Linux Mint Will Adopt Gnome 3 315
sfcrazy points to news, posted in the current blog post about Linux mint statistics, that the Linux Mint team "has thus decided that in the next version of Linux Mint 12, they will continue to support Gnome 2, but will also introduce Gnome 3." Related news from an anonymous reader:"Contributors in the GNOME community have started a GNOME desktop user survey. The GNOME Foundation wouldn't endorse any survey, but the community has put together a 23-question desktop survey. Regardless if you use GNOME, they encourage all Linux users to participate."
GNOME Survey (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"GNOME works great! Please take away more options so I have even fewer buttons to worry about!"
Unfortunately by only asking feedback from self-selected users, they'll only get feedback that reinforces what they've already decided.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately by only asking feedback from self-selected users, they'll only get feedback that reinforces what they've already decided.
That's why more people that aren't necessarily happy with GNOME need to take the survey. I've used GNOME since the 1.0 days, but GNOME3 was enough to make me install XFCE4 -- and I'm considering dropping the whole Desktop Environment thing altogether and going back to fvwm (or something similar)
Maybe I'm just old, but I think the current direction of development has lost sight of the reason XWindows was created in the first place. The client and server shouldn't have to be on the same host. The User shou
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:GNOME Survey (Score:4, Insightful)
I was of the exact opinion as you until a day ago. Since I upgraded to to Ubuntu 11.10 I got stuck with GNOME3 (sorry, I still hate Unity) and I had a variety of issues - but many I found could be resolved in very interesting ways. Lack of a lower task-bar for example, you can use tint2 or a dock like Avant Window Manager - and the bar that comes out when you hit the bottom right of the screen already has plug-ins and modifications to make it work like a taskbar. Multi-monitor behavior bugged me as well until I learned you can change it, but I actually got hooked on the default behavior. In general my hands leave the keyboard much less now as well - alt-tab switching with that drop down selector is very intuitive and the search/launch is much nicer and more idiot proof than alt-f2 or continually opening terminals. Then today I was giving a demo to some prospective customers (dirty mac users!) and they pointed out how nice they thought it was.
I really really understand the feeling of loss and confusion over GNOME3 vs 2, I do miss my old desktop - but with just a few customization options (that look like they will come in future releases) I think I'll stick it out and enjoy the new.
By the way, rough calculation we've been using GNOME now for something like 12 years. Really up until now the biggest change was moving to the upper and lower bar by default (which I love(d)), that and ditching the stone texture on the icons...
Re: (Score:2)
Until you use it on a laptop and discover there is no Gnome3 tool to control the synaptics touchpad and it drives you insane....
Re:GNOME Survey (Score:4, Interesting)
In general my hands leave the keyboard much less now as well - alt-tab switching with that drop down selector is very intuitive and the search/launch is much nicer and more idiot proof than alt-f2 or continually opening terminals.
The irony of all of this is back in the day, many linux folks who were users of Fluxbox, Openbox, Blackbox, Afterstep, E16, etc said that they were more productive with their desktops because of all of their custom short-cut keys. Users of KDE and Gnome scoffed at this and said that icons, menus and mice were the way to go. 10 years later and the users of Unity and the Gnome 3 Shell tell us how productive their environments are. Both of these environments are optimized for "touch" and small display size. With larger screen monitors they fall far short of the "mouse friendliness" that Gnome 2 possesses. How do they make up for this? By boosting their productivity with shortcut keys.
Yes, that would be the very same type of shortcut keys we were told were not needed and users would not adapt to using. Welcome back to 1999 computing 2011 style. A keyboard driven interface that needs 2 gigs of ram and an i5 processor with a 256mb nvidia graphcis card.
Of course as I say that I go back to work on my Fluxbox driven workstation. Using the same short-cut keys I defined 10 years ago and continue to take with me by moving my .keys file to every new computer I get. Maybe they will discover dock apps next.
Re: (Score:3)
Would you use it on a boat? Would you use it with a goat? Would you use it in a box? Would you use it with a fox?
