I agree with your view. I think that MATE is not the cause of the "shiny new thing", but the fact that Gnome 2 was abandoned by the Gnome Foundation. This is also why the name "Gnome" can't be used anymore for the fork.
The very interesting thing is that MATE project will soon support all the new cool technologies like GTK+3, Wayland and systemd (like Gnome 3) but without changing the desktop experience for the users (unlike Gnome 3).
Yes Gnome 2 was officially abandoned by the Gnome Foundation, but a lot and growing number of peoples are making contribution to the MATE fork. The name change was needed because the project was not officially supported by the Gnome Foundation. This don't imply that the MATE fork don't get support from others peoples outside of the Gnome Foundation. Seriously, the Gnome Foundation is not the only entity on the planet capable to support a desktop project. In fact I tend to say that there miserably failed the Gnome 2 to Gnome 3 transition.
To me, this is the greatest desktop project since the fading of Gnome 2. If fact this how the Gnome foundation should have managed the desktop project: continue the Gnome 2 support e improvement until the experimental Gnome 3 project is polished in a way that Gnome 2 users start using it by there own choice. The failed by cutting the life of Gnome 2 way too early and trowing a unfinished, buggy and incomplete Gnome 3 kludge.
Gnome 3, Unity, KDE and the rest can all run ALL apps (except maybe some applets that are desktop-specific) on the same desktop.
If you just lunch a unique single window application like a browser, maybe. But my experience with Gnome 3 and Unity are really bad as soon as I want a lot of virtual desktop with a lot of windows into each of them. So bad that I now use XFCE or MATE to get my shiny 8x8 virtual desktop grid to fit all my projects.
Gnome 3 break almost any applications that use multiple windows or full screen, in addition to break virtually all preexisting applets without decent replacement. Unity is even more broken with the full screen mode and there old style common top menu bar that behave erratically. Managing a lot of windows on those desktop is a unbelieving nightmare. The most ridicule part of the story is that both scarified decade of improvement in Gnome 2 in the name of a more intuitive interface. For me, there both miserably failed: * If the users just wants to start a few application full screen, Gnome 2 was really capable of doing so very well. * If the users wants a powerful, comfortable, and fast desktop for complex task with a lot of windows, Gnome 2 was also the best choice.
And I am certain to not be alone with the regret of Gnome 2, since so much contribution effort are now given to MATE project for example. I will not be surprised that MATE will overtake Gnome 3 in a few years. I fact, I hope this will be the case, because projects that are unable to understand his users base will see there contribution effort going down over time.
...! I really wonder what is the life of the guy that have nothing more constructive to do than anonymously insulting me like this. Didn't expect this for my first story submission that is not so much more than a link to a relatively known web server statistics.
As you say "I don't know if it's true". I hope that someone can raise some tangible prove of that scenario, even if the others graphs tend to make it likely true.
Voting for peoples is not enough: this give too many power to them at the risk that there use it the wrong way despite there promises. Here in Switzerland any change in the constitution must be voted by the population, and others changes can be avoided by popular referendum. I believe that those features are good enough to balance peoples and parties that take too much power.
Sorry, but I am not connected either nor to Dice, not to Microsoft. I submitted the story simply because I wanted to understand the ground of the fast ISS raise in the first graph.
Hi, I am the submitter of this story. Believe or not, I am really not connected to Microsoft, directly or indirectly. I am the co-founder of a very small company that provides services for embedded electronics and almost exclusively use Linux. I submitted this story after reading the monthly Netcraft email news. I wondering how Microsoft marketing team could possibly use the potential news "ISS > Apache" and how the OSS community will react to that news.
Reading many comments, It look like the "ISS > Apache" event is probably unavoidable because of the rise of Nginx that eat Apache share and the fact that Nginx is still less used that ISS in the first graph. Still the ISS fast increase is hard to explain by reading the comments. Is that only smoke that affect only the first graph, or an other trend that will drive the others graphs ?
