supersloshy writes "Contrary to popular opinion, GNOME 3 will not be released in March next year. It has been delayed until September 2010, six months later. According to the news message, this is because 'our community wants GNOME 3.0 to be fully working for users and why we believe September is more appropriate.' GNOME 3's main goal is to re-define the ways people interact with the desktop, mainly through a new UI design (currently called 'GNOME Shell'), while GNOME 2.30, set for release in March, will have a focus on being stable. An early visual tour of GNOME 3 has been posted at Digitizor."
All GUI experiences I had always were some combination of stuff that's around since ages. Artistic freedom in CS is at its best when it is heavily curbed. Hell, saving your document in MS Word has become an art form. Even my Mac, which allegedly comes with the most wonderful GUI on the planet, drives me up the wall. All I want and all we need is Firefox, Eclipse, a terminal and Openoffice and plain and simple menus with it. Anything else just plain and simple. Brothers unite and let's get back to the roots. I say "No more rotating, sliding, enlarging, diminishing menus!" Saving a document is best done using a simple key sequence:w
Its hard to know when to stop. Windows has been done. This is evidenced by the two most recent versions which don't actually do anything more than XP. It may be the same with gnome. This happens all the time, and not just in software.
There is always FVWM for me. That will never change.
Can you please explain why? I wrote a plugin for Gnome-Do last summer and found the code refreshingly simple and easy to grok. I'm a hard core C/Perl/Java coder, and I really like some of the features of C#, such as the in-line properties for accessors/mutators. The dbus hooks into Mono are first-class citizens, and MUCH easier to use than their C counterparts. Apart from the "omg a Microsoft engineer designed it" knee-jerk reaction, what is the complaint with Mono?
Most Linux desktop environments have this. The default in Gnome is to use to pop up a run dialogue, that will autocomplete recently used apps. I configured the same thing in openbox, with lxpanel.
so windows 7 FINALLY implemented alt+f2 launcher from kde and gnome, but the huge improvement was that they made it appear instead of the start menu ?:) i've been using launcher for years now, and i completely agree that it is very convenient. but somehow i see this as windows following what was available on linux long time ago, except that they have brought commandline in front of the user as opposed to gui. very simple commandline, but still we get people complaining that "if you have to enter text into s
Gnome3 looks unusable anyways, delay it forever. Go through the early tour and tell me that is more usable. I've no idea wtf they were thinking.
Lose the ability to 1click to open aps. Clock takes a huge chunk of real estate. The aps button is needlessly large and boring text. Opening a common folder takes more time now. This is just my first look at it but still wtf...
Some of it's just a big mental jump, and I think I could get used to it, especially if some of the appearance and behaviour can be customised.
One thing grabbed me right away, though. The idea of slightly minimising the desktop while I'm working with the menu is interesting. But in the examples, look how every item in the menu is truncated. It's all "Home..." and "OpenO..." and "Docu..."
That alone would drive me crazy. If nothing fits in your menus, then your menus are badly designed. If there isn't a option to show just a list, instead of a grid of too-large icons with ellipses everywhere, it's definitely a no for me. Might seem trivial, but I'm going to be looking at that annoyance a LOT.
I respect that they're aiming for stability (quite different from what KDE did), but I'm not sure I like the direction their UI is going. I'll probably hop to KDE or LXDE.
KDE feels largely like a shadow of its former self at this point.
Back in the 3.x series, KDE was my favorite desktop environment. It was fast, intuitive, and entirely configurable. I preferred it gnome at that point. It just seemed better developed.
Then 4.0 was released. What a disaster. It had fewer features than the 3.x series, and was filled with significantly more bugs. Even things like the desktop were broken - all for the sake of a few cool-looking but generally not that important desktop widgets. The
I respect that they're aiming for stability (quite different from what KDE did), but I'm not sure I like the direction their UI is going. I'll probably hop to KDE or LXDE.
So it's finally happened. After months of "I hate where KDE is going with KDE 4, I'm switching to GNOME!", now it's GNOME that's making unpopular changes and people are saying "I hate where GNOME is going with GNOME 3, I'm switching to KDE!".
Maybe they're trying to innovate and do something new and different. I don't share your doubts but if I did, I would rather give them the benefit of any doubt then criticize before I had even tried the software. It seems to me that they're in a tough spot: do what UIs have been doing for a long time and get accused of copying rather than doing something new, or do something new and get bad word from people who reject the free software out of hand at their "first look".
