I learned to love that menu. At first I was really annoyed with how much work I had to do to set up the system the way I liked it but I had just come from Ubuntu where everything is done for you. It was a real eye opener to see how much customization is possible in Linux. I think that using CrunchBang really changed what I expected from a distro and more than anything, it helped me learn the system as a new user and gave me quite a bit more confidence.
It's not like their trajectory is set in stone. Canonical may respond to the criticisms from users and begin to move in a new direction. Plus, Ubuntu is a fantastic base to build on cf Linux Mint, and I still think Ubuntu is the best way to introduce new users to Linux. I think it is nearsighted to proclaim the beginning of the end.
It's not exactly a "new moon." It's just that nobody knew it was there before. I saw another headline that said "Neptune has a new moon" but I'm sure it's been there for billions of years. I'm just sayin'...
This issue is moot. Cinnamon, MATE and XFCE all offer the ability to regain your old functionality and work-flow . Maybe there are needs I don't understand, but all three of these alternatives have worked really well for me, particularly XFCE.
I made the switch to Xubuntu too when Unity came out. It's not that I think Unity is terrible or anything, but it's not what I'm looking for. To be honest, I'll probably just stick with Xubuntu because, in my opinion, Gnome 3 is not very far removed from Unity and suffers from the same set of problems re: multitasking.
Maybe I'm being stupid, but my four Linux desktops seems to say that Linux is alive and well on the desktop. They all have OSs that were released within the last six months. They are consistently updated, and I can do everything I need to on them. Also, in my house anyways, OSX could never kill my desktops because it will only go on that overpriced, white plastic garbage plastered with Apple branding. Honest question: have I missed the point of this article?
I couldn't agree more. I'm studying education and there is a pretty sizable push for teachers to adopt technology in the classroom seemingly for its own sake. I'm not in favor of this. If the teacher (or professor) has to figure out some way of integrating the technology, then it is alredy pointless.
That is a good way of phrasing the question: what does it do? There is a huge push in teacher education of integrating more technology into classroom instruction for its own sake. It is my opinion that if the teacher has to find a way to integrate the technology, then it's already pointless.
of use and understanding of classroom technologies among my professors. Some are very skeptical and perhaps a little afraid of using the management software (we use CTools which is open source and pretty awesome). The biggest difference in adoption that I notice is between colleges. The professors in the school of education use way more technology and with much more confidence than my liberal arts professors.
I use XFCE myself, and largely because I'm not a fan of Gnome 3 because it's not easy to multitask, but I think for many many users (my wife, my parents, most of my friends), Gnome 3 is what they are looking for. It has a nice, easy to use launcher, it gives most of the screen to what you are using, and it looks sleek and modern. I think it could probably go a long way to bring GNU/Linux to a greater market share. That is reason for optimism, at least for the less ridiculous users.
So much time is spent arguing about global warming that we seem to have totally abandoned the non-global-warming-causing pollution issue. Global warming is certainly disastrous, but turning all the water on earth to a poisonous garbage dumb seems more imminently dangerous.
The people who actually need to be scrutinized are the cabinet members. Since the candidate probably know less about science than I do, a debate between them would just be sad and ideological. Instead, there should be some public debate regarding potential cabinet members and at least some democratic accountability for them.
Slashdot Mirror
I learned to love that menu. At first I was really annoyed with how much work I had to do to set up the system the way I liked it but I had just come from Ubuntu where everything is done for you. It was a real eye opener to see how much customization is possible in Linux. I think that using CrunchBang really changed what I expected from a distro and more than anything, it helped me learn the system as a new user and gave me quite a bit more confidence.
It's not like their trajectory is set in stone. Canonical may respond to the criticisms from users and begin to move in a new direction. Plus, Ubuntu is a fantastic base to build on cf Linux Mint, and I still think Ubuntu is the best way to introduce new users to Linux. I think it is nearsighted to proclaim the beginning of the end.
It's not exactly a "new moon." It's just that nobody knew it was there before. I saw another headline that said "Neptune has a new moon" but I'm sure it's been there for billions of years. I'm just sayin'...
This issue is moot. Cinnamon, MATE and XFCE all offer the ability to regain your old functionality and work-flow . Maybe there are needs I don't understand, but all three of these alternatives have worked really well for me, particularly XFCE.
Hear, hear.
That's absolutely right. I played both rugby and football. Nobody wants to go head-on without a helmet. Problem solved.
She owes about $24.
I made the switch to Xubuntu too when Unity came out. It's not that I think Unity is terrible or anything, but it's not what I'm looking for. To be honest, I'll probably just stick with Xubuntu because, in my opinion, Gnome 3 is not very far removed from Unity and suffers from the same set of problems re: multitasking.
Maybe I'm being stupid, but my four Linux desktops seems to say that Linux is alive and well on the desktop. They all have OSs that were released within the last six months. They are consistently updated, and I can do everything I need to on them. Also, in my house anyways, OSX could never kill my desktops because it will only go on that overpriced, white plastic garbage plastered with Apple branding. Honest question: have I missed the point of this article?
I couldn't agree more. I'm studying education and there is a pretty sizable push for teachers to adopt technology in the classroom seemingly for its own sake. I'm not in favor of this. If the teacher (or professor) has to figure out some way of integrating the technology, then it is alredy pointless.
That is a good way of phrasing the question: what does it do? There is a huge push in teacher education of integrating more technology into classroom instruction for its own sake. It is my opinion that if the teacher has to find a way to integrate the technology, then it's already pointless.
of use and understanding of classroom technologies among my professors. Some are very skeptical and perhaps a little afraid of using the management software (we use CTools which is open source and pretty awesome). The biggest difference in adoption that I notice is between colleges. The professors in the school of education use way more technology and with much more confidence than my liberal arts professors.
I use XFCE myself, and largely because I'm not a fan of Gnome 3 because it's not easy to multitask, but I think for many many users (my wife, my parents, most of my friends), Gnome 3 is what they are looking for. It has a nice, easy to use launcher, it gives most of the screen to what you are using, and it looks sleek and modern. I think it could probably go a long way to bring GNU/Linux to a greater market share. That is reason for optimism, at least for the less ridiculous users.
So much time is spent arguing about global warming that we seem to have totally abandoned the non-global-warming-causing pollution issue. Global warming is certainly disastrous, but turning all the water on earth to a poisonous garbage dumb seems more imminently dangerous.
The people who actually need to be scrutinized are the cabinet members. Since the candidate probably know less about science than I do, a debate between them would just be sad and ideological. Instead, there should be some public debate regarding potential cabinet members and at least some democratic accountability for them.