GNOME Shell Extensions Are Live
DrXym writes "GNOME Shell has been criticized for certain shortcomings when compared to GNOME 2.x. Chief amongst them was that 2.x offered panel applets whereas 3.x is seemingly lacking any such functionality. What most people don't know is that GNOME Shell has a rich extension framework similar to Mozilla Firefox add-ons. Now, the official site to install extensions has gone live. So if you yearn for an application menu, or a dock, or a status monitor, then head on over. Extensions can be installed with a few clicks and removed just as easily."
Not compatible w/ GNOME 3.0-- I guess I'm waiting 5 months...fucking Shuttleworth...
Gnome 3 has nasty visual artifacts on Ubuntu 11.10 with my notebook's ATI chip.
I appreciate all Shuttleworth has done for the Linux community, but he's really got to take quality more seriously if he wants to win me back to Ubuntu.
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:gnome3-team/gnome3
sudo apt-get install gnome-shell-extensions
*Fixed but may break everything else.
I loved it for a few weeks on Oneiric with nVidia. Then? A new kernel last week - and now the shell captures all mouse and KB events - won't release focus to apps!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Xfce is the next standard for the authentic-gnome users, I've made the migration and I'm entirely satisfied.
And just when I'd gotten XFCE to look the way I want....
There's a lot of major open source projects that have gone stupid over the past year or two. Firefox is the other big one, of course. But we've seen similar stupidity from Thunderbird and Ubuntu, for instance.
It's like a big mass of unemployed web designers have moved on to fucking up real applications, perhaps because nobody will hire them to do web development any more, given similar fuck-ups in the past.
No, we don't want gradients and curved corners all over the place. No, we don't want the menus to be removed. No, we don't want the status bar to be hidden. We just want software that works, and these failed designers just can't provide that!
The biggest idiocy of GNOME 3 last time I tried it (Ubuntu 11.10) was that Right click on the panel didn't work. You had to alt-right-click for everything. This is because the GNUssolini decided it was too distracting for me to right click and I wouldn't get any work done if I right clicked. So they changed all context menus to alt-right-click.
So, is there a GNOME Shell Extension that makes right-click work the way it used to?
You're welcome.
Thanks, but no, thanks.... been happy with KDE4 after GNOME screwed GNOME3.
none
Here's the problem: they're trying to make a desktop that has a broad appeal. Gnome 2 was mostly used by nerds (such as myself!) and nerds don't like change, nor do they like things that have broad appeal.
Getting new users/customers vs. making your existing users/customers happy is perhaps the oldest problem in business, and it's the minefield that Gnome 3, KDE 4, Unity, etc. etc. have all stepped into recently.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Sure, they're good in theory, but after you've been using some extension for years the Gnome developers decide that they want Change and then your extension breaks and the developer hasn't updated it in a long time because it's done and there's really no way to improve it, and now it's dead unless someone else learns whatever arcane Gnome-isms are required to fix it.
Users simply can't rely on anything outside the main code development tree, and with Gnome you can't even rely on that.
Xfce is great if you thought windows 95 was a little too fancy. As Torvalds said yesterday, Gnome 3 should come with gnome-tweak-tool right in settings.
Once you've used that, there's really no competition.
Now that they will have statistics to show which extensions are most used (i.e. what users are missing the most). Will GNOME undo the mess?
none
Ive been a long time ubuntu user, and with the ubuntu unity/gnome fiasco I've been looking at going back to SuSE or even switch to Fedora since I work on redhat boxes all day.
But I decided to go with Mint, and with the extensions installed, its back to what Gnome 3 should have been. I do like being able to reload the desktop without closing my apps, and the looking glass debugger is a nice touch. I think now that extensions are out, and distros can start using them again, Ubuntu will make a comback. But now that I'm switched to Mint, its basically Ubuntu with the better desktop, I might not go back.
I just wish the gnome extensions were installed by default, so people didnt have to learn about them 2nd hand after they already get pissed off at a crippled and funny looking desktop.
Nice to see them trying to bring G3 back to the usability levels of G2. They have a ways to go, but hey, at least they started. The more usable desktops we have to choose from, the better.
People keep saying they tried G3 on Ubuntu, and I'm wondering if they mean Unity instead? I know G3 can be installed on Ubuntu but it doesn't come installed by default. For instance: Pausanias talking about alt-right-click. I've never seen that anywhere in G3, and I've been using it basically since it came out.