TLC flash, the kind that degrades WHEN YOU READ IT
This is true for any technologies of flash and also true for hard disk track. To read something from any media, a small energy transfer is required. It could be very small, but there is always a certain quantity involved. Any media need a refresh after a certain read quantity. For the record, even without read, any media tend to loss energy, mainly due to the thermal agitation and ambient radiation. Certain flash are specified as over 100 years retention time: this is a lot but far from the infinity...
Now there is a category of people so disconnected from reality that are ok to overpay an already excessively rich phone manufacturer that refuse to support free format, and there only reaction to there frustration is to ask a poor free project to support commercial format. I wonder how many of them have donate something to Wikipedia.
But I am not so surprised. I have observed many times that a lot of people tend to be proud of what there have payed and disregards what there have not payed, even when the reality clearly show that there money was not worth the result. It's a childish behavior to ask others to fix your own false choice.
Sorry but I strongly disagree with you point of view.
A lot of networks settings for example are still into/proc/net. There are not hardware dependent and a lot of them can be acceded in write mode. A lot of different programs or library use them, especially if you build routers like I have do in a early workplace. Just look at how many API and codes exists to simply do a DNS query...
The/proc interface will stay almost forever because it is too deeply part of the UNIX history, but it really a mess after decades of erratic evolution, especially in the Linux kernel that initially put almost anything into it before trying others ways.
In more than 20 years, this is the first time I hear about VSS. Hopefully since according to Wikipedia this was a Windows only product since this time. RCS was the dominant tool in my field of work when I started.
You can always make things different, but this add complexity for the others. having something in common help the grow of communities. Mercurial don't bring any clear advantage over git, but have the big problem that only a few people know it. So peoples that wants to contribute to a project using Mercurial have first to learn Mercurial, and this was not there primary goal. The probability that an user have to learn git only for a project is actually far lower than for Mercurial.
Almost any large project includes peoples with different culture. But there use it to merge new features instead of creating an other project that will never get enough audience to change anything but add complexity to potentials users of the features.
The fact that modules are optional make the Linux kernel no so monolithic. It also use a lot of kernel threads that can be more or less see as services in a microkernel architecture. You can argue that is't not as fun as a microkernel, but if you want to do with microkernel services all what Linux do, you will probably end up with the same order of code quantity.
I actually found Avahi extremely well implemented. It work exactly as expected and I never have identified any problem with it.
I am afraid that the future will make your dbus-free system more and more challenging. I do a lot of embedded system and the dbus-deamon is so critically important that nothing will work without it.
Exactly. A new standard is not the solution. Putting DBUS in the kernel has the merit of making an existing good and long established standard available to a wider range of communication demand.
ps and netstat only show the current state. You need very different others tools to modify the state or to dynamically monitor the state transitions. From this point of vire, DBus if far more generic, coherent and cleaner than a lot of others tools.
In other words, Linux isn't being engineered anymore, it's being driven by the masses.
You can use your own conclusion, but Linux was always driven by the masses of engineers that work on it. There is no other kernel project with so much authors. And this is precisely what make it so successful.
Now if you think that Linux is not a good engineering work, a lot of peoples will be more than happy to learn from you how to make it even better.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with your view.
I think that MATE is not the cause of the "shiny new thing", but the fact that Gnome 2 was abandoned by the Gnome Foundation. This is also why the name "Gnome" can't be used anymore for the fork.
The very interesting thing is that MATE project will soon support all the new cool technologies like GTK+3, Wayland and systemd (like Gnome 3) but without changing the desktop experience for the users (unlike Gnome 3).
MATE is improving really fast. Give it a new try.
