Slashdot Mirror
Tom's Hardware Tests and Reviews Fedora 16 and Gnome 3
New submitter LordDCLXVI writes with a review at Tom's Hardware that starts out with some loaded questions about GNOME 3, as included in the newest version of Red Hat's Fedora: "While most other distros are passing up or postponing GNOME Shell, Fedora is full steam ahead. Does Red Hat know something the rest of us don't? Or is GNOME 3 really as bad as everyone says?" Writes LordDCLVXI: "This massive article amounts to a full-blown guide to Fedora 16 'Verne' and complete dissection of GNOME Shell. It begins with an installation guide, with instructions for enabling third-party repos, proprietary graphics drivers, Wi-Fi, Flash, Java, multimedia codecs, and 32-bit libs. Next up is a GNOME Shell tear-down, including customization options and methods to 'fix' the Shell or mimic GNOME 2. Finally, Fedora is benchmarked against Ubuntu 11.10 and Windows 7. [While the author] adds to the voices criticizing GNOME Shell, he also points out that the extensions can empower distributors to create unique, yet compatible layouts. One of the most fair and constructive critiques of GNOME 3 — definitely worth the read, and even makes GNOME 3 worth a second look."
Since the Ubuntu version of Gnome3 didn't work right because of my AMD/ATI graphics card, I went with the XFCE4 Spin when I installed Fedora. Runs like a champ!
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
I see it still sucks, then.
I've honestly never understood why Red Hat would believe that pushing a tablet interface on an OS that's primarily used for servers and corporate desktops makes the slightest amount of sense.
AKA lubuntu. The most lightweight version of Ubuntu, and it still looks like a standard menu-based OS (start menu, tabs, etc). Plus I needed something small for my Pentium 3/256 megabyte laptop.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
After a while of using it, I got used to it. I still find myself trying to launch and switch tasks the old way, but the new way is not bad. Nowhere near as extreme as Windows 8. Still have trouble using that, and we have been testing it since November.
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GNOME/GNOME3_Stable
In other words, its not stable enough on Gentoo
"fix" would be a 3rd party program for win8.
until they come up with some libs they'll only ship for 8, dunno why one should switch though..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Can someone please explain to me the whole GNOME Shell/Unity is a tablet interface meme? I understand how people may not like the interface, but I don't understand calling it a mobile one.
Even though it's barely out of the gates, I tried out Cinnamon, a fork of Gnome3 by the folks that brought us Mint Linux. MUCH better than the base Gnome3.
To keep things short, one could say the biggest point of contention with Gnome3 was how radically different it was from Gnome2, moving from a task-centric way of managing the shell to an application centric method. While great for a novice, this tended to frustrate a lot of power users. Cinnamon allows more flexibility in the shell's method of focus on tasks and applications, essentially letting the user pick whatever point on the scale they prefer. It's a good approach - perhaps the best approach.
I don't know if it's offered for Fedora or Red Hat based Linux's in package form, but you could build it from source if need be.
This review, like most others, makes a big deal of there being no dock for multitasking. The complaint being that to switch applications you have to mouse to the corner to open the activities screen and then click on the destination. Is it really that hard to use the keyboard instead? Or just press the banner key to get to activities and click on the destination. To me this looks like a big improvement over hunting for the destination on a cluttered desktop. Do you really hate using the keyboard so much that key+click is a totally unacceptable change from move+click?
And it's sad that most /.ters won't read the review, because it is truly very complete. At one point you read
Another side-effect presents itself after a few weeks of regular use.
or
I needed to open it on the Dell Inspiron Mini 10v to access my DropBox account [...] Back on my desktop, KeePassX reported that my password database was locked
and think "a review that actually tried to use the fucking thing for weeks intead of just installing, looking around for a few minutes and writing about it? What the hell is happening to tech journalism?". Gnome Shell didn't, but Tom's Hardware scored a few points with me today.