Just like in Firefox, each time API version changes, extensions will break and will not work for a while. That is not cool. This is just an excuse from the Gnome developers for not fixing what users complain is broken..
And that's why it's the default on Linux Mint, the most popular linux distribution on distrowatch.com?
I'm a nerd and I love gnome shell (with MGSE for taskbar/tray icons), it looks so polished and expensive.. it's about time we had OS X quality on desktop linux. Sure, it's not flawless.. but I expect it to become more stable and provide some expected basic functionality once the developers get their "creative energy" out of the way.
So did minecraft: why i was talking to a creeper just now and
soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
I agree with you that gnome should not belong with fsf any more. But at least on paper they are still the official desktop of GNU. I think RMS is trying to get them to behave but not having much success.
www.gnome.org/about/
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME
For no other purpose than to add to the obnoxious rumble of discontent: Me too!
And I'll add, Ubuntu did a terrible job of communication around this change of direction. I couldn't have cared less which side of the window the close box is located on, but the way they handled the change should have set my teeth on edge much sooner than it did.
just switch to LXDE or XFCE done....
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Unfortunately the people who are unhappy tend to be the loudest. I just wanted to chime in and say that I absolutely love Gnome 3 and wouldn't dream of going back to Gnome 2.
bad news for you, Vista has one of those "stupid new UIs" too. Windows 7 is actually somewhat less whacked. But yeah, some major open source projects are doing their damn hardest to kill GNU/Linux on the desktop. Firefox, GNOME, KDE, Ubuntu with Unity....gawd damn, its madness.
oh, is that your fantasy about my sexual orientation? put some lube on that cucumber so you don't chafe your poop chute wanking to your Rubycodez dreaming, by the light of your GNOME-3 desktop-turned-cellphone-UI
after a forced/inadvertent migration that i couldnt undo to gnome 3 (thanks debian. -_-), i bailed. i tried to use the new UI, i really did but it was horrid. i couldnt get anything done and kde was just as bad. i'm still working on finding/writing programs to make a good desktop environment but i refuse to be a victim of Gnome developer stupidity again.
i've left you Gnome and i'm not coming back.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
I used XFCE before it was authentic.
"The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond
I'll get modded worse but this is something I feel I HAVE to ask: Wasn't Linux supposed to be the "sensible" one? the one where you didn't have code just being chunked because of some new shiny? I mean here you had KDE 3 and GNOME 2, both had been battle tested, were rock solid, were certainly not ugly on the eyes, had tons of features and were getting pretty damned bug free, so what happened? Did MSFT going bling happy force everyone to be blinded by the shiny?
I swear the whole Linux situation reminds me of an old SNL skit about Bizarro world. its like "Quick users am happy and things am stable! This is no good, we must throw everything out and break lots of stuff! Now look, users am unhappy and things broken, all better now" WTF?
I don't know, maybe its all Canonical's fault as they seem to be the ones that really started doing Bizarro shit like 6 month releases and seeming to go out of their way to piss of their users. When I first tried Linux in 2004 I thought that by now me and every other retailer in America would have penguins on boxes and Linux PCs and laptops right beside the Windows and Mac machines. progress was slow but steady, every year things got better, drivers got a little more stable, things got less fiddly, it really looked to be coming along nicely.
Now it just seems more like politics and fanboyism, where every request or critique is treating like pissing on the bible, things seem a hell of a lot more unstable and all that progress seems to have been thrown right out the window into the path of a bus. I have tried damned near every "user friendly" distro I have ever heard of and can't get a single one to pass my "is it safe?" test which simulates my customer having the PC and just keeping it updated for 3 years, not a single one. Drivers break, DEs get swapped out, UIs get flaky, and when i point this out all I get is heaps of insults and accused of being one of THEM whoever the THEM is this week.
I just think its a damned shame, that's what it is. When XP goes EOL there will be literally tens of millions of machines with frankly overpowered hardware that COULD be running Linux and offering low cost computing to the masses and instead me and every other system builder and repair guy will be scrambling for cheap Win 7 Starter and Home CALs simply because nobody will listen to us and give us a simple, easy to use, fiddly free Linux that Suzy the checkout girl can run without picking up "Bash and scripting for dummies". Is that REALLY so much to ask?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I have been using Gnome 3.2 since Ubuntu 11.10 came out. So far I have been liking it quite a lot, it feels really natural and clean way to work. Before Gnome 3, I have been using Awesome & Gnome 2 desktops for years.
