do is show some respect for a project that is pushing the envelope FOR USERS.

o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.

non-geeks already have choosen the apple or microsoft way, because these have something gnome 3.2 still doesn't have: IT WORKS and the desktop IS INVISIBLE (Read: designed to help you, not get in your way)

My god, you truly are thick. GNOME 3 and 3.2 work, very well. No one can plausibly deny that. The only thing you can say is that they don't work for YOU, which would be significantly less offensive and misleading. Not to mention more honest.

GNOME *is* designed to help you and is as invisible as a desktop can get without being non-existent. It does ask you to change your workflow. It's worth the effort.

Non-geeks haven't really chosen anything beyond a brand identity. They just pick one of two widely available commercial platforms, usually based on their financial ability - the rich poser sheep choose macs, the poor non-technical scroungers get Windows 'cause that's what came on their Dell.

We want them to choose open platforms; that means we need to be both DIFFERENT and BETTER. GNOME 3 is the only desktop project moving that way.

When the 9X% of your users says something is wrong, then something must be wrong... The problem is that the Gnome guys aren't known to hear anyone that don't praise their viewpoint of things. Kinda Ulrich Dreppers but more polite.

The thing is, 9X% of users don't say that. Just a few bitter loud-mouths with invalid arguments. You people and your fresh-from-the-ass statistics. The GNOME guys respect debate among CONTRIBUTORS, not armchair critics parroting talking points (like you).

Turn in your geek cards, old dudes, from someone who was using Linux way back in the days of Slackware 4.

So you're and oldfag huh? well... I'm not that old, but at least i know the difference between a phone, a computer and a console.... I think that's way more than the gnome guys know about these nowadays... and maybe neither you, given what you wrote.

I understand now! You're a 17-year-old /b/ tard! Go back to trolling 4chan and running LOIC. You "knowing the difference" between existing platforms now means nothing. Stand back and watch people with actual skills DEFINE the way future platforms will look and act.

Never fear, they'll make things nice and easy to use for smug, self-important people like you.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Runaway1956]

Not fighting Gnome, here. I'm just abandoning it. Why, you ask? Well - among my machines, I have an Athlon 5300+ with 4 gig of memory installed. As time passes, that memory usage tends to go up, but it was more than adequate until I finally tried a distro with Gnome3. I've already posted this in another discussion, but here goes again.

Sabayon Linux version 5 and 6. Grab the CD/DVD's and do an installation with each. You want Sabayon 5 Gnome, Sabayon 6 Gnome, and Sabayon 6 Enlightenment.

Sabayon 5, which uses Gnome 2 runs comfortably under moderately heavy multitasking.

Sabayon 6, with Gnome 3, running the same apps, will quickly run out of memory, and start using swap file.

Sabayon 6 with Enlightenment uses about 2/3 the resources that Sabayon 5 with Gnome uses.

Since doing that little experiment, I've added another 4 gig of memory to that computer - but I have to ask myself why do I want to allow Gnome to use all that memory? I'd rather keep it for myself, and whatever I decide to do with it. As a side experiment, I decided to do a little "gold farming" on a popular MMORPG. With Gnome 3, I was able to keep two clients up and running reliably. With Gnome 2, I can keep 4 clients up and running for - uhhhmm - I forget how long exactly, about 40 hours, I think it was. I meant to add a couple more clients, to see how far I could go with it, but never got around to creating the accounts. Maybe I'll revisit that little experiment, then try it again with Enlightenment.

One of Linux' strongest suits has always been it's ability to run on old, legacy hardware. If Gnome is this resource hungry, then it is clearly NOT going to be running on legacy hardware. In fact, it's not going to be running on modern budget hardware! Yeah, I know, 8 gig of RAM only costs about $150 to $200 these days. But, there are millions of people who either can't afford that much, or they don't understand the wisdom of loading up with RAM. Gnome simply isn't going to cut it on budget hardware.

Re:Go away, geezers

[epyT-R]

ahh yes.. you're the geezer stereotype that clings to every new thing that comes along without any balance or perspective for critical analysis because he's so desperately trying to stay socially relevant.

the whole ipad on pc trend is shit..plain and simple.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Dystopian Rebel]

Although I do like the functionality of Gnome 2.x and have been a long-time Gnome user, I recently switched my Linux boxen to LXDE (Fedora and Lubuntu).