You think we're bitching about Metro? Wait till it lands in front regular users. I had people freaking out because their desktop looked a little different in Windows 7. They're going to have a fucking aneurysm when 8 hits. Also, people are talking about touch-screen monitors like it is something we are going to have on our desktops. I can see using the TSI for some off-hand UI stuff, but most use is going to have to be mouse driven. It sounds great until you have to lift your hand up to actuate the UI, after a couple of times it gets real old. We have had touch screens employed for their optimal uses for many many years now, the desktop is not one of them.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
Gnome 3, once you start hitting the os-button you will never go back. The shell is awsome :)
Well, I keep my distance from RH distros due to dependency issues w/ both rpm and yumm, so that rules out not just Fedora, but better Linuxes before it, such as Mandriva. And I never liked any of the Gnomes either. There is one distro called Comice Linux that made Gnome3 look like OS-X, but aside from that, I see no reason for anyone to prefer Gnome. I'd prefer any Debian based distro or PC-BSD along w/ KDE or GNUSTEP. (Would like to see how PBI compares to apt-get, ports and other packaging methods of other OSs)
I was very favorably impressed with the review. I actually tried to use Gnome3 for a while and gave it up as a bad job, after reading this I've got a good idea of how I could fix a lot of the annoyances I found. I'm not sure I'd want to (as the reviewer says, he had to go through a pretty insane amount of effort to make the desktop usable), but still this guy went to some serious effort and found several tips and tricks I didn't know about. Combined with a really good explanation of the pluses and minuses for a pure FOSS distro on the first several pages and a clear effort to really use and abuse the system being reviewed, this may be one of the most useful and informative reviews I've seen in a while. Whether for a new Linux user or a Linux veteran that hasn't really played with Gnome3.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Tom's Hardware scored a few points with me today.
Definitely. I could feel his agony, having tried Gnome 3 myself on Fedora in a VM. His pain threshold is obviously much higher than mine, as he stuck to it for a couple of months...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
One thing the review left out, but others have alluded to is that Gnome 3 may not be the only desktop one uses. I've used both Gnome Shell and Unity quite a bit and if they were all I had to use, I could more readily adapt to them. However, I also have to use Windows a lot and going back and forth between them is cumbersome.
Under Gnome 2, XFCE and KDE, at least my desktop functions similarly in all cases (menu bar, task list, notifications, etc.). I don't have to think to switch tasks on this computer, I need to do this and on this computer I need to do that. I don't think I am alone on that.
I have no doubt that I could set my mother up to use Gnome 3 and it's shell and she would get along quite well with it. She only has the one computer and once she was familiar with how to do things, she'd be fine. However, I, and many /.ters have multiple computers at home and work and we don't necessarily have the luxury of choosing the OS or desktop environment. In these cases, similar functionality is more important than sexiness.
I do agree, however, that the Tom's Hardware review was extremely well done. Then again, I agree with their findings, so maybe I'm biased.
Why is the default download type a "live" CD? Choosing "Applications -> Install to hard drive" doesn't seem at all intuitive. Granted, I installed on a virtual machine which kicked Fedora into "fallback mode" (no display drivers yet) on first boot so maybe that prevented a dialog from displaying.
I wouldn't trust what they say about hardware, let alone Linuxy stuff.
I've been using Unity (or whatever it was called back then) on my 10.1" netbook since it was available and I never liked it for the desktop.
But I've gown to like Gnome 3 and, in particular, it's task switching.
While Gnome 2 style task switching works well, it becomes a bit painful when you have a more than a few windows in the same desktop.
If I have more than a few, names in the task list buttons will become truncated, which tends to require extra effort to figure out which button I want.
If I have a lot (and I sometimes do), then the task list button will group windows, requiring me to navigate through the groups.
Gnome 3's requirement of the mouse to the upper left corner or pressing the "Windows key" is a hassle, but a very small one in imho.
The Windows key is well at hand, and I don't really move the mouse to the upper left corner: I just throw it there.
And in return, I get a visual overview of all windows. Of course, your mileage may vary but for me it's a boon.