Gnome 3 extensions seem to be really easy to install, just two clicks and that was. I was already using some via ppa's, but this seems nicer.
Now, just if I can get automatic window tiling extension Gnome 3 would be perfect (there is manual tiling extension available, and one automatic one, but it is still buggy). Also, there is some small bugs in Gnome 3 still, but nothing earth-breaking anymore.
I wonder how many people hate Gnome 3, without having tried it, for no other reason than the fact that it is a change from what they're used to. Now I can totally understand that, most people on a site like Slashdot use their computer for work, there is no reason for one to mess up his long developed work flow for the new shiny. Gnome 3 is quite different and it will require quite a few adjustments to get comfortable in the new environment. I recently moved from Ubuntu 10.04 to Fedora 16 after my system ended up fucked after months of maintaining a pretty much custom compiled system because I was too stubborn to make the move away from the environment I was so accustomed too, but I still wanted to take advantage of all of the improvements in the compilers and libraries. I was apprehensive at first, but I learned to adapt pretty quick, and after a week or two there really isn't any impact on my productivity using Gnome 3, and there are some great benefits. There are also some issues, but the shell is still young and I'm sure some of them will be addressed as it matures. On the good side, losing the bottom panel gives me a bit more screen real estate, which I can use all I can on a laptop with a widescreen. I always had to have that around in Gnome 2, even though all of my window/workspace switching was done by keybindings, having it taken away turned out to be a good thing. I like the way Gnome 3's workspaces function, how it just generates a new one when I need it, which is real nice for me because when I'm developing I tend to have everything I need full screen on workspaces, and it always seemed that I would end up needing one more workspace than I had when I was using Gnome 2 and I would either have to go and create a new one, or switch between multiple windows on a single workspace, which does slow me down a bit. On the bad end, it does require quite a bit more mouse movement if that is how you navigate through your desktop environment, and I'd imagine for a lot of people that's how they do it. I usually navigate via keybindings, so things work pretty much the same as Gnome 2 in that respect. I've noticed an issue with Gnome 3 where I have to enter some key combos twice to get them to work, like the shell is eating the first one before using it for what I want, and that is kind of irritating. I wish the run dialogue would also function like a sort of search dialogue like I've seen in pictures of Unity, in fact I think Gnome 2's run dialogue was better because at least it would bring up a list of options. It's fine when I know exactly what I want to do, but it's a pain in the ass trying to run a new application and running a bunch of combinations and spellings trying to get it just right with no suggestions. I also find the configuration options of the desktop to be lacking, like many others, and find it silly that I have to install a bunch of extra applications and extensions just to change some basic things like entries in the Applications menus or applets in the top panel.
My point with all of this is, I understand why there is so much hate for Gnome 3 and Unity, they're taking away the environment you're used and forcing you to change how you work. Whether you stick with Gnome, or you move to something else, you have no choice. Gnome 2 will succumb to bitrot sooner or later, and then it's gone. It's not the type of application that you'll just be able to install and run like it's 5 years ago in 2017 and have everything work just like you remembered it. I just wish people would give it a solid chance before they knocked it, at least give it a fair assessment. In a way, a lot of geeks are kind of like Gnome, they'll stick with the one thing they're used to come hell or high water. The world's changing though, Windows 95 is quite limited for the type of tasks we do today, and if you don't move forward you die, that's just how things go. If you're still writing 16 bit real mode because you're more comfortable with segment addressing and don't want to deal with all of that hipster protected
Don't be an ass, coward. Mint 12 also comes with MATE, a repackaged Gnome2 that does not conflict with Gnome3. They give you a choice.
https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912/posts/WTLyn7dqYoR
Linus on Gnome3
"Now I just hope those things become part of the standard gnome shell setup and made available in the regular "system config" thing rather than hidden off. Sure, make them default to off if you want that "clean default", but make them easy to find and part of the standard install.
Or would that be too close to "Ok, we admit we were wong" and thus not politically acceptable?"
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
I know a lot of people hate Gnome Shell, but I want to let you know that there are a substantial number of people like me, who love vanilla gnome shell. And no, I don't work for Gnome. Before shell came out, I had a similar setup on my ubuntu 10.04 with synapse as a launcher, and a hot corner using compiz for selecting between apps. Having said that, shell needs to work on their performance issues, but I think their vision isn't really bad.
