I call bullshit. I'm a sysadmin and I've used it for two months now and it's perfectly fine with systems administration. I don't think you've tried it at all and shooting from the hip. GNOME 3 and GNOME-do are a potent combination. I'm really fast and I use workspaces like candy which go away as soon as the last window is removed.
I suggest you try it. Get the live cd and try it for a week. Put your money where your mouth is.
sri
What you want is conformance to what you had before. We're asking you to try something different. Work with it for a week and see if the new way works for you. Try it in the way it was designed not in the way it was done before and what you were comfortable with.
You need to evaluate how you use a computer. A lot of people get fixated on the desktop and the options and tweaking it whatever. But really, you want the desktop to fade away so you can focus on whatever productivity you're working on. We do have extensions that you can install. Try out the gnome tweak tool and see if it works. I know that Fedora 15 already has it.
Right there is no one true way. The desktop metaphor between GNOME and KDE is essentially the same. So diversification is a good thing. What happens is sites like slashdot really wants conformance not moving forward. We talk about innovation but only under strict confines of these tech users. We talk with both sides of our mouth of wanting "innovation" but really then get angry when innovation does occur because it means their work model has to change as well if they want to use.
When you get people who complain that it looks like a smart phone or something else clearly are not consumers of smart phones or tablets. They rather sit with their linux laptops doing whatever. I'm willing to guess that younger audiences would appreciate a fresh new look that keeps up with our information laden times.
sri
Then we have an extension system. The extension system can access just about everything. Window manager, overview, hell maybe even printers, and network. It's all in javascript and whatever api they expose, you can use.
Remember this is a 1.0, that means that we have plenty of ways to do perfection and in the way our solutions to certain things are going to be more unique than other desktops. We're trying to design for today's world with social networking, online banking and whatever else that is out there. We design for that. The underlying libraries and what not are still pretty much the same. GNOME didn't throw all that out they improved the developer experience as well. We should be able to get better apps that integrate even more thoroughly with the desktop.
Maybe you don't want that, but really in that case we solved everything back during fvwm2. You want launchers, a dock, and a file browser. We had all that back in fvwm2 days. The supersloshy had it exactly right. Nobody liked the car either, they were comfortable with the horse. If we didn't shake things up, we'd still be plowing fields with a horse and a plow.
Look at it this way, we are demanding more things from the Linux ecosystem. 3D has to work now, if GNOME 3 gets momentum those drivers are going to get more attention. When we ask more of the eco system then the eco system moves forward. It's good for GNOME, it's good for Linux, and it's good for Free Software.
sri
sri
Oh brother. Do you know how much flammage GNOME took for 2.0 from slashdot? Everything that was said in this thread was repeated 9 years ago with even more vitriol. Most of the people responding haven't tried it or even intending to try it. They still remember 9 years ago and are rehashing and recycling the same damn emotions back then.
I can tell when people haven't even given GNOME 3 a test drive when they only complain about minimize and maximize. Give it a week with an open mind and see how it works. That's what GNOME asks.
There are some live cd's from www.gnome3.org. See how it works for you. Have an open mind. I switched from GNOME 2 to GNOME 3 and after about a week I could not go back to GNOME 2 anymore.. Also you don't need to switch until you're ready. The GNOME 2 environment is still going to be there, and GNOME 3 is going to continue to evolve adding features. What is taken away can be done a different way.
As for the minimize and maximize issue.. it is a bit of an experiment. Yes, you're right that there is no window list. But you'll see your window in the overview mode. There are some things problematic specifically privacy, but otherwise in this method is better than window list. You have absolutely no distraction on that main window. You can be completely focused on the task you're working on. To understand the design decisions regarding minimize and maximize here is a blog post by Allan Day.