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. GNOME3 is horrible. I'm not a regular GNOME user, but just yesterday I happened to need a Linux system quick for some maintenance and the only thing handy was an Ubuntu 11 live CD. I hate to admit it, but I had to google to figure out how to get a terminal. As far as I could tell, there is no menu of applications, just a search interface...? What the hell happened to discoverability?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're just supposed to know what you want, and type it into the search bar. The era of looking through a menu to see all your options is apparently over.
Luckily, KDE still hasn't changed from the traditional desktop UI. People who want a menu, or configurability, should look into it. Make sure to look at a distro that uses 4.6 or better yet, 4.7; don't bother with the latest Debian "stable" that for still uses an ancient KDE 4.4 that's full of bugs.
Re: (Score:2)
Well I hope you're wrong; that sounds to me like all the worst features of the command line and the GUI simultaneously (And I'm a die-hard CLI jockey).
Uh, yes.
Whenever people complain about how crappy the Unity/Gnome 3 graphical interface is, the fanboy answer is 'yes, but you can just type the name of the application to run it', without even realising how retarded that sounds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a perfectly targeted Potential New User and I'm trying to weave my way through the Linux maze, but I'm getting a little lost.
Last I had figured out, I'm Ex-Ubuntu after various updates stopped working on my older hardware. OpenSuse was okay, but I was thinking I wanted the Debian Packager and the improvements in Squeeze, but Debian "Raw" is too hard for newbies, so indications were leaning towards Mint-DebianEdition. I've used (and disliked!) both Gnome3 and KDE4, so I think that means I'm leaning towar
+1 (Score:3, Insightful)
+1
right click disappeared. But PCs are not macs, and HAVE a f*** second button !!!
no menu mean no way to find an application unless you remember the name !!
Gnome 3 is bullshit
Unity is worse
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm just old, but I think the current direction of development has lost sight of the reason XWindows was created in the first place. The client and server shouldn't have to be on the same host. The User should be able to customize their own environment in whatever way makes it easier for them to work.
"Client-server" approach for a desktop UI looks like an old attempt to solve problems that never became common. I would prefer to have direct (except for kernel-level abstraction) hardware access, memory efficiency and low sound latency instead. Network transparency can be added on top of that (see Windows & Mac OS X) for those who need it.
Xubuntu FTW! (Score:2)
Same here. I recently switched over to Xubuntu and couldn't be happier. I'm curious to see their download statistics. From what I've read on other Linux forums, quite a few are defecting from Gnome and the God-forsaken Unity.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm just old, but I think the current direction of development has lost sight of the reason XWindows was created in the first place.
XWindows won't be long for the world either and good riddance to it when it happens.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because any other project might actually be interested in why people DON'T use it, so that they can find out what the biggest mistakes are.
But since it's GNOME they all have they head stuck up the "We do it the right way, anyone not agreeing with our way must be wrong" place, which again shows in the survey.
Re:GNOME Survey (Score:4, Interesting)
I really hope the input from the phoronix survey gets forwarded to the GNOME devs. Especially the comment field. I am also excited to see the results as a whole. How many are really still holding onto their 2.x installs like myself? Using GNOME for about 10 years now and am looking for a decent replacement for 2.32 (or until gentoo gets rid of 2.x)
I don't want to put all the GNOME devs in one basket but after what they pulled with the 3 release , I refuse to use it. It just appears they they keep getting more and more out of touch. After reading things like this [slashdot.org]and for laughs this one [slashdot.org] too.
Re: (Score:2)
A preview [phoronix.com] of the types of comments being received was just posted, with predictable results so far (i.e. an onslaught of anger and hate directed towards the GNOME devs)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly right. I'd like to see more distros work harder on integrating KDE, as it's the only full-featured DE left that still uses the traditional desktop UI. Basically, if you want a full-featured DE these days, your options are KDE, or Windows 7 of all things. Plus, unlike Gnome which shuns configurability because it's "too confusing", KDE has it in spades. 10+ years ago, Linux software was all about being configurable and modifiable to your heart's content, but now it's basically a cheap copy of Appl
Re: (Score:2)
> I feel like I'm living in a weird parallel universe.
