GNOME 3.4 Released

supersloshy writes "The popular GNOME desktop environment has just announced the release of version 3.4. User-facing updates include, among others, a new look for many GNOME applications, smooth scrolling support in GTK, integrated document search in GNOME Shell, a new dynamic background, improved accessibility configuration options, new high-contrast icons, and more documentation. Developer-facing improvements include the release of GTK+ 3.4 and updates to standard GNOME libraries as part of the latest GNOME Developer Platform."

Comments

Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see how many messages pass by before the usual flamewar against GNOME erupts...

Re:Will this be any different?

[MemoryDragon]

Flame on: Gnome is unbearable...

Re:Will this be any different?

[justforgetme]

What's to flame? GNOME 3 was good, now it's better

<runs and hides>

Re:Will this be any different?

[bacon.frankfurter]

Not if you use Unity... (*snicker!*)

Re:Will this be any different?

[0123456]

Nah, everyone who wants a usable desktop has switched away and no longer cares how much the Gnome boys fsck theirs up.

Re:Will this be any different?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

It's just like Lion, only different.

(Actually, with the right extensions, and Docky? I quite like Gnome 3.)

Re:Will this be any different?

[uberjack]

After getting used to GNOME 2 with Compiz Fusion, I can't stand GNOME 3, and I'm having an impossibly difficult time finding a replacement. I've tried GNOME 3, GNOME Classic, Mate, and even KDE, and at this point, I have to either endure xfce's bugs, or wait until Mate's are ironed out. All along, my install of Mint 10 is aging, and given that its support period is ending, I'm basically stuck between a rock and a hard place. I don't understand why GNOME's devs would screw its supporters this way. Not only is 3 inferior to anyone who likes any sort of flexibility, but its interface is downright maddening at times.

Re:Will this be any different?

[IANAAC]

... with the right extensions, and Docky? I quite like Gnome 3.)

Don't know about it being like Lion, but I agree that it's pretty nice with the right extensions. Workspace Navigator is my favorite, at the moment.

Re:Will this be any different?

[0123456]

I don't understand why GNOME's devs would screw its supporters this way.

The other alternative was to start fixing Gnome 2's numerous bugs, and where's the fun in that?

Re:Will this be any different?

[unixisc]

Comice OS - a distro of Linux - took GNOME 3.2, and made it look exactly like OS-X. I'd think it's not difficult to tweak it so that it looks like Lion.

Re:Will this be any different?

[unixisc]

Why, what was the problem w/ KDE?

Re:Will this be any different?

[Curunir_wolf]

I haven't encountered any major issues with xfce, although it does have some idiosyncrasies. Still much better than dealing with Gnome 3. At least with xfce I can actually get some work done.

I hadn't heard about Mate before...

Hello everyone. I've made a GNOME2 fork. I've called it "Mate". My english is not so good. And so, maybe I can not give support in English. Correct me if I'm wrong. Any suggestion is welcome.

Yea, okay, looks like a dead-end. I'm sticking with xfce. Those guys should, too. It will probably be easier to do what they want with that base instead of the Gnome 2 base

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

In a chat room somewhere in the darkest corners of IRC:

tehGnomez: People who don't use Linux keep complaining about how difficult it is to get set up the first time. If we want to crush our enemies, we need a simple, one-click UI.
gnomoz: Most of those complaints are about getting a stable setup if you don't exactly follow a distro.
tehGnomez: Nonsense, all it takes is sudo pkgmgr -m -r -!prig '/dev/usr' to sort out that kind of issue. It must be the UI that's to blame.
gnomoz: Not everyone memorizes the pkgmgr manual before even installing an OS.
tehGnomez: That's crazy talk, it's not like they have anything better to do.
gnomoz: Well, actually some of us do have something better to do, and I have something better to do than try to convince you not to ruin your UI.
***gnomoz has disconnected.
tehGnomez: Bah, he must've been a Micro$oft $hill all along. Everyone, get to work on our new UI!
*rampant cheering from the gnomelets*

Re:Will this be any different?

[Githaron]

I didn't like Gnome3. Cinnamon was a nice compromise though.

Re:Will this be any different?

[cupantae]

endure xfce's bugs

I'm tempted to accuse you of not ever really trying Xfce. I use Xfce every day, and it is certainly not buggy. Neither the debian stable version nor the current version.
The problem is that it seems incomplete to some people. However, if you're comfortable with the command line, you might actually prefer it, as I do. The sophistication of Gnome/KDE applications can just make things more difficult, in that respect. I don't think there's anything much that you can do with Gnome 2 but not Xfce. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Re:Will this be any different?

[tuppe666]

Cinnamon is not a nice compromise. It is simply great. Its a way of accessing everything that is great about Gnome3 without any of the short term regressions.

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

Right now, Cinnamon is the only compromise for Gnome3. You either live with Gnome3 is Gnome2 capatibility mode, Cinnamon, or live with a horrible tablet user experience which is Gnome3.

Gnome3 is actually a REALLY good way to determine if you are a power user. If you like Gnome3, you are not a power user. Gnome3 is tedious and cumbersome to such a degree, no power user would be interested in using it. It does, however, seem to greatly appeal to the neophyte Linux users who actally are application centric and who are more than happy to live with a dramatically inferior user experience simply because they never used the power of conventional desktops in the first place.

Re:Will this be any different?

[tuppe666]

(Mate) looks like a dead-end. I'm sticking with xfce. Those guys should, too. It will probably be easier to do what they want with that base instead of the Gnome 2 base

Using cinnamon http://cinnamon.linuxmint.com/ its a step forward from Gnome 2 without the regressions.

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the problem with using GNOME 3 stack? You can use compiz as the window manager and gnome panel 3 as the panel! Works for me (TM).

Re:Will this be any different?

[Ignacio]

The other alternative was to start fixing Gnome 2's numerous bugs, and where's the fun in that?

Yeah, why fix bugs we know when we can go write a whole bunch of NEW ones!

Re:Will this be any different?

[gspear]

I was disappointed to find out that cinnamon won't implement 2-D virtual desktop configurations either, something I started usng with swm, and through olvwm, fvwm, sawfish, and compiz+wall plugin. nd if you had to stick with one dimension, I'm finding gnome-shell's vertical layout of multiple desktops more sensible than cinnamon's horizontal layout.

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't Gnome 2. The font feels ugly. The interface feels dark. The icons are too small. The task tray is in the wrong spot. The toys in the tray are too numerous. Yes, I know I can fix all of these things, but why would I want to spend hours doing it when I can just get the desktop I want with minimal effort?

Re:Will this be any different?

[ichthus]

KDE is beautiful, but buggy:
It won't play videos over an smb:// connection. VLC simply throws an error.
Press the power button to shut down the computer. Now, wait for 45 seconds before the shutdown actually gets called.

I tried both Fedora 16 and Mint 12 KDE versions. Both distros exhibited these same bugs, whereas the Gnome flavors worked just fine. Either both of these distros have the same configuration issues, or these are simply long-standing bugs in KDE -- and they're both showstoppers for me.

