GNOME 3.4 Preview

Aaaaaand cue Gnome bashing by Dega704 · 2012-02-29 04:18 · Score: 2

Any time now.

Re:Aaaaaand cue Gnome bashing by Barbara,+not+Barbie · 2012-02-29 04:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

Don't you mean Canonical and Unity bashing? Gnome is OK - it's Ubuntu that's the problem.

Probably not for much longer ... both the Internet and open surce have ways of routing around the damage.

--
Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
Re:Aaaaaand cue Gnome bashing by realityimpaired · 2012-02-29 04:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

Not bashing, exactly... more a question of logic...
Why would they make "major interface changes" in a minor revision number update? Isn't the point of a minor version to be bugfixes and usability improvements, and keep the "major" changes to the "major" revision numbers?
I don't use gnome, I use e17, so I don't think I'm qualified to pontificate on how awful gnome is. It doesn't work for me. If it works for you, great. So happy for you. I don't like it, but that doesn't make it automatically bad.
Re:Aaaaaand cue Gnome bashing by ArcherB · 2012-02-29 05:15 · Score: 5, Funny

Aaaaaand cue Gnome bashing
Any time now.
No, bash is still fine.

--
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Re:Aaaaaand cue Gnome bashing by unapersson · 2012-02-29 10:19 · Score: 2

I'm not sure I'd trust opinion articles from LinuxInsider to be anything other than anti-linux trolling. Weren't they constantly talking up SCO during that whole debacle years ago?

Application menus by LizardKing · 2012-02-29 04:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

Can't say I'm happy about the global application menu that they've half-inched from OS X. It's one of the annoyingly unintuitive aspects of the OS X interface, and I'm disappointed to see it here. The other changes look sensible though.

Re:Application menus by wahaa · 2012-02-29 04:58 · Score: 3, Informative

And this is sad:

Nope it’s not optional and more and more apps will use it in the future
(This quote is from a comment in the tour)
Re:Application menus by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 05:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

Despite all the usability studies to show a global menubar is more intuitive, and easier to use.
Re:Application menus by SyntheticTruth · 2012-02-29 06:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

I actually like my application menus at the top of the screen; it's actually very intuitive for me and past studies have shown it to be as well for others. BUT -- and this is a huge ass BUT -- it's not right for Gnome apps or Linux apps over all.
See, Mac applications are different from how pretty much all other OS' handle their applications. MacOS is *document* focused where Windows and Linux is *application* focused. On Mac, the windows represents a single document within that application (or is supposed to be; some apps break the paradigm) where on Windows and Linux the window represents the *application* itself.
It's a subtle, but huge difference. It's one of the old beefs with MacOS that when you close that last window, the application is still actually running. But it made sense to have a unified menu bar for the entire application and the top of the screen made the most sense.
And really, ergonomically? Relax your eyes, which way do they go? They go up. It's same reason I don't even like my Win7 task bar at the bottom. To each their own, though.
But, back on point, Linux applications are not like Mac applications and the window represents the app, not a single document, so the unified menu bar is not part of that paradigm.
Re:Application menus by StuartHankins · 2012-02-29 06:56 · Score: 2

MacOS is *document* focused where Windows and Linux is *application* focused.
<blinks> Wow, somebody gets it. This is one of the most basic things people misunderstand when comparing these systems.
Re:Application menus by dannys42 · 2012-02-29 07:22 · Score: 2, Funny

Well it's consistent with GNOME's approach to things since about 2.0. Copy the bad features of other UIs and make sure to do it worse.
Re:Application menus by supersloshy · 2012-02-29 07:45 · Score: 3, Interesting

I agree with you but GNOME is taking a different approach than what you suggest. Instead of cloning Mac and moving everything to the top of the screen, it only moves application-centric functions there. For example, if you wanted to access your program's preferences dialog, you'd use the standardized "application menu" (no more hunting in "Edit" or "Tools" anymore!). If you wanted to zoom-in on your document, however, you'd use the "view" menu on the window itself because it only affects that window. From a glance this might sound like it makes searching for options even more confusing, but once this becomes standard it should be even easier than the current method.

--
"Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Re:GNOME 3.4 team by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 04:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

Then don't use ubuntu. Problem solved

Think Different by Dimwit · 2012-02-29 04:28 · Score: 3, Interesting

GNOME 3 is the first desktop I've used in a long time that actually tries to do something fundamentally different and better, and, you know what? They've more or less succeeded. I'm glad to see the open source community actually try something different, interesting, and better.