That is a inevitable consequence of Linux growing and becoming commercially interesting and "mainstream". Now the hackers do not have a say more in how their product is going to work and look like, this is now the sole decision of the Mac using "design team". The devs now just implement a specification and thats it. They maybe dont even use the abomination themselves, they maybe hate it es much as their users, but they simply dont pull the strings any
Re: (Score:2)
Now the hackers do not have a say more in how their product is going to work and look like, this is now the sole decision of the Mac using "design team". The devs now just implement a specification and thats it. They maybe dont even use the abomination themselves, they maybe hate it es much as their users, but they simply dont pull the strings any more.
The problem is, this just doesn't make much sense, at least in the case of Gnome. In the case of Unity, it sounds perfectly plausible, as Unity is an Ubuntu
Re:GNOME Survey (Score:4, Insightful)
Gnome 3 is as much the stupidification of the Linux desktop as Metro is to Win8. It always happens when you let the developers make decisions rather than letting consumers have the choice.
What they need is gnome 3 with the gnome 2 interface.
Re:GNOME Survey (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Microsoft is much smarter than the Gnome devs: they know that a lot of users would be severely pissed off if they were stuck with the crappy Metro interface, especially corporate users who typically shun change. But, they also don't want to look too stodgy compared to Apple, since all the 20-something Facebook users seem to love locked-down appliance-like computers that have very little configurability or versatility, so MS's answer was simple: give the users both options.
Gnome's approach is to t
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Win8 is that even in the classic desktop mode, Start button is no longer there (well it is, but it activates Metro instead). Having actually used it for a few days, it sure breaks a lot of my muscle memory.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? I haven't used it, but if the Start button isn't there any more, how do you bring up a menu to see all the programs you have installed, go to the Control Center, and all that stuff?
Re: (Score:2)
The menu is gone, plain and simple.
Clicking "Start" or pressing Win gets you to Metro home screen. That has icons for programs that you have installed, pinned as tiles (basically, when before something added icons to Start menu, it's now adding tiles to Metro home).
If you start typing while in the home screen, it'll start searching. This is basically the same as Start menu search in Vista/7 (and there the search field is also what has focus initially when you bring up Start menu) but with a new Metro-style
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, that sounds absolutely terrible.
Re: (Score:3)
It's also wrong. The menu hasn't gone.
Press the windows button (or mouse-move to the top-left-corner)
You then get to choose from "windows" (running apps) or if you want, click on the word "Applications" and you get the FULL menu with categories to the right. You can either browse the full menu or click on a category and browse that sub-menu of applications.
It's something new and original and much easier to work in principle and not based on windows 95 either.
I think it's great.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to use SuSE too, but it was never that great. It's an RPM-based distro, and as such I always had problems with dependencies, updates were slow as hell, installing software was a PITA (I frequently had to compile my own from downloaded sources), etc. Kubuntu was a welcome change from all that; any time I want to install some obscure program, I just type "sudo apt-get install program" and it's done. I never had that on SuSE. I've heard they're better about this these days (I switched in the early 1
Mint- How many slashdotters out here use it? (Score:2, Interesting)
I understand Mint has a rather loyal (and loud) user base. I gave it a try, but wasn't very impressed. My experience was pretty much a buggier, less supported version of ubuntu. Mint seems to be tailored for a very specific environment and group of users, and falls apart quickly if you go off the rails just a little.
I would not be surprised if it's popularity picks up, however, because there are lot of users that don't like unity. I don't like unity either, but I like a lot of the other subtle-yet-important
Re: (Score:2)
What's the reason to not use Debian?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Using Debian remnds you of all the little papercuts that Ubuntu takes care of.
Also, setting up any sort of wifi on Debian feels like having a little RMS on your shoulder lecturing you. Complete with smell.
That said, once Debian is set up it stays set up. Ubuntu (specifically parts of GNOME) is flaky as hell in 11.04.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When was that actually true? In 1998? As long as you know about Debian's Free policy and take care to install the firmware packages you need (which is easy), it's far easier than Ubuntu for the simple fact that it's much easier to avoid PulseAudio.
Re: (Score:2)
Which works fine, as long as you're happy with the decisions that Canonical makes, it's a bit like Apple actually, it works fine as long as you don't want to do something that the creator of the software doesn't intend for you to to at which point it becomes a major hassle. At least with Ubuntu, you can ultimately install the packages or remove them.
Re: (Score:2)
Using Debian remnds you of all the little papercuts that Ubuntu takes care of.
