Slashdot Mirror


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."

48 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. Fixed* in two commands by OliWarner · · Score: 3, Informative

    sudo add-apt-repository ppa:gnome3-team/gnome3
    sudo apt-get install gnome-shell-extensions

    *Fixed but may break everything else.

    1. Re:Fixed* in two commands by atari2600a · · Score: 2

      Breaking everything else is what I'm worried about. It's bad enough using the prerelease channels breaks the little things just enough to warrant a / wipe every release cycle. (actually what I do is I use the beta & once it goes stable I wipe /)

  2. Re:And yet... by revcompgeek · · Score: 2

    Gnome 3 had artifacts for me until I stopped using Catalyst and switched to the Open Source driver. Unfortunately that means lower graphics performance, but I don't play games much anyway.

  3. Re:Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Xfce is the next standard for the authentic-gnome users, I've made the migration and I'm entirely satisfied.

  4. It's not just GNOME 3. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!

    1. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      How dare you! They have a pedigree of owning Macbook pros and multiple thousands of dollars in skinny jeans and emo glasses. How dare you question their qualifications!

    2. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by mehemiah · · Score: 2, Informative

      thats why linux values freedom of choice most of all. If you don't like it, switch and quit your bitchen. try fluxbox or Awsome. The gnome expatriate DE of choice has been XFCE but i think theres a branch of metacity being mantained like there's a kde3 branch being maintained

    3. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 2

      I doubt most sysadmins are dumb enough to care what a user installs in their home directory used solely by themselves.

      --
      Brian Fundakowski Feldman
    4. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by rapidreload · · Score: 5, Insightful

      thats why linux values freedom of choice most of all. If you don't like it, switch and quit your bitchen. try fluxbox or Awsome. The gnome expatriate DE of choice has been XFCE but i think theres a branch of metacity being mantained like there's a kde3 branch being maintained

      I really hate this retort. A lot of people used GNOME 2 because it was the best at what it did. Either KDE was too complicated (too many options/controls) or XFCE was too lean (lacking in functionality). GNOME 2 had a nice middle-ground. With GNOME 3 fucking up things, we have a problem. We can stick with GNOME 2 until it falls into disrepair (which does happen when libraries are upgraded but the DE is not), or we can switch to something like MATE which is still in development.

      The problem with the argument of how Linux provides options is that they aren't necessarily any good. People generally use one DE over another because it provides something the others don't. If the development direction of said DE makes it no longer desirable, all the freedom of choice doesn't help much if now ALL of your options are lackluster as opposed to all but one.

      --
      To all newcomers - people here are very close-minded and can't handle complaints about Linux. Keep this in mind.
    5. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 2

      xfce, lmde, openbox, gnome-fallback, the list goes on...

    6. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by hufter · · Score: 2

      It's good that someone forked Gnome 2 into Mate, however Gnome 3 should have been the fork, because it's more of a new product rather than upgrade of the old.
      Usually when you upgrade you get something similar, but with new features. Now you'll lose features if you upgrade. But I will not join Gnome 3 bashers. It's not "dumbed down" as some folks claim, It's an early version of the new DE.
      When Mate fork is finished it will be just like Gnome 2 was, and Gnome 3 will get more customisability while it develops, things will be good again.

    7. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's funny how all this GNOME 3 flaming happens in the comments of a newsitem that basically is about the solution to one of the main gripes people are (rightfully, to an extent) complaining about. GNOME 3 extensions can basically turn the whole thing back to like how GNOME 2 worked, if that's how you preferred it. Many power user extensions are out there, and very likely now that GNOME 3 has most distributions it wouldn't surprise me of many many new extensions popup filling every possible niche. What's more, it's fairly straightforward to create your own, if you know some CSS/JS (which are pretty easy to pick up anyway). GNOME 3 may have stripped out a lot of stuff, and for sure I defiintely felt lost for a while after switching to GNOME 3, but it put in place a very nice extension system that easily makes up for it, if you ask me.

