GNOMEbuntu Set To Arrive In October

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GNOMEbuntu Set To Arrive In October

Posted by timothy on Thursday August 30, 2012 @06:58AM from the would-prefer-mate dept.

First time accepted submitter Rzarector writes "Good News Everyone! Thanks to the Ubuntu Gnome Community and Jeremy Bicha, it seems that the popular distribution will ship a flavor with a relatively pure GNOME experience in the next release cycle, on October 18. At this point the effort is community based, but hopefully GNOMEbuntu will make it as an official Canonical spin, similar to Kubuntu, Xubuntu, et cetera, in the 13.04 release. This is the story: At the Ubuntu Developer Summit in May, some discussions took place on the need for a Gnome spin. On August 13, Jeremy Bicha posted on Gnome mailing lists about looking a name for the new Ubuntu derivative. After that, I had no news till Stinger gave us a thread in Ubuntu Forums. On there, Jeremy talks about working on an Alpha version! So I contacted him and he verified that GNOMEbuntu will be released together with Ubuntu 12.10."

33 of 157 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Which Gnome? by AliasMarlowe · 2012-08-30 06:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

If it's Gnome 3, then screw it. It goes into the "ignored trash" category, along with the Unity flavor of Ubuntu.
If it's a Gnome 2 fork (like Mate) or other Gnome 2 flavor, then I might be interested.
We converted all our home PCs from Ubuntu 10.04 LTS to Xubuntu 10.04 LTS more than a year ago,. This was after testing a couple of versions of Ubuntu with Unity in a VM and seeing the train-wreck that it was. Now we're on Xubuntu 12.04 LTS.

--
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
1. Re:Which Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-30 07:06 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  From TFA: "Unity won’t be included"
  From TFA: "Gnome Display Manager (GDM) and Gnome Shell will be obviously included!"
  Well... looks like Gnome 3.
2. Re:Which Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-30 07:12 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  If you base your Gnome 3 experience through your interactions with Unity, please realize that you are practically talking about two different things (even if it is the same libraries)
  I know plenty of people who like Gnome 3 but hate Unity, so there is a difference in user experience.
  If you really want Gnome 2, well there's two libraries which were targeting making that kind of desktop experience better, with less bloat and cruft. So, why do you want the big, bloated, slow, version of that desktop back? Move on to Xfce or LXDE.
3. Re:Which Gnome? by bluefoxlucid · 2012-08-30 07:13 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Unity is a train wreck but Gnome Shell seems to be dead on.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
4. Re:Which Gnome? by binarylarry · 2012-08-30 07:18 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.
  I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.
  I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.
  
  --
  Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
5. Re:Which Gnome? by McSnickered · 2012-08-30 07:26 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Looks like Gnome 3.6 Desktop Environment:
  http://news.softpedia.com/news/GNOMEbuntu-Will-Be-Released-on-October-18th-289041.shtml
  
  --
  They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
6. Re:Which Gnome? by Dcnjoe60 · 2012-08-30 07:53 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.
  I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.
  I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.
  Likewise, I like both Unity and Gnome Shell (at least after extensions). I find that I really don't use the Unity-lenses all that much with the exception of the applications one. Same thing with the HUD. It's interesting and all, but I don't find it improves my productivity. Given that, I find Gnome-shell to be more responsive and productive once I add dock and frippery menu extensions.
  But I agree, both are quite usable although different than Gnome 2.
7. Re:Which Gnome? by RabidReindeer · 2012-08-30 08:16 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.
  I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.
  I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.
  Obviously your definition of "serviceable" is more flexible than mine.
  I swapped Gnome 3 out for Cinnamon. Not quite everything I used to routinely do in Gnome 2, but closer than Gnome 3.
8. Re:Which Gnome? by binarylarry · 2012-08-30 08:31 · Score: 2
  
  I used to use the classic mode as well, especially in the beginning.
  I still like classic but I think the newer desktops are usable and have way more potential.
  I hope classic sticks around though, you need a fairly beefy machine to run Unity/Gnome 3 with satisfaction (Unity being a bigger problem than Gnome 3). It would suck to run them on a netbook that doesn't have a lot of power.
  
