Slashdot Mirror
GNOME 3.10 Released
kthreadd writes "Version 3.10 of the GNOME software collection has been released. New in this release is improved support for Wayland, the upcoming X replacement. The system status menus have been consolidated into one single menu. Many of the applications in GNOME now features header bars instead of title bars, which merges the titlebar and toolbar into a single element and allows applications to offer more dynamic user interfaces. GNOME now also includes an application for searching, browsing and installing applications called Software. Several other new applications have also been added to GNOME including Music, Photos, Notes and Maps."
"GNOME now also includes an application for searching, browsing and installing applications called Software"
I had to read that like 4 or 5 times before it clicked that the name of the application is "Software"
Is it just me, or is GNOME picking a completely new default multimedia applications every other release or so? Why can't they run with something for a few years, for a change?
Gnome and KDE went through similar histories. The maintainers (for some unkown reason) decided they had to radically change their product - just as Ubuntu decided to introduce a totally new gui a few years ago. The verdict with Gnome is almost universal - the new Gnome (Gnome 3, which you have with Centos 6, unfortunately) stinks and isn't getting any better. Nevertheless, those who offer Gnome - e.g., Redhat, SUSE, others - offer only the latest version. Redhat has made it the default. Their motto is "just get used to it". But there is one hugely positive development: Mint decided to fork the old Gnome, Gnome 2. Mint offers 2 versions of Gnome 2: the Cinamon gui and the Mate gui (pronounced matey, a type of tea). I have no experience with Cinamon but love Mate. I am using it on my main computer. I noticed recently that Fedora also offers a Mate variant. My guess is that eventually most of the distros will; they will offer their main gui, whatever it is, plus Mate, XFCE, LXDE, etc. I am guessing that Gnome 3 will eventually go away.
KDE4 is like Gnome 3 but actually improved as it developed. One of its peculiarities is that it offers 5 (I think) different ways of laying out and using the desktop. One of them - called Folder View - makes it quite similar to the discontinued KDE3. I have instances of folder view KDE4 in my PCLinuxOS and Mepis setups, and like it. Be aware, however, that KDE3, like Gnome 2, has been forked. If you go to the Trinity Linux website you will find that there are people who have rejiggered Debian, Ubuntu, and PCLOS with the KDE3 gui. In fact, one of my partitions is running Debian Wheezy with KDE3. One of the best things about KDE4 is the Dolphin file manager which I have imported into all of my non-KDE setups. It is far, far superior to every other file manager, including the old Konqueror, which Trinity KDE3 still has.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Gnome for Workgroups!
How bad of a shot do you have to be to target 99% of everything out there and still miss?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I understand some of the complaints. It get it. But, wow, Gnome is looking really good! It will be interesting to see how this new menu layout works. So far I haven't had any complaints in Gnome 3. I've been using Gnome everyday since it was initially released in the RedHat/Fedora distros. I've had more complaints with the bumps in the road with Fedora over the years than Gnome itself.
Curious to know people's thoughts on this: how necessary are projects like MATE now that GNOME 3 has a supported-in-the-long-term "Classic" mode?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
now that GNOME 3 has a supported-in-the-long-term "Classic" mode?
The Gnome developers have a long history of throwing out features and behavior based on a whim. Why would anyone believe that "classic mode" is going to receive long-term support?
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
I realize it's passe in today's society to value fact, reason, and truth over feelings, impulse, and consensus, but it's still ok for people to state their opinions, whether they're using the product or not. Criticism should not be silenced for the sake of feelings. Frankly, gnome is just a collection of current design trends that are questionable at best, and that is the reason you see the commentary. The problem is bigger than gnome itself.
1. too much wasted space. I didn't buy a high res monitor just to have a giant tablet.
2. sparsely populated dialogs. I suppose this relates to #1, but still.. Why do we need 4000 extra dialogs to move through remedial tasks like changing backgrounds and color schemes?
3. hidden or nonexistent advanced tweaking. Again, a trend that makes living with computing frustrating. In this age, the user is assumed not suited to define his own workflow and layout, so we're all stuck with assumptions made by 'designers' who 'went to school for design', who never actually did anything else with their computers other than run photoshop...maximized fullscreen of course. To get what I want, I now have to manage a litany of patches against libgnome et al, or if I'm running windows 7, I have to hack up shellstyle.dll using a resource editor, and don't even get me started on windows 8. Why? This is not progress.
The problem boils down to placing aesthetics above functionality. This might work sorta ok for limited use devices, but not desktop machines used for complex workflows.
Because RHEL7 is going to use it as the default desktop environment, and Red Hat is the biggest paying contributor to Gnome.
When you are a gnome, you have to aim high to avoid shooting people in their feet.
I recently converted from gnome 3.4 fallback to gnome 3.8.