(I did try the "Protocols=smb" fix to no avail, BTW)

Re:Will this be any different?

[KugelKurt]

The font feels ugly.

Fonts are rendered by FreeType just as under GNOME. If you feel that fonts look different, you're imagining things. Either that or you are lying.

The interface feels dark.

Strange, considering that white and light gray are the default theme colors. Sure you're not lying?

The icons are too small.

Which icons? Dolphin has a slider in the status bar to resize icons. There isn't even a need to go to some options menu.

The task tray is in the wrong spot.

Move the panel

The toys in the tray are too numerous.

Which toys? If you have toys there, you have installed them on your own.

Yes, I know I can fix all of these things, but why would I want to spend hours doing it when I can just get the desktop I want with minimal effort?

Hours? Now there is no denying that you lie. Panel position and icons sizes are changed within seconds, not minutes, let alone hours.

Re:Will this be any different?

[RDW]

Yea, okay, looks like a dead-end. I'm sticking with xfce.

A little more Googling might lead you to the official site, whiich has a support forum (in English), and actively updated repositories for various distributions:

http://mate-desktop.org/

Re:Will this be any different?

[KugelKurt]

KDE is beautiful, but buggy:

It won't play videos over an smb:// connection. VLC simply throws an error.

How is VLC supposed to play videos over KIO slaves when VLC is a pure Qt application that does not support KIO?

Re:Will this be any different?

[Curunir_wolf]

But I was Feeling Lucky (tm)!!

Re:Will this be any different?

[Ksisanth]

I moved to my own cobbled together Compiz standalone shortly after Gentoo devs forced the issue with KDE4 (the second or third time). I was really ticked at the KDE devs -- and separately, the Gentoo devs -- at that point. Basically, I was used to the way I had things set up and I didn't want anyone compelling me to make changes I didn't want to make for reasons that ultimately had nothing to do with me. I didn't care what these people's vision of the future was, and didn't understand why they were "screw"ing the users who had supported KDE for so long.

I knew if I switched to Gnome, the same thing was going to happen, and soon. Of course, now the compiz packages I use are getting removed from portage, so I made them local packages. When the deps change again and break compatibility, I can look forward to a new round of hell. But either way, it's my responsibility--I can complain to myself about all the bugs that I've failed to address. Puts things in perspective. I understood, but didn't fully appreciate just how complicated this crap is, but now I just couldn't imagine any screwing involved. Screwing implies some satisfaction on at least one end!

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

My standard response to your bullshit: Make KDE look exactly like Gnome 2. Otherwise, just shut up.

Re:Will this be any different?

[ichthus]

I don't know the answer to this question. As a user (and not a KDE/QT developer), all I know is that VLC will do this in Windows and in GNOME. The fact that VLC (as with several other applications like XMMS) will not stream in KDE seems to (apparently to the user) be a problem with KDE and not the various applications themselves.

If the problem is that the applications simply aren't communicating the way KDE expects them to, then I would ask why KDE is reinventing the wheel. I can do an smbmount and then point VLC to the file located past the mount point and it works fine. I would think the application would simply be given a file handle -- regardless of whether the file is stored locally or on the network. The Linux OS handles this just fine. Why is it a problem in KDE?

Re:Will this be any different?

[fbjon]

who are more than happy to live with a dramatically superior user experience

FTFY. Unless you were talking about yourself, in which case you'd say it is inferior. But you're clearly talking about other users, who obviously find it superior for their uses. I won't say it isn't inferior to you, but you seem to be claiming that your particular preferences are superior regardless of the use case?

Re:Will this be any different?

[ancienthart]

I just can't get over the fact that the article refers to "The popular GNOME desktop environment".

Re:Will this be any different?

[tick-tock-atona]

I don't know the answer to this question. As a user (and not a KDE/QT developer), all I know is that VLC will do this in Windows and in GNOME. The fact that VLC (as with several other applications like XMMS) will not stream in KDE seems to (apparently to the user) be a problem with KDE and not the various applications themselves.

Well you would be wrong in that assumption, and frankly I'm disappointed that someone with a UID as low as yours would be unable to track down the actual problem; a bug in VLC, which is already fixed.

http://trac.videolan.org/vlc/ticket/6158

Re:Will this be any different?

[ichthus]

*facepalm*

Re:Will this be any different?

[unixisc]

Isn't Kontrol Panel available under KDE4.7+? Doesn't it include a theme for GNOME2 - in KDE3, it had themes for all sorts of UIs - CDE, OpenLook, Motif, XP (which they called Redmond) and so on. I forget whether they had a GNOME2 theme, though. But it would seem that if they had all that, it could easily be included here.

Re:Will this be any different?

[KugelKurt]

If the problem is that the applications simply aren't communicating the way KDE expects them to, then I would ask why KDE is reinventing the wheel.

Really, you need to stop spreading bullshit. KDE did not reinvent the wheel in this case. Fact is that KDE'S KIO is around much longer than alternative solutions on Linux (eg. GNOME's GVFS). THEY reinvented the wheel.

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

... and gnome panel 3 as the panel ...

gnome panel 3 ? let me check ...

oh, you mean that pale imitation of gnome panel 2 that Gnome dev said they didn't know for how long they would keep supporting it and that has the lowest possible priority in their agenda ?

Re:Will this be any different?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it was right the first time. Both usability experts and power users agree here. Its only you and seeingly non-power users who hold your opinion. That's pretty telling that you're far from anything one would call a power user.

Bet you didn't know even the Gnome's usability experts called Gnome3 a stinking pile of pooh - did ya. And they are right.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that loss of coherent multitasking means a loss of productivity. Which in turn means a loss of usability. Regardless of you actually using said usability, its a loss, nonetheless because now you don't have a growth path. Rather your growth path is limited to that of a tablet user. AND, its universally agreed that a tablet experience is dramatically less than that of desktop. This is tolerated because of use-case requirements. The rest was already addressed in the post above; to wit you seem to have ignorantly ignored and were confused.

Sorry, but epic failure to know and/or understand the subject matter at hand - along with most all others who ignorantly agree with your position out of fanboyish and/or the need for something shiney and new.

Re:Will this be any different?

[fbjon]

Bet you didn't know even the Gnome's usability experts called Gnome3 a stinking pile of pooh - did ya. And they are right.

I can't immediately find any reference to their usability experts dissing Gnome 3, but maybe they did. In any case, I didn't start using it until 3.2 (because I wanted to avoid any initial crappiness), I read up on the problems, and I immediately put in a whole bunch of extensions to bend the shell -or most of it- to my will (that's why they're there).

So maybe I have an atypical experience of Gnome 3, but it works very well for me. I won't say better than Gnome 2, but there are parts that work much better, and just for those I'm more than willing to put up with the remaining bugs and speed bumps. God knows I hit far too fucking many of those in Gnome 2, with seemingly no hope of ever getting fixed or redesigned.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that loss of coherent multitasking means a loss of productivity. Which in turn means a loss of usability.