Oh, for Pete's sake. That's unbelievably lame. If you lose single-click-to-open capability, then it's a huge step backward and a crock. Double click is an abomination. It BARELY had some feeble justification when there was only a single mouse button, but it's a complete crock in the real world of 2 or more buttons.
If it takes even longer to open a folder than current Gnome, that's just unacceptable. Compare navigating folders containing thousands of files using the Gnome file-open dialog now, against the Kde file-open dialog. It's night and day. The Kde version is faster when you first hit such a folder, and then it caches the contents and is blazing fast after that. Night and day.
Time to branch at 2.28 and maintain a sane alternative.
Yep. Gnome 3 is a mental disorder. It's what happens when you spend all your time dreaming about how to come up with a new UI paradigm when there is already a highly satisfactory, perfectly usable, and well accepted paradigm that has stood the test of time, and that no one is complaining about. It is new for the sake of new. Kde 4 was much the same thing, but at least they optimized their infrastructure and cleaned up some rough edges in the process (while hopelessly screwing up some basic stuff).
by Anonymous Coward
on Saturday November 14, @04:48AM (#30096104)
It is a major ongoing failure. The problem with relying on people that are motivated by their inspiration is that you tend not to get "normal." You have to pay people to work on "normal". Refining and polishing is not fun. Inventing your own bespoke miracle from whole cloth and taking it no more than 10% of the way to functional before you lose interest and wander off is infinitely more fun.
There are some amazing products among the Gnome and KDE collections. Amarok, kate, konsole, k3b, etc. Individually these are nice programs.
KDE 4 is and ongoing failure. I haven't bothered to get my hands on 4.3 yet because 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 killed all hope. They haven't had the 5 years it's going to take to fix what's wrong with 4.x. I'm sticking with 3.5.x until that interval has passed.
Gnome is still plagued by Nautilus [1]. Dolphin appears to have a point, although pursuing it at the expense of a real file manager is another fail. The vast collection of background services sucking down hundreds of MB of RAM doing who the hell knows what is also on-going and ever worsening problem.
Both systems pollute home directories with vast file hierarchies hidden in dot-file directories making a shared NFS home a practical impossibility. You'd think they were being paid by the dot-file. No one in either group seems to realize why this isn't desirable. It doesn't even occur to them that it might not be!
[1] Just boot XP and clone Windows Explorer, mkay...? A badly done clone of Explorer would trump anything Gnome/KDE has produced to date wrt file management. And remember kids, detail/list view is, if not pretty, absolutely fucking critical; alphabets replaced pictographs for a reason.
So true... both desktop environments are missing the point. You have misguided ego-hounds like Aaron Seigo chasing after some elusive new "desktop paradigm" which no one has asked for nor wants.
The formula for a popular successful desktop is so simple: something fully integrated with all options available via menus (program launching, suspend/hibernate, screensaver, etc), and something fast and stable. Very few everyday users care about some translucent twitter widget on the desktop. They want a platform to launch applications from that is simple, fast and stable. That should be priority number one.
80% percent of the tour looks like stuff in the current gnome. I mean we already have a NetworkManager and you already get a calendar when you click on the clock.
Virtual desktops get more recognition. The UI is more modal and Mac like. So what if their default configuration has just the one panel? Thats how I configure it anyway.
Yeah, lots of people will be in an uproar! There are millions of problems with Gnome 3! For starters, it won't be enough like KDE 3, so everyone will think it's broken when there's really no problems with it!
This isn't what I'm missing in Gnome. I'm missing desktop sharing and conferencing software like Livemeeting. I'm also missing some ease-of-use dealing with very simple things like cutting and pasting a link to a windows share and using it to look at a remote directory without having to edit all the slashes.
Instead, some *person* for want of a better word, thinks I need to have yet another new way to select the same applications, wants to "improve" (i.e. remove the choice from) the task list to be *more* application-centric (so retrograde it's laughable).. What a waste of time. What about an Object-Oriented or task-oriented desktop? How about some *actual* innovation? Being force-fed this kind of thing is pretty unpleasant;.
Being force-fed this kind of thing is pretty unpleasant
If the was Microsoft, and you didn't know better, then perhaps it's fair to say you are being "force fed" this change. However, this is OSS, and nobody is forcing you to use Gnome Shell. You have options: stick with Gnome 2.x, use XFCE, KDE or any of the other window managers available. Just stop whinging about how you don't like it.
I'm also missing some ease-of-use dealing with very simple things like cutting and pasting a link to a windows share and using it to look at a remote directory without having to edit all the slashes.