Yes, GNOME 3 is wildly different from the traditional WIMP interface, but once I got used to it, I really think it's the best desktop experience I've had since my NeXTstation days.

--
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...

Re:Think Different by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 04:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

My thoughts exactly.
It's not perfect -- far from it -- but it's better than the alternatives and seems to have a lot of momentum *in the right direction*.
Re:Think Different by Pausanias · 2012-02-29 04:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

I hear this said a lot, but would you care to back it up? What problem does it solve; how does it make you work better? The only things I've read so far from GNOME 3 supporters are statements are about how things like status notifications and multiple windows up at the same time are unnecessary distractions and that I need to change my work flow to fit this style.
I know I can download this or that tweak to make GNOME 3 behave like GNOME 2, but I'm interested in hearing arguments about how exactly these interface changes have improved the way you work over the old style.
Re:Think Different by erroneus · 2012-02-29 05:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

Problems:
1. I want to make changes that are difficult if not impossible
2. The mouse interface requires wild movements to go from one app to another
3. Probably other things too....
I can work in Gnome3. I can. I've used it enough that I can use it. I don't like it better than other things and I fail to see how it's better than other things. It's a lot of "get in your way of doing things" from where I sit. To add to item #3, getting to run your applications is a PITA when you have to do a "search all>search category" thing all the time. Menus are essentially the same thing but faster.
Gnome3 does a LOT to get in the way of the user accessing his applications. Gnome3 needs to get the hell out of the way.
Re:Think Different by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 05:55 · Score: 2, Informative

Personally I wasn't too convinced, but after using certain extensions, I found it to be on par with gnome 2.
Re:Think Different by supersloshy · 2012-02-29 06:01 · Score: 5, Informative

Here are some reasons from somebody that uses both GNOME 3 and Windows 7 on a daily basis:
* In Windows, if I want to switch to an application that has multiple windows (like a chat application) and I used Alt+Tab, it only brings up one window and I have to use Alt+Tab multiple times in succession to get all of the windows up. In GNOME 3, application windows are grouped by default so if I switch to my chat window, it also brings up my buddy list. If I want to switch to a specific window only, it lets me do that too with minimal effort.
* In Windows I feel like the Start menu is hard to navigate properly. Applications are sometimes grouped into folders and some aren't. There are no categories whatsoever. In GNOME 3 I not only get the same, handy "search" function that Windows 7 has, but I also get a much more intelligent application list which groups them by category and sorts them alphabetically without them being shoved into pointless folders.
* In Windows I feel like my application launchers are a distraction from my work. GNOME 3 helps me stay focused (yes this is an actual problem for me) by keeping the icons on the Activity overview, which is just as easy to open as the Start menu (Windows key).
* The clock is in the center of the top bar instead of useless white space. This isn't huge but it feels like a much better place for a clock than being shoved in the corner with a tiny font. This way it's larger easier to read from a distance and, since it's white text on black, it's also easier to look at in general.
* I just love the default theme. It has a lot of unnecessary padding, but it feels silky-smooth and "proper". The applications integrate well with it, too. Windows 7's Aero theme, while nice, feels somewhat pretentious and hacked-together. Also I don't really need glass-like transparency everywhere I look.
* Chat integration! I used to be a Pidgin fan when it comes to IM, but I tried Empathy and, while it has less features than Pidgin, it has just enough for me and it makes up for the lost features by being extremely simplistic and easy to use. No matter what window I have brought to the forefront, I can quickly respond from the nice little pop-up at the bottom of the screen without switching windows. Changing my availability from the status menu in the upper-right corner is also very nice since I don't have to hunt for a program icon in the "notification tray" or whatever people call it.
* It creates multiple desktops on-the-fly. I used to be the kind of person who had 4 desktops in a square formation, each for different programs, but with the new Alt+Tab functionality that has become rather outdated to me. In the event that I do need another desktop and I drag an application to another desktop, it makes a new, empty one right below it. My desktops dynamically adapt to my workflow instead of the other way around.
* I can click the application name in the top bar and close every single window owned by the application instead of hunting them all down.
* No minimizing ever! While most people rely on minimizing, I find no need to with GNOME 3. The desktop is uncluttered and simple, reducing distractions and removing the need to organize your icons and widgets and whatever else for it. The only times I'd ever feel like minimizing a window are obsoleted. Maximizing is also easier (though less straightforward at first) because, instead of hunting down the maximize button, I can just double-click the title-bar. This leaves more room for the close button in the corner of every window.
I could go on and on about the little things I love about it but I think I've made my point pretty clear by now. I can still use other desktops just fine but if I could replace them all with GNOME 3, I would in a heartbeat. Honestly the only reason I ever use Windows is for Steam games.