LXDE is fast and configurable.

Re:Go away, geezers

[justforgetme]

WTF? the war to the anonymous cowards???

Anyway, parent is unpopular but correct. Gnome did everything right except of two things:
second) it made jump onto linux for a non-geek a tiny bit more difficult by dropping the conventional menu/taskbar paradigm
first) it jumped the gun on release because they got scared from teh youbuntooz

Actual gnome 3.0 should be this release.

Re:Go away, geezers

[justforgetme]

No replies?

<news_bulletin>"Anonymous coward scares away the gnome 3 trolls"</news_bulletin>

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people don't want 'bleeding-edge', they want something that works. If you're pushing something new, then we want something that's, you know, better than what we already have.

Basically, what you're saying is that if you had panels in 2.x, you expect panels in EVERY FUTURE GNOME RELEASE and ANYTHING ELSE IS BROKEN.

You're pathetic; you're either indignant because your video card is 10 years old and can't handle GNOME 3's graphics, or you've never actually used it for more than a day. Besides, GNOME 3's classic desktop should serve you well, so your point is moot.

Remember "Better for YOU" does not necessarily mean "Better for everybody." Welcome to the minority.

Basically he's saying that most people want to do something else (WORK, are you familiar with the concept?) than how to learn how to use their computers again and again and again. Neither GNOME 3 or KDE 4 are in any way intuitive for new or old users. And really, "never used it for more than a day"? WTF man, if you were actually a person with a job instead of a fat slob in your parent's basement you would not think that wasting a day to play with computers is OK. Well, perhaps you're not a fat slob, but you are in your parent's base, even if figuratively.

GNOME 3 works great on the desktop. I can use the mouse *less*, which is way faster. It also works great on touch panels. Far from a disaster; it's good design. It's just not what you're used to, Mr. MoreOfTheSamePlease.

Sure it's not what you're used to, I'm not used to Windows or OS X either and still can use them just fine. This couldn't be further from the truth with GNOME 3.

Guess what? I respect Lennart too, and I think PulseAudio and systemd are fantastic. That should prompt a few more flames from random losers.

What I guess is that you like broken shit and fixing problems that should not exist in the first place. Linux has severe problems the way it deals with audio, PulseAudio did nothing to fix that. If anything, it made the mess even worse. I bet that most Linux users are no different from their Windows/OS X counterparts in that they don't want to tinker with their operating systems - they have ACTUAL STUFF to do. My experience with Linux in work environments has been that of fighting the interface instead of doing what I want to do. GNOME 2 was nothing I particularly cared for, but it was tolerable. It's fine if you enjoy tinkering with your operating system, or even if that is your job, but do not think that this is the case for most people. We use computers for an end, not because we just like to press buttons on the keyboard.

Re:Go away, geezers

[m50d]

it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns

And so it's unsurprising that most of its efforts fail. I'm glad that there is an innovative experimental DE out there, but such a thing should never be the default anywhere - it should be for the bleeding-edge users who want to try something new and are willing to put up with the rough edges.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Kjella]

Yeah, I know, 8 gig of RAM only costs about $150 to $200 these days.

FYI, your pricing is seriously out of date. Here's a set of standard 2x4GB modules for 53$, 38$ if you count the mail-in rebate. The problem would be more mobile form factors and other places you can't update than the desktop.

Re:Go away, geezers

[ebassi]

sorry to disappoint, that wasn't me. the GP is correct, though, in identifying most of the negative feedback for Gnome 3 as the result of hypocritical hipsters - so it's understandable that you might be confused.

you don't know me, son, so let me explain this to you once: If I ever bitchslap you, you'll be using an AC post. I'll be using my account. and I'll still bitchslap you so hard, your mom will feel it (just like she did last night).

Re:Go away, geezers

[ebassi]

this.

oh, if I had mod points.

kudos, dude.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Pecisk]

#1
"Most people don't want 'bleeding-edge', they want something that works. If you're pushing something new, then we want something that's, you know, better than what we already have."

