Slashdot Mirror
GNOME Shell No Longer Requires GPU Acceleration
An anonymous reader writes "The GNOME 3.0 Shell with the Mutter window manager no longer requires GPU acceleration to work, while still retaining the compositing window manager and OpenGL support. GNOME Shell can now work entirely on the CPU using the LLVM compiler via the Gallium3D LLVMpipe driver. This will be another change to Fedora 17 to no longer depend upon the GNOME3 fall-back, which is expected to eventually be deprecated and further anger GNOME2 fans."
Is slow. I'm not sure that this is an advantage.
To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
Oh for fucks sake. I've just switched the wife's laptop from Ubuntu 11.10 to the beta of Fedora 16, since unlike that Unity bollocks at least the GNOME shell has the "fallback" mode that turns it back into something usable.
thank goodness for xubuntu and lubuntu! kubuntu too... the linux-for-OS-refugees world still has some shining lights.
~.~
I'm a peripheral visionary.
Debian Sid introduced Gnome 3 a couple of weeks ago and I had a bit of a tough time to come to terms with it, but now I have reached a good compromise by installing tint2 and the alternate menu extension (which basically brings back the switch off menu item).
I'm rather pleased with this setup and the only thing I am really missing are a couple of applets, but nothing major.
Or, as other have said, XFCE is a great alternative, especially if you NEED external outputs (which gnome-shell still miserably fails to manage properly).
It's the way the Gnome3 devs are all working against each other that really sucks.
You have a half-incomplete tablet UI allied to a half-incomplete laptop UI both of which get on the tits of desktop users;
- and my feeling of 'at least they are going somewhere different and interesting' has evaporated now I see Gnome 3.2 is identical to 3,0 in every single cockup. Only one of the real UI problems has been addressed; and more ill-considered and contradictory decisions have been imposed on us.
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
It was useful for the poster to quote the entire post because many of us often filter out all posts by Anonymous Cowards. By filtering out the ACs, you avoid a lot of crap and frosty pisses and enthusiastic racist name-calling.
It was an insightful post by someone who didn't care to create an account, even though it's very easy to create an account and Slashdot is very good about not misusing our email addresses. By quoting the good post in full, the GP performed a service to the community.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Is that an attempt at recursive humor?
Presumably why they now have Vala.
AKA: Object Orientated?
I'm not convinced by this argument, it's possible to write inefficient code in any language.
While I don't actually like Gnome, being written in C is about the only thing I do like about it. I certainly don't consider GObject/Gtk to be worse than QT or Apples API's.
None. Not any.
It becomes clearer every day that people hate Gnome 3, and yet even as the soft noise builds to a roar, some people think it's merely a few haters bellyaching.
Listen, people hate the *shit* out of Gnome 3. It seems obvious that what started out as an attempt to create some sort of tablet-compatible UI which is also palatable on the desktop has now become a large liability. Gnome 3 has nothing that users asked for - it has been funded and driven by corporate interests (ahem INTEL) that wish to eventually provide some competition to Android's current domination in the Linux tablet market.
People hate Gnome 3. Developers hate Gnome 3. Gnome 3 is simply one of the worst abortions of a window manager to ever appear on Linux, and the situation is not going to get any better until people start fleeing and distributions leave it in the dust.
The writing's on the wall, but just because you avoid glancing in that direction that does not mean you can expect us all to swallow your fantasy about Gnome 3's awesome suitability.
> I've had a lot more success with interoperability between Java, Scala, and Clojure than I ever have had with any GObject-based code. The same goes for .NET when the languages are C#, VB.NET and F#. Those all work seamlessly with almost no effort, while GObject needs a lot of hand-holding and even then it often just doesn't work.
That's hardly a surprise. All JVM languages use the same object system underneath and were explicitly designed to interop with it. Same for CLR languages. When you use GObject, you are using it as a portable, but foreign object system that has to co-exist with the native one (like Python's). This is not poor design. It's a good work-around, given the constraints.
It's one thing to discuss whether GNOME should have been in C++, but another to compare it with JVM/CLR features. Core libraries should be native, not byte code.
You've had AC's disabled for a while, eh? I only ever see a few frosty pisses or goatse's or whatever per discussion, and a lot more useless shit from people who've actually signed in.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.