--
"Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
Re:Think Different by supersloshy · 2012-02-29 06:08 · Score: 5, Informative

Oh I almost forgot to add one very, very important detail that really sets it apart: one-click extension support! If you go to extensions.gnome.org while running GNOME 3, you can click any extension you want, slide an on/off switch, and it's installed! You can change lots of different aspects of GNOME with this, like adding buttons to the User Menu in the corner, removing things you don't need in the UI, making the behavior more like that of GNOME 2 or other desktop environments, and whatever else you can code in javascript. Nearly any major problem you may have with GNOME 3 can be remedied with an extension, and there have been some very comprehensive ones released so far! I only use one extension, the "Alternative Status Menu" one, but I could easily live without it.

--
"Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
Re:Think Different by ohnocitizen · 2012-02-29 06:22 · Score: 2, Informative

Sure. I used to spend time customizing my desktop to work just the way I liked, look just the way I liked, and feel like an extension of my workflow. With Gnome 3's cornucopia of options available to the user, I no longer spend time tweaking my desktop. Its very zen.
Re:Think Different by swilly · 2012-02-29 07:52 · Score: 2

I really, really love the extension support. Vanilla GNOME Shell is annoying and doesn't fit me very well, but with a few extensions I have something that is much better for me than GNOME 2 ever was. And it look like extensions are pretty easy to create too, though I haven't played with this yet.
The one click enabling of extensions only seems to work in Firefox. Last time I tried them in Chrome, it would complain that I wasn't running a valid version of GNOME Shell. Hopefully they will get this fixed soon (if they haven't already, can't check right now).
Re:Think Different by bytesex · 2012-02-29 08:01 · Score: 2

Agreed, but
- there's too much focus on the 'tablet' experience. I use a workstation, not a tablet.
- it's defenitely not versatile and configurable enough. Unity's dumber than MacOS and that's saying something.
- Its first release on Ubuntu (and many consequent releases since) has been plagued with bugs. So much so, that I'm back to xcfe, until someone can point me out that Unity will not abandon me anymore for some reason.

--
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
Re:Think Different by sqldr · 2012-02-29 10:56 · Score: 2

What problem does it solve
I can list a couple actually.
1) The taskbar. It's a throwback to windows 95 and didn't work very well then. Once you have too many windows open it gets too cramped, and they move around, so you can't get used to it. The "winkey-type about 3 letters" has the advantage that a) I don't have to reach for the mouse, b) it's way quicker to bring up the window you want, c) doesn't use real estate, d) takes advantage of the whole screen to show you big enough icons for what you're looking for, rather than "xter..*snip*"
2) Desktop icons: You have to move the windows out of the way to use them. I use any screen space I have spare for windows, so what's the point? I always get rid of them anyway. The "desktop" metaphor got taken too literally. Unless you want to do it PROPERLY in a throwback to RISCOS. no thanks.
3) Multiple desktops. In the old days you set up a fixed number (usually 4 by default), then came up with a system for yourself. Mail and browser on desktop 1, bunch of terminals on 2. Alas, I'm replying to an email and need to pop up a terminal to get some information about it. Now I've just dirtied my "mail" desktop with terminals. 3 hours later I've got crap all over the place and need to tidy up. Gnome just keeps adding spare desktops whenever you use the last one up. The result of this is I now use about 10 desktops at once, and happily flick between them with keyboard shortcuts. Much as I don't really go in much for desktop animations, the quick switch animation is quite pleasing
4) Which brings me to over the top 3D stuff. They use your 3D hardware to offload work from the CPU (who doesn't have at least intel GMA these days), and use it minimally where it's actually worth scaling/sliding etc. As opposed to wobbly windows
5) The empathy chat stuff which allows you to respond to a message without firing up a full chat window is simply great. In fact most of the notifications are
.
6) The dual monitor support is excellent, although was a bit odd at first. It only switches desktop on the main monitor. After a while I found this VERY useful. Keep something on screen by shifting it to the other screen whilst switching between other desktops. Eg. HOWTO docs on the right, lots of windows on several desktops on the left.
7) Much improved terminal emulator
8) I use the "drag to left to maximise to left side of screen" function all the time now. Hardly a gnome innovation, but it does help you keep things nice and tidy.
Basically, they got rid of a whole lot of clutter that I didn't need from my desktop so I can just get on with coding and reply to the odd email occasionally before switching back to the coding.