If gnome (and linux in general) wants to escape the geek-in-a-basement marketshare, it has to focus on the average non-tech user. And no, pasting a link to a windows share is not what this user does.
Instead, this user is interested in finding "that god-damn file" that he saved somewhere yesterday morning and has no idea where it is. He doesn't organize his files, he doesn't care about file hierarchies, he just wants his file. He also wants to easily find that openoffice window that got lost in the 20 windows he opened and never closed in the last hour. Believe it or not, no desktop environment makes it really easy to do such basic stuff.
IMHO Gnome Shell and Zeitgeist [gnome.org] is a step in the right direction for the average user.
I'm yet to be convinced that that is the correct approach. Users should learn to save their god-damned files somewhere sensible so they can actually find them again, and close windows when they're done with them. This isn't a technical user, this is a user with a clue, for goodness sakes. If you're so dumb you can't learn the concepts behind these tasks, I really do wonder whether you are suited to the operation of a Turing machine.
He doesn't organize his files, he doesn't care about file hierarchies, he just wants his file.
Gawd, the hell. I want a system that forces the user to organize his stuff. I'm sick of seeing desktops so cluttered with icons that there's no room for anything else. I wouldn't mind shoving that Ubuntu Netbook Remix interface down their throats. I mean, I make my desktop a mess too, but I clean up my shit eventually. Tons of people (like my sis) simply DON'T, EVER. EVERYTHING GOES ON THE DESKTOP. That's ridiculo
...but from an Ubuntu scheduling perspective this sounds like good news. The last thing Ubuntu needs for its next LTS release (10.04) is a big new jump to GNOME 3. It'll be nice to have an LTS that will let less bleeding-edge users wait until GNOME 3 has a year and a half of polish, integration, and (most importantly) actual user feedback to upgrade, while still retaining full support
Plus, it'll be just plain interesting to see how Mark Shuttleworth reacts to this frankly rather iffy-looking overhaul. (Oh well, so much for not commenting about it.) Although let's be nice - the screenshots in the link seem to be design mockups, while in the actual screencasts they seem to have solved the billions-of-elipses problem.
My first reaction when I saw this news was that it was delayed specifically for the Ubuntu LTS release. Probably just a coincidence though, but everybody likes a good conspiracy theory.
Lack of taskbar makes it unusable..
Ubuntu remix way is so much better than this.. so gnome people.. please stop working on useless stuff like gnome 3.
I was considering giving some money to the foundation but when i see where they're heading to.. no thanks.
It looks like the task bar is missing. It looks like you have to click more to get where you want to go. It looks shiny. If I wanted all that I'd go to windows. Maybe I will. Windows 7 isn't bad at all. Hopefully when 3.0 IS released it will be customizable to get it back to where it was!
Imagine you were looking to buy a new car. Going to a dealership, you are presented with a sedan that is marketed as "redefining the way drivers interact with their automobile." Getting behind the wheel, you discover that standard conventions like the steering wheel, turn indicator, gear shift, accelerator and brake pedals have all been replaced with New and Improved devices that the salesman assures you are so much Better.
Would you buy the damned thing?
I'm sick and tired of coders who pretend they are cognitive psychologists or ergonomics experts.
Just implement a standard GUI using normal conventions. Anything more and people like me will either find ways to turn the bullshit off, or we'll avoid using your product.
Microsoft is about to learn this the hard way with their new bullshit replacement for the task bar.
Not only that, but this supposedly "fucking with the interface" doesn't actually happen. In KDE4, you still close windows by single-clicking the small [x] up in the right corner of the window, you still open apps by clicking icons in a menu, you can still put files on your desktop. Yet, you have masses of assclown know-it-alls like the GP who will complain that everything is ruined, because, oh -- they never really say, they just whine, whine, whine.
The idea of designing a new approach to the desktop is commendable and shows one of the advantages of open source. If people doesn't like it they can switch to other alternatives.
The idea of making it work well is also a positive innovation on some well established practices of both the FOSS and proprietary camps.
However there are for sure some strange things in this Gnome Shell.
The absence of the task bar will puzzle a lot of people used to it since Windows 95 (but I had no problems working without it on X Terminals before then) so removing it is a very bold and risky decision.
I cannot understand why the clock is so important to be in the middle of the top bar. Considering how many times one needs to know the time and how many times one needs to do something else, hiding it into a corner looks just right. Maybe there is a need to fill the top bar after having removed all the open application icons/names from it. It surely has to look bare and empty.