The problem is that a lot of developers making things on Linux started using Macs and instead of developing things for their Macs they try to change things on Linux to what they are used to.
Gnome developers! stop using mac os now!!! we've had enough. every fcuking turd knows that Linux Gui or Desktop Environments are blatant copies of Windows or Mac! KDE = way too much windows! ya fans will definitely denyy Gnome = mac os x el copy... When WIll Linux Get a Real Desktop Environment? GNOME 2 was the closest thing. People are really settled with it. Now, they want to show us a tablet/mobile UI called Gnome3! Why? Gnome3 has problems with window manager mutter and clutter(libs). Many applications render like sh1t especially firefox,eye of gnome etc when pages gets garbled,stuck. this is in addition to the frustration of not having Gnome2.. tbh
move to FOSS,save ur nation's resources.
I have several machines with multiple monitors: two desktops and a laptop with a dock. They each have a different graphics card: Nvidia, ATI, and Intel. Each one supports multiple monitors flawlessly without having to do that annoying twinview thing anymore. Docking and undocking with the laptop automatically adds or removes the second screen; I even configured Gnome 3 to move the applications bar to the larger secondary monitor when I'm docked and back to the laptop when I'm not. On one machine I have the secondary screen have an independent workspace and another I have it change with the workspace: I'm still trying to work out which I like better.
So in summary, my experience is just the opposite of what you claim: multiple monitor support, on different chips, out of the box with no configuration.
It isn't what needs to be added it is what needs to be removed. If I can't remove something from the Window Manager then I will have to remove the Window Manager.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Is it -has- taken away my productivity. I have used GNOME 2.x and Compiz ever since there was such a matchup available, and it has come to be my 'perfect' desktop. For me, this involves being able to group and switch between windows ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_uAA9OK-jQ ) and window opacity based on mouse position ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg1qbw8pML4 ) . Unity, and GNOME 3 both cannot handle either of these, and so I still WANT to use Gnome 2 with Compiz. My other issues involve Unity and GNome 3 utilizing way more ram/cpu cycles than they should be, just for some fancy effects; craptacular decision to 'lets be like mac and put the menubar in the top panel' retardations; and one of the worst decisions I've seen to menu system, EVER.... that horrible 'take up 75% of your screen 'menu' box where you have to TYPE AND SEARCH for your program' . I Can do that just fine in a damn terminal, but when I'm using a GUI, point and click based DE, I -want- and need to be able to see all my items laid out in a logical manner, so I can quickly get to the item I want to use. Not spend longer attempting to find it through your convoluted search box.
Well I've been using Fedora 15 alongside Ubuntu 10.04, and I can say that despite getting used to Gnome 3 (and recognising its advantages), I find Gnome 2 more functional. I can give three reasons:
I like my workspaces - I have four arranged horizontally, and switch between them using Alt-1/2/3/4, and I like being able to move applications between windows just by pushing it off the side of it, and then picking up the window on the next workspace. This isn't possible with vertically arranged workspaces. You have already mentioned that if you use the mouse to switch workspaces in Gnome 3, you would probably go mad and give up. But... there's more - I often work with a directory of image files open fullscreen in nautilus on workspace 1. I have GIMP open on workspace 2. I select the photo I wish to edit on workspace 1, move it to the workspace switcher's workspace 2, wait til it brings up workspace 2, and then drop it into gimp. Try doing that in Gnome 3! (Drag the file to the top left, drag to the right over the appropriate workspace, wait, drag back to the centre of the window and wait until the application comes to the fore, then release).
Secondly - 'places'. Why was this dumped??!! This is what sold me about Gnome 2 when I switched from XP. I always had direct access to my files and folders, and later learnt I could bookmark particular folders so it appeared in the menu. In gnome 3 I find a real step backwards to launch nautilus, and then navigate within it. I've also tried pressing the windows key and typing, which admittedly is a bit better, but I miss the direct option. I have also installed the 'places' extension for Gnome 3, but the button is small to press, and works in the opposite way to the rest of gnome 3 (in the shell-view, selecting a folder will open it minimised onto the workspace, whereas searching for the folder and opening it will take you out of gnome shell).