The problem with slashdot and other venues is that they talk about lack of innovation in FOSS, but when projects strike out in a different direction they suddenly want conformity to either an apple or windows methodology. They have irrational fear that the power user will be shunted off. In many ways, nobody wants the linux desktop to succeed merely because it will no longer be in a domain of technocrats. In any case, if you want to follow the old model there are plenty of other choices I agree. But keep in mind, there is a convergence that GNOME is taking advantage of. The way I interact with my phone is very similar to GNOME 3. How many more regular users will find themselves feeling quite comfortable in the GNOME 3 because of that familiarity?
sri
But your firefox browser doesn't have any options which a lot of you claim you need. If the linux desktop is indeed dead dying to the browser then GNOME has nothing to lose by that logic, does it?
You can put the minimize and maximize buttons back if you want. Also if you right click on the title bar you will also be able to get minimize.
Finally, as for using workspaces, what makes you think you will be forced to use it?
And that's exactly what is being done. You can change most things inside dconf/gconf. But designing the default GUI should be geared towards don't care which is about 90%. The default should be able to take care of 90% of what you're going to do with your desktop. Some of you people just like the comfort of being able to tweak everything. It is a hold over from the days of fvwm and twm where you had all these options. Most normal people don't interact with their user environment so intimately. They use it for tasks.
The idea is to appeal to the other 75% of the planet who aren't geeks otherwise we cant' grow. So we need to change the game.
sri
Well who is to say that Jesus's disciples weren't all avatars either? In general, Hindus will believe anybody who says that God came down and got down to business as merely another expression of God.
Brahman is the universe. But if there is imbalance then an avatar will show up to right the imbalance. But really as an individual (see Vedanta) you want to be on a conscious level with Brahman. Hinduism doesn't really have rules. Basically what it says is that we have a tried method that we feel works, but we concede that there might be other ways to reach Brahman. So as a programmer, you have a default methodology but it doesn't exclude other methodologies. That's why it is easy for a Hindu to accept another religion simply as another method. So what you see in India is really Indian culture influencing itself on the religion. So Hinduism goes through periods of liberalism and conservatism based on what the population is feeling at the time.
To continue with the lack of rules in Hinduism the other thing is that there is less dictating of "morals". Essentially, what Hindu philosophy says is that if you are in touch of Brahman, you don't need moral rules. Because if you've and understanding then it's unlikely that any rules required. People however do require some kind of default guide because Hinduism as a philosophy is somewhat cerebral and most simple folks just want a roadmap that they can integrate into their day.
I love the philosophy but I hate the rituals. I enjoy the cerebral philosophy and it's fun to talk with like minded Jews. I haven't really had much with Christians so much, but Hindus and Jews have some similarities that is fun to discover.
sri
Well, Hindu philosophy is actually quite interesting. The Hindu Gods are all introduced in the epics like Mahabharata, but in essence it's the same thing. To say we believe in "The Force" is probably not that big of a stretch.:-)
As to Brahman, check it out on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman
sri
Move to Bing? Of course, it makes total sense. You know who else is named Bing? Bing Crosby! And we all know that Bing Crosby is a wholesome American with the right values. So of course, you would place your trust in Bing.
sri
Which of course makes no sense since they are in fact, muslims and are in fact in control. They probably mean that it'll end up like Iran which is currently getting revolutionized as well. Really he needs to rail against the Internet and twitter which made all this stuff possible. He's going after the wrong guy!
sri
So, they are just like Hindus then? We too have only one one God with multiple views. Brahman is one God who can present himself in a million faceted ways.
sri
Really? I'm always fucking getting pink floyd. Especially wehn the radio is called 'Rush'. I mean I like Pink Floyd, but I always get some 10 minute song on there and it drives me nuts.
They really have nothing to complain about since they are getting free money from the public for the assumption that things are being pirated by a small proportion of the population.
And if the population does stop pirating for whatever reason, will it be reasonable to stop collecting taxes on blank media?