That sounds like something that would hinder productivity. Except I'm not sure what sort of multitasking you would call "incoherent", but maybe that's also something I haven't run into.

As for accusations of not being a "power user", that troll goes into the circular file. I'm not entering an e-peen contest for desktop environments, good grief!

Re:Will this be any different?

[KugelKurt]

My standard response to your bullshit: Make KDE look exactly like Gnome 2. Otherwise, just shut up.

Why should I make it look like GNOME 2? What the fuck are you talking about?

2012 is going to be year of the linux desktop!

[Anonymous Coward]

With GNOME 3.4 2012 is most certainly going to be year of the linux desktop!

Re:2012 is going to be year of the linux desktop!

[justforgetme]

With GNOME 3.4 2012 is most certainly going to be year of the linux desktop!

Either that or with the new version of TurboJPEG

Re:2012 is going to be year of the linux desktop!

[tuppe666]

With GNOME 3.4 2012 is most certainly going to be year of the linux desktop!

With OSX 2012 is most certainly going to be year of the Apple server.
With Windows Phone 7.5 2012 is going to be the year of the Microsoft Phone.

Re:2012 is going to be year of the linux desktop!

[Psion]

Meh. Been there, done that. For me, 2008 was the year of the Linux desktop.

Let the KDEvsGNOMEvsETC wars begin!

[Anonymous Coward]

title ^

Re:Let the KDEvsGNOMEvsETC wars begin!

[unixisc]

I'm waiting for the day that a complete GNUSTEP based DE will be available, but until then, my favorite is KDE. GNOME2 had too many limitations, and GNOME3 seems to be worse.

All good so far

[Anonymous Coward]

But how will my distro of choice mess it up?

That's what I want to know.

Maybe put the window buttons of the bottom.

Re:All good so far

[Noughmad]

Stop using crappy distros, Arch is where it's at.

Re:All good so far

[Noughmad]

Sorry, wasn't meant as a flamebait. They really make no changes to base software, unlike distributions such as Ubuntu or Suse.

Slow news day?

[Anonymous Coward]

Meh.

Re:Slow news day?

[Anonymous Coward]

I dislike GNOME as much as the next guy, but how exactly is news about the a new version of a major desktop environment "slow news"?

Engineers. They love to change things.

[cpu6502]

Yet another new look for no apparent reason. (shrug). I guess it ain't so bad. I'll adjust. Or just keep using Lightweight ubuntu/LXDE instead.

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[justforgetme]

The look isn't any departure. From what I see on the screens it is similar to 3.3, 3.2, 3.1. And the things that did change i personally like. search bar in overview mode has much better visibility this way and the transparent buttons also seem to be more effective. The other optical changes seem quite minute so I hope they also worked on some bug squashing and didn't just wax poetic about the illustration the whole time...

Epiphany - Web

[Anonymous Coward]

"Epiphany, the GNOME web browser, has been renamed Web. "

Ok. Now that I learned what Epiphany is, it changes. Not that the original name meant anything useful, but Web is even worse: too general.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[jojoba_oil]

Tech Support: What web browser are you using?

User: Web.

Tech Support: Right. What's the program you use to view the web?

User: Web.

Nope. Can't see how this would be a problem. Ever.

But I think they were going for the same idea that Microsoft had when they added "Internet" and "Email" links to the start menu in XP. Generic shortcuts that launched whatever program you had setup as your default. At least Microsoft didn't rename the entire programs...

Re:Epiphany - Web

[unixisc]

I used Epiphany once, and found it too minimal. At this stage, is it too much to expect browsers to have Firefox like news feeds on their bookmarks bar? Firefox & derivatives have it, and IE8 and beyond has it, but others don't. I found that annoying, whether it was Epiphany, Konqueror, Safari, or Opera. Never got to check whether Chrome supports it or not, and I would be interested to know whether Camino does. As for the name, I think it's an improvement in that most of the FOSS names just suck - who would guess that Totem is a music player, or that Avidemux or Cinerella are video editors?

Re:Epiphany - Web

[unixisc]

Well, in Vista & 7, they canned Outlook Express and replaced it w/ Mail. But one could call it Microsoft Mail. A good solution here would have been to rename Epiphany as GNOME Browser. That would have made it simpler.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[AliasMarlowe]

They did the same thing years ago with Totem, which is just called "Movie Player" (to considerable annoyance).

Re:Epiphany - Web

[tuppe666]

They did the same thing years ago with Totem, which is just called "Movie Player" (to considerable annoyance).

What is wrong with it, is it needs no be universal. Its time to get rid of ALL the silly naming. Thing what is wrong with "Gnome Movie Player" or "Gnome Web". Let the renaming continue; "Epiphany" and "Totem" mean nothing.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[serviscope_minor]

Web is even worse: too general.

Imagine trying for search when errors occur.

"Web 2.3.1 crashes"

"Web cache not cleared"

etc

Re:Epiphany - Web

[unixisc]

Fully agree w/ you here. Get rid of these funny names, as well as the fun that people have when they get to name software titles, inevitably giving it stupid names. On the KDE side of things, drop the K's - KMail, KDevelop, Kate, Kerry, Kleopatra, Krusader, et al, and just give them proper names, like KDE Mail, KDE Development Studio, KDE Text Editor, KDE Search, KDE Cert Manager, KDE File Manager and so on. Of course, if a different group is providing the app, such as Chromium, Firefox, Opera, Libre Office, and so on, retain their names, since their brands are already recognized. Give them names that make it obvious as to what they are.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[b4dc0d3r]

This is a good idea. It is entrenched, however, by the idea of a 'unix name' or 'package name'. At sourceforge, you register with a unix name, which is in the URL. So the featured project Scribus is located here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/scribus/

I need to install KDevelop, which package do I get? Easy, it should be apt-get kdevelop. What about "KDE Development Studio"? Well, I'd probably need some sort of GUI thing to let me select, and then know what the package name is.

Short, unique names are how we do things, and getting that to change will require more than just the projects changing the official names. It has to satisfy the point-and-click people as well as the command-line people.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a truly lousy idea. I don't know about you, but I, e.g., have several different web browsers that I use for different purposes. Perhaps ideally I wouldn't need more than one, but that's not the world we live in, and different browsers do different things better. Similar arguments apply to graphics programs. I often need to use four different programs when editing one picture. Etc.

N.B.: Frequently I will find the Gnome standard program so inferior in every application that it will NEVER be used. As an example, even though I have a gnome desktop (Gnome2, thank you.) my most common browser is iceweasel. Second most common is Konqueror. I don't use Epiphany, as I find it inferior for every purpose. (Or is that their mail program, which I also never use.)