Using Ubuntu reminds you of all the doors they plastered over.
Also, setting up any sort of wifi on Debian feels like having a little RMS on your shoulder lecturing you
Have you tried wicd?
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried wicd?
I have, about a year ago. Round about the last time it was updated. It used to be fairly decent, but now it no longer even compiles.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, last usable Ubuntu was 10.04.. It's a rerun of 2002 when redhat was king and overnight screwed linux desktop adoption in one fell swoop. Ubuntu is doing the same, all the inroads and advances are being thrown away to stroke someone's ego.
Re: (Score:2)
Usable or usable out of the box?
I am on 11.04 now, and debating allowing the upgrade to run...and only because I know I can ditch unity easily enough still. Aside from Unity what makes it so "unusable"? I use it both on my laptop for work, and desktop at home as the primary OS (desktop has steam also, which I can't get to work under Wine so I have windows for that...and pretty much only that).
I can't say as I remember the redhat thing since I didn't use it at all in the 2002 period, as I had last tried redh
Re: (Score:2)
It tends to be old. Debian was the first Linux that I liked, I was a user since the Hamm came out. Until Ubuntu 5 or so, when I jumped ship on the desktop...but.... on servers.... I still run Debian.
Why?
Well.... Last I ran debian on the desktop, I compared it to Ubuntu and it was several years old. It was taking Debian folks upwards of 4 years between releases, and I was finding myself in the conundrum of really wanting newer tools, but not wanting to build them myself, go "off the reserveration" and then h
Re:Mint- How many slashdotters out here use it? (Score:5, Insightful)
I use Mint KDE because GNOME is
I like Mint. It's easy to install and I can do what I want to the desktop. As long as there is a KDE version of Mint I'll keep using it. If there isn't, I'll go looking for another distro where KDE is used (it won't be Kubuntu).
I used to be a GNOME user back in my RedHat/Gentoo days, along With E.16. E.17 is teh seksi, but I haven't tried it yet.
Re: (Score:3)
I use GNOME 3 (with not much suffering to share), and I don't have any Mono-based applications. In fact, I just checked and it appears I don't even have the Mono runtime installed.
That disease is gone, if it ever was in GNOME itself. The language of choice is now Vala.
Desktops (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I have to admit Unity looks pretty good. Reminds me of RiscOS in the way you can drag files onto the task bar, items on the task bar actually do something (eg showing how many emails unread), and you can right-click and get context-sensitive actions. Under KDE the items on the task bar are as useless as under Microsoft Windows.
Phillip.
Re:Desktops (Score:4, Funny)
Reminds me of RiscOS
Is that the one where you attack Kamchatka from Irkutsk to get a directory listing?
Re: (Score:2)
After getting rid of the silly menubar-at-the-top thing (one of the biggest misfeatures of Mac OS that makes it so hard to use) and putting the window buttons back where they're supposed to be, I found Unity to be quite good.
Gnome 3 is unusable unless you've got a keyboard with a Windows key (so that's my IBM Model M out, then), and it has seemingly been deliberately designed to be impossible for left-handed people to use effectively. If I'm doing graphics work, I don't want to have to keep taking my hand
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Unity is that even if they do get it to work properly, they managed to chase off people by introducing an obviously alpha menu bar that doesn't scale well to large displays, with the threat of dropping the alternatives with a future release.
They probably will/have gotten it to work properly, but at this point it's pretty hard to justify using a distro that can't even be arsed to allow logins with a wireless keyboard.
Re: (Score:2)
The Answer to Ubuntu/Unity and Mint/Gnome 3 (Score:4, Informative)
Is Arch Linux [archlinux.org]. After using Ubuntu for a long time they have really forced me to leave with their decision to force a Fisher Price desktop on me.
Re: (Score:3)
Because the default desktop environment is what the distribution will tend to fine tune/focus on. I have installed other desktop environments on Ubuntu only to find annoying issues that were probably overlooked because the focus was not on that environment.
Re: (Score:2)
This is an important point and I'm glad to see someone making it.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume you are taking about things like poor integration of the NetworkManager in KDE - and you're correct. If the same thing start to happen where they have a good Unity version and a crummy GNOME version of things it's back to Debian for me.