How they will know that it is better if they don't even try, because it looks so alien and...where is my desktop pager? People don't like to retrain motor skills, they *don't* like new stuff.

And for your knowledge, in GNOME 3 you launch application just pressing meta/windows key (or throwing key in top left corner, if you're can't live without mouse) and writing first two or tree letters. Sometimes even one. Ohh, and it is much faster than doubleclicking with mouse. But you already knew that, right?

#2
"Gnome 2, yes. Gnome 3 is a tablet UI being pushed onto a desktop mostly used by technical users. It's a disaster even worse than Mozilla's random version upgrades."

I actually use it at my work computer and I never been so productive and fast in my sysadmin life. Go figure. Must be some steorids tabled ui they have made if it works on both - work desktop and home laptop - computers.

#3
Linus claimed that GNOME 2 sucks too, only relenting and going to GNOME after KDE 4 turned into disaster. He is supergeek who likes to customize things. Of course GNOME 3 is not for him. So it doesn't make his subjective desires true for everyone.

I don't have problem that you don't like GNOME 3. Really. I have overgrown my "heh, why they don't use one desktop enviroment" point of view, I accept that other users like it other way and move on with my life. Mostly I care about compatibility, about that we could share information without restrictions - that matters mostly. What kind of desktop style you or I like - don't.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

4 Gb is far more than enough for GNOME 3. Really, either you are seeing an obscure bug most others aren't or there was another difference in the setups. GNOME 3 just shouldn't use that much more memory (and doesn't here).

Gnome-shell requires and uses 3D acceleration so it's not going to be usable for all legacy hardware, this is true. The claim that GNOME is not going to cut it on bugdet hardware is just bollocks -- individual bugs may make life hard on specific hardware but that's life on any OS...

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for writing my reply for me :)

Also, thanks to to GNOME 3 developers, at RH and elsewhere. Good job.

Re:Go away, geezers

[petermgreen]

If you have a recent machine 8GB is indeed cheap. If you have a slightly older machine that takes DDR2 and supports 8GB (not all DDR2 based systems do) it's about twice as expensive. If your machine is any older than that you are most likely looking at replacing the motherboard and quite possiblly the CPU as well to get 8GB.

Re:Go away, geezers

[BrokenHalo]

Can someone explain to me... why Gnome or any other desktop environment would be better than what I have been happy with for five years now...

No.

If you have found a desktop environment that works for you, then that's good. If the developers of your chosen DE have not decided to pull the rug from under you, then it's even better. Enjoy your life. :-)

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

What I guess is that you like broken shit and fixing problems that should not exist in the first place. I bet that most Linux users are no different from their Windows/OS X counterparts in that they don't want to tinker with their operating systems - they have ACTUAL STUFF to do. My experience with Linux in work environments has been that of fighting the interface instead of doing what I want to do. GNOME 2 was nothing I particularly cared for, but it was tolerable. It's fine if you enjoy tinkering with your operating system, or even if that is your job, but do not think that this is the case for most people. We use computers for an end, not because we just like to press buttons on the keyboard.

In my experience, actual work has been hindered in Windows as well. Going from XP to Vista to Windows 7 is the same re-learning of an OS as going from Gnome 2.X to Gnome 3.X. And all the talk about having to re-learn an OS is a little overexaggerated. In my experience with GNU/Linux, it has always been a one time set-up for things that I need for actual work as opposed to a constant fight with the OS just to get through a day of work. I will say that GNU/Linux is something I do as a hobby, and there are Saturdays I spend tinkering and fixing things in some random OS I decided to try. But at the same time while I'm at work, I have to tinker around trying to find things every time something isn't where I feel it should intuitively be in Windows.

In a time management seminar that I recently attended, it was mentioned that it takes on average about 8 minutes to return to a task once a person is distracted. So that starts to add up whenever one has to do something like Google where some common option is buried, or research why their application written in XP's VBA doesn't work in Windows 7's VBA.

Re:Go away, geezers

[Anonymous Coward]

All you people criticizing GNOME 3 are doing exactly what your parents did when you tried to get them to use Linux years ago - holding on to what you know, fighting change, refusing to let old habits die or to see the good in a *different* way of working.