Thirdly - I'm not sure I like the idea of the 'hot edges' or corners. I'm used to throwing the pointer up to the top left to reach a menu item, and frequently overshoot. In Gnome 3 this means irritatingly activating the gnome shell, and requiring an extra bosh into the corner. I have the same problem with Unity - viewing webpages I often place the mouse to the left side of the screen before scrolling in order to ensure the mouse isn't over flash or a text box before I do it - and activating the Unity menu is really irritating. It reminds me of times when using WinXP and auto-hiding the bottom bar, but quickly finding it too irritating to work with. I'm starting to believe that important parts of the desktop should have it's own area, and not share it with others - so that you can guarantee that moving your pointer to that area will do a specific thing, and not require you to consider the context. By 'important parts' I mean launching applications, select between applications, opening folders, and viewing content.
I'll admit there are good points of gnome 3. There is more screen real-estate (though I believe there is a cost to this in the paragraph above). The 'windows button and type' is well-implemented for launching applications (though I find slightly less good at opening folders). Alt-tab switching between applications is improved with being able to switch to apps on other workspaces.
It would be easy to improve gnome 3 by adding a 'places' tab in the shell - that would please me, but I can't see how the workspace switching could be fixed. Also I can't see how the 'hot corner' can never be an irritation (maybe if I could disable it and only activate it with the windows key? or clicking on it).
Can someone describe their experience with G3 and dual monitors. I usually work with one monitor showing the online documentation, while I code with the other.
Without dual monitor support, I am, as I did in the past, keep two systems side by side.
I am after productivity. With Fedora 16, I went the compiz route, and only use the extensions for four desktops and for wobbly windows. (That is how I justify compiz)
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Yeah, I didn't really think about dragging in to another workspace, I haven't had to do that yet with Gnome 3. I really do hope that some sort of "Places" functionality is moved in to Gnome Shell instead of having to explicitly launch Nautilus to navigate the file system. I'm imagining just another menu option in addition to "Windows" and "Applications" that would allow you to navigate files, and then drag and drop them in to applications open on the workspaces on the right side of the screen. That would probably go a long way towards solving at least on of your problems with opening up images with the new workspace setup. I think I saw an extension on the new site that will allow a places menu on the top panel, that might be useful to you. So far I've found the new extension system to be a pain in the ass and a lot of the available extensions to be either horribly broken, or damn near featureless.
Honestly, I found Gnome 2 to be really mediocre as a DE - KDE was a lot better. I really liked their Kontrol Center. However, reading about KDE 4, I just don't see why they made the default browser Rekonq, when Konquerer, while not perfect, was already far more mature & tested - just needed HTML 5 support so that one can run YouTube videos on it. I do think that once KDE refines all the dozens of KApps that they have packaged w/ the DE, they'll make a more compelling argument for getting picked.
That, and I'd like to see Etoille get up & running, so that we can have a GNUSTEP DE available as well.
Clem and team are trying very hard, Mint 12 is still rough though thus far. maybe by Mint 13 they'll have it smoothed
I guess it's still early days for Gnome 3, and like KDE4, hopefully a lot of the previous functionality will return. If it's the places menu that I already have installed - it's not ideal as it doesn't really fit in with the rest of the system. A simple extra tab would do the trick - with a list of the main folders and bookmarked ones.
I've made the same request before and I'll make it again.
Give me some way to search window titles to filter the window preview. KDE does this, compiz does this. I have lots of windows and searching with keyboard would be nice.
Mouseover an application icon in the 'activities' view should filter away windows not belonging to that icon and make the windows belonging to that app take up the full screen.
KDE 4.7+Icon Tasks has been a fairly decent experience though. I wish the single window and multi-window case of an application behaved more similarly though. If I click on an icon with only one window, it toggles minimize. If multi-window, present windows. I can make the multi-window do minimize toggle, but I actually kind of want the converse change...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Sadly, i don't have modpoints today I would have thrown a bunch into this thread of happy Gnome 3 users.
I got a taste of Gnome 3 on Ubuntu. (I used the Gnome Shell login option to get Gnome 3 rather than Unity.) I loved it and the increased productivity it gave me so much I switched back to Debian so I could get Gnome 3 in unmolested form rather than the hacked up Ubuntu version.
"Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
While upgrades are something that you've displayed that Linux may be weak on, I still don't think that's a reason not to run a Linux box. There's also no hard and fast rule that Linux operating systems need to be upgraded. If it works NOW and you don't fool with it, it will still work 3 years from now. We're not talking about Windows here, we're talking about an OS with a lot of security already built in. Since 3 years worth of updates hose the systems you build, why update?