There was a time during the days of KDE3.x when my browser was Konqueror and my mail program was Kmail. But Kmail wouldn't handle large folders of mail well. (If I didn't delete old mail, it started crashing.) And it was difficult to integrate Konqueror with a different mail program, so I switched to Mozilla...which was a combined browser, mail program, news reader program, and web page editor. I'm not sure there was any benefit gained in splitting the pieces up. But do note that I did not continue to use the default browser when it became a problem, but switched to something more convenient. Calling it just Browser would have been highly inconvenient. (I switched to Gnome2 from KDE3 because KDE4 wasn't convenient, and the software update system wasn't continuing to support KDE3.) When I am coerced to switch away from Gnome2 I will probably switch to a different desktop than Gnome. (Which one depends on which one is best at that time. I've already tested a few that I find acceptable, though less desirable than Gnome2. They're still better than Gnome3 or KDE4.) One of my consideration will be how easy it is to add things to the menu, and how easy the top and bottom screen panels are to customize as I desire. And if the applications are given generic names, that will definitely count heavily against them.

N.B.: I don't care about what icons are on the desktop. My desktop is always covered with work, so those would be inaccessible in any case. And if I can't use an area of the desktop because it would cover icons (pseudo menus) that would count extremely heavily against the usability of that Desktop Manager. I don't have unlimited screen space.

FWIW, I do not see myself using a tablet in the future. Some of the changed that are being proposed might conceivably be useful for tablet users. I don't know, and don't intend to know. My usage patterns will probably not include desktops, though they could, conceivably, include phones. But I sure don't want my desktop computer crippled by a phone style interface.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[Sri Ramkrishna]

Well you would say that you are using the GNOME default web browser. Otherwise you say firefox or whatever. I don't see what is so hard about it.

Re:Epiphany - Web

[unixisc]

The fllenames themselves can be something like kdev.dev, or kdev.rpm, or kdev.pbi, or whatever. Not an issue - go ahead & type apt-get kdev, or yumm install kdev, or whatever. But once it's installed, on the desktop, the name should read KDE Development Studio, and if the application is opened, that's the name that should be sitting on the title bar, alongside the file name. The short, unique names needn't be broken just b'cos you're making it understandable to the general public. Oh, and while we are at it, do we really need so many different media players - Kaffeine, KPlayer, KMPlayer, and so on - that too from the same source?

Re:Epiphany - Web

[unixisc]

I happen to be like that - I use different browsers for different purposes. Currently, on XP, I use IE8, Safari and Firefox, while on Linux, I used Flock (while it lasted), Firefox and Konqueror. I tried Epiphany once, but wasn't impressed. Konqueror too didn't allow me to view YouTube videos.

However, I don't see why that has to cause these weird names to be maintained. You'd still have Firefox, Opera and Chromium, but since Konqueror/Rekonq and Epiphany are specific to their DEs, just call them GNOME Browser and KDE Browser (if there are more than one, number them, like Konqueror is KDE Browser 1, Rekonq KDE Browser 2, and give similar variant names to Dolphin and Krusader. Only preserve names when there are famous brands involved (although for Debian, Iceweasel is a problem - how many are going to guess that it's Firefox?)

Re:Epiphany - Web

[unixisc]

^^^ I meant kdev.deb

Re:Epiphany - Web

[Anonymous Coward]

epiphany != firefox

My commentary...

[Junta]

My problems with Gnome 3:
-Extensions are a very awkward approach to what should be simple config changes. For example, there are two hotcorners by default, upper-left and lower-right. Rather than offering a straightforward configuration to disable it, you have to dig through extensions and find either the extension to disable upper-left, the different one to do lower-right, or the third one that disables both. This accumulates quite atrociously with all the settings.
-Because of the extensions being particularly invasive and pretty much required, the 'oh no' screen is easy to hit.
-In the event of an 'oh no' screen, gnome shell does not care that your apps are still running and could conceivably be used if gnome-shell would just let you restart without logout. It just says 'screw you, log out and kill all your applications'. I've tried starting metacity and it will run, but I can't get rid of the 'on-top' oh no screen.
-No window title search, like has been in Compiz scale and KDE for a very long time. Very hostile to large window count scenarios.
-No way to show all windows belonging to an application in activities view exclusive of other windows
-The application button is sloppy-focus unfriendly

What I like about gnome 3:
-Hot-plugged multi-display is handled pretty well (one of my biggest reasons to lean toward gnome away from KDE, less work when I dock my laptop).
-I actually do like the new alt-tab,alt-above-tab. Having two tiers helps that be almost useful (had given up on alt-tab as unscalable without this)
-Nominally having all task switching/launch elements hidden, but taking over the full screen when you want to switch or launch applications. Keeps my workspace cleaner and doesn't limit the real estate used to facilitate task switching/launching to some small corner of the screen when it is the only thing I am thinking about while that is happening.

Re:My commentary...

[Nerdfest]

Well said. Most of the things I need are now handled, or are at least configurable. The speed is good (I find Unity extremely slow on my low-powered laptop, while Gnome Shell is fast). The Gnome Live extensions integration is quite nice, but a better grouping/searching facility would be nice. I do find that Gnome shell leaks memory, but at least it can re re-started quickly and easily if required with no application closing required. I find the notifications are still not quite as nicely integrated as in Gnome 2 or even Unity.

Re:My commentary...

[Pi1grim]

You can restart gnome-shell without logging out. Just type ALT+F2, type in "r" without the quotes, just the letter r, and hit enter.

What seems to really be the problem — is failure to implement plugin-based dash search. Unity is doing a stellar job at providing "lences", wish there was a similar thing for gnome 3. Or, better yet — support for unity lences.

Re:My commentary...

[Junta]

But that doesn't rid me of the 'oh no screen', but a logout and login does...

Re:My commentary...

[Pi1grim]

> The Gnome Live extensions integration is quite nice

Are you kidding me? The sole fact, that the only place where you can turn extensions on and off is website is somewhat strange, if not you use a stronger word. Imagine me installing an extension and then needing to disable it later on — I need internet connection to disable an extension that is already installed on my system. This whole web-centric touch-ui with special disabilities support policy is leaving majority of users with unusable interface. Well, I guess, at least those people with special needs, that use Gnome3 on a x86 tablet while having a 24/7 internet connection will be delighted.

Re:My commentary...

[Anonymous Coward]

is failure to implement plugin-based dash search. Unity is doing a stellar job at providing "lences", wish there was a similar thing for gnome 3.

No, it's there. Just create an extension that implements a SearchProvider: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell/tree/js/ui/search.js#n69

Re:My commentary...

[Anonymous Coward]

I use GNOME fallback with XMonad. I'm able to kill the "Oh no!" window with Mod4/Win+C. I haven't tracked down the cause of the "Oh no!" window, but it doesn't stop me from using the environment.

And yes, it occurs on every machine I've got with GNOME 3 installed.

Re:My commentary...

[Nerdfest]

You can install the advanced configuration program and turn extensions on and off through that as well. There's even an extension that adds it to the user menu.

Re:My commentary...