What about paper? I mean I can pirate a poem or something right? What about printers? Do you have to pay a levy for that? What about photo paper? What about my mouth? I mean I can say copyrighted things and duplicate it? My voice can be used a duplication device, ya know?
sri
I have bought more games under Steam this past year than I have ever bought in the past 20 years. They make the games cheap enough that I'm willing to buy. Mostly I buy the older titles of a couple of years ago. I'm also exposed to indie games that normally I would not have bought. I think Steam is doing a great thing here.
Writing games is hard, and selling them as hard. That's why there is so much consolidation in the game publisher industry. Places like Steam that makes games affordable even for people who don't have a lot of money is a great thing. I mean really, you can afford 3-5 bucks for game can't you?
sri
During the Iraq war, the military was literally giving *suitcases* of money to Iraqi politicians. We apparently cannot afford education for our kids, but we are willing to give millions of dollars in cash in a suitcase to an Iraqi politican. Fuck what a sinkhole of money that war was. What did we get out of it? What? DId we get oil? IF this was a company the president would have been fired for wasting shareholder money.
sri
Actually, they'll just move their jobs somewhere else. Capitalism requires stability. If there is no stability then it is hard to make money isn't it? So they'll just pick up and move somewhere else.
We pay taxes and the taxes go towards moving towards a just society. If society is not just then we have instability.
sri
He tried. You aren't paying attention. Democratic congressman decided NOT to do it. So don't put this on Obama. Obama inherited a crappy pile of shit and a party who are scared of their own shadow.
cain
This. I've fallen into that trap a lot myself despite allegedly employing critical thinking. The problem is that if in addition of new evidence your opinion changes, you are mocked in this political climate.
We aren't talking about corporations. We're talking about wealthy individuals. Your CEO is not going to move to Idaho when his base of operations is currently in Washington. He might build a vacation home, but it's not likely he'll be away from the main hub of operations.
The CEO would still be liable for the income tax on all monies made in Washington State regardless of where he lives. If he moved to Idaho and commuted to Washington, he would still owe the income tax on the income earned in Washington. And yes, companies have moved their upper level management facilities to other states before because of tax benefits. This actually happened with Boeing (and I believe a subsidiary of ford motor company) in Washington a few years ago when they attempted to escape the B&O tax. Washington ended up taking them to court and winning because the B&O tax is on gross not net operations.
That's fine. It's a free country. If they want to bail out because they don't want to pay that's their choice. They can enjoy the good life. Moving their corporate headquarters doesn't mean much. Each executive is in charge of a section of the business. They can't work in a vacuum with each other. It's not very efficient to be away from their core business center. One might ask why workers don't move to Idaho?
Your second paragraph are usual conservative talking points about big government. Those are not convincing arguments for me. You need to think about how well government functions. A well functioning government is not proportional to how large it is.
So if you make it, you earn it and it's yours is a conservative talking point that you do not buy into? Interesting- Then who does it really belong to? I mean if you earned $100k last year, is it yours or someone else'? It's your time, your effort, should it be yours or someone else'? I can't believe the basics of freedom is a conservative talking point that you won't buy into.
That's where you're incorrect. In order for me to make that $100 million I need to have an infrastructure to do it. That means that I need to have roads, trains, safety, and whatever else. Government in this case enables me to make my 100K. That doesn't come for free.
I also understand that I have a role to play in civil society. With great wealth comes great responsibility. I'm acutely aware that I need contribute back. Sometimes that's higher taxes, sometimes that is charity whatever it is I have an obligation.
The premise that you need to be selfish is the bedrock of those of you who complain about high taxes. I used to think it was because of efficiency of private enterprise and I used to believe it. But I've toiled in a big corporation for some time and private enterprise is not some magic bullet. Worse, the value of executives is over valued.. even big mistakes are not punished.