I read your post. I hadn't tried Gnome 3, so I did. Sorry, but Gnome 3 is not better in any way. If it were to provide a better even on par user experience in exchange for learning to do things differently, that might be okay. But frankly, Gnome 3 is different, forcing you to re-learn the most basic things, in exchange for a horribly shitty user experience. This is in no way a "get off my lawn" user reaction. This is a "stop shitting on my front door", user reaction. And not only are the Gnome 3 developers taking a stinking shit on my front door, they've nailed the front door closed so I have to run out from the back door to circle around to the front door to stomp on the burning paper bag, they've placed the stinking pile of shit which is Gnome 3, into.

Honestly, Gnome 3 sucks ass. It is by definition a neophyte's GUI. It is for someone who is absolutely NOT a power user or even someone who likes to multitask. Ironically, Gnome 3 is the elderly person's GUI. It is designed from the ground up to be an inferior experience for people who don't like to multitask, have no discipline, no impulse control, no knowledge of a computer, with strong leanings toward a yet further, inferior experience provided by that of a touch screen environment.

Sorry, but I honestly made an effort to learn Gnome 3. Some things are "cool" just because they are different. Having said that, one the "cool" factor is over, its sucks ass - badly.

I hate to tell you this, but YOU are the old person here. Stop telling everyone to, "get on your lawn."

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Bucky24]

someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong

Last I understood that's kinda the point of a *NIX system, the fact that you have so much control.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Desler]

Way to miss the blatantly obvious sarcasm.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Bucky24]

Eh... As of late the ACs have seemed to be even more stupid than usual so I thought OP was serious...

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[segedunum]

Someone lied to you or you misheard. Go read the original article by Havoc Pennington.

You don't read what someone writes, you look at their actions. The behaviour of the Gnome project over the years says otherwise.

Mod parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

Opinion is unpopular, but largely correct. And the sarcasm is hilarious.

Much more productive

[Flammon]

The new shell is absolutely fantastic. The flow between the apps and tasks is incredibly smooth. It's really too bad that Ubuntu didn't see the potential and decided to go their own way. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for competition but it would be really nice to see Ubuntu join the GNOME shell effort. Unity is just getting in the way when it's trying to get out of the way ironically. If you haven't tried the new GNOME shell, you're missing out on a really cool experience. I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago.

Re:Much more productive

[TheTyrannyOfForcedRe]

If you haven't tried the new GNOME shell, you're missing out on a really cool experience. I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago.

+1

I wouldn't go back to the old gnome if you paid me.

Re:Much more productive

[celle]

"I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago."

Get a rope. Don't forget the gall and spikes and do this crucifixion up right. /humor

PS. Robes and torches optional.

Re:Much more productive

[synapse7]

You lost me at "The flow between the apps and tasks...", I need an explanation for this. I used Fedora 15 since release up until about a month ago, it seemed to create situations where extra mouse inputs were required and there is something about being able to put alias/shortcuts/objects (whatever you want to call them) on the desktop to be addressed later.

Re:Much more productive

[Anonymous Coward]

I like that Canonical did not choose GNOME Shell as it just means Ubuntu is being dropped off when others use GNOME Shell as it is superior to Unity. Canonical and Ubuntu got too much media attention only by that both were founded by person who went to space and has enough money to push to Ubuntu to keep it unfairly competing with other commercial distributions. Ubuntu does not deserve its position in Media.

I am more for KDE myself because customization possibilities to get everything work better than in Gnome Shell. But it is matter of taste more if people like Gnome Shell. Even I like it but everything when I need to do more than just open few files or browse web, it comes my way.

I still think GNOME 2.x has potential more than Shell, but Shell is designed more for other purposes to be more complex and hiding stuff than simple Gnome 2.x.
Nothing bad for either ones.

Re:Much more productive

[ugglybabee]

He gets it. I don't. To me, it just looks like an Unholy mess. It may be my fault that i don't get it it, but either way, it's just as useless to me.

Simple

[neiras]

I'm sure there are some real advantages to using a desktop environment that I'm just not getting, so please educate me.