--
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
Re:Think Different by trevelyon · 2012-02-29 11:40 · Score: 2

Here are some reasons from somebody that uses both GNOME 3 and Windows 7 on a daily basis:
This is not meant to be a slight in any way but I suspect you did not use GNOME 2 very much. Several of the things you mention are in G2 already. I note them below. I should mention these were also present without being hostile to new or power users. To me G3 is just not good for either of those groups which begs the question who IS it targeted at?

New users don't know the "magic keys" and struggle to get basic tasks done. It is very unintuitive in this aspect. I support and have rolled out G 2.x to more than 20 users. Every single one of them could get up to speed within 10 - 20 minutes on their own. When I tested G3 with 4 "average" users none of them were using it on their own within 20 minutes. The fact that this page exists : https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet shows exactly what I am talking about.

Power users have simply been crippled in G3. For them the one app focus is the death knell of productivity and the an extra keystroke or 2 to launching apps, changing desktops, getting anywhere is just insult to injury.

I organize your comments into a couple categories.

New G3 functionality:
* In Windows, if I want to switch to an application that has multiple windows (like a chat application) and I used Alt+Tab, it only brings up one window and I have to use Alt+Tab multiple times in succession to get all of the windows up. In GNOME 3, application windows are grouped by default so if I switch to my chat window, it also brings up my buddy list. If I want to switch to a specific window only, it lets me do that too with minimal effort.
* It creates multiple desktops on-the-fly. I used to be the kind of person who had 4 desktops in a square formation, each for different programs, but with the new Alt+Tab functionality that has become rather outdated to me. In the event that I do need another desktop and I drag an application to another desktop, it makes a new, empty one right below it. My desktops dynamically adapt to my workflow instead of the other way around.
* I can click the application name in the top bar and close every single window owned by the application instead of hunting them all down.
G2 functionality that was already there:
* In Windows I feel like the Start menu is hard to navigate properly. Applications are sometimes grouped into folders and some aren't. There are no categories whatsoever. In GNOME 3 I not only get the same, handy "search" function that Windows 7 has, but I also get a much more intelligent application list which groups them by category and sorts them alphabetically without them being shoved into pointless folders.
* Chat integration! I used to be a Pidgin fan when it comes to IM, but I tried Empathy and, while it has less features than Pidgin, it has just enough for me and it makes up for the lost features by being extremely simplistic and easy to use. No matter what window I have brought to the forefront, I can quickly respond from the nice little pop-up at the bottom of the screen without switching windows. Changing my availability from the status menu in the upper-right corner is also very nice since I don't have to hunt for a program icon in the "notification tray" or whatever people call it.
Poor justification for removing features (i.e. they could be done in G2 with ease):
* In Windows I feel like my application launchers are a distraction from my work. GNOME 3 helps me stay focused (yes this is an actual problem for me) by keeping the icons on the Activity overview, which is just as easy to open as the Start menu (Windows key).
* The clock is in the center of the top bar instead of useless white space. This isn't huge but it feels like a much better place for a clock than being shoved in the corner with a tiny font. This way it's larger easier to read from a distance and, sin

Re:GNOME 3.4 team by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 04:44 · Score: 3, Interesting

Thanks for all the hard work, but Ubuntu will just ruin it, because they have some crappy new interface chages they been working on and they insist that it be used instead of your efforts

X team, Thanks for all the hard work, but Gnome will just ruin it, because they have some crappy new interface changes they been working on and they insist that it be used instead of your efforts.

Re:What's up with all the white space? by cyclomedia · 2012-02-29 04:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

Yeah, but never mind the colors specifically, this is something I noticed a few years back and seems to be getting worse, Gnome at 1280x1024 now looks like it's only 640x480 because everything is so massive. Maybe it's related to the increasing age - and therefore long-sightedness - of the chief devs.

--
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.

Re:Gnome by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 04:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

No, but luckily they've decided that everyone who thinks it's bad is just not being logical, so they did a perfect job in their own minds.

Re:GNOME 3.4 team by monkeyhybrid · 2012-02-29 05:01 · Score: 2

Linux Mint.