And you seriously think that the government will take money from the rich and give it to you? When has that ever happened in the past unless you were "defined" as poor and they wanted your vote? This has nothing to do with a well functioning government, it's entirely about the concept stated of cutting your own throat if you don't go after the rich. It has nothing to do with liberal or conservative, it has to do with reality. We either have freedom in this country and one of the core concepts of freedom is to be able to own things you worked for, or we don't. I find it a tad bit troubling that you somehow think that if you earn it- it's not yours, and that we should penalize the most productive people in society for the sake of penalizing them. But what is really disturbing is that you somehow think the converse of that is a conservative talking point that doesn't deserve your time or attention. I mean Wow, Just Wow!
Slashdot Mirror
I call bullshit. I'm a sysadmin and I've used it for two months now and it's perfectly fine with systems administration. I don't think you've tried it at all and shooting from the hip. GNOME 3 and GNOME-do are a potent combination. I'm really fast and I use workspaces like candy which go away as soon as the last window is removed. I suggest you try it. Get the live cd and try it for a week. Put your money where your mouth is. sri
What you want is conformance to what you had before. We're asking you to try something different. Work with it for a week and see if the new way works for you. Try it in the way it was designed not in the way it was done before and what you were comfortable with. You need to evaluate how you use a computer. A lot of people get fixated on the desktop and the options and tweaking it whatever. But really, you want the desktop to fade away so you can focus on whatever productivity you're working on. We do have extensions that you can install. Try out the gnome tweak tool and see if it works. I know that Fedora 15 already has it.
Right there is no one true way. The desktop metaphor between GNOME and KDE is essentially the same. So diversification is a good thing. What happens is sites like slashdot really wants conformance not moving forward. We talk about innovation but only under strict confines of these tech users. We talk with both sides of our mouth of wanting "innovation" but really then get angry when innovation does occur because it means their work model has to change as well if they want to use. When you get people who complain that it looks like a smart phone or something else clearly are not consumers of smart phones or tablets. They rather sit with their linux laptops doing whatever. I'm willing to guess that younger audiences would appreciate a fresh new look that keeps up with our information laden times. sri
Then we have an extension system. The extension system can access just about everything. Window manager, overview, hell maybe even printers, and network. It's all in javascript and whatever api they expose, you can use. Remember this is a 1.0, that means that we have plenty of ways to do perfection and in the way our solutions to certain things are going to be more unique than other desktops. We're trying to design for today's world with social networking, online banking and whatever else that is out there. We design for that. The underlying libraries and what not are still pretty much the same. GNOME didn't throw all that out they improved the developer experience as well. We should be able to get better apps that integrate even more thoroughly with the desktop. Maybe you don't want that, but really in that case we solved everything back during fvwm2. You want launchers, a dock, and a file browser. We had all that back in fvwm2 days. The supersloshy had it exactly right. Nobody liked the car either, they were comfortable with the horse. If we didn't shake things up, we'd still be plowing fields with a horse and a plow. Look at it this way, we are demanding more things from the Linux ecosystem. 3D has to work now, if GNOME 3 gets momentum those drivers are going to get more attention. When we ask more of the eco system then the eco system moves forward. It's good for GNOME, it's good for Linux, and it's good for Free Software. sri sri
Oh brother. Do you know how much flammage GNOME took for 2.0 from slashdot? Everything that was said in this thread was repeated 9 years ago with even more vitriol. Most of the people responding haven't tried it or even intending to try it. They still remember 9 years ago and are rehashing and recycling the same damn emotions back then. I can tell when people haven't even given GNOME 3 a test drive when they only complain about minimize and maximize. Give it a week with an open mind and see how it works. That's what GNOME asks.