No problem. The advantages:

  - Applications written for a DE are better integrated with each other.
  - Apps written for a DE tend to use the same toolkits and work in predictable ways.
  - Desktop environments tend to have collections of blessed applications. Less hunting.
  - Desktop environments tend to have communities filled with like-minded people.
  - DEs are installed by major Linux distros, providing a standard interface.
  - Commercial support is available for some DEs.

It all comes down to convenience. Sure, I used to fuck around with Enlightenment and Blackbox and fvwm. Then one day I realized that powerful computers were cheap, and my time ought to be expensive. So I installed GNOME and never looked back.

No disrespect - you can choose whatever you want to use, or whatever your hardware can support. But you're outnumbered by people like me.

I do miss Blackbox though.

Re:Simple

[dbIII]

The time cost is trivial. I'm still using the same Enlightenment theme on this work machine that I was using in 1998 FFS, and at home the default for E17 does the job. The new gnome confused a few people here so I had to downgrade a few machines and use compiz+KDE to give them an environment they did not hate on sight and which actually worked with some of the legacy applications used (and gave them the terminal beep removed by metacity).

Re:Simple

[lee1]

I appreciate the reply, but I don't think I understand it. I like my setup because it saves me time; I don't fret over what color the close boxes should be, because my windows don't have any close boxes.

The only one of your items that means anything to me is your mention of the apps being "better integrated". But whenever I've looked at this it seems to mean I need to use the apps that, as you put it, are "blessed" by the DE, and those are inferior to the programs that I prefer to use. I was really looking for examples of this famous "integration" that are compelling and flexible enough that I would consider altering my setup in order to enjoy them.

Re:Simple

[goarilla]

Offtopic: Have you tried awesome and if so why did you settle for dwm ?

Re:Simple

[lee1]

Never tried it; had to look it up. It looks interesting. It's a dwm derivative and may not have been around when I adopted dwm. I like that dwm is 2000 lines of C and nothing else. Another interesting WM that I would look at if I were in the mood to look at WMs is xmonad.

Awesome!

[neiras]

Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.

Hey bashers, take note! :-)

Re:Awesome!

[slydder]

I didn't wanna say anything. I thought maybe it was one of those 4 a.m. drunk of his ass posts that would just embarrass him the next day. I don't like to kick people (much) when they're down. ;)

Re:Awesome!

[dbIII]

Thousands of people looked at Slashdot on the first day and didn't bother getting a UID. I didn't get mine until the mod system came in, then lost the password and got a slightly higer UID a year or two later.

Re:Awesome!

[Nite_Hawk]

Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.

Hey bashers, take note! :-)

Wow, that's almost as good as having Linus's endorsement!

Re:Awesome!

[marcello_dl]

may that happen because he has a fullscreen terminal window opened by xinit and not much else? :D

Re:Awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Just shows that some of those old folks are starting to get senile.

Maybe that's why GNOME sucks so badly. They are in fact working towards a specific target demographic... Sadly though this is tiny tots and senior citizens with mental impairments.

Re:Awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.

Hey bashers, take note! :-)

As a proud ksher, I love bashing the bashers.

I took the liberty of not noting the post by the man with a 4-digit UID :)

Re:Awesome!

[losinggeneration]

But if I'm using Bash, I obviously prefer a terminal anyways, and have no use for those fancy DE's. Obligatory "Now get off my lawn"

Re:Awesome!

[unixisc]

Tiny tots are pretty smart in figuring out UIs

Re:Awesome!

[asherlev]

He's an impostor!. There's a hidden '99' between the 47 and 26.

Re:Awesome!

[Flammon]

Actually, I waited a couple of weeks after it launched too. I had been reading Rob's Chips & Dips religiously and knew months before that it would become Slashdot. My UID really should be -42 or something.

Re:Awesome!

[dbIII]

I was one of the many people following his Enlightenment stuff (ePlus and the themes) - probably just as well I didn't sign up for a low ID because it would have been annoying to lose that instead of the higher number :)

Re:Awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, he's clearly just a GNOME 3 developer.

How to try this out

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw a video of this, and it actually looks quite polished. I'd love to try replacing my current Gnome 2 with it, but it's just so hard to install.

Does anybody know if there is some straightforward way to make this bad boy run on Ubuntu LTS (10.04) without risking completely hosing the system?

screensaver?