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
KDE 3 was better than Gnome 2. KDE 4 is so bad, it made Gnome 2 better. Now we have Gnome 3, which seems poised to put Gnome at a new disadvantage to KDE.
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
Mate does not conflict with Gnome 3. The whole point of Mate is to create a Gnome 2 fork that can be run alongside Gnome 3.
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
I love Mint but 11 is as far as I can go right now. I'm aware of the work of bimsebasse and esteban1uy but myself and many other users aren't interested in manually editing one XML file after another and installing myriad extensions in a special order. I'm actually hoping they'll get things sorted out in the current version of Mint. If not, I'm sure it will be ready for 13.
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
Dude, you sound like a nice guy but you DO know that Linux has security holes like everyone else, yes? i could post a half a dozen links from Securina if you'd like, or even articles from here. Its not like I have users running update in the hope that there will be some new shiny, its because its stupid to run unpatched software because we ALL know that the script kiddies and malware guy use those patches to reverse engineer and make new malware!
I'm not asking for the moon here Kev, not asking for shiny bling bling or running Linux on a toaster. i just want to hand a box to some and know it WILL be patched AND stay running for the life of that machine. I mean I have XP boxes going on 12 years in the field and the community harps on about how inferior it is right? Well prove it and make a better product!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I just think its a damned shame, that's what it is. When XP goes EOL there will be literally tens of millions of machines with frankly overpowered hardware that COULD be running Linux and offering low cost computing to the masses and instead me and every other system builder and repair guy will be scrambling for cheap Win 7 Starter and Home CALs simply because nobody will listen to us and give us a simple, easy to use, fiddly free Linux that Suzy the checkout girl can run without picking up "Bash and scripting for dummies". Is that REALLY so much to ask?
That's right. We really need something like that. These days linux stable fast reliable and has all the apps you need to get shit done. It's also a free download away, will never bother you about licencing, you don't even need to waste a DVD anymore, just use a spare usb stick. Infact, you can run the whole OS off a USB drive.
.iso download.
So anyone, even a newbie, could shove a distro boot disk in your computer, boot, install, and all your computing problems would be solved. It would be a fire-and forget fix for a virus infested old XP box (you know the kind), that doesn't take too much learning, and doesn't need micromanagement to maintain. You install it on your old aunty's PC, and walk out the door.
I can't put my finger on just what is going wrong. Your right, for a while it looked like it was going to be all ok and we would actually have the year of desktop linux. but WTF happend?
You know what is really really damning, right now there is an example of linux done right, of a mainstream graphical linux distro that's steamrolling over the competition and will become the #1 in it's market. It's Android. It's also coming to x86. Hell, I already have 3.2 it running on my netbook. It's much more capable than just a smartphone/tablet OS and it's early days of it's foray into the x86 world. Quite bizarrely, without much optimization it's a lot faster on anemic netbook than any major linux with any level of graphicial effects. It was also a stunningly small 86mb
Frankly Canonical, Gnome and others should not be following the exerting Apple/Microsoft like control over design and manipulating end-user experience, because rubber stamping that method does not equal success. They should be taking a good look at what Google's done with Android's design.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
I understand the importance of running a fully-patched OS but I'm a Linux user and a Slashdot reader. What I'm saying is the odds are so greatly in our favor to never have problems anyway that it's likely never necessary to be OCD about patching a Linux box for personal use. Yes, things are different in the commercial world. Storing personal information or processing credit cards on an Amazon server is a totally different scenario than the average user playing Farmville at home. That's not what I'm talking about at all.
Do you really think every XP box you have out there is properly maintained? Regular users boot their computers and ignore the update messages for Windows and Norton/McAfee updates. They don't know what the updates do, why they're needed or what to do if something goes wrong. Ignoring them is the safe choice. They don't have to update their TVs and they treat their computers the same way. Take into account there are still over 3 million AOL subscribers and that Wal-Mart sells a shit-load of computers. These are the people with the systems I'm talking about. (Likely you cater to a higher class of end user but that doesn't suit my half of the argument so I will pretend it's not the case. Heh heh.)
Windows PCs and Windows-based code are where the real security concerns are. Concern for an unpatched Linux box is like working as a manager in a bank that's being held up and being concerned that the robbers will take the postage stamps from you happen to have in your desk. The target for digital miscreants is huge and glaring and it isn't our private Linux boxen.