[dballanc]

You can ALT-F4 the "Oh no screen". It's silly that you can't close it any other way, but it is just a window.

Re:My commentary...

[unixisc]

Does it allow me to make a pic of me & my kid the wallpaper? Does it allow different wallpapers for different screens?

Re:My commentary...

[fbobraga]

I need internet connection to disable an extension

Gnome Tweak, or "Advanced Settings", can enable/disable extensions - no internet connection needed

Re:My commentary...

[cyclomedia]

what they should do, and I've only just thought of this, is let you hold down the $Platform keyboard key and click the left mouse button on whatever it is you want to change, be it a widget, the desktop background, an app icon or the volume-control-icon and have that launch the configurator for it.

Testing the three big ones

[jones_supa]

I did some testing with DEs lately and I my best friend I found from GNOME3 + Gnome Shell. Everything is nicely in its place, providing an intuitive, minimalist desktop. I had to hack the theme though, to not display titlebars when maximized, as the title is shown in the top bar anyway (tutorial). However the whole thing is quite similar to Unity, but for some reason Unity runs dog-slow (?). If you want a more full-fledged desktop, KDE4 seemed very snappy and smooth too.

Open Sores FAIL! (again..and again... and again..)

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. Gnome 3.4 is as bad as any other open sores project. You losers wouldnt know how to write software if god himself came down and showed you. You losers, just give up already and leave the software coding to the adults. LOL.

FTFY

[znrt]

"The popular GNOME tablet environment has just ..."

i'm using a real desktop and have no use for tablets, so gnome made itself irrelevant as of 3.0 already.
happy new release day anyway!

Re:FTFY

[IANAAC]

i'm using a real desktop and have no use for tablets, so gnome made itself irrelevant as of 3.0 already. happy new release day anyway!

These comments give me a chuckle. It's pretty obvious you've not seriously even tried to *use* Gnome3/Shell. It makes pretty heavy use of the keyboard use (and, in fact, shines when you rely on your keyboard instead of a mouse).

Re:FTFY

[RocketRabbit]

I find it quite a stretch to say that Gnome is a popular tablet environment.

Quick, name five tablets using Gnome. Or, name three that have sold more than five million units.

Re:FTFY

[unixisc]

Name ONE! I can't think of any. I can think of one that uses KDE's Active Plasma - the Spark.

Re:FTFY

[znrt]

These comments give me a chuckle.

you're welcome!

It's pretty obvious you've not seriously even tried to *use* Gnome3/Shell.

and you're pretty right about that. i very soon realized the metaphor was useles for me.

It makes pretty heavy use of the keyboard use (and, in fact, shines when you rely on your keyboard instead of a mouse).

if i'd want to rely on heavy keyboard use I always could stick to good old tty (I spend much time in that land anyway). however, if I use a gui it's for a reason. that being: having a configurable layout with fast acces to functions a click away, a configurable and stable overview of running processes and a convenient way of task switching. i really don't need much more. sadly, Gnome3/Shell only gives me the latter so it's of not much use for me.

I'm however glad you like it and can throw keystrokes at a broken ui designed for casual users all day long. and I'm particularly glad because the fact that you are enabled to experiment such glorious joy doesn't prevent at all me of using some sane and truly sophisticated gui, ... like xfce for instance.

so let's chuckle together, bro :-)

Re:FTFY

[znrt]

I find it quite a stretch to say that Gnome is a popular tablet environment.

Quick, name five tablets using Gnome. Or, name three that have sold more than five million units.

I can name none, but I already said I'm not interested in tablets.
however, if it isn't for tablets, what the faq is it supposed to be for?

ok, we might say it's an overhauled gui trying to look macosish. it even might succeed at that (ask a mac user, please). again, if I'd want a mac I would use a mac. it's very ok for me if gnome3 attracts more (probably broke) mac users but ... why in heaven should I degrade my own user experience? wasn't linux all about choice?

Re:FTFY

[RocketRabbit]

That's my point in a nutshell. If you could name one, it'd be merely a very unpopular tablet UI. If you could name five, independent of sales figures, it'd be a legitimate tablet UI. I you could name three that sold five milon or more, it'd be a very popular tablet UI.

I think this is one of the many problems over at the Gnome super secret headquarters - they are fully deluded. They have a couple thousand groupies standing in a hall of mirrors, shouting into an echo machine, so it looks like there are billion of them, and the Gnome developers and UI designers live in this fantasy world.

Re:FTFY

[Anonymous Coward]

Feel free to say fuck here if you think it's appropriate.

Now to the actual points: First, there are a lot of people who really like the direction GNOME is going, and that includes long time linux users / developers like me. Don't try to extrapolate from your opinions to everyone else... Personally I think GNOME 3 is the first time a linux UX is going somewhere, instead of just being a almost-but-not-quite competent clone of another product.

Second: "wasn't linux all about choice?" Thankfully no: http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/ . For those to lazy to click through to Ajax's post, I'll reference the summary: "the chain of logic from 'Linux is about choice' to 'ship everything and let the user chose how they want their sound to not work' starts with fallacy and ends with disaster."

Re:FTFY

[unixisc]

Easy answer to this one - are you willing to pay premium prices for an Airbook, or any other Mac? If not, you could buy OS-X and try installing it on a normal PC, but you'd be on your own. OTOH, there is a Linux distro called Comice OS which has the Mac look & feel, so if you wanted a Mac but were on a budget, it would make pretty good sense to get this distro on one's laptop. Unless of course one thought it was too much of a hassle, and more worthwhile sinking the extra cash on a Mac

Re:FTFY

[znrt]

well I guess there's a lot more to a mac than it's ui. basically damn pretty well assembled hw, and a hw specific sw on top, and some fine ideas, polished work, you name it. at a price, of course. and I personally don't like it's ui but getting myself a macbookpro and slapping any linux on it could seem a bit weird but still would make sense to me. still, a macosish "desktop" environment doesn't make a mac, but the hype is already here: windows clearly imitates the look with 7 and even more so with 8. why shouldn't gnome too? it's lame but its understandable. it's ok for me but it's just not for me.

Re:FTFY

[znrt]

Feel free to say fuck here if you think it's appropriate.

thank you.

Now to the actual points: First, there are a lot of people who really like the direction GNOME is going, and that includes long time linux users / developers like me. Don't try to extrapolate from your opinions to everyone else...

thanks for the tip, I've just re-read all my contributions to this and didn't find any statement implying what you suggest. on the contrary, I've cheerfully celebrated gnome3's joyfull release, just added that I couldn't care less. if you like it I'm happy for you, as for me I'm also happy because I have a choice so it seems were quite a bunch of happy bunnies now. want some lettuce? :D

Personally I think GNOME 3 is the first time a linux UX is going somewhere, instead of just being a almost-but-not-quite competent clone of another product.

personally I think gnome has little to do with linux besides being one of multiple apps that runs on linux, and personally I think indeed gnome shell isn't at all original since it is mostly a mix of concepts borrowed from tablet and mac uis thrown on top of ... wait, a linux desktop. oh my! but, as said, be my guest.