[porjo]

Still no support for screensavers (other than blank screen)? :'(

Re:screensaver?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the best screensaver!

Why are they fucking with the Desktop metaphor?

[ugglybabee]

For a half hour, I just looked at this interface and it simply baffled me. I don't know what the organizing principle is supposed to be, and believe me, I don't care anymore. A half hour is all you get. I'm not saying that it's a train wreck. I'm saying that after a half an hour, I was unable to figure out how it's NOT a train wreck. I was unable to discern how these icons and windows are supposed to work together. It looks to me like gnome discarded the organizing metaphor of the desktop in favor of the details of the interface. To me, the details don't matter. If you discard the desktop metaphor, you need to have something better to take its place, or your users have every reason to scream bloody murder.

Re:Why are they fucking with the Desktop metaphor?

[slydder]

You aren't the only one. I switched most of my family and friends over to ubuntu over the years. After the Unity fiasco I had to disable it on ALL systems and then switch back to gnome 2. That is about 20+ systems that I had to do that with. VERY annoyed.

I posted a rather long list of complaints from all (including a few of my own) and am currently getting ready to migrate everyone over to mint or some other viable alternative.

The really bad part of it is that I was REALLY looking forward to G3. I have since lost all faith in Ubuntu and the gnome project. If it had benn 1 or the other that dropped the ball then fine. Work around the problem. But when both have their collective heads so far up the ass' that they can't see what's happening then they deserve nothing more than to be ignored and forgotten.

Seriously. If I want a mobile OS I have my smartphone and my tablet. G3 belongs, at most, on netbooks and NOT on the desktop. I don't care that most of the people that are using G3 are doing so on a laptop with a pad. That's their problem. I have a laptop with a dock/replicator and 3 external monitors for my work. G3 just don't cut it for real work.

I'm not even gonna start on the whole alt-key topic. It's just not worth my time anymore.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Knuckles]

Sorry I don't see that. And the basic argument that each option comes with costs was correct.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Anonymous Coward]

You're being snarky, but exactly this happened, mostly due to a change of mind caused by this year's Desktop Summit conference where the thousand Gnome and KDE core devs got themselves collectively their ass handed for not listening to their users. The chewing out was epic. Expect both desktops to have a better user experience in the near future, I hope it's not just a one-time concession. A constant reminder from the user base should help them keep their discipline.

Too Bad...

[cerealito]

I already switched to XFCE

Re:Too Bad...

[ugglybabee]

I'm using Trinity / KDE3, but Gnome 3 definitely makes KDE4 look a whole lot better.

Testdrive GNOME 3.2

[Pecisk]

If you wanna try out without waiting for official distribution releases like Ubuntu Linux 11.10 (with apt-get install gnome-shell) and Fedora 16 (full GNOME 3 desktop by default), try Fedora 16 Desktop Live CD nightly builds from here: http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ (As currently available alpha is way behind in fixed bugs sense). Drop it on Flash USB and you are set. You can even install it on hard drive if you like what you see. Click on 'Desktop' Spin and use ISO file from Output.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand that Gnome policy is to ship version X.0 with the most minimalistic set of configuration options they can come with. Then they will gradually add the options that people really need based on the amount of uproar from the user community.

Makes sense in a way

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[jejones]

I'd suggest reading the interview with Jon McCann, who heads up GNOME3 development and who brought us the "user configuration is bad, because the user will do evil things" gnome-screensaver. Note particularly the following:

"And I think there is a lot of value to have that experience you show the world to be consistent. In GNOME2 we didn't do that particularly well because everyone's desktop was different."

GNOME = Total crap

[Anonymous Coward]

Enough said.

I hope both gnome users enjoy sitting there drooling at their shiny new single big button.

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Lisandro]

You know it all went to shit when GNOME developers release a tool to tweak "advanced options" like how the laptop behaves when you close the lid, font sizes or if the shell clock shows date or not.

I love Gnome!

[Just Some Guy]

Gnome's been great to me. If it hadn't sucked so badly, I wouldn't have given up on Linux desktops after 13 years of trying and gotten a Mac. Thanks!