I also don't understand why is so important to show the name of the current application. Another way to fill all that empty space in the bar? But it if is so empty maybe the right thing to do is to remove it and leave only an Activities button to the left and the icons and clock to the right. That leaves more useful space for the applications and vertical space is always precious.
Some people will really get sick when the screen moves so much every time they open the menu. This interface may be not for everybody.
The Plus button to add new desktops uses up so much space (it takes a whole bottom bar with it) that it hints that a lot of people actually use multiple desktops. I do, but are they really so popular?
On the positive side, the large Activities menu could be very useful on the forthcoming generation of touchscreen computers because it provides a larger target for fingers than the menu items we have now. It reminds me a lot of the interfaces used by some Linux distributions for netbooks it is seems good. Maybe it's not so handy for computers that only have a mouse (too much travel).
Finally I hope that the top bar can be moved to the bottom because I just hate top bars. They are placed right where my eyes look by default but they are the less important piece of information on the screen. Apple made it totally wrong IMHO and MS improved their design, maybe the only time they did it.
So, I'll be using Gnome Shell in its present form? Maybe I'll give a try but I bet I'll soon switch to something else, back to Gnome 2 if I can. Other desktops I so for Linux look to much like Windows, something that cannot be good considering all the years I had to use it and never liked the way it worked.
I'm seeing this kind of "MMO style" user interface more and more, where the desktop becomes more and more obscured by locked down immovable user interface elements. I've gotten used to the task bar on Windows and the Menu Bar on the Mac and the Panel, I can deal with that, there's one box and it's pretty small and I can stuff everything into it... but Microsoft keeps turning menus into big obtrusive blocks (ribbons and sidebars and the start panel and so on) and this new Gnome scheme seems to be putting this horrid scheme on steroids.
My experience with *inexperienced* users always shows one thing that no Desktop GUI seems to have addressed/solved yet: the User who does not care whether the program they want is already running or not, they just want to use it. At the moment you look to see in one area if, say, you have a web browser already running and if not then you start one. This is one step too many. The User should just have one button to press per app and then the GUI decides whether to simple bring an existing app window to the front, or start the app for the first time. (Some programs play well with multiple startups, others do not.)
I have many problems with gnome as well, but several of the things you mentioned are available now.
But the menus do need to be more configurable. I am annoyed that everything has to be so damn big.
And they could use to get single clicking right, which only KDE ever pulled of effectively.
Yeah, yeah. Windows control 99.99% of germs, I mean desktop computers.
I've been freed from Windows for about 4 years now, and there is no way in hell i am going back. I barely tolerate it on my netbook (hardware driver issues), and I install linux on all of my other machines now for these reasons: 1. I spend 95% of my non-work computing time in Firefox. 2. I spend 95% of my work computing time in Firefox and Eclipse. 3. The other 8%, there are linux software for those. 4. I use Virtualbox for the 2% of the time I _need_ Windows.
In return for not using Windows, I gain: 1. I don't worry about firewalls, or anti-virus software. 2. Complete incremental backup of computer to network drive, usb drive, whatever. 3. nfs, and sshfs. They really are awesome. Windows/mac users don't even know what they are missing.
And most importantly: 4. New OS every few months, FREE. FOREVER..
Nobody except the millions of people like me who use Gnome. The current version is near-perfect and the new one seems to have lost all the good points and added nothing. OK, all the desktops on screen at once could be useful once in a while, but WTF! If it ain't broke (and it ain't), don't "fix" it.
Getting more serious.. Why do you even question that there are millions of users. Ubuntu alone has stated counting 7-8 million regular users of the repositories, and it's default desktop is Gnome. And as Gnome is one of the big two, if not the most common desktop supplied with a distro, tens of millions is not difficult to justify as a probable user count. And even if you take the most pessimistic figures guessed at by the various web trackers, desktop Linux's 1% is 1% of a billion computer users. Do the math.
Except that it isn't. According the GnomeShell [gnome.org] page on Gnome Live, "Much of the code of the shell is written in Javascript and Clutter and GNOME platform libraries via GObject Introspection and JavaScript bindings for GNOME."
GObject Introspection is actually quite cool IMO, it makes it much easier to create bindings from dynamic languages libraries that use GObject, like the GNOME platform, GStreamer, etc.
...this is because...and why... (Score:5, Funny)
beGrammarNazi $POST
done
I couldn't resist.