  --
  Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
9. Re:Which Gnome? by Dcnjoe60 · 2012-08-30 08:43 · Score: 2
  
  I'm a former hater but I really like Unity now.
  I think Unity could be amazing with the 12.10 release.
  I previously used Gnome 3, which is a perfectly serviceable desktop, but I prefer Unity.
  Obviously your definition of "serviceable" is more flexible than mine.
  I swapped Gnome 3 out for Cinnamon. Not quite everything I used to routinely do in Gnome 2, but closer than Gnome 3.
  You should also look at the Gnome 3 fall back mode. It looks and acts similar to Gnome 2, but is still Gnome 3. Ubuntu previously also shipped Gnome Classic Mode, but this was built on Gnome 2 and has since been discontinued. Cinnamon is Mint's version of Gnome's Fallback mode.
10. Re:Which Gnome? by justforgetme · 2012-08-30 09:56 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I know plenty of people who like Gnome 3 but hate Unity
  Me! Hi! I'm here!
  No, really guys. OK, I get that things can get rough when major changes are undertaken in your infrastructure. Whether that is Country, State or Desktop. But really all this hating on the gnome desktop has to subside at some point in time. I mean, come on! Ok, the guys made a total mess out of usability testing (not that large scale usability testing is good in any way but still some controlled environment tests are helpful) but in general they pulled it through. Gnome shell, in the past year, has been doing leaps!
  
  --
  -- no sig today
11. Re:Which Gnome? by justforgetme · 2012-08-30 10:09 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  What I can't digest about the unity interface is that it can't be effectively used as a mouse oriented UI nor can it be effectively used as a keyboard only UI. And that really makes a big difference for me. In an HTPC mouse only environment it is much easier to just use Gnome3 (even the theming for the living room aka huge fonts and buttons) are better applied by gnome shell. On the workstation again Gnome 3 works better because the keyboard mappings are very very concise and thought out, to the point where you can get to the behavioral patterns of a tiling wm without having done one modification. Unity? its nice if you have one hand on the keyboard and one on the mouse. Only that I am 99% less productive like that and it really doesn't make any sense.. And don't start talking about the hud thing because it plainly doesn't deliver.
  
  --
  -- no sig today
12. Re:Which Gnome? by RabidReindeer · 2012-08-30 11:03 · Score: 2
  
  You should also look at the Gnome 3 fall back mode. It looks and acts similar to Gnome 2, but is still Gnome 3. Ubuntu previously also shipped Gnome Classic Mode, but this was built on Gnome 2 and has since been discontinued. Cinnamon is Mint's version of Gnome's Fallback mode.
  Similar, but not identical. If you can make the Gnome 2 applets run under Gnome 3, you know more than me, because I haven't discovered how (so much for user-friendly!) And the loss of the applets was one of the biggest things that I hated about Gnome 3. Sure, they've apparently slapped in some sort of "extension" system in the later release, but it seems to require rewriting everything.
  If I've got to rewrite everything, I'd rather do it in Cinnamon. From what I've seen, it's a lot easier to work with than Gnome ever was when it comes to creating applets.
13. Re:Which Gnome? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-30 16:45 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Actually, Gnome Shell isn't the problem with Gnome 3. Yes it's a big divisive change that some people hate, but it works pretty well.
  The real problem with Gnome 3 is the continued march of "I, the developer don't know why you would want this feature, so clearly no one needs it, so I will remove it. Anyone that disagrees in Wrong. Even if that means that everyone other than me is Wrong".
14. Re:Which Gnome? by justforgetme · 2012-08-30 20:15 · Score: 2
  
  Nope, the correct nvidia drivers are installed. It's just too much work for the CPU.
  Unity2D only will help if you can't handle the graphics load. the problem with this PC though lies also with the CPUs power.
  