Re:The Answer to Ubuntu/Unity and Mint/Gnome 3 (Score:4, Insightful)
A distro will pick its official desktop and all the programs will be better integrated with that particular desktop. The only real negative that I experienced is some distro (eg. Ubuntu) do a poor job with their packaging of alternative desktops and lead to runtime errors that aren't being experienced by folks who use a distro that supports it better.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you want to run any 3D programs, like Tux Racer, then Arch is out if it doesn't support non-kernel drivers as you say, because you need an Nvidia proprietary driver to get 3D support. Nouveau is still way, way behind.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what GP meant by "non-kernel drivers", but Arch has a package [archlinux.org] for NVidia binary drivers, same as most other distros.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for pointing that out. "del diablo"'s comment implied that Arch doesn't support such things.
Re: (Score:2)
I like Arch because they don't mess with most of the software. The KDE or GNOME you get from Arch is really as its developers want it to be. Ubuntu and many other distros, on the other hand, have all sorts of specific modification that don't always work, and tend to break when there are changes upstream in the same area.
Also, you get important fixes and improvements very fast, sometimes even the same day they are released. With Ubuntu, you are about a year behind most of the time.
Decouple GUI from OS (Score:4, Interesting)
Why does every distro but Debian have this weird hangup where the GUI cannot be decoupled from the OS?
Or rephrased, why does Debian apparently find it easy to do, whereas the big corporate OSes just can't handle it?
(I use Debian w/ xfce and on a netbook with a dead mouse pad, ratpoison)
Does anyone expect this trend to accelerate, perhaps the next Ubuntu will only ship with emacs and if you want to edit with vi, well then you'll just have to install Arch which will only have vi and no emacs? Maybe this game will become popular with languages and if you want Python you'll only be able to select from certain distros?
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea where you get the idea from that these distros have a hang-up about GUI and OS not being decoupled - you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
Ubuntu/Lubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu only differ in the choice of GUI. And if you don't care for Unity, Gnome 3 is trivially installed. (Which, I presume, is how Mint (an Ubuntu derivative) is doing it in the first place). If you favour an esoteric GUI, that is easily installed too; this is still a debian derivative!
So you really seem to be complainin
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu offers a fixed set of choices, none of them satisfactory for me. It is not that hard in Ubuntu, or Mint, to do things your own way, but it is definitely easier to do that in pure Debian. Trying to use for example fvwm2 and slim in OpenSUSE is total exercise in frustration, I tried that for about a year, and ended up running screaming back to Debian. You are correct saying that it is possible to use any wm and dm in most current desktop distros, but the GP is definitely correct stating that it is
Re: (Score:3)
I have no idea where you get the idea from that these distros have a hang-up about GUI and OS not being decoupled - you clearly don't know what you're talking about...Ubuntu/Lubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu only differ in the choice of GUI.
I'm not sure that make your point very well. The Ubuntu derivatives use the same packaging system and repositories, but differ a lot in their selection of default software, not just the desktop. Ubuntu could very easily make the choice of desktop an option in the installer, but deliberately doesn't - that would mess with the 'corporate indentity' it's trying to create, which has now become synoymous with Unity. Of course there's nothing to stop an experienced user installing, say, Xfce afterwards, which is
Re: (Score:2)
It's simple, man power. The sheer number of dependancies that Gnome and KDE require alone is mind blowing. Someone has to package all those things up. It's not one big Gnome package, it's a package for gtk, gnome libs, pango, pkg-config, gstreamer, gdm3, ...
Debian is lucky enough to have a lot of people working on packages. Most projects don't have that kind of support. Some of them are very small and only have a few guys helping out.
As someone working on a BSD project with a similar issue, I can tell
Re: (Score:2)
Because commercial distros are expected to ship with a pretty GUI to appease the marketroids. They have to pick one to go with by default, and that one gets elevated among the rest.
Distros like debian, arch, slackware, etc, which don't install a GUI by default make it much easier to choose your own desktop, but it's more work up front to get to a pretty GUI.
There's nothing stopping you from installing ratpoison on Ubuntu or what have you. Just get rid of [x|k|g]dm, and put ratpoison in your ~/.xinitrc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why does every distro but Debian have this weird hangup where the GUI cannot be decoupled from the OS?
