Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tom's Hardware Tests and Reviews Fedora 16 and Gnome 3

Posted by timothy on from the love-it-or-hate-it dept.

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."

30 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. I went with XFCE by ArcherB · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:I went with XFCE by synapse7 · · Score: 2

      Is XFCE the best desktop alternative to gnome3/unity for PCs intended to be used with a mouse and not touchscreen? My social machines are still riding mint10.

    2. Re:I went with XFCE by rish87 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Same here, I went with XFCE years ago and haven't looked back. It's not that I am opposed to new directions in UI development, I've just never felt Unity/Gnome Shell offered anything useful. For someone who spends most of their time in linux with a maximized terminal and screen session, when I DO have to interact with the desktop, I want it to be as small and light as possible. I know there are lighter environments, but XFCE is a good blend of efficiency and usefulness IMO.

    3. Re:I went with XFCE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I use a mix of XFCE and OpenBox. OpenBox and KDE are apparently one of very few desktops these days that can handle 4+ monitors correctly. Even that stock XFCE window manager doesn't work correctly. What a shame.

      GNOME 3 can't do it at all. If I load it on my 4 monitor setup (two twinview screens) it gets all screwed up with only half the screen rendering and the rendering is done on the opposite monitors from where the actual mouse clicks are detected. It's seriously broken.

      10 years ago this setup worked perfectly. It's sad to see so much software getting worse with age.

    4. Re:I went with XFCE by nschubach · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've been debating moving back (xfce, or KDE) for a while now. I've given Gnome3 a good 4-5 months of good attempts to use, but I find that multitasking is not the forefront of the interface. Yeah, you can "snap" windows to the edges and see more than one, but it's just not the same somehow. Maybe it's because the windows mostly open full screen? Maybe it's the added complexity of having to hit Shift + click to open a new instance of something instead of bringing up the old one (that still bugs me the most...) Maybe it's not being able to "pin" (or favorite) an application to the launcher if it doesn't have a .desktop file associated with it. Why can't I run a Java app from the prompt and make that pin-able? Maybe it's the annoying bottom bar notification? (I prefer mine up top... been trying to get used to it, didn't put much effort into seeing if I could move them back up to the clock...) It mostly pops up when I don't want it to (when I have to click on the scroll down button.) Maybe it's all that combined. I just use the machine as a web browser anymore because that's usually full-screened anyway. I tried developing on it, but it feels clunky to do so.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    5. Re:I went with XFCE by justforgetme · · Score: 2

      Yes, if you want a plug'n play type of OS installation.

      If you like tinkering then there are many many more possibilities.

      --
      -- no sig today
    6. Re:I went with XFCE by RDW · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you liked Gnome 2, then MATE is an obvious choice:

      http://mate-desktop.org/

      It's an active fork of Gnome 2, and is included in the current Mint distribution, though you can get a more recent version from the developers' repository (which also supports Debian and Ubuntu):

      http://wiki.mate-desktop.org/download

      Third party rpms for Fedora 16 are now available too.

    7. Re:I went with XFCE by Znork · · Score: 2

      I'd just gotten the enthusiasm going to use gnome3 but that quickly ended as I discovered that it doesn't seem possible to span graphics cards (for quad screen). I went with xfce, it does what I need.

      While gnome shell at least seems the least offensive of the 'new' gui's, and while I'm not opposed to change in itself, I really dont like regressions and the last couple of releases have broken a lot of functionality that used to work well.

    8. Re:I went with XFCE by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is XFCE the best desktop alternative to gnome3/unity for PCs intended to be used with a mouse and not touchscreen?

      Both xfce and KDE would be good choices. Neither Gnome 3 nor Unity is acceptable in their present incarnations.

      I've converted our Ubuntu gnome desktops to xfce, with a little customization (preparing for the 10.04 LTS to 12.04 LTS migration). The laptop has been xfce for a while. From many trials using VMs, my opinion is that Unity is an abomination - nobody in the family likes it - and Gnome 3 sucks on multi-display systems.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    9. Re:I went with XFCE by Rennt · · Score: 2

      To some extent. You can always install another DE later on, but some distros are more... brittle then others when it comes to being able to customise stuff.

      In general, the more plug-and-play distro's are less flexible due to the large amount of customised software and integration work they have carried out. These customisations can also change drastically between major updates, which is fine if you are just upgrading a vanilla ubuntu install from 10.10 to 11.04 but will can really trash your system if you make moderate customizations to the OS.

      None of these problems are impossible to work around, but the amount of effort you will expend will be greater in the long run then just using a more generic system designed that is designed for modification in the first place.

      But don't get obsessed about picking the distro that is just right on your first install. You just need to use one and get your feet wet. You'll soon work out what you like and what you need from your distro.

    10. Re:I went with XFCE by ArcherB · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ah, I see. Well, I have very little interest in using Linux on my main machine, but I do like it in principle. (I am, unfortunately, a very heavy gamer and far too lazy to dual boot or fool around with stuff like WINE).

      Nevertheless, you've been very helpful and enlightening. Thank you!

      If you are a serious gamer, you probably don't want to use Linux, unfortunately. But, for the average user, Linux is great. My neighbor across the street was constantly bringing his notebook over for "repair". I put the XFCE version of Ubuntu on it and rarely see him at my door with notebook in hand. He still comes by, just not with his computer anymore. The only question he had after I showed him how to get to his stuff was, "What was the password again?" I asked him what street he lived on. He told me and I said, "THAT is your password." He's not a gamer though. He checks his mail, browses the web (weather channel mostly), and plays the occasional card game. I showed him the other cool stuff to like sky maps, Google Earth and so on. He really seems to dig it. He really likes the fact that he has not seen a virus since installing it.