  --
  -- no sig today
2012 by hammeraxe · 2012-08-30 07:01 · Score: 5, Funny

This will make 2012 the year of the linux desktop for sure!
Sorry, but... by dotancohen · 2012-08-30 07:02 · Score: 2

Kubuntu is no longer an official Canonical distribution.

--
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
1. Re:Sorry, but... by Tarlus · 2012-08-30 07:48 · Score: 2
  
  it is simply no longer directly developed by Canonical
  So in other words, it is no longer an official Canonical distribution.
  
  --
  /* No Comment */
2. Re:Sorry, but... by theshowmecanuck · 2012-08-30 07:54 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  For Kubuntu/Ubuntu, this "part of the official family" is pure cynical corporate marketing to Kubuntu's disadvantage. It is only good for Canonical and this thinking can and will hurt Kubuntu in the long run. They have been cast adrift and must admit it, and not just intellectually. In the corporate world you will really ONLY see what "officially part of the family" means when it comes to money.
  Mandriva started from Redhat 5.1, is it part of the "official" Redhat family? No? Why? The money thing. Suse adopted the Redhat file structure and RPM package management system. Does that make it part of the Redhat family? Obviously no. If not, why not, for both Mandriva and Suse? Is it because it writes it's own installer and package manager even though for the most part they both can install pretty much the same RPMs? No, that's not it. Having similar and/or compatible package managers doesn't make systems part of the family except manybe for marketing. Taking ownership or spending time and money on it does. You are really only part of the official family if you are part of the corporate family. Otherwise you are part of the "we'll milk this as long as it gives us good marketing benefit" family. And again, that still comes back to money. Marketing is to make money.
  And that's the crux. Right now the Kubuntu community is still in the, "we can still be friends stage." Later when it is understood that Canonical doesn't give a flying fuck about Kubuntu financially (and that means no free help or declining free help over time until reality sets in). And BTW, I don't blame Canonical, it is business. The now all volunteer Kubuntu needs to get that through their heads too. They should start with a name change to make it readily apparent in heads and in hearts.
  I thiink right now there is still some warmth between kunbuntu and canonical. But as time goes by and less or no support comes from Canonical the rose will come off the bloom.
  FWIW, when I use Linux (on my VM guest on Windows 7) I use Kubuntu.
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Which version by ThatsNotPudding · 2012-08-30 07:08 · Score: 2

If it's Gnome 2, I would consider it. Actually, no; I've already moved on from Canonical's increasing ego drama and switched to LMDE.
I'm holding out for CinnaBuntu... by steveha · 2012-08-30 07:10 · Score: 5, Insightful

...but I would also go for MateBuntu.
http://cinnamon.linuxmint.com/
http://mate-desktop.org/

--
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Whis is this not a meta-package? by Zombie+Ryushu · 2012-08-30 07:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why is is this not a meta-package? Why is it necessary to have a completely different Ubuntu for Gnome?
1. Re:Whis is this not a meta-package? by stevenh2 · 2012-08-30 07:36 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  If the people are not an expert, then they have no need to know what GNOME is. In reality, it's really easy to install the GNOME package, go to the software center and install it, then change your desktop at login.
Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? by INowRegretThesePosts · 2012-08-30 07:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

This was after testing a couple of versions of Ubuntu with Unity in a VM and seeing the train-wreck that it was
Why all the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? Among my friends, they generally like or at least tolerate Unity. In the Ubuntu Software Center, the most recent (later than March 2012) reviews average 4 star.
I, personally, like it very much. It saves screen real-state and:
1) Provides direct buttons for all the programs I commonly use
2) For other programs, I just hit Super and type the first letters of the program name
It is perfectly convenient.
So why the hate?
1. Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? by Charliemopps · 2012-08-30 07:41 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Because it makes my $2k powerhouse computer running a super geeky OS look like something made by Vtech.
  
  http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81hhVZULnhL._AA1500_.jpg
2. Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? by Tarlus · 2012-08-30 07:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It's a lingering hatred from Unity's early days when it was still buggy and lacking in customization options. It's less buggy now but still doesn't offer the level of customization that some geeks like to have. As Unity matures, though, I find myself agreeing that it is in fact quite usable.
  