      The only thing that still bothers me is GNOME 3's heavy dependance on accelerated 3D graphics, given that Linux GPU drivers are generally in such a poor state (improving, but still..), and because somehow, despite today's GPU's power, things still feel more sluggish than they did in GNOME 2

    8. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by DaVince21 · · Score: 2

      They're apparently working hard to make GNOME 3 work without hardware acceleration, so that's also a gripe you won't have any more soon enough.

      Another big gripe I have read about, though, is that the source code is designed in such a way that it can hardly be optimized - it's slow by nature. I can sort of see that, running Gnome 3 from a 4-core i7 system.

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    9. Re:It's not just GNOME 3. by mehemiah · · Score: 2

      Task oriented ... you have no idea how right you are

  5. Re:And yet... by icebike · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

    Linux Mint seems to work great with Gnome3 and their own Shell extensions. They used it mostly to restore the missing bits that Gnome3 lost. I found it very stable am quite pleased with it. Its no KDE in terms of richness of functionality and flexibility, but its pretty sweet.

    I'm starting to like this LinuxMint distro more and more, especially for casual use.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  6. Alt-right click vs. right click? by Pausanias · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

    1. Re:Alt-right click vs. right click? by maztuhblastah · · Score: 2

      The biggest idiocy of GNOME 3 last time I tried it (Ubuntu 11.10) was that Right click on the panel didn't work.

      I hate to break it to you, but Ubuntu's UI is Unity, not GNOME Shell. It has nothing to do with GNOME.

    2. Re:Alt-right click vs. right click? by Pausanias · · Score: 2

      I hate to break it to you but you can switch between unity and gnome shell in Ubuntu. My statement is correct as it stands.

      The biggest idiocy of GNOME 3 last time I tried it (Ubuntu 11.10) was that Right click on the panel didn't work.

      I hate to break it to you, but Ubuntu's UI is Unity, not GNOME Shell. It has nothing to do with GNOME.

  7. Thanks, but happy with KDE by gtirloni · · Score: 2

    Thanks, but no, thanks.... been happy with KDE4 after GNOME screwed GNOME3.

    --
    none
  8. Dead -- to nerds by MrEricSir · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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."
    1. Re:Dead -- to nerds by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's not a problem at all. The problem is the fallacy that in order to make a UI that appeals to new users you must automatically get rid of everything that your old users liked about the original. You CAN have both, just bury the option to switch somewhere that only the old power users will find and you're fine.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    2. Re:Dead -- to nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      they're trying to make a desktop that has a broad appeal

      And that is completelly understandable. They need to abandon nerds and prepare for a broad audience because next year is, definitely, the year of linux on the desktop.

    3. Re:Dead -- to nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You CAN have both, just bury the option to switch somewhere that only the old power users will find and you're fine.

      That's exactly what gnome-tweak-tool and extensions are: buried options for power users. So what's the problem

    4. Re:Dead -- to nerds by DemonGenius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm a nerd, but I also like to get meaningful work done without having to tweak a UI everyday. Up until Ubuntu 10.10 I had the benefit of an attractive AND functional desktop, heck, I even finally perfected my ideal desktop configuration with 10.10, even with warming up to the stupid-application-buttons-on-the-left-side-of-the-title-bar-because-we-want-to-be-like-Apple. However, as much as I like change, the kind of change that prevents me from effectively using my main computer exactly the way I want will drive me away. They could have at least had the courtesy to make the new UI into a separate DE that can be selected at the login screen, but apparently that was too much to ask... bastards. This is why I've switched to Mint and will not look back until the Mint team gets on the idiot UI bandwagon.

    5. Re:Dead -- to nerds by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

      "just bury the option to switch somewhere that only the old power users will find and you're fine."

      Seriously? You didn't see the wave of outrage over the default tabs on top?