      So, if you have that person who you are constantly fixing their machine who doesn't use their PC for gaming, I'd highly recommend Linux. Dual boot setup is extremely easy with the hardest part being the partitioning setup. Once that is done, it will repartitions your drive, installs the boot manager, copies your Windows files and settings over and leaves your windows partition intact, if a bit smaller.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  2. Gnome 3 by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Gnome 3 by ArcherB · · Score: 2

      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.

      Totally agree. Leave the tablet interface to the tables and the desktop interface to the desktop! When Fedora releases a Tablet Spin, they should go with the tablet interface. I don't understand why Fedora wouldn't just go with KDE as the default since it's still a desktop interface (assuming we are limited to the big two managers, Gnome and KDE). KDE (finally) runs great.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    2. Re:Gnome 3 by justforgetme · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Gnome3 is the default desktop env that gets installed. Anaconda (the OS installer of fedora) asks
      you, on install, if you wish Gnome3 or KDE. Just choose KDE and you are set.

      I get the point though, from the two KDE is definitely the better desktop env. Probably that choice
      came from higher up though.

      --
      -- no sig today
    3. Re:Gnome 3 by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      Yeah, they really jumped the shark here. I can sense what they are aiming for, the aesthetic of less to the point of having nothing and forcing the user to jump through hoops so the designers can revel in a blank desktop.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    4. Re:Gnome 3 by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "the most feeble of users"Doesn't that sum up the majority of desktop users? For real work I use Chakra, on the computers that everyone uses Fedora with Gnome 3. 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.

    5. Re:Gnome 3 by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Totally agree. Leave the tablet interface to the tables and the desktop interface to the desktop! When Fedora releases a Tablet Spin, they should go with the tablet interface. I don't understand why Fedora wouldn't just go with KDE as the default since it's still a desktop interface (assuming we are limited to the big two managers, Gnome and KDE). KDE (finally) runs great.

      I agree with this sentiment. That's why I went with KDE. On my desktop, I have a desktop interface, on my netbook/ultrabook, I can use the netbook interface and on a tablet, the new plasma active. Three different UIs for three different purposes, but underneath it all, one desktop environment to learn.

    6. Re:Gnome 3 by Sussurros · · Score: 2

      I totally agree. I use Fedora 16 on two of my computers but with KDE instead of Gnome 3 and the look and feel is good. Actually I find it better than Kubuntu except that I don't like Apper very much and Fedora doesn't let you use anything else. When I read the review and saw that Gnome 3 desktop on what is now my customary desktop I couldn't believe how plug-uglified it was. I couldn't finish reading the review. I really didn't like Unity when I used it and that was why I moved to KDE, but Gnome 3 seems to be ugly for ugly's sake. Seeing Gnome now is like seeing George Best or OJ Simpson after the meltdown. Even Tiger Woods is looking better than Gnome.

      --
      I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
  3. I went with LXDE by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

    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"
  4. Got used to Gnome 3 by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

    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.

  5. Not stable enough by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 5, Informative
    here is a list of things on gnome in Gentoo before they can make it stable and unmask it.

    http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GNOME/GNOME3_Stable

    In other words, its not stable enough on Gentoo

  6. Cinnamon - what Gnome3 should have been by Dakiraun · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  7. Why the keyboard hate? by Chemisor · · Score: 2

    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?

    1. Re:Why the keyboard hate? by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Is it really that hard to use the keyboard instead?

      It's a GUI, dude. If I wanted to be using the keyboard, I'd use a CLI.

      And yes, having to move my hands between mouse and keyboard all the time because they've totally fscked up the mouse interface for no good reason would be incredibly annoying.

      You see, here's the thing. Changes are supposed to take what we have and... improve it. When you do that, users are happy and start using the new features and few people complain. But all these new GUIs are a big step backward for desktop users, merely to support a tablet market which does not exist. Android and iOS own the tablet market right now, Microsoft might get a small market share, but no-one is going to be pushing Red Hat tablets any time soon.

    2. Re:Why the keyboard hate? by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 2

      Do you play games with just a mouse? Or do your browsing habits require you have a free hand for a non computer related peripheral?

  8. Re:Divisiveness for Fun and Profit by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  9. Re:Why say Tablet UI? by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can someone please explain to me the whole GNOME Shell/Unity is a tablet interface meme?

    Single-tasking full-screen apps with no application menus, and masses of enforced mouse movement to get anything done? Clicking in the corner of the screen to switch windows doesn't cause RSI when using a table, but it's horrendously bad design when using a mouse.

    Unity is fine on my netbook when I just want to check email or look at some web pages, but it's a total cluster-fsck when I try to get any real work done; I'm continually having to move the mouse all over the screen to switch windows, and the stupid task bar is continually blocking the left side of the screen when I move the mouse over there and don't quite stop before the edge (e.g. to use the 'back' button in Firefox).

  10. Re:Divisiveness for Fun and Profit by DrgnDancer · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
  11. Re:Divisiveness for Fun and Profit by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

    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
  12. Re:Divisiveness for Fun and Profit by dslbrian · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.