Yes Gnome 2 was officially abandoned by the Gnome Foundation, but a lot and growing number of peoples are making contribution to the MATE fork. The name change was needed because the project was not officially supported by the Gnome Foundation. This don't imply that the MATE fork don't get support from others peoples outside of the Gnome Foundation. Seriously, the Gnome Foundation is not the only entity on the planet capable to support a desktop project. In fact I tend to say that there miserably failed the Gnome 2 to Gnome 3 transition.
http://mate-desktop.org/
To me, this is the greatest desktop project since the fading of Gnome 2. If fact this how the Gnome foundation should have managed the desktop project: continue the Gnome 2 support e improvement until the experimental Gnome 3 project is polished in a way that Gnome 2 users start using it by there own choice. The failed by cutting the life of Gnome 2 way too early and trowing a unfinished, buggy and incomplete Gnome 3 kludge.
Gnome 3, Unity, KDE and the rest can all run ALL apps (except maybe some applets that are desktop-specific) on the same desktop.
If you just lunch a unique single window application like a browser, maybe. But my experience with Gnome 3 and Unity are really bad as soon as I want a lot of virtual desktop with a lot of windows into each of them. So bad that I now use XFCE or MATE to get my shiny 8x8 virtual desktop grid to fit all my projects.
Gnome 3 break almost any applications that use multiple windows or full screen, in addition to break virtually all preexisting applets without decent replacement. Unity is even more broken with the full screen mode and there old style common top menu bar that behave erratically. Managing a lot of windows on those desktop is a unbelieving nightmare. The most ridicule part of the story is that both scarified decade of improvement in Gnome 2 in the name of a more intuitive interface. For me, there both miserably failed:
* If the users just wants to start a few application full screen, Gnome 2 was really capable of doing so very well.
* If the users wants a powerful, comfortable, and fast desktop for complex task with a lot of windows, Gnome 2 was also the best choice.
And I am certain to not be alone with the regret of Gnome 2, since so much contribution effort are now given to MATE project for example. I will not be surprised that MATE will overtake Gnome 3 in a few years. I fact, I hope this will be the case, because projects that are unable to understand his users base will see there contribution effort going down over time.
...!
I really wonder what is the life of the guy that have nothing more constructive to do than anonymously insulting me like this.
Didn't expect this for my first story submission that is not so much more than a link to a relatively known web server statistics.
As you say "I don't know if it's true". I hope that someone can raise some tangible prove of that scenario, even if the others graphs tend to make it likely true.
Voting for peoples is not enough: this give too many power to them at the risk that there use it the wrong way despite there promises.
Here in Switzerland any change in the constitution must be voted by the population, and others changes can be avoided by popular referendum.
I believe that those features are good enough to balance peoples and parties that take too much power.
Sorry, but I am not connected either nor to Dice, not to Microsoft. I submitted the story simply because I wanted to understand the ground of the fast ISS raise in the first graph.
Hi, I am the submitter of this story. Believe or not, I am really not connected to Microsoft, directly or indirectly. I am the co-founder of a very small company that provides services for embedded electronics and almost exclusively use Linux. I submitted this story after reading the monthly Netcraft email news. I wondering how Microsoft marketing team could possibly use the potential news "ISS > Apache" and how the OSS community will react to that news.
Reading many comments, It look like the "ISS > Apache" event is probably unavoidable because of the rise of Nginx that eat Apache share and the fact that Nginx is still less used that ISS in the first graph. Still the ISS fast increase is hard to explain by reading the comments. Is that only smoke that affect only the first graph, or an other trend that will drive the others graphs ?
TLC flash, the kind that degrades WHEN YOU READ IT
This is true for any technologies of flash and also true for hard disk track. To read something from any media, a small energy transfer is required. It could be very small, but there is always a certain quantity involved. Any media need a refresh after a certain read quantity. For the record, even without read, any media tend to loss energy, mainly due to the thermal agitation and ambient radiation. Certain flash are specified as over 100 years retention time: this is a lot but far from the infinity...
Thanks for the correction. I am not an English speaker.
Actually the reality is that the contents creators are locked by the fact that a few majors manufactures refuse to support free formats.