There are some live cd's from www.gnome3.org. See how it works for you. Have an open mind. I switched from GNOME 2 to GNOME 3 and after about a week I could not go back to GNOME 2 anymore.. Also you don't need to switch until you're ready. The GNOME 2 environment is still going to be there, and GNOME 3 is going to continue to evolve adding features. What is taken away can be done a different way. As for the minimize and maximize issue.. it is a bit of an experiment. Yes, you're right that there is no window list. But you'll see your window in the overview mode. There are some things problematic specifically privacy, but otherwise in this method is better than window list. You have absolutely no distraction on that main window. You can be completely focused on the task you're working on. To understand the design decisions regarding minimize and maximize here is a blog post by Allan Day. The problem with slashdot and other venues is that they talk about lack of innovation in FOSS, but when projects strike out in a different direction they suddenly want conformity to either an apple or windows methodology. They have irrational fear that the power user will be shunted off. In many ways, nobody wants the linux desktop to succeed merely because it will no longer be in a domain of technocrats. In any case, if you want to follow the old model there are plenty of other choices I agree. But keep in mind, there is a convergence that GNOME is taking advantage of. The way I interact with my phone is very similar to GNOME 3. How many more regular users will find themselves feeling quite comfortable in the GNOME 3 because of that familiarity? sri
But your firefox browser doesn't have any options which a lot of you claim you need. If the linux desktop is indeed dead dying to the browser then GNOME has nothing to lose by that logic, does it?
You can put the minimize and maximize buttons back if you want. Also if you right click on the title bar you will also be able to get minimize. Finally, as for using workspaces, what makes you think you will be forced to use it?
And that's exactly what is being done. You can change most things inside dconf/gconf. But designing the default GUI should be geared towards don't care which is about 90%. The default should be able to take care of 90% of what you're going to do with your desktop. Some of you people just like the comfort of being able to tweak everything. It is a hold over from the days of fvwm and twm where you had all these options. Most normal people don't interact with their user environment so intimately. They use it for tasks. The idea is to appeal to the other 75% of the planet who aren't geeks otherwise we cant' grow. So we need to change the game. sri
Well who is to say that Jesus's disciples weren't all avatars either? In general, Hindus will believe anybody who says that God came down and got down to business as merely another expression of God. Brahman is the universe. But if there is imbalance then an avatar will show up to right the imbalance. But really as an individual (see Vedanta) you want to be on a conscious level with Brahman. Hinduism doesn't really have rules. Basically what it says is that we have a tried method that we feel works, but we concede that there might be other ways to reach Brahman. So as a programmer, you have a default methodology but it doesn't exclude other methodologies. That's why it is easy for a Hindu to accept another religion simply as another method. So what you see in India is really Indian culture influencing itself on the religion. So Hinduism goes through periods of liberalism and conservatism based on what the population is feeling at the time. To continue with the lack of rules in Hinduism the other thing is that there is less dictating of "morals". Essentially, what Hindu philosophy says is that if you are in touch of Brahman, you don't need moral rules. Because if you've and understanding then it's unlikely that any rules required. People however do require some kind of default guide because Hinduism as a philosophy is somewhat cerebral and most simple folks just want a roadmap that they can integrate into their day. I love the philosophy but I hate the rituals. I enjoy the cerebral philosophy and it's fun to talk with like minded Jews. I haven't really had much with Christians so much, but Hindus and Jews have some similarities that is fun to discover. sri
Well, Hindu philosophy is actually quite interesting. The Hindu Gods are all introduced in the epics like Mahabharata, but in essence it's the same thing. To say we believe in "The Force" is probably not that big of a stretch. :-)
As to Brahman, check it out on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman
sri
Move to Bing? Of course, it makes total sense. You know who else is named Bing? Bing Crosby! And we all know that Bing Crosby is a wholesome American with the right values. So of course, you would place your trust in Bing. sri
Which of course makes no sense since they are in fact, muslims and are in fact in control. They probably mean that it'll end up like Iran which is currently getting revolutionized as well. Really he needs to rail against the Internet and twitter which made all this stuff possible. He's going after the wrong guy! sri
So, they are just like Hindus then? We too have only one one God with multiple views. Brahman is one God who can present himself in a million faceted ways. sri
Really? I'm always fucking getting pink floyd. Especially wehn the radio is called 'Rush'. I mean I like Pink Floyd, but I always get some 10 minute song on there and it drives me nuts.