Reply to This
How can xterm be improved? (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
Re:How can xterm be improved? (Score:4, Insightful)
Its hard to know when to stop. Windows has been done. This is evidenced by the two most recent versions which don't actually do anything more than XP. It may be the same with gnome. This happens all the time, and not just in software.
There is always FVWM for me. That will never change.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
2.) USE="-alsa -cups -dbus -gstreamer -kde -gnome -mono -opengl" emerge xfce4-meta firefox terminal openoffice eclipse-sdk
I am aware that xfce4-meta contains unneccessary cruft but you should be able to deal with it.
Re:How can xterm be improved? (Score:5, Interesting)
You're looking for Yakuake [kde-apps.org]. It's just like Quake: hit the tilde and a command console drops down from the top.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:How can xterm be improved? (Score:5, Informative)
You're looking for Katapult. And you know what - that was probably the first (or one of the first) apps of such kind.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How can xterm be improved? (Score:5, Informative)
The "Docky" frontend is a fantastic dock experience as well.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:How can xterm be improved? (Score:4, Informative)
Can you please explain why? I wrote a plugin for Gnome-Do last summer and found the code refreshingly simple and easy to grok. I'm a hard core C/Perl/Java coder, and I really like some of the features of C#, such as the in-line properties for accessors/mutators. The dbus hooks into Mono are first-class citizens, and MUCH easier to use than their C counterparts. Apart from the "omg a Microsoft engineer designed it" knee-jerk reaction, what is the complaint with Mono?
Reply to This
Parent
Re:How can xterm be improved? (Score:4, Informative)
Linux needs this
Most Linux desktop environments have this. The default in Gnome is to use to pop up a run dialogue, that will autocomplete recently used apps. I configured the same thing in openbox, with lxpanel.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
so windows 7 FINALLY implemented alt+f2 launcher from kde and gnome, but the huge improvement was that they made it appear instead of the start menu ? :)
i've been using launcher for years now, and i completely agree that it is very convenient. but somehow i see this as windows following what was available on linux long time ago, except that they have brought commandline in front of the user as opposed to gui. very simple commandline, but still we get people complaining that "if you have to enter text into s
WTH (Score:5, Insightful)
Lose the ability to 1click to open aps. Clock takes a huge chunk of real estate. The aps button is needlessly large and boring text. Opening a common folder takes more time now. This is just my first look at it but still wtf...
Reply to This
Re:WTH (Score:4, Insightful)
Some of it's just a big mental jump, and I think I could get used to it, especially if some of the appearance and behaviour can be customised.
One thing grabbed me right away, though. The idea of slightly minimising the desktop while I'm working with the menu is interesting. But in the examples, look how every item in the menu is truncated. It's all "Home..." and "OpenO..." and "Docu..."
That alone would drive me crazy. If nothing fits in your menus, then your menus are badly designed. If there isn't a option to show just a list, instead of a grid of too-large icons with ellipses everywhere, it's definitely a no for me. Might seem trivial, but I'm going to be looking at that annoyance a LOT.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:WTH (Score:5, Insightful)
I respect that they're aiming for stability (quite different from what KDE did), but I'm not sure I like the direction their UI is going. I'll probably hop to KDE or LXDE.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
KDE feels largely like a shadow of its former self at this point.
Back in the 3.x series, KDE was my favorite desktop environment. It was fast, intuitive, and entirely configurable. I preferred it gnome at that point. It just seemed better developed.
Then 4.0 was released. What a disaster. It had fewer features than the 3.x series, and was filled with significantly more bugs. Even things like the desktop were broken - all for the sake of a few cool-looking but generally not that important desktop widgets. The
Re:WTH (Score:5, Funny)
I respect that they're aiming for stability (quite different from what KDE did), but I'm not sure I like the direction their UI is going. I'll probably hop to KDE or LXDE.
So it's finally happened. After months of "I hate where KDE is going with KDE 4, I'm switching to GNOME!", now it's GNOME that's making unpopular changes and people are saying "I hate where GNOME is going with GNOME 3, I'm switching to KDE!".
Reply to This
Parent
Damned if they do, damned if they don't, eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they're trying to innovate and do something new and different. I don't share your doubts but if I did, I would rather give them the benefit of any doubt then criticize before I had even tried the software. It seems to me that they're in a tough spot: do what UIs have been doing for a long time and get accused of copying rather than doing something new, or do something new and get bad word from people who reject the free software out of hand at their "first look".