Second: "wasn't linux all about choice?" Thankfully no: http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/ . For those to lazy to click through to Ajax's post, I'll reference the summary: "the chain of logic from 'Linux is about choice' to 'ship everything and let the user chose how they want their sound to not work' starts with fallacy and ends with disaster."

while respecting your opinion the abstract doesn't make any sense. having choice is not the same as "pick and choose right out of the box". the point about choice is that in propietary systems (like mac or win) you basically have *none*. with linux you have lots, but it may well take you a bit of jumbling around - not necessarily, but it might. no big deal, really, or else show me another system with similar plurality (regardless of effort). there simply isn't any. thus: linux is definitely about choice, no matter what your gurus say. but thanks for the link, I'll have a look because it could actually contain some valid point to the point (which is kinda philosophical, btw) .

Re:FTFY

[znrt]

Thankfully no: http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/ [islinuxaboutchoice.com]

lol, good one :-)

ok, got it, linux is a kernel. this kind of an oldie. not even GNU/llinux is common nowadays. in this regard not even gnome is related. generally speaking linux is also the sheer and colorful bunch of distros out there, including the ones you can assemble all for yourself. embrace choice! :P

Re:FTFY

[RocketRabbit]

Fuck you AC. You know you're full of shit when you say there are a lot of people who like the direction that GNOME is going. The Internet disagrees with you.

Re:FTFY

[unixisc]

I agree - all the work that Apple does has to be recouped somewhere in terms of costs, which they've thrown into their h/w. In order to prevent that being ignored, in addition to other reasons, like potential compatibility, they deliberately don't warantee OS-X if installed on something you either bought from Dell, or built yourself. So someone can put in $40 on an OS-X box, try installing it on that laptop, but be out of luck in case it doesn't work. Or just get Linux or PC-BSD on that laptop, but put GNOME3 w/ an OS-X like theme and have a similar, if not identical experience (Comice Linux, for instance, uses Opera as the browser, since Safari ain't available.) Yeah, the conveniences of an OS-X or Windows are no longer there, but it's understood that people who prefer Linux or BSD are sacrificing them when they pick these latter OSs over the former.

What I don't understand is why would anybody ever install Linux or PC-BSD on a Mac? On a Mac, you already get FreeBSD (the XNU underpinnings are irrelevant here), but Quartz running on top of it, which makes it simple, and yet, CLI hermits can still invoke terminals and continue doing their thing. And from any Apple store, one already knows what hardware is supported and what ain't, and can go from there, whereas w/ Linux, one would be put on a hunting expedition. I can understand people replacing Windows w/ Linux, since there is nothing in common b/w PowerShell and bash or any of the gazillion Unix shells out there, but replacing OS-X, which is essentially a quasi-fork running parallel to FreeBSD, doesn't.

Re:FTFY

[IANAAC]

Fuck you AC. You know you're full of shit when you say there are a lot of people who like the direction that GNOME is going. The Internet disagrees with you.

Gosh, how were you able to measure that on "The Internet"?

We see what we want to see. Because of the things I've subscribed to on Reddit, Google+, Twitter, etc. I see a lot of love for Gnome3/Gnome Shell. You probably see a lot of dislike because of what you subscribe to/read.

As for Slashdot, I really don't see all that much hate for Gnome3/Gnome Shell. I see a fairly vocal group shouting it down, but that's it: one group.

Re:FTFY

[RocketRabbit]

You forgot to reply as AC.

interesting consequence of gnome 3

[Anonymous Coward]

It added two more desktop environments to the linux world: Mate (a fork of Gnome 2 http://mate-desktop.org/ ) and Cinnamon (a fork of Gnome 3 http://cinnamon.linuxmint.com/ ). These new alternatives to Gnome 3 don't get the attention that they deserve.....

Re:interesting consequence of gnome 3

[Githaron]

I currently use Cinnamon some of what Gnome3 takes away. I hope eventually it will get more attention.

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[nschubach]

All I really want is the ability to pin any app to the dock without having to create .desktop file for it... and the ability to always launch a new app instead of the default action of bringing up the previous instance.

Fix bugs, don't break UI...

[RocketRabbit]

I think it's time for Gnome to have a feature and UI freeze, for perhaps a year or two, and concentrate on fixing bugs in all the various subsystems. Every new release focuses on new features, but there are numerous bugs in Gnome from five or more years ago!

Take Apple as an example. Their UI has undergone little change since OS 10.4 (minor tweaks excluded) and they have concentrated on improving the underlying stuff. This could be a methodology that Gnome might take to heart.

Instead, the Gnome developers and design team will continue to sparkle a phone / tablet friendly UI on top of a desktop system, with the unrealistic goal of making legacy software work on a touch UI with a simple recompile. Sally buggers.

Re:Fix bugs, don't break UI...

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, Mac OS has undergone little UI change since 10.4 - except that now all the mouse scrolling works in the EXACT OPPOSITE WAY to how it was before and how it works on every other desktop operating system. Which is apparently with the unrealistic goal of making legacy software work on a touch UI with a simple recompile.

Multiple monitors?

[AliasMarlowe]

Actually, with the right extensions, and Docky? I quite like Gnome 3.

Are you using multiple monitors? If so, which extensions made the difference for you? I ask this because I tried Gnome 3 and gave up on it due to its nastiness towards multiple monitors. All of our PCs at home are now on xfce due to the apparent nonexistence of sane Gnome options.

Re:Multiple monitors?

[jdjennings]

Same here. Multiple monitors makes Gnome 3 (and Unity, for that matter. Shuttleworth admitted as much) unusable. Cinnamon tries to make things better, but I ended up with XFCE.

Re:Multiple monitors?

[Grishnakh]

You don't need to use multiple monitors. The Gnome developers, who are UI experts and should never be questioned, have determined that multiple monitors are distracting and too complicated for anyone to use, so they don't support them. You need to just get rid of your extra monitor so you won't be confused and stop questioning the Gnome developers, because they are the world's premier UI experts and should never be questioned.

Re:Multiple monitors?

[TheDarkMaster]

How can I mod the parent Insightful and funny at the same time? :-)

Re:Multiple monitors?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now you can't do either.

Re:Multiple monitors?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same problem here. It's actually a problem with almost everything nowadays. It used to work much better 10 years ago, go figure.

I have four monitors made up of two twinview screens with Xinerama stitching them together (because X.org sucks). The only things that work correctly with this setup are KDE and OpenBox. Even the XFCE window manager doesn't work properly so although I use XFCE as my DE I have to run OpenBox as the window manager.

On top of that, I can't use anything with compositing because of Xinerama. Honestly, X.org is falling way behind in this regard. Windows and OSX work a hell of a lot better than Xorg when it comes to multiple monitors.

Re:Multiple monitors?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even the XFCE window manager doesn't work properly

Can you elaborate on that? (preferably file a bug at https://bugzilla.xfce.org/ or just describe it here).