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
Despite what Linus says, he still stuck with GNOME even though he complained about it. Most of all, he's like a lot of other people he just wants things to wrok without tweaking stuff. In all the loads of comments here, nobody has bothered to actually talk about the extension system. Why do you think that is?
I did see the extensions mentioned - but they were released about the same time as LT's post.
"he still stuck with GNOME even though he complained about it"
Maybe he is hoping he can get stuff changed for everyone.
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
Unlikely. He has to file bugs and what not like everyone else. The extensions are there so that you can solve your own problems with the design. What people don't seem to understand is the extent to what you can manipulate the DE environment. You can pretty much manipulate anything that has gobject introspection and gnome shell allows you to expose. Including the window manager, the network manager, bluetooth whatever. So if you want different animations it should be possible to do your own animations. The extensions were created not just for users to do something interesting wtih it, but to also test out new designs and help evolve the desktop. GNOME can do more things with it with simple things like javascript and css. Recent web technologies.
Thank you. I'll turn off the lights when I leave.
I can tell you EXACTLY what went wrong, that damned Linus Torvalds is what went wrong! between his constant kernel fiddling breaking drivers (He needs to just change the logo for Linux from tux to Goatse because frankly it feels like he's trolling) and Canonical getting everyone on an INSANE 6 month release schedule (which means nothing gets fixed, just new versions that add new bugs on top of old bugs) the quality has backslid BAD and QA is right out. I mean when one of the top 4 OEMs has to run their own repos because even on a TEENY TINY subset of hardware they can't even get enough QA from Canonical to keep the drivers from taking a big old shit if you run the default repos? Something be stinking in Linux land.
Pulse Audio, Linus kernel Goatse, DEs getting tossed, frankly the guts in Linux is as stable as the shifting sands now. I've tried Linux on just about every off lease and refurb that has come through my shop and in ALL CASES the drivers shit themselves, the DEs gets screwy such as settings not "sticking" after reboot unless you input the data by CLI, its just one big fucking mess, that's what it is.
And they can complain about "Waaah they won't give us drivers waaah!" but you know what? a company would have to be certifiably INSANE to support Linux. With Windows just FOUR count 'em FOUR drivers gives you support for every version of Windows from 2000-2014 at the very least! 2K/XP XP X64/2K3 X64, Vista/7 32 bit, Vista /7 64 bit...tada! I'm done, stick a fork, my device will work now and keep working. and look what a company gets for bending over backwards to support linux? AMD not only opened the specs they hired developers to help the community write drivers, only for the drivers to constantly have to be rewritten (Linus Goatse) and the community to say in EVERY forum 'LOL Buy Nvidia". if i was AMD I'd tell the community to go fuck themselves.
Finally as for Android, lets break it down shall we? what IS Android? its the SAME DAMNED THING we retailers have been BEGGING the community to give us for X86/64. Its an ALL GUI no CLI OS where everything is "clicky clicky" and there are NO driver borkage because Google doesn't allow Linus "The Goatse" Torvalds to touch "their" kernel, that's why. Hell read his thoughts on the kernel and tell me if your ass wouldn't get a pink slip if you tried that! No roadmap, no plans, he scratches itches like its 1993 and he is still passing the kernel around over IRC.
Frankly I've given up. I've talked and written articles and begged until i'm blue in the face only to have the community throw shit and insults and say "Your a dirty poo poo head M$ Ninja!", I've tried every damned Linux there is and watched them shit themselves over tasks that frankly Windows could do a decade ago, hell they still don't even have a "Find drivers" or "roll back drivers" button and when i point this out I get a lecture on how my "duty" is to waste my time for free teaching my customers to do forum hunts and CLI tweaking copypasta that they have NO desire to learn or do, because they HAVE to "embrace the POWER of CLI" like its the God damned force!
Insanity friend, that's what it is, sheer mass insanity! To this very day they truly believe that the masses are all gonna abandon GUIs for terminals and go back to the 1970s! Frankly it shouldn't surprise me though, just look at their hero RMS. I swear to God the man still calls everyone "hackers" and acts like he is at a computer club meeting in 1978!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
It's frighting how much we think the same. You're already one of my Slashdot friends, but if Slashdot ever adds a BFF or "Bestie" relationship option, you're gonna be a worthy contender. :)
To all newcomers - people here are very close-minded and can't handle complaints about Linux. Keep this in mind.
Let us know how PC-BSD 9 is once you've tried it. I've read some good things about it.