I've been long time (K)Ubuntu user on the desktop but I'm not liking some of their recent direction with regards to UI and such. I've been playing with Linux Mint in a VM for a while now and really like it. It's Ubuntu but with a clean and polished Gnome / KDE; none of the Unity stuff.

I had been thinking about going back to Fedora or some other distro, but I think I'll be putting Linux Mint on my desktops next time I upgrade, probably in May / June when Linux Mint 13 will be out (new releases follow about a month after new Ubuntu releases).

"Questionable" by supersloshy · 2012-02-29 05:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

but some of them seem questionable

I know that it's considered traditional here on Slashdot to rant on GNOME 3 and how "awful" some people think it is, but can we at least keep that in the comments section? The article summaries should just say what's new, not whether or not you like the changes. I'm sick of hearing things like "maybe it's time to move to KDE for me" or "when will the GNOME developers listen to the community?" or similar things in article summaries here on Slashdot. Unless there's someone you're quoting who says that, please keep your comments in the comments section.

Anyway I'm really looking forward to GNOME 3.4! I'm really enjoying 3.2 on my desktop and I might just put it on my netbook too with this new update. The only real problems I've ever had with it are a couple problems with the notification area, to be honest. If they could improve that then I'd be willing to give it my full recommendation to nearly anybody... Well, excluding the people who like to really customize their UIs. I've grown past that and I'll just try to use what I'm given now, and this is honestly making it really easy for me instead of being really frustrating.

--
"Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen

wobbly windows? by edmicman · 2012-02-29 05:05 · Score: 4, Interesting

And when can I get wobbly windows back on GNOME3?

Re:wobbly windows? by supersloshy · 2012-02-29 08:06 · Score: 2

It was never there to begin with. That was Compiz, a third-party project that was never really official. Metacity never had wobbly windows.

--
"Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Fist impression by Per+Wigren · 2012-02-29 05:06 · Score: 2

Too much whitespace.

--
My other account has a 3-digit UID.

Re:GNOME 3.4 team by SpzToid · 2012-02-29 05:08 · Score: 2

Try Pinguyos, it is my new best Ubuntu-ish friend. Comes in two flavors. The 1.1Gb deluxe Original flavor comes with all the apps installed nicely as if your uncle gray beard took the time and patience to give you a Christmas present. It is so good, that by popular demand a newer 2nd flavor was introduced, more like Ubuntu itself is, just the few basic apps setup nicely, (but not everything, certainly not everything, because that's the Original Pinguyos).
http://pinguyos.com/

--
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.

Re:Gnome by redneckmother · 2012-02-29 05:08 · Score: 3, Funny

Did they remove the suck?

Nah, just replaced it with BLOW.

Re:What's up with all the white space? by Krojack · 2012-02-29 05:10 · Score: 2

Agree. The look or theme is horrible. I've come to like the Windows 7 look myself. If you tweak some of the themes and use a 3rd party app such as Rainmeter you can get some pretty sweet interfaces.

Re:What's up with all the white space? by evilned · 2012-02-29 05:13 · Score: 2

To be honest, thats why I like it so much. Almost all of the UI is hidden normally, but available quickly with a quick click. There is definately room for improvement, but its minimalism under normal circumstances is one of the big selling points.

--

"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

Let's rename Gnome -- how bout GnOSXme? by pholus · 2012-02-29 05:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

Actually, it appears to be the final nail in the coffin as far as my love-hate relationship with Gnome goes. Yup, I tried it like everyone said and after heavy configuration 3.2 kind of works so-so for me if I hold my nose. I was hoping it would get better with a few more extensions or through cinnamon. Now this. I use sloppy mouse focus as a work-related feature in my image processing work. To lose a valuable work related feature just to get a serial-number filed off OS X clone desktop gets me off this train for good.

It now raises two other questions:

Is gnome software going to work outside of gnome if it looks for this top bar to place a menu all the time? If not, too bad for open source in general.

Is cinnamon going to be able to work around this? Obviously their alternate top menu bar will have some problems.

Tablet UI by ArcherB · 2012-02-29 05:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

(leading to a world where hackers, tablet users, and grandma can all get along).

And that's the problem. When I'm on a tablet, I want a tablet interface. When I'm on a desktop, I want a DESKTOP interface.

Stop trying to make one interface to rule them all. When I can use a keyboard and mouse on a tablet, I'll consider having a desktop interface. Until then, KEEP THEM SEPARATE!