Re:Multiple monitors?

[AmbushBug]

I use Gnome shell with multiple monitors at work and home. Is the workspace switching tripping you up? By default it only switches workspaces on your primary monitor.
 
This works great at work where I'm using a laptop as my second screen - put email on that screen and use the external monitor for everything else. At home its not so great since I have two 24" widescreen monitors. You can change this behaviour by editing a gconf key.

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pinning the app icon is as simple as adding the app to your favorites. Simply search for it as if you were going to launch it and right mouse click on the icon and select "add to favorites". If it is already running you can right mouse click on the app icon in the dock. If you mean pin apps that don't have .desktop files - that is a freedesktop standard.

As for default to lauch - https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/67/dash-click-fix/

Unix

[unixisc]

Can/will any BSD distros support this? Like GhostBSD? NetBSD? Or have they already implemented systemd dependencies on it that would effectively make it Linux only? Also, any idea whether this new DE has been embraced by other Unixes, such as Solaris, OpenIndiana, HP/UX and so on?

Re:Unix

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure this can be compiled on BSD, as long as you have either a fast CPU (for Mesa OpenGL software renderer) or a hardware accelerated graphics chipset driver that supports OpenGL. I had one box running OpenBSD on an Intel PC, and OpenGL was pretty acceptable on it, albeit being rendered in software, probably. But in the past years there's been a lot of work to incorporate direct rending support etc. in the BSD kernel, IIRC.

Solaris should work too if you have an OpenGL driver or software renderer w/ a fast CPU.

Almost as good as Windows 8

[Curunir_wolf]

This is great news! Gnome 3 is certainly surpassing Windows 8 now. If only they could implement all that "log in with your web account" stuff like Windows 8 does, it will be awesome!

For my tablet.

Re:Almost as good as Windows 8

[shutdown -p now]

On a tablet, I'm afraid that it'll be largely decided by the app library, not by the UI itself (unless it's particularly atrocious). Hence why Apple has such a big lead, and any contender, no matter how good, has to struggle real hard to even set foot on the market.

Re:Almost as good as Windows 8

[neminem]

I... totally thought that sentence was going to end with...
"for me to poop on...!"

But yours works too I guess. (For certain definitions of "works".)

Nothing wrong...

[Anonymous Coward]

apart from:

1. for such a minimalist interface that has chosen to be modal the flip between modes isn't snappy enough.
2. when in overview the keyboard short cuts (ctrl alt pagedown) is so slow to respond I might be better off using the mouse.
3. the 'max half screen'/side-by-side thing was good until some one thought it and said ' maximise screen the same kind a thing' and bolted it on. Now I've had to turn it all off. Double clich the title bar, use the maximize icon in the title bar. Thats how you maximize.
4. Sometime access to a list of apps is quick the oldway and using search rather than a place in a menu stored in muscle memory. Fixed by plugin.
5. It getting harder and harder to avoid pulseaudio and the like. If you want or need low latency audio, bekind and give us an option to bypass some of you hardwork without getting arsy about it.
6. Same for browser preferences, mailclients, networking.
7. button in to title bar removed. plubin puts the back thankfully. Doesn't cost any realestate maintains a paradime
8. it would also be nice to adopt the blender way of telling you the code that will action a control when you hover so you can write macros

but is fixable in c of javascript although I wish they had picked python as well. GSettings and pyGobject is are start but

Use extensions and gnome-tweak tool

[kubusja]

Use extensions and gnome-tweak tool - probably you can fix your problems with the right extension.

Initially I was also rejected by GNOME 3 but now after adding a few extensions I just love it and it is the best desktop I ever used.
I love win key and Alt-~

dock@gnome-shell-extensions.gnome.org
alternative-status-menu@gnome-shell-extensions.gnome.org
drive-menu@gnome-shell-extensions.gnome.org
apps-menu@gnome-shell-extensions.gnome.org
places-menu@gnome-shell-extensions.gnome.org
Break_Dynamic_Workspaces@rmy.pobox.com
remove-accessibility-icon@martin-weusten.de

Also hacking is relatively simple javascript - I hacked so my dock is always between my screens (I have monitor on the left at work and on the right at home).

Wayland

[unixisc]

Does the GNOME3 team have any plans to make their DE run on Wayland?

Re:Wayland

[0123456]

Does the GNOME3 team have any plans to make their DE run on Wayland?

No. That would result in such an accumulation of suck in one place that the universe would implode.

Re:Wayland

[serviscope_minor]

If I had mod points, I'd have to choose between funny and insightful.

Re:Wayland

[jmccue]

same here, I would have chosen funny, thought it was hilarious

Re:Wayland

[KugelKurt]

Does the GNOME3 team have any plans to make their DE run on Wayland?

Yes. Clutter has already been ported and GTK is in the process of being ported.

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[Curunir_wolf]

Oh, wow, so they're still recognizing right mouse clicks? They should just go ahead and deprecate that and just do mono-button for all mice. Nobody needs more than one mouse button...

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[nschubach]

You can't favorite a program you download off the Internet to a subfolder of your home folder without that .desktop file. That's a usability problem. I don't care what the standard says.

If you mean pin apps that don't have .desktop files - that is a freedesktop standard.

Fine.. .then have Gnome Shell create that .desktop file using the executable name and default the path to the folder you ran it from and add it to favorites. Is it really that hard? Currently, if I right click on an app in that bar there is no option to add it to favorites. I have to open a terminal to run the application every time. The only workaround without manually creating the desktop file is using alacarte, but I find that doesn't always put the run path in the desktop files and some apps don't like that.

You can do it in Unity, however. But Unity has some other really big issues that keep me from using it.

As for default to lauch - https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/67/dash-click-fix/

This should be a setting somewhere. I still don't know how to add/search for extensions (without this webpage?) Last time I checked by typing Extensions in launcher search, nothing comes up. There's also no apparent visible way to do it from the task bar or launcher. I can download new background images fairly easy... why are extensions hidden away?

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can launch a new instance by dragging the icon from the dock and dropping it anywhere on the desktop. It's just as fast as clicking for me.

Being able to configure the default action would be nice, too.

I look forward to wasting my ample free time

[Pausanias]

My graduate students and I happily live in blissful ignorance of all this, running GNOME 2 under Ubuntu LTS (long term support) 10.04. I am able to configure my entire desktop without any need for downloading extensions. I have been able to go for a long time without a reinstall; this wonderful stable setup was an LTS to LTS upgrade from Hardy.

Now 10.04 is not going to be supported forever. I am greatly looking forward to flushing all my hard-won knowledge of this desktop down the drain and spending time looking on line for this-or-that extension that will enable us to maintain the smooth workflow we have had so far. Indeed who am I to question to the wave of progress in GUI engineering. I bow down to my software engineer overlords who will enlighten me with the flaws in my current workflow and who will teach me to use my time in more efficient ways. I am grateful to you, GNOME 3 dev team, for this bountiful treasure of GUI improvement that awaits me in the near future.