Reply to This
Parent
Re:WTH (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, for Pete's sake. That's unbelievably lame. If you lose single-click-to-open capability, then it's a huge step backward and a crock. Double click is an abomination. It BARELY had some feeble justification when there was only a single mouse button, but it's a complete crock in the real world of 2 or more buttons.
If it takes even longer to open a folder than current Gnome, that's just unacceptable. Compare navigating folders containing thousands of files using the Gnome file-open dialog now, against the Kde file-open dialog. It's night and day. The Kde version is faster when you first hit such a folder, and then it caches the contents and is blazing fast after that. Night and day.
Time to branch at 2.28 and maintain a sane alternative.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yep. Gnome 3 is a mental disorder. It's what happens when you spend all your time dreaming about how to come up with a new UI paradigm when there is already a highly satisfactory, perfectly usable, and well accepted paradigm that has stood the test of time, and that no one is complaining about. It is new for the sake of new. Kde 4 was much the same thing, but at least they optimized their infrastructure and cleaned up some rough edges in the process (while hopelessly screwing up some basic stuff).
Despai
GNOME Shell == Clusterfuck (Score:5, Insightful)
Do we laugh or cry? It's like KDE and Gnome are in some sort of frantic struggle for who can botch desktop Linux the most.
I hope some commercial company like Google puts grownups to work like they did with Android on some replacement for these two basketcase projects.
Reply to This
Re:GNOME Shell == Clusterfuck (Score:5, Insightful)
It is a major ongoing failure. The problem with relying on people that are motivated by their inspiration is that you tend not to get "normal." You have to pay people to work on "normal". Refining and polishing is not fun. Inventing your own bespoke miracle from whole cloth and taking it no more than 10% of the way to functional before you lose interest and wander off is infinitely more fun.
There are some amazing products among the Gnome and KDE collections. Amarok, kate, konsole, k3b, etc. Individually these are nice programs.
KDE 4 is and ongoing failure. I haven't bothered to get my hands on 4.3 yet because 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 killed all hope. They haven't had the 5 years it's going to take to fix what's wrong with 4.x. I'm sticking with 3.5.x until that interval has passed.
Gnome is still plagued by Nautilus [1]. Dolphin appears to have a point, although pursuing it at the expense of a real file manager is another fail. The vast collection of background services sucking down hundreds of MB of RAM doing who the hell knows what is also on-going and ever worsening problem.
Both systems pollute home directories with vast file hierarchies hidden in dot-file directories making a shared NFS home a practical impossibility. You'd think they were being paid by the dot-file. No one in either group seems to realize why this isn't desirable. It doesn't even occur to them that it might not be!
[1] Just boot XP and clone Windows Explorer, mkay...? A badly done clone of Explorer would trump anything Gnome/KDE has produced to date wrt file management. And remember kids, detail/list view is, if not pretty, absolutely fucking critical; alphabets replaced pictographs for a reason.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:GNOME Shell == Clusterfuck (Score:5, Insightful)
The formula for a popular successful desktop is so simple: something fully integrated with all options available via menus (program launching, suspend/hibernate, screensaver, etc), and something fast and stable. Very few everyday users care about some translucent twitter widget on the desktop. They want a platform to launch applications from that is simple, fast and stable. That should be priority number one.
Reply to This
Parent
New Gnome? (Score:4, Informative)
80% percent of the tour looks like stuff in the current gnome. I mean we already have a NetworkManager and you already get a calendar when you click on the clock.
Virtual desktops get more recognition. The UI is more modal and Mac like. So what if their default configuration has just the one panel? Thats how I configure it anyway.
Reply to This
Problems on the horizon for Gnome 3! (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, lots of people will be in an uproar! There are millions of problems with Gnome 3! For starters, it won't be enough like KDE 3, so everyone will think it's broken when there's really no problems with it!
Reply to This
Glad it's delayed. It's rubbish. (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't what I'm missing in Gnome. I'm missing desktop sharing and conferencing software like Livemeeting. I'm also missing some ease-of-use dealing with very simple things like cutting and pasting a link to a windows share and using it to look at a remote directory without having to edit all the slashes.
Instead, some *person* for want of a better word, thinks I need to have yet another new way to select the same applications, wants to "improve" (i.e. remove the choice from) the task list to be *more* application-centric (so retrograde it's laughable).. What a waste of time. What about an Object-Oriented or task-oriented desktop? How about some *actual* innovation? Being force-fed this kind of thing is pretty unpleasant;.