      (If you don't use FF, it's reversed forever by right-clicking on a blank part of any toolbar and unticking "Tabs on Top". Real Power User stuff.)

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    6. Re:Dead -- to nerds by MrEricSir · · Score: 2

      "The problem is the fallacy that in order to make a UI that appeals to new users you must automatically get rid of everything that your old users liked about the original."

      DOS had a lot of powerful features that Microsoft dropped with Windows 95. Do you think Microsoft would be doing better now if they'd stuck with DOS?

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    7. Re:Dead -- to nerds by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I repeat: ...the FALLACY that in order to make a UI that appeals to new users you MUST automatically get rid...

      Do you think they would've been doing worse if they'd still gone to windows 95 but kept the powerful features available for when people needed/wanted them?

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    8. Re:Dead -- to nerds by fnj · · Score: 2

      Both of you cowards are S-T-U-P-I-D.

      1) Mint 12 gives you MATE, which is a repackaged Gnome2 with the signal advantage that it can be installed together with Gnome3 and they do not conflict with each other. So Mint gives you a choice of which one to log in under.

      2) Mint 12 has gone to a lot of trouble with extensions for Gnome3 to mitigate the pain. It's only to get better.

    9. Re:Dead -- to nerds by lennier · · Score: 2

      The desktop PC is dead.

      It is? So what is this odd black box under my desk with a keyboard and mouse that I'm browsing the web, playing games, keeping my spreadsheets and buying music on and which I just jacked the HDMI cable into my widescreen TV?

      I guess the kids must call it some kind of cellphone? Well, call it whatever makes you happy, I suppose. I'm just glad it's still there, and isn't going anywhere. Cos you could try to put a widescreen TV in your pocket, but I'm not sure you'd enjoy doing that.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  9. Extensions suck by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  10. Re:And yet... by mrmeval · · Score: 2

    Even that is drool compared to what I have had in the past. I just want to get shit done and soon I'll either accept the meager offerings in lieu of the degenerating main stream or pretty much just use a server version and get either Win7 or a Mac.

    It would be about as disruptive to what I normally do with the same level of guarantee they won't fuck up anything in a short time frame.

    I note that Google also shit on their stable UI.

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  11. Eeek... by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  12. Re:And yet... by sunderland56 · · Score: 2

    I'm starting to like this LinuxMint distro more and more, especially for casual use.

    I heard all of the great press, so I downloaded Mint 11, which was okay, and Mint 12, which is so horribly bad I fed the DVD to my paper shredder.

    User Interface Manifesto:

    1. We do not want a dock. If we wanted a dock, we'd be Apple fanboys.
    2. Calling a dock something else, like an "Activities Panel", does not get you around rule #1.
    3. We will launch programs via a menu system, or via shortcuts. No other nonsense, please. I'm looking at you, Mr. Activities Panel.
    4. Once you have a facility like panel applets, that people like and use, do NOT take them away. If you want to add some other way of doing the same thing - like "Gnome Shell Extensions" - then keep the ability to run panel applets for at LEAST one major revision, so that all existing applets can be ported.
  13. Re:Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

  14. Re:And yet... by sunderland56 · · Score: 2

    By "dock" I mean, some form graphical display that lists currently running programs intermingled with programs that you can lauch if you wish.

    So, a mashup of popular items from the 'Start' menu and the currently running windows list. A list of two completely different things - action buttons and status buttons - slammed together in a random sort of order.

    I suppose this follows the trend of using nouns as verbs, and vice versa.

  15. Re:Not GNU's fault by Pausanias · · Score: 2

    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

  16. Re:And yet... by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    By "dock" I mean, some form graphical display that lists currently running programs intermingled with programs that you can lauch if you wish.

    So, a mashup of popular items from the 'Start' menu and the currently running windows list. A list of two completely different things - action buttons and status buttons

    See, that doesn't bother me a bit. The only thing I use that type of facility for is High Frequency items, email, browser, file manager, command shells. If one of those is ALREADY open I want the open one 99.94444% of the time, and if I want a new one, its left click.