Or rephrased, why does Debian apparently find it easy to do, whereas the big corporate OSes just can't handle it?
(I use Debian w/ xfce and on a netbook with a dead mouse pad, ratpoison)
Does anyone expect this trend to accelerate, perhaps the next Ubuntu will only ship with emacs and if you want to edit with vi, well then you'll just have to install Arch which will only have vi and no emacs? Maybe this game will become popular with languages and if you want Python you'll only be able to select from certain distros?
The code is open, so go ahead and install whatever you want. You don't have to restrict yourself to what your distribution ships.
Re: (Score:3)
Because many distros have different goals than Debian.
Consider one of the more extreme examples of a Unix coupled with an UI: Mac OS X. In that instance, the UI is practically defined as part of the OS. If you're a techie or otherwise take a reductionist view, you know that's not really how things are (there are various different components, such as the Darwin kernel), yet conflating all the components
Re: (Score:2)
HUH?
Slackware dies this perfectly. as well as CentOS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Canonical benefits from RedHat paying kernel developers, and RedHat can benefit if they adopt anything that Canonical writes. To some extent it all goes around.
My observation is that desktop environment designers are VERY picky. They're focused on vertical integration and everything is my-way-or-the-highway. It is getting to the point that you won't be able to run a particular DE unless you also run a particular SysVInit implementation, or X11 implementation.
To me this is breaking away from the unix way,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I nearly barfed when I typed "crontab -e" on a new CentOS 6 server we just moved to and nano was the editor. I didn't notice at first (I wasn't looking at the bottom), until I realized that my vi commands weren't working. It's not that nano is bad, it was more of a "Since when?!" thing for me. It's actually harder for me to use a so called "easy" editor like nano, when a traditional vi based editor is second nature. I realize I could change that variable, but now I'm done setting up my cron jobs.
I compile a
Re: (Score:2)
I hope it is better than unity (Score:2)
Thanks, Mint (Score:2)
Oh noes! They changed Facebook...er Gnome! (Score:3)
You'd think it'd be different around here, but it's not.
I can't speak to how well Gnome 3 works on typical large-screen multi-monitor setup, but my home laptop with a 14" screen, it works exactly the way I've always wished Gnome would. It's well put together, well designed and while there aren't a lot of native config tools for it yet (3.2 aside--haven't tried it), I'm sure that's all in the works (and if it's not, people/distros will create them).
the idea of Mint's polish on top of Gnome 3 sounds just about perfect to me--exactly the desktop I'd like to use.
Re:Oh noes! They changed Facebook...er Gnome! (Score:5, Insightful)
The hatred for all things new in the FLOSS community never ceases to surprise me.
We don't hate it because it's new, we hate it because it's crap.
Re: (Score:3)
The hatred for all things new in the FLOSS community never ceases to surprise me. When they change Facebook, all my nontech friends all winge for days about it.
You'd think it'd be different around here, but it's not.
There's a reason for that. Change for change's sake is a very bad thing. If it's not broken, don't fix it.
There's nothing wrong with a different desktop type. If you like a gnome 3 style interface, more power to you. It shouldn't have been an update to gnome, though. It should have been launched with a brand new name as a competitor to gnome. After all, think about it: the reason all those people were using gnome 2 was because they liked that interface. Now you removed what they liked.
Basically, upd
I can't be the only one can I? (Score:5, Interesting)
Am I the only developer using a very large desktop area? I must be because both Mac, Windows, Unity and Gnome 3.0 SUCK DONKEYBALLS when all you need from your desktop is a very large space to put windows on. KDE is the worsed. MS tried the Active Desktop thing before and it only makes sense for people that see the desktop. I don't, there are windows in front of it on which I am doing my work. I HATE files on the desktop because I first need remove windows to access it. At most I use it because it is an easy place to find in most file managers.
As an experienced users, focus follows mouse is also a must. I very often switch input between windows/apps and that means every click to focus I don't have to do saves a lot of time and agro. It is so bad that on windows I routinely have input go to wrong window simply because I am so used to not having to click a window or WORSE part of a window to have THAT part of my screen receive input.Why should I ever want to move the mouse away from a window and still have the input go to that window?