Reply to This
Re:Glad it's delayed. It's rubbish. (Score:5, Insightful)
Being force-fed this kind of thing is pretty unpleasant
If the was Microsoft, and you didn't know better, then perhaps it's fair to say you are being "force fed" this change. However, this is OSS, and nobody is forcing you to use Gnome Shell. You have options: stick with Gnome 2.x, use XFCE, KDE or any of the other window managers available. Just stop whinging about how you don't like it.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Glad it's delayed. It's rubbish. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this a preview if they don't want people to say what they think?
You really aren't going to help F/OSS by calling people whingers - it's a kind of whinging in itself.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Glad it's delayed. It's rubbish. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm also missing some ease-of-use dealing with very simple things like cutting and pasting a link to a windows share and using it to look at a remote directory without having to edit all the slashes.
If gnome (and linux in general) wants to escape the geek-in-a-basement marketshare, it has to focus on the average non-tech user. And no, pasting a link to a windows share is not what this user does.
Instead, this user is interested in finding "that god-damn file" that he saved somewhere yesterday morning and has no idea where it is. He doesn't organize his files, he doesn't care about file hierarchies, he just wants his file. He also wants to easily find that openoffice window that got lost in the 20 windows he opened and never closed in the last hour. Believe it or not, no desktop environment makes it really easy to do such basic stuff.
IMHO Gnome Shell and Zeitgeist [gnome.org] is a step in the right direction for the average user.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Glad it's delayed. It's rubbish. (Score:5, Insightful)
Make a system any idiot can use and only idiots will use it.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Glad it's delayed. It's rubbish. (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Gawd, the hell. I want a system that forces the user to organize his stuff. I'm sick of seeing desktops so cluttered with icons that there's no room for anything else. I wouldn't mind shoving that Ubuntu Netbook Remix interface down their throats. I mean, I make my desktop a mess too, but I clean up my shit eventually. Tons of people (like my sis) simply DON'T, EVER. EVERYTHING GOES ON THE DESKTOP. That's ridiculo
Re:Go Fuck Yourself (Score:4, Funny)
Thanks for your deep insights, I am now convinced that the Gnome people should listen to anonymous trolls like you to make their decisions.
Reply to This
Parent
Not going to comment about the actual product... (Score:3, Interesting)
...but from an Ubuntu scheduling perspective this sounds like good news. The last thing Ubuntu needs for its next LTS release (10.04) is a big new jump to GNOME 3. It'll be nice to have an LTS that will let less bleeding-edge users wait until GNOME 3 has a year and a half of polish, integration, and (most importantly) actual user feedback to upgrade, while still retaining full support
Plus, it'll be just plain interesting to see how Mark Shuttleworth reacts to this frankly rather iffy-looking overhaul. (Oh well, so much for not commenting about it.) Although let's be nice - the screenshots in the link seem to be design mockups, while in the actual screencasts they seem to have solved the billions-of-elipses problem.
Reply to This
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
just kill gnome 3, please (Score:3, Insightful)
Reply to This
Please fix the window manager (Score:4, Interesting)
Reply to This
It ain't broke so they fixed it... (Score:3, Insightful)
It looks like the task bar is missing. It looks like you have to click more to get where you want to go. It looks shiny. If I wanted all that I'd go to windows. Maybe I will. Windows 7 isn't bad at all. Hopefully when 3.0 IS released it will be customizable to get it back to where it was!
Reply to This
Stop fucking with the interface (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine you were looking to buy a new car. Going to a dealership, you are presented with a sedan that is marketed as "redefining the way drivers interact with their automobile." Getting behind the wheel, you discover that standard conventions like the steering wheel, turn indicator, gear shift, accelerator and brake pedals have all been replaced with New and Improved devices that the salesman assures you are so much Better.
Would you buy the damned thing?
I'm sick and tired of coders who pretend they are cognitive psychologists or ergonomics experts.
Just implement a standard GUI using normal conventions. Anything more and people like me will either find ways to turn the bullshit off, or we'll avoid using your product.
Microsoft is about to learn this the hard way with their new bullshit replacement for the task bar.
Reply to This
Re:Stop fucking with the interface (Score:4, Insightful)
Not only that, but this supposedly "fucking with the interface" doesn't actually happen. In KDE4, you still close windows by single-clicking the small [x] up in the right corner of the window, you still open apps by clicking icons in a menu, you can still put files on your desktop. Yet, you have masses of assclown know-it-alls like the GP who will complain that everything is ruined, because, oh -- they never really say, they just whine, whine, whine.