I also like being being able to navigate windows when I keep "Alt+tab" down.
Although I'd prefer if the new scheme was activated just with "Alt+~" and "Alt+tab" operated in a more traditional manner.
I agreed with his review as well. Frankly I found his tolerance far exceeding my own when it comes to GNOME3. Pretty much everything he said on the "Why it Failed" page is spot on. I thought this was insightful regarding their target demographic:
So, when the power users are leaving, GNOME doesn't really seem to care. After all, GNOME 3 isn't designed for them. But what the GNOME Project leaders don't seem to understand is that new Linux users are like vampires, or werewolves, or zombies. Stick with me here.
New Linux users don't just spontaneously pop into existence, they have to be "bitten" by someone who is already involved. Average Joe, who needs to use his computer and doesn't care how it works, doesn't wake up one day and, out of the clear blue sky exclaim, "You know what? I think I'm gonna screw around with Linux today.” New users are typically converted by a friend or family member who gets them set up and interested.
By gutting GNOME of every power user-oriented feature (a functional desktop, virtual desktops, on-screen task management, applets, hibernation, and so on) it's losing that intermediate-to-advanced crowd that's responsible for bringing users on-board. The power user demographic isn't going to recommend and support GNOME 3-based systems if they've already jumped ship.
Just how does GNOME intend to put the GNOME Shell into the hands of new users? By chasing away its current base with a brand new interface designed to be "easy," and with no clear strategy for acquiring an easy-seeking audience, GNOME simultaneously shoots itself in the head and foot.
And finally:
Using GNOME Shell is an exercise in supreme frustration. After spending the first month with this interface, I wanted to crawl into a corner and die.
Just the reaction the GNOME devs were hoping for, no? I kind of wonder how long Fedora will stick with it given that.
I never even got gnome to start after ugragrading to Fedora16 system, so just went back to Enlightenment17 which goes to the opposite extreme of letting you customise everything while having quite sane defaults.
I've tried the new gnome from a live CD, but from the little I've used it I became so pissed off that I even prefer the old early 1990s style TWM (which I used last week). Perhaps the initial defaults should be changed so it works more reliably and pisses people off a bit less on initial use. Maybe all it would take is a README file linked from an icon on the desktop, some sort of intro animation, or even just a web page describing why it is the way it is and the benefits.
I cannot stand the childish and immature desktop environments that are being forced upon end-users. Unity/Gnome Shell are both awkward, clunky, unusable and feel like a shameless ripoff of Mac OS X in feel. I sure as hell don't want a desktop environment that restricts what I can do and offers me no customization - that sucks. For these reasons I've chosen Xfce4 on all of my Debian installs as it's the only SANE desktop environment left for power users and those with common sense.
I have been using gnome 3 for a few months now. I have applied enough customisations that it is tolerable - not great, but good enough to get real work done.
The three things I would like to see are:
Named Workspaces In addition to the dynamic workspaces, which I quite like as a concept, I want a fixed set of named workspaces for my routine tasks.
Task Display I want to be able to see, at a glance, what is running on a workspace. I do not want to have to switch to the workspace view just to see if something has slipped under another window.
Task Launching The idea that I would want to reuse a terminal session on another workspace is daft. I can see that for some apps it might be OK, but for others its just wrong. This needs to be something that can be set on a per application basis.
Fedora 16 is also good for core i5. Opensuse 12.1 kernel crashed all the time.
It is the firt time I find the multi-virtual-desktop thing usable : it becomes very practical to setup multiple virtual desktops for so many different tasks, and it is nice.
I had to customise it a little though, with the folowing extensions, right out from the https://extensions.gnome.org/ website :
- Coverflow Alt-Tab : Replacement of Alt-Tab, iterates through windows in a cover-flow manner.
- Dash Click Fix : Fix the dash's behavior when you click on an already running icon. The default behaviour is to switch to it, this extension changes that to lanch a new instance instead
- Places Status Indicator : Add a systems status menu for quickly navigating places in the system
- Power Options : Show Suspend, Hibernate (if available) and Power Off options in user menu.