--
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.

Re:Tablet UI by sqldr · 2012-02-29 11:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

How many tablet interfaces do you know that allow you to move windows around, have drop down menus from the top bar, or open chat sessions in the notification bar? It wouldn't work on a tablet in its current form and isn't a tablet interface.

--
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.

Re:GNOME 3.4 team by fahrbot-bot · 2012-02-29 05:38 · Score: 4, Funny

Srsly?

Have something against vowels?

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .

An even better Gnome by ThatsNotPudding · 2012-02-29 06:20 · Score: 3, Funny

Now with five toes!!

Thanks for the additional warning. by pholus · 2012-02-29 06:24 · Score: 4, Interesting

As far as clones, my local Cult of Apple members spent a lot of time teasing me by placing the Gnome 3 "System Settings" panel side by side with the OS X "System Preferences" panel. I certainly could not defend against the assertion that that feature at least was a wholesale ripoff. Perhaps you could have done better. The categories are the same, the icons look the same, only difference in the end is that the OS X panel seems to offer more options for customization. If you're keeping score I wouldn't count that as a win for Gnome either....

It does reinforce my initial impression after reading about Gnome 3.4 that after trying to adapt to 3.2 has resulted in nothing more than a massive waste of time I could have otherwise spent being productive had I jumped ship immediately upon the first performance hits. The "one task at a time" idea makes me feel like I am performing surgery with ski-gloves on when doing image processing where you are constantly flipping between an image window and menus/terminals which manipulate it. On a 30" monitor I have been fighting how silly it seems that a terminal dragged too far up becomes a 30" wide terminal. It feels unnatural to have to check the motion of the terminal and drop it several tenths of an inch from the top bar, wasting as much space as I was supposed to be saving. I guess maybe it's supposed to be fun -- goof it up and it's just like the guy's nose buzzing in Operation. I used to be able to balance my thoughts using the desktop as a way to keep an overview of my various tasks in minimized windows or iconified desktop switchers (which to me functioned kind of like a heads-up-display) but in the new Gnome, out of sight is out of mind without hands on the keyboard. I tried, with an open mind, to get with the program on the advice of Gnome advocates and out of a loyalty to Fedora which I've used since RedHat 4. But after seven months it still doesn't feel right --it's awkward and keeps me from getting things done.

Now the user experience demands that applications start placing the menu on the top bar? I guess if you run one application at a time that's a strength but I don't nor can I. I see people worried about how sloppy focus pays a penalty for this happening and I believe you've just told me that this concern is a price you're willing to pay for a user experience. In essence this is a big warning that I will end up rewriting code if I wanted to stay with gnome. I was paid to write the code, I am most certainly not going to be paid to rewrite it. I am currently paid to produce with it.

YMMV obviously, but it's a warning I cannot ignore about what Gnome's future will mean for my work...

Re:GNOME 3.4 team by Anne+Thwacks · 2012-02-29 06:24 · Score: 2

There is NO need to consider that option. We ALL hate its guts.

One major problem is the removal of the words under Icons in an interface that is completely icon dependent, yet uses icons which are new, and not recognisable. This effectively disguises your system as a POS.

The fact that, dependent on the situation the icons are either too small to recognise, or so huge you only get 6 on a 2048x 1440 screen definitely does not help.

Lesson 1: Words (and by extension, hierarchical menus) are a great way to interface with people who are literate. Illiterates do not actually need a GUI on a computer at all. (They need an iPhone).

--
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII

Shoutout to KDE developers: Don't screw it up! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-29 08:53 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is a shoutout to all the KDE developers. All you have to do to win is DO NOT SCREW UP. Don't change KDE radically. Just keep is slow and steady. I had to switch from Gnome 3 to KDE, and I like KDE. Many will be abandoning Gnome 3 in the months to come. KDE is fine just like it is. All you have to do is not screw it up! That's it. Just don't mess up the user interface like Gnome, Unity, etc. Don't make KDE look like a tablet, Mac, Windows 8, etc. Just keep it the same. Don't screw it up, like I said already.

Fallback mode by saratchandra · 2012-02-29 09:28 · Score: 2

Like many out there, I'm surviving the recent GNOME "upgrades" by running fallback mode which mimics GNOME 2.x. That's the only means to maintain sanity and a semblance of productivity. Going at this rate, keep an eye for a GNOME branded one-button mouse, because right-click is for pussies.

46 of 144 comments (clear)