  --
  /* No Comment */
3. Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? by BoogeyOfTheMan · 2012-08-30 08:18 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I used to hate Unity with a passion. But after giving it a shot, I find that its not as terrible as I originally thought.
  The main reason I hated it was that you pretty much HAVE to use the keyboard to use it. Not so bad for most people, but my monitor is a 42" tv sitting across the room with my pc. I have a wireless mouse and keyboard, but I usually left the keyboard turned off and sitting on a table out of the way. Until Unity, I could access all of my applications with no more than 3 mouse clicks, and I only had to use the keyboard to enter passwords or for the occasional terminal session. Now, I leave the keyboard turned on and always accessible because I have to use it much more often to actually accomplish anything. Though I have learned that as long as I use the keyboard a lot, Unity is actually pretty decent. I still have some major gripes though.
  1- Yes I can just type a few letters and the program will show up, but if I cant remember the name of the program because I only use it once in a blue moon, I need to spend 5+ minutes searching for it. I also cant get programs installed through wine to show up with a few keypresses. (Probably a PEBKAC error, but still annoying)
  2- I have to jump through a few hoops to get all my app notifications to show up correctly.
  3- I have 5 third party apps installed to tweak various settings in Unity that should be built in
  4- I think the universal menu system is retarded. I have it turned off, but it really should be a simple checkbox in the system settings.
  5- It needs a better workspace indicator. The one that is stuck on the launch bar should at least tell me what workspace I have active since I cant remove it. (I have an extra mouse button set to open workspace switching, and I have the cube set up where if I scroll on the left or right of the screen, it changes workspaces)
  6- I would like the option to only show open application on the active workspace instead of always seeing all open apps on all workspaces. If its already pinned to the launchbar, the little arrows are cool, but I dont really need to see a transmission icon taking up space on my main workspace when I only have it open on workspace 4
  Wow, that was more than I thought there would be. After all of that, I still use it because I feel that it has promise, it just needs more polish. I believe that by 13.10 it should be fully featured enough to be a worthy successor to Gnome 2.
4. Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? by Tarlus · 2012-08-30 08:26 · Score: 2
  
  I think they're doing pretty well for themselves. You'll always have the die-hards clinging to older DE's with an icy grip but as of 12.04, I have started to notice a changing attitude toward Unity around here.
  
  --
  /* No Comment */
5. Re:Why the Slashdot anti-Unity hate? by Dcnjoe60 · 2012-08-30 08:48 · Score: 2
  
  2) For other programs, I just hit Super and type the first letters of the program name
  My keyboard doesn't have a "Super" key. And if it did, if I'm running an application I don't commonly use, I often don't know the name of it, so I would like a categorized menu of software to choose from.
  You could run Gnome 3 and press alt+f1 instead of the Super key and if you install the frippery menu extension from extensions.gnome.org, you will have a traditional applications menu (you can also add a places menu with an additional extension).
  Here are other keystroke/shortcuts besides the alt+f1: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fedora-16-gnome-3-review,3155-10.html
Nice development by Pecisk · 2012-08-30 07:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

I like Debian and Ubuntu, because of systematical structure, good packaging system and overall atitude to open system development. However, I strongy dislike Unity (nothing objective, just subjective feeling), and I love GNOME Shell. So this is good news, because I would like to work on Ubuntu and Debian, while still using GNOME stack.
It's nice to see that while with lack of resources (this and KDE version of Ubuntu are realeased without support from Canonical), Ubuntu has all popular enviroments to install. While someone like GNOME founder/now troll Miguel like to blame fragmentation why Linux isn't bringing him millions, I think having it is not bad - altough I vote for lot of integration which already have took place.
So thanks goes to devs who undertook this rather daring quest.