The OSX unified menu is not just a killer of focus follows mouse (the menu would change as your mouse passes other windows on the way to menu) on a large desktop it means the menu can be a long way away from the window. This would matter less if you didn't need to first click the window to give it focus and then go back to the menu to use the menu... I do notice that most hardcore mac users are users of special packages that have an insane amount of short cuts on their input devices. But us mere mortals have to deal with apps that are far less optimized.
Unity loves to put the menu on the far left... so if your main monitor happens to be on the right... happy mouse travelling!
Gnome 3.0... actually, I am not sure what the hell it is trying to do. Crash a lot? Make years of development of utilities a waste as nothing works anymore? Create a desktop with absolutely ZERO options for configuration?
I know what the flaw is with the recent KDE, Gnome 3.0 and Unity developments. The linux year of the desktop never happened (despite the fact that it has been years my employers even had to consider whether to allow me to use Linux as my development desktop) and they saw how iOS and even Android suddenly got people to use non-MS Windows... and they think that this audience will make them the millions they been dreaming off in secret.
Hell, even MS is doing with Windows 8. Surely it is the standard desktop that is the block to selling more? It even makes some sense. The more supposedly "noob" friendly the app, the more it deviates from the old windows (and I mean here the style slowly evolved from the xerox design, not MS specific). Check your latest brand name computer and its crapware. Wanna bet the config utitlities and virus software looks "slick" with non-standard buttons and such?
Do "users" really like it? I don't. But I am a developer so I don't matter.
So, when asked once again to rescue a windows machine for people who are perfectly good friends but not the brightest people in the world, I installed Ubuntu instead once Flash updates had made certain that it was good enough for people who only use the web, play music, download and chat.
Surely these people, a few who have a below average IQ (this is not me being elitist, one of them has been tested as being around 85 ) would never be able to work with Linux?
Well, they did and not only did they manage but do you remember the nerd rage when Ubuntu switched the window buttons? None of them even cared, most hadn't even noticed. All I really had to do to instruct them was how to accept updates.
Yes, that was silly because when Unity hit, that was the end of the experiment. Unity was NOT understandable and Gnome 3.0 was no better. It was a disaster far worse then ANY MS update EVER. It broke about a dozen installs and I had no easy way to recover. And while these people had no problem switching from Windows to Ubuntu they NEED their Facebook and so i just reinstalled windows and r
Re:Ha ha haa... Linux. (Score:5, Informative)
Don't you mean the remaining 75 million? Linux growth continues. There's been no decline in users adopting it, only solid increases. 75-100 million users is a significant market. Stop being a troll and get back into your mom's basement (or rather back under your bridge).
Re: (Score:2)
You must be very ill informed. There are between 75 and 100 million people using Linux world-wide. Go back to your bridge troll.
Re: (Score:3)
No I'm not counting Android. Android has 550,000 activations a day. In one year that's roughly 200 million. Ubuntu alone has around 25 million users, not including servers. Redhat has nearly that amount if not more. Again, he's a troll. Kick him back to Mordor.
Re:Ha ha haa... Linux. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would one want to demotivate people who work on an "indie" OS? Would he/she also bash amateur music bands for making "indie" music and not working for a major record label? What kind of person are such people?
Re: (Score:3)
Why would one want to demotivate people who work on an "indie" OS? Would he/she also bash amateur music bands for making "indie" music and not working for a major record label? What kind of person are such people?
You must be new on the Internet.
Re: (Score:3)
Most of it stems from people's prejudices. When they should be fighing against criminal activities by government and corporations they fall back into the weaker area of their lives and attack anything different. Some of it stems from their desire to not learn something new. They spent years learning simple things over and over, that to learn something that requires a modicum of thought horrifies them. Some make a living off what they learned, and they just don't want to go back and relearn, they are t
bash? or dash? (Score:3)
better to "bash" linux that to "dash" linux or "sh" linux, or worse: "ash" linux
Re: (Score:2)
The underpants gnomes stare at you in disgust.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It does not. We're talking about Lawn Gnome 3, here.
Re: (Score:2)
I did as well. Focus follows mouse is a must, neither Gnome3 nor unity allow for that. This means Gnome3 and Unity are broken.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
More like the year of xfce.