Yep, does seem like that. Well, such as it is. Hopefully they'll figure it out and something about it.
They really have nothing to complain about since they are getting free money from the public for the assumption that things are being pirated by a small proportion of the population. And if the population does stop pirating for whatever reason, will it be reasonable to stop collecting taxes on blank media?
What about paper? I mean I can pirate a poem or something right? What about printers? Do you have to pay a levy for that? What about photo paper? What about my mouth? I mean I can say copyrighted things and duplicate it? My voice can be used a duplication device, ya know? sri
I have bought more games under Steam this past year than I have ever bought in the past 20 years. They make the games cheap enough that I'm willing to buy. Mostly I buy the older titles of a couple of years ago. I'm also exposed to indie games that normally I would not have bought. I think Steam is doing a great thing here. Writing games is hard, and selling them as hard. That's why there is so much consolidation in the game publisher industry. Places like Steam that makes games affordable even for people who don't have a lot of money is a great thing. I mean really, you can afford 3-5 bucks for game can't you? sri
During the Iraq war, the military was literally giving *suitcases* of money to Iraqi politicians. We apparently cannot afford education for our kids, but we are willing to give millions of dollars in cash in a suitcase to an Iraqi politican. Fuck what a sinkhole of money that war was. What did we get out of it? What? DId we get oil? IF this was a company the president would have been fired for wasting shareholder money. sri
Actually, they'll just move their jobs somewhere else. Capitalism requires stability. If there is no stability then it is hard to make money isn't it? So they'll just pick up and move somewhere else. We pay taxes and the taxes go towards moving towards a just society. If society is not just then we have instability. sri
He tried. You aren't paying attention. Democratic congressman decided NOT to do it. So don't put this on Obama. Obama inherited a crappy pile of shit and a party who are scared of their own shadow. cain
This. I've fallen into that trap a lot myself despite allegedly employing critical thinking. The problem is that if in addition of new evidence your opinion changes, you are mocked in this political climate.
Wow so many planets and possible life who do not know that Jesus died for our sins on the cross! sri
The CEO would still be liable for the income tax on all monies made in Washington State regardless of where he lives. If he moved to Idaho and commuted to Washington, he would still owe the income tax on the income earned in Washington. And yes, companies have moved their upper level management facilities to other states before because of tax benefits. This actually happened with Boeing (and I believe a subsidiary of ford motor company) in Washington a few years ago when they attempted to escape the B&O tax. Washington ended up taking them to court and winning because the B&O tax is on gross not net operations.
That's fine. It's a free country. If they want to bail out because they don't want to pay that's their choice. They can enjoy the good life. Moving their corporate headquarters doesn't mean much. Each executive is in charge of a section of the business. They can't work in a vacuum with each other. It's not very efficient to be away from their core business center. One might ask why workers don't move to Idaho?
So if you make it, you earn it and it's yours is a conservative talking point that you do not buy into? Interesting- Then who does it really belong to? I mean if you earned $100k last year, is it yours or someone else'? It's your time, your effort, should it be yours or someone else'? I can't believe the basics of freedom is a conservative talking point that you won't buy into.
That's where you're incorrect. In order for me to make that $100 million I need to have an infrastructure to do it. That means that I need to have roads, trains, safety, and whatever else. Government in this case enables me to make my 100K. That doesn't come for free.
I also understand that I have a role to play in civil society. With great wealth comes great responsibility. I'm acutely aware that I need contribute back. Sometimes that's higher taxes, sometimes that is charity whatever it is I have an obligation.
The premise that you need to be selfish is the bedrock of those of you who complain about high taxes. I used to think it was because of efficiency of private enterprise and I used to believe it. But I've toiled in a big corporation for some time and private enterprise is not some magic bullet. Worse, the value of executives is over valued.. even big mistakes are not punished.
You're making a lot of assu