--
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Re:Oh boy... by Grishnakh · 2012-08-30 08:11 · Score: 2

I don't think that's fair. Ubuntu isn't a trainwreck, only the Unity component is. The rest of Ubuntu has long been a very good distro (largely because of Debian, which it's based on). It's Unity that's crap. Gnome3, of course, is also crap, but with this GNOMEbuntu, you're just trading one POS for another POS, so it's still only one trainwreck in the package, not two.
However, from what I'm reading, it seems that Gnome3 is a bigger POS than Unity, so this is still a downgrade it appears.
Re:*Buntu = Suck by cpu6502 · 2012-08-30 08:32 · Score: 2

>>> they are more "rolling release" than set milestones, so upgrading is a lot less of a pain
I'd like an OS that doesn't upgrade at all (except security fixes), so I know my software will still work today in 2012, or in the future in 2020. I am sick-and-tired of these bullshit "upgrades" that make things break on my PC. I call it a DOWNgrade when programmers break your favorite tools. Can you image if carmakers did that? "We upgraded the firmware in your 2010 Civic and, sadly, the radio and air conditioner don't work anymore. You'll have to visit the nearest mechanic and buy new ones."

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
deprecated == you suck, removed = you REALLY suck by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-30 10:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

Totally with you on this one.
Every time I see "deprecated" or "removed", I curse the programmers to hell.
I installed a new webserver a few weeks ago, basically a job of moving working, production setup to new hardware and so of course a new OS level (though still linux.) moved some very vanilla Perl scripts to it, and bingo, they wouldn't run.
Fucking Perl changed how one of its special variables worked so that you have to use regular expressions to get the same effect, not to mention the scripts spew all manner of warnings about using references for hashes is deprecated. I then spent days digging through the code to change things so they'd work again. That wasn't all, either. Fucking Perl DBI module wouldn't talk to our postgreSQL server any longer, either, was bitching about "protocol", had to actually call python from perl so we could get to our data -- python still works (python 2 series... python 3... not even the same language, not interested, but thank you SO much for not breaking Python 2!!!.) Ended up writing a replacement for DBI that essentially is a wrapper around Python. Fucking fuck.
Fucking Apple broke the living shit out of cron in one "upgrade." And even once it was "working" it was spewing errors to the system console, which they promised to fix, but never did. They thought nothing of moving the ground by fucking with the PPC emulator, too... I fucking PAID for my PPC software, I'm not particularly inclined to just give it up because some Appletard thinks its "old."
Windows XP broke all the windows metrics that let devs know how to deal with titlebars.
When this shit happens, I just fume. Here we are, trying to do things the way we're supposed to, and fuck-all does it matter when the underlying OS or language or library takes a left turn because they're too fucking lazy or stupid to deal with how they told people it used to work. I swear, it reminds me of that scene in some movie where these two guys walk up to a door, open a listing, and ask "were you online in such and such a chatroom on such and such a date?" and then proceed to beat the living shit out of the guy. That's just how I feel about the assholes who break compatibility with prior use.
Fucking fucktarded fuckheads.
Programmers: If it isn't fucking broken, don't fucking fix it. You want new functionality? Fine. PUT IT IN A NEW MECHANISM. DON'T FUCKING BREAK THE EXISTING ONE. YOU FUCKING TARDFUCKERY ASSMUNCHING CARELESS DOUCHENOZZLE SUCKING ASS-BRAINED CHUCKLEFUCKS !!!ONE!LEVENTY!ONE!!!
I should feel better, but I really don't. Because I know it's going to keep happening. Because those new kids really kinda suck at this whole programming thing.