- Remove Accesibility : Remove the accesibility button from the top panel.
- System Monitor : Add a system monitor to the left side of the message tray.
Hardware / software base : Debian "Wheezy" (testing) on a high end full HD laptop with an external monitor attached to it sometimes.
Usage : web / email / some games / office work / platform prototyping with virtual machines, modelling.
The external display behaves like a charm (with really minor glitches : le login screen will somtimes not appear properly if the monitor gets plugged off before one unlocks the screen, but it still work).
I miss the cube. I miss a screensaver, I miss the capacity to change windows themes and colours and the "control pannel" lacks several usefull features, but overall, it is very usable and properly translated in French.
I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
I have had windows users with no linux experince ask me to intall Gnome 3 on their computers. That has never happened for me in the past with any desktop.
I've had a very similar experience as a GNOME3 user since June. The transition to Gnome 3 is jarring for someone used to any other "Traditional" desktop environment. However my first experience with it went much MUCH better than my first kick at the can with unity. Unity was such a turnoff for me that I stuck with Lucid and eventually ditched Ubuntu for Debian for my new computer. I can't be alone in that respect--the initial releases of Unity were an unmitgated disaster, though it has improved somewhat. Gnome 3 on the other hand has been by far the most well recieved desktop when I've presented it to computer novices. To a slashdot-like audience "tablet-like on a PC" is an insult--it makes no sense, but to my young niece or my father in his 70s who make the same observation they say it as a complement. Computers are "hard"--iPads and iphones and droids are "easy", or at least "easier". The differences in form factor mean there should be some differences in the user interface obviously, but for "regular folk" incorporating some more appliance-like design makes the computer much less intimidating.
I found that although the initial release of GNOME 3 was quite un-polished there was certainly a sense of where the project is trying to go. Though I don't totally agreee with some of the Tom's Hardware editorialising, I was impressed with the throroughness of its review and that they did at least "get it" at some level. Gnome 3 is striving to cater to the "uninitiated" linux user--indeed to users unaccustomed to computers of any platform. When presented with the Gnome 3 desktop and told to figure out how to do a given task with no assistance, what would a novice user do? That seems to be the approach the designers have taken.
To put yourself in a newbie's shoes: If you want to do anything you'd thing "activities--that must be where I go". There are more efficient ways to bring up the launcher/switcher screen--notably the super/"windows" key but that is something you can learn. It brings to mind a humourous youtube video where an IT blogger/journalist shows his dad the Windows 8 "public preview" and tells him to perform a simple task, ends up getting out of the "metro tile" screen onto an empty desktop, then has no idea how to get back without prompting. Gnome 3 may have its growing pains, but it seems Win 8 will have more than its share of issues with novices and opwer users alike.
So if you aren't a regular computer user what do you do when you are done using a gadget? Well, you turn it off. how do you accomplish this in Gnome 3? They are going to press the power button, and in Gnome 3 when you do that the shutdown dialogue pops up and counts down from 60, just like a Mac. So if you can do that, why bother with a superfluous shutdown icon or menu item on the screen?
As an experienced user with a definitely established set of habits I can certainly say I encounter frustrations with Gnome 3 from time to time, but I find I'm really growing into Gnome 3 quite well. The learning curve is NOT as steep as Tom's might have you believe--admittedly it does present some obsacles if you are trying to "2-ify" the shell to make it conform to your habits. However one thing Tom's very effectively demonstrates is that however flawed you might find the Gnome 3 shell out of the box, as a platform is has fantastic potential, certainly moreso than Unity could ever offer and enough flexibility to hold its own against KDE. The Gnome Shell Extensions are still in their infancy but it makes the new Gnome Shell into a very versatile platform.
I think the jury is still out on whether the strategy of simplification and stepping out of the traditional "desktop box" more than any other GUI is a mistake. I can understand how seasoned Linux users could take offense to the "dumbing down" but perhaps it was the right t