Re:I look forward to wasting my ample free time

[Stormwatch]

Now 10.04 is not going to be supported forever. I am greatly looking forward to flushing all my hard-won knowledge of this desktop down the drain and spending time looking on line for this-or-that extension that will enable us to maintain the smooth workflow we have had so far.

Look into Mate, the Gnome 2 fork.

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[Anonymous Coward]

Another vote for Lubuntu. Blazing fast, does everything I need (admittedly my needs are basic), can be tweaked to look and work the way I want. Preferred even over Gnome 2 and XFCE.

I am hoping Unity and Gnome 3 will cause more folks to discover Lubuntu. Good stuff.

+5 Flamebait...

[AliasMarlowe]

How can I mod the parent Insightful and funny at the same time? :-)

At the present time, GP's sarcastic comment is at "+2 Flamebait". So if any moderators just up-mod that post as "underrated", it could reach the elusive "+5 Flamebait" level! Perhaps a prouder achievement than anything in Gnome 3...

Re:+5 Flamebait...

[Grishnakh]

Unfortunately, it's just +5 Funny at the moment. It'll be my all-time crowning achievement on Slashdot if I can reach the elusive "+5 Flamebait" level. I'll have to take a photo and frame it to memorialize it for all time.

Re:+5 Flamebait...

[unixisc]

Someone explain to me - what is the difference b/w +5 Flamebait and -5 Flamebait? I mean, which one is bad for your 'karma'?

Re:+5 Flamebait...

[ShieldW0lf]

The score is calculated off the mean. The label is calculated off the mode. Negative ratings reduce your karma. Positive ratings increase your karma, except Funny, which does not.

-3 Flamebait, +1 Insightful, +1 Interesting, +1 Informative and +1 Underrated would give you +1 Flamebait with a net +1 to your karma.

-2 Flamebait, +3 Funny would give you a +1 Funny with a net -2 to your karma.

Re:+5 Flamebait...

[AliasMarlowe]

The score is calculated off the mean. The label is calculated off the mode. Negative ratings reduce your karma. Positive ratings increase your karma, except Funny, which does not.

A minor correction: no matter how many there are, Underrated and Overrated don't count towards determining the label.
-1 Flamebait, +6 Underrated would result in the elusive +5 Flamebait.
-3 Flamebait, +2 Insightful, +2 Informative, +2 Interesting, +2 Funny would also give +5 Flamebait.

Re:+5 Flamebait...

[ShieldW0lf]

Elusive indeed. I'm pretty sure my record is +4 Flamebait

Who needs a DE?

[Anonymous Coward]

Openbox, tint2, and gmrun provide all the desktop environment I need. I have multiple desktops, easily customized hot keys, a task bar with a clock and a window picker. Only trouble I have is the rare occasion when I need to run a graphic file manager and nautilus decides to fuck everything up because I still have figured out how to force everything to use Thunar instead.

Yeah

[Robert Zenz]

Is it just me or does Gnome3 look more and more like a crappy Windows/MacOS-bastard rip-off?

Re:Yeah

[scdeimos]

No, it's not just you. I too had recollections the system menu bar from GeOS, GS/OS and MacOS (long before OSX) when I read this in TFRN...

Application menus are a new feature that will become an increasingly familiar part of our applications in the future. These menus, which are labelled with the application's name and can be seen in the top bar, provide a new space for options that affect the whole application (as opposed to specific windows), such as application preferences and documentation.

It's just 80's vintage GUI with more curves and colours thrown in. Won't stop me from using it, though.

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[spitzak]

I agree that is really stupid. Since you can double-click on the App in the folder and run it, Gnome obviously has all the information necessary to make it run from the dock. Just create the .desktop file with a pointer to the app and the same Icon the file browser is showing and it is done. This should be automatic.

yes it is buggy

[poppopret]

So far I've hit two xfce bugs.

I had xfce save it's session without the window manager. (so no window borders, all windows in the top left corner, and unable to change the stacking order) I never asked for the session to be saved, certainly not in some crazy state, and I don't see why the window manager should be a forgettable item in the first place. I had to start the window manager from the command prompt, then go into the session part of the settings tool and tell it to save the session. Note: all non-hackers would have had to reinstall the OS. (hit this on Debian)

I had the desktop switcher decide I only get to have 1 desktop. This bug is absolutely maddening. I can switch it back, but the setting won't stick. Every time I restart, I get only 1 desktop, just like Windows. Arrrrrgh! Hate, hate, hate! Multiple desktops are **extremely** important to me. I found the XML file where xfce fucks up, writing a bad config for itself, and used chattr to set the immutable bit. Somehow, xfce is still able to fuck up. (hit this on Mint mainly, but also Ubuntu and Fedora and Debian)

I miss GNOME 2.

Contacts Documentation

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope that Contacts is provided some sort of _documentation_ with this release.
I have no idea where/how the contact entries are being stored!

Beyond useful

[Anonymous Coward]

I quit KDE yonks ago when they fell out of their sanity seat and moved to gnome
I quit Gnome with their 3rd release for pretty much the same reason.

Fortunately there is always XFCE - Long live the functional desktop!

Re:Engineers. They love to change things.

[fbobraga]

As for default to lauch - https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/67/dash-click-fix/

Ctrl+click?

You could try LXDE...

[Sussurros]

Well I don't like Gnome 3 because it is ugly, but I believe that both Gnome 2 and Compiz are still available through the add applications facility of most distros. I haven't tried it myself because while KDE takes a while to get used to and become familiar with, it can be made nearly as beautiful as Gnome 2 without too much trouble. I still haven't worked out how to stretch one wallpaper across multiple monitors - I ended up chopping the image into pieces and assigning one part to each monitor.

One distro I have used to replace Gnome 2 with great success is Lubuntu which uses LXDE. It's quick, it looks nice, and it feels good if you come from a Gnome 2 paradigm. Best of all it's maintained by supporters rather than Canonical so it's not going to get messed up on you.

Gnome3 - disappointment

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been RedHat/Fedora user since RedHat version 1, but all the mess with Gnome3, symlinks (eg /sbin is now symlink in Fedora rawhide) etc, tells me that it is time to choose something new. There are also serious problems with ATI fglrx. I still use a HP TouchSmart TM2 laptop with Fedora 14 (the last which has Gnome2), but the next choice after a year or so will be the MacBook Pro. Maybe there is some conspiracy inside free software community to break all good things, so people start to choose proprietary stuff?

GNOME 3 is the new emacs

[Anonymous Coward]

All the extensions makes gnome 3 feel like a new emacs. Nothing works out of the box, but you can change everything as you like.

It is annoying to use multiple desktops with gnome 3. I am still waiting for someone to replicate the gnome 2 applet.

The lack of a CPU-meter is annoying, but happily someone has created an extension to replicate the functionality of gnome 2.

The notification area is annoying. I am still waiting for someone to move notifications to the task bar.