Reply to This
Parent
Commendable, but (Score:3, Insightful)
The idea of designing a new approach to the desktop is commendable and shows one of the advantages of open source. If people doesn't like it they can switch to other alternatives. The idea of making it work well is also a positive innovation on some well established practices of both the FOSS and proprietary camps.
However there are for sure some strange things in this Gnome Shell.
On the positive side, the large Activities menu could be very useful on the forthcoming generation of touchscreen computers because it provides a larger target for fingers than the menu items we have now. It reminds me a lot of the interfaces used by some Linux distributions for netbooks it is seems good. Maybe it's not so handy for computers that only have a mouse (too much travel).
Finally I hope that the top bar can be moved to the bottom because I just hate top bars. They are placed right where my eyes look by default but they are the less important piece of information on the screen. Apple made it totally wrong IMHO and MS improved their design, maybe the only time they did it.
So, I'll be using Gnome Shell in its present form? Maybe I'll give a try but I bet I'll soon switch to something else, back to Gnome 2 if I can. Other desktops I so for Linux look to much like Windows, something that cannot be good considering all the years I had to use it and never liked the way it worked.
Reply to This
NO JOHN RINGO NO. (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm seeing this kind of "MMO style" user interface more and more, where the desktop becomes more and more obscured by locked down immovable user interface elements. I've gotten used to the task bar on Windows and the Menu Bar on the Mac and the Panel, I can deal with that, there's one box and it's pretty small and I can stuff everything into it... but Microsoft keeps turning menus into big obtrusive blocks (ribbons and sidebars and the start panel and so on) and this new Gnome scheme seems to be putting this horrid scheme on steroids.
No, no, no, ten thousand times, no.
Reply to This
Does not fix the real problem (Score:4, Insightful)
My experience with *inexperienced* users always shows one thing that no Desktop GUI seems to have addressed/solved yet: the User who does not care whether the program they want is already running or not, they just want to use it. At the moment you look to see in one area if, say, you have a web browser already running and if not then you start one. This is one step too many. The User should just have one button to press per app and then the GUI decides whether to simple bring an existing app window to the front, or start the app for the first time. (Some programs play well with multiple startups, others do not.)
Reply to This
Re:taking the time to get it right (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm glad that we can make such broad sweeping generalizations these days, that Microsoft now represents the entire private sector.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who needs GNOME when Windows is affordable (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah, yeah. Windows control 99.99% of germs, I mean desktop computers.
I've been freed from Windows for about 4 years now, and there is no way in hell i am going back. I barely tolerate it on my netbook (hardware driver issues), and I install linux on all of my other machines now for these reasons:
1. I spend 95% of my non-work computing time in Firefox.
2. I spend 95% of my work computing time in Firefox and Eclipse.
3. The other 8%, there are linux software for those.
4. I use Virtualbox for the 2% of the time I _need_ Windows.
In return for not using Windows, I gain:
1. I don't worry about firewalls, or anti-virus software.
2. Complete incremental backup of computer to network drive, usb drive, whatever.
3. nfs, and sshfs. They really are awesome. Windows/mac users don't even know what they are missing.
And most importantly:
4. New OS every few months, FREE. FOREVER..
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Who needs GNOME when Windows is affordable (Score:4, Insightful)
You are aware that OS X natively supports NFS and MacFUSE works exactly like Linux FUSE?
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Leave well alone! (Score:5, Insightful)
nobody cares.
Nobody except the millions of people like me who use Gnome. The current version is near-perfect and the new one seems to have lost all the good points and added nothing. OK, all the desktops on screen at once could be useful once in a while, but WTF! If it ain't broke (and it ain't), don't "fix" it.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Leave well alone! (Score:4, Insightful)
millions? really?
do you have a source?
It's Linux, Of course we do..
Getting more serious.. Why do you even question that there are millions of users. Ubuntu alone has stated counting 7-8 million regular users of the repositories, and it's default desktop is Gnome. And as Gnome is one of the big two, if not the most common desktop supplied with a distro, tens of millions is not difficult to justify as a probable user count. And even if you take the most pessimistic figures guessed at by the various web trackers, desktop Linux's 1% is 1% of a billion computer users. Do the math.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Except that it isn't. According the GnomeShell [gnome.org] page on Gnome Live, "Much of the code of the shell is written in Javascript and Clutter and GNOME platform libraries via GObject Introspection and JavaScript bindings for GNOME."
GObject Introspection is actually quite cool IMO, it makes it much easier to create bindings from dynamic languages libraries that use GObject, like the GNOME platform, GStreamer, etc.