Slashdot Mirror
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."
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)
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?
Gnome is a tablet environment. Without the touch.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
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.
ayottesoftware.com
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.
Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.
Hey bashers, take note! :-)