Epic

[Anonymous Coward]

For those with memory official screenshot: http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.2/figures/certificate-viewer.png.en

Re:GNOME sucks

[udippel]

You're wrong, though you're better than your -1 as of now.

Have those who modded you down see the crap of windows placement in the video? Totally top left. Huuh. I though we had been over this in the last millennium. And then Forefox pops out in the centre. No idea, why we need the extra 'window' around its window?? I mean, what is is good for when you open a Firefox to have it centered with real estate margins? And then he opened the system information, and - up popped a ridiculously large grayish area with around 5 lines of information, and 98% of vide. Of course totally obfuscating the underlying Firefox and showing almost nothing.
Then it was time to stop the self-flagellation and close the YouTube video. When the Steves see this video, they'lll have an extra drink on the Gnome developers, who have shown a very gnomish stature in designing - if one may call this so - a user interface.

How is DE different from WM different from....

[unixisc]

OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)

In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.

So in Apple, what is the X11 equivalent on which the MacOS sits on top of their FreeBSD? What was it when NEXTSTEP was around on BSD?

And what exactly is the difference b/w windowing system (X11) vs GDM vs Desktop Environment (Gnome/KDE/XFCE) vs Window Manager? And I know that GNUSTEP is a development environment, but if you have something like Windowmaker as your Window Manager, what exactly is the desktop environment? Is it still GNUSTEP, or is it something else?

Re:How is DE different from WM different from....

[X0563511]

I couldn't tell you, the last time I interacted with a Mac was in the late 90s.

X11 is the windowing framework. It's very low level. GDM/KDM/XDM are session managers. The session manager handles your login (note, you can log into a remote X11 display!) and starts your specified Window Manager. These are also called "sessions" and GDM/KDM/XDM should have a dropdown on the login screen somewhere to select them.

The Window Manager tells X11 what to do. At that point, the *DM is out of the way.

The "Desktop Environment" is typically considered the whole stack excluding X11. Note it is entirely possible to use GDM with KDE for instance. It's also theoretically possible to run, say, Metacity within KDE... though in practice this is not so usable or easy.

Re:How is DE different from WM different from....

[unixisc]

Thanks. I wish I could mod you up, but somehow, I haven't figured out the basis on which I can do that w/ some posts, but not others.

Re:How is DE different from WM different from....

[X0563511]

No worries, though I appreciate that thought!

Re:I don't understand... more configurable setting

[Knuckles]

Nice piece of work in the quoting there:

Note particularly the following:

"And I think there is a lot of value to have that experience you show the world to be consistent. In GNOME2 we didn't do that particularly well because everyone's desktop was different."

Actual context:

We are also not only users of free desktops, but we are also its advocates, we are in the marketing team. Everywhere we go people look over our shoulders and say "Hey that's cool, what's that?" and then we get a chance to talk about GNOME, a chance to talk about free software. And I think there is a lot of value to have that experience you show the world to be consistent. In GNOME2 we didn't do that particularly well because everyone's desktop was different. So when people are looking at it, they don't see something that is idiosyncratic, they see you as part of a larger movement. And I think that's worth considering when customize your desktops. But that's not something we will ever prevent.

So it's still broken?

[Rix]

If I wanted a GUI with hidden/broken workspaces, I'd use windows or OS X.

Re:So it's still broken?

[amirulbahr]

Are you trolling? It's no longer hidden and you haven't explained how it's broken. Or is the comment too hard for you to read as well.

Re:So it's still broken?

[Rix]

It looks to me like it's still hidden in the overview, not visible on the primary view.

When mouse-wheel scrolling can be configured ...

[morkk]

... to move a page per click I'll get excited. Windows still rules in that regard (I threw up in my mouth a bit saying that) - RSI sucks.

Lol

[Anonymous Coward]

Well what I have to say: shell now is somewhat working.
But still there will be many BS going around.(Yes now I'm trying 3.2).
Actually the most usable UI around is KDE4: it matured know to really awesome UI, despite ugly start....

Shame everyone has abandoned this already...

[Anonymous Coward]

XFCE is awesome, GNOME3 is an utter failure. It should have been called GNOME Tablet Edition and then leave the desktop edition alone, which was working perfectly.
Yet another New Coke-like failure.