    You keep most menu items in the start-bar menu / what ever you want to call it. But the high frequency items I want handy, and If they are running already chances are I want the running one, and not another one.

    It may not be to your liking, but it is very well thought out in all the implementations I've see of something like that. Why dig thru application menus? Computers are supposed to be intuitive. See icon, click Icon, get the desired result. They are not two completely different things. Its the way people work.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  17. Re:Will GNOME get a clue now? by grcumb · · Score: 2

    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?

    To quote Linus:

    "They don't need a bug report. Trust me on this. They seem to feel that they need different users."

    So no, I think the die is cast on this issue. GNOME devs have decided that they know better than their users, and if we would just open our minds to enlightenment (sorry), we'd all get along better.

    Again, many people don't even have a huge problem with GNOME deciding what we need; it's the fact that they've removed a bunch of things that they've arbitrarily decided we don't need that's getting everyone's panties in a twist.

    --
    Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  18. Re:And yet... by KugelKurt · · Score: 2

    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.

    Shuttleworth would say that because Canonical does not contribute to driver development, Canonical is not guilty of lacking quality there.
    Critics would say that Canonical should help driver development for a change.

    Decide for yourself which side you're on.

  19. Re:And yet... by KugelKurt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    KDE Activities: a stunning failure rammed thru by a pigheaded minority to meet a need that did not exist,replacing perfectly good alternatives, and in the process, alienated the vast majority of the KDE user base

    WTF?!? Activities in Plasma Desktop were never ever forced on anyone. Everybody who doesn't want them simply doesn't use them.

  20. Happy Gnome 3 User by jon3k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Happy Gnome 3 User by ADRA · · Score: 2

      In slashdot, all users are treated equally, and if you get modded up its because the mob generally agrees with what you're saying. That said, after the 16th or so Gnome3/unity story, I think this flame war is about as boring as grass. Us haters have found somewhere else to hang our hats, and the lovers will defend it with their dieing breath. The winner like so many other decisions won't be held by the jury of slashdot, but instead in everyone's home/office/laptop from machine to machine, and no matter how much one shouts, that fact won't change.

      If OSS history's taught us anything, its that distros / programs only remain relevant as long as they continue to service the needs of their users.

      --
      Bye!
    2. Re:Happy Gnome 3 User by jon3k · · Score: 3, Informative

      I love the new virtual desktop system. Once I figured out a few tricks I've found Gnome3 to be fantastic.

      1. Use CTRL+click to open a second copy of an already open application, instead of switching to the currently running instance
      2. Press alt+~ to switch between different instances of an open application (eg - multiple terminals) without switching between different apps, like alt+tab
      3. To shutdown, click on your username in the top right, then press alt. You'll see at the bottom of the list "Suspend" will change to "Power Off"

      I really enjoy being able to launch applications so quickly by just pressing the "Windows" key and beginning to type the application name, then pressing enter. I really feel like Gnome 3 gets out of my way and let's me use my applications.

  21. Hipster GNOME users by qxcv · · Score: 2

    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
  22. Re:Dead by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  23. Re:Dead by DMFNR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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

  24. Re:And yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    You couldn't avoid them if you want multiple desktops with different wall paper.
    The stripped out any ability to do that an foisted activities on you.

    Like I said, its better now, because the bitch level got so high they made an option that "looks" like the old way, but its still using activities. You really can't avoid activities.

    System Settings > Workspace Behaviour > Virtual Desktops, check "Different widgets for each desktop". It doesn't say it, but this also lets you set different wallpapers for each desktop, and doesn't seem to use activities to do it. At least, the activities list doesn't show any additional ones created.

    That's admittedly not very obvious, and I only found it by chance, but it seems to be what you want. It wasn't available in the first few KDE4 releases, but it's been possible for a year or two.