Now there is a category of people so disconnected from reality that are ok to overpay an already excessively rich phone manufacturer that refuse to support free format, and there only reaction to there frustration is to ask a poor free project to support commercial format. I wonder how many of them have donate something to Wikipedia.
But I am not so surprised. I have observed many times that a lot of people tend to be proud of what there have payed and disregards what there have not payed, even when the reality clearly show that there money was not worth the result. It's a childish behavior to ask others to fix your own false choice.
Sorry but I strongly disagree with you point of view.
A lot of networks settings for example are still into /proc/net. There are not hardware dependent and a lot of them can be acceded in write mode. A lot of different programs or library use them, especially if you build routers like I have do in a early workplace. Just look at how many API and codes exists to simply do a DNS query...
The /proc interface will stay almost forever because it is too deeply part of the UNIX history, but it really a mess after decades of erratic evolution, especially in the Linux kernel that initially put almost anything into it before trying others ways.
In more than 20 years, this is the first time I hear about VSS. Hopefully since according to Wikipedia this was a Windows only product since this time. RCS was the dominant tool in my field of work when I started.
You can always make things different, but this add complexity for the others. having something in common help the grow of communities. Mercurial don't bring any clear advantage over git, but have the big problem that only a few people know it. So peoples that wants to contribute to a project using Mercurial have first to learn Mercurial, and this was not there primary goal. The probability that an user have to learn git only for a project is actually far lower than for Mercurial.
Almost any large project includes peoples with different culture. But there use it to merge new features instead of creating an other project that will never get enough audience to change anything but add complexity to potentials users of the features.
For the same reasons.
Take a look at the reality:
linux$ for i in $(find ./ -mindepth 1 -maxdepth 1 -type d); do r=$(find ./$i -type f -iname "*.c" -print0 | wc -c --files0-from=- | tail -1 | cu)); printf "%16d\t%s\n" $r $i; done | sort -rn ./drivers ./arch ./fs ./sound ./net ./kernel ./mm ./security ./crypto ./tools ./lib ./scripts ./block ./Documentation ./ipc ./virt ./init ./samples ./usr ./firmware ./.tmp_versions ./include ./.git
176570632
39285154
25360678
16726520
16270981
4178246
2149028
1321702
1196376
1138780
1061679
789517
518658
224637
185020
132264
73918
42353
12747
6731
0
0
0
The fact that modules are optional make the Linux kernel no so monolithic. It also use a lot of kernel threads that can be more or less see as services in a microkernel architecture. You can argue that is't not as fun as a microkernel, but if you want to do with microkernel services all what Linux do, you will probably end up with the same order of code quantity.
Sorry but your "finding" really don't match with the reality: http://lwn.net/Articles/551969/
Sorry if it's hurt your sensibility: this was not my intention.
I thought it was a correct response to the "Linux isn't being engineered anymore" statement.
I actually found Avahi extremely well implemented. It work exactly as expected and I never have identified any problem with it.
I am afraid that the future will make your dbus-free system more and more challenging. I do a lot of embedded system and the dbus-deamon is so critically important that nothing will work without it.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQ5NzQ
Exactly. A new standard is not the solution.
Putting DBUS in the kernel has the merit of making an existing good and long established standard available to a wider range of communication demand.
Standard package of dbus should already contain the dbus-monitor and dbus-send commands.
If you want an easy tool, try D-Feet https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Apps/DFeet?action=show&redirect=DFeet.
ps and netstat only show the current state. You need very different others tools to modify the state or to dynamically monitor the state transitions. From this point of vire, DBus if far more generic, coherent and cleaner than a lot of others tools.
In other words, Linux isn't being engineered anymore, it's being driven by the masses.
You can use your own conclusion, but Linux was always driven by the masses of engineers that work on it. There is no other kernel project with so much authors. And this is precisely what make it so successful.
Now if you think that Linux is not a good engineering work, a lot of peoples will be more than happy to learn from you how to make it even better.