I found it the most annoying pos to try and work with, until I started adding extensions to get back little bits of what I consider core functionality. Kudos to the gnome peeps for making it very easy to download/enable/disable various addons now. The only problem? Twenty fuckin extensions are required to get back those options I want, or to remove shit thats being forced down my throat. Then guess what...extensions often collide and interoperate strangely. Then you have 'mega extensions' that come with one small thing you want and twenty other features you give not a shit about, and, one of those other twenty things collides with another plugin you use.
Then you have the lockscreen. Maybe gnome devs don't use it, but I do, and locking and unlocking / resuming from screen off take anywhere from 30-60 seconds!?!?!?!?! The whole time you're like what in the fuckin fuck is going on.
Want to suspend? No you don't apparently. You only turn off your computer completely or reboot in gnome.
Want to try and use up more than a small portion of the top bar? Ok we'll start chopping the fuckin clock short so you can't read it AND clicking on the (now shortened) clock/calendary display to bring up the calendar pane? No clock on it, awesome. Not to mention it taking 2-5 seconds to pop up the stupid calendar pane.
So much in gnome 3 feels sluggish during operation, even if its just a ~100ms delay, that I feel like my i7 with 32gig of ram is from the early 00's.
Once middle click paste goes away gnome can go fuck themselves, but I'm sure by then they'll have removed more small things I didn't know I found vital---or forcefully prevent some current extensions from working anyways. /rant over
You know, I remember, many years ago now, an article that got posted on /. about usability of the Linux desktop for casual/beginner/"regualr people" users. GNOME and KDE were examined. At the time Gnome 2.x was fairly new.
One of the prominent complaints (one that got MSFT and AAPL fanbois gloating) was how people struggled with the exotic names for everyday applications.
So...you have to click this GIMP thingy to edit pictures? To go ont he web you need to clock "Konqueror" or "Galeon" (the latter of which morphed into "Epiphany"--so much more clear what it does eh?). To burn a CD I need "Brasero", etc.
The user had to rely on icons--sometimes they were not so useful either.
So the GNOME people have finally done something about it and name the app that helps you install software "Software", and call the web browser "web" instead of "Epihpany"...makes sense considering the feedback right? Well, now they are being mocked by experienced users for the unimaginative names. It's not like a computer literate person can't figure out what "WEB" does (oh gee, that must be the GNOME web browser...well isn't that more boring than Epiphany, but I guess now Aunt Martha will know how to get on the web).
By the way--"WEB" is just Epiphany renamed--the GNOM browser. Firefox/Iceweasel or Chromium still appear with their respective names/icons, so you can relax unlessyou are among the 1% of GNOME users who just use the GNOME Web browser and nothing else.
(As I type this I use GNOME 3.8 from Debian unstable and experimental packages--'tis a great improvement over 3.4 and earlier that so many still use or base their first impressions on--hopefully 3.10 will be packaged for Debian in due time--pwehaps a couple weeks before 3.12 comes out ;-)
But I *DO* repect your opinion. You don't like GNOME, that is fine. You've stated reasons why you don't like GNOME. That is great. That is on topic, even if I don't entirely agree (though GNOME 3 *does* have room for improvement).
That said, "GNOME 3 sucks I use MATE" and then going on to expound about how wonderfully traditional MATE is is OFF TOPIC. The article is about the release of GNOME 3. Unless you are going to make some observation about GNOME 3 beyond a one line "sucks" comment then said comment is very deservedly modded into oblivion.
We've heard it all before. It is a broken record, it is a dead horse that people just can't stop beating. If you must be critical be constructive and be a bit specific about what needs improvement. We do NOT need to hear "GNOME 3 sucks". That is less than useless. Go away and let *intelligent* critics have some input (I would even put up with Torvalds or DeRaadt style profanity laden rants so long as they have meaningful point to them).
There is some confusion about what is a GNOME-based application and what is part of the GNOME environment itself.
For example Shotwell is a third-party GNOME based application. It has never been part of the GNOME project--not a GNOME component. Rather, it has merely been the most commonly used app for photo management and viewing as packaged by distributions. Shotwell supplanted F-Spot becaus the latter was built with .NET/Mono and many had concerns about potential MSFT-interference.
GNOME did not have final say on either F-Spot OR Shotwell given they weren't GNOME desktop components--just apps designed to work on GNOME. Until now there WAS no official default app. Now there is:: GNOME Photos.
As such, I expect that GNOME Photos, Music, Notes, Maps, etc. will continue for the long term as the "defaults" as they are new official GNOME components. Furthermore I suspect Shotwell, Rythmbox, etc will continue on as alternatives, likely with some enhanced capabilites, different feature sets, etc. just as WEB (aka epiphany) is the "official" GNOME browser client it is still commonly (or even normally) supplanted by a 3rd party browser.