Gnome Foundation: Stop the Madness!!!
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| kennethh Dec 21, 2011 8:23 PM EDT |
There is no end to this mess! But, there seems to be a lot of promising projects looking to take the place of gnome2. It will be interesting to see desktop usage polls in the coming years. I had thought mate would be the big player but with razor-qt making the buzz and now cinammon. One can only wonder at this point, but I think it's safe to say that lxde & xfce just were not cutting it for most or these projects might get a bit more fanfare other then being mentioned as an alternative versus the replacements mentioned above. Of course there is always time for the Gnome Foundation to revert & apologize :P |
| cr Dec 21, 2011 9:30 PM EDT |
Quoting: Of course there is always time for the Gnome Foundation to revert & apologize :P I'm afraid they can't do that, Dave... |
| DrGeoffrey Dec 21, 2011 9:39 PM EDT |
One man's manure is another man's fertilizer. |
| gus3 Dec 21, 2011 11:54 PM EDT |
Call it what you want, but that doesn't change the stench. |
| caitlyn Dec 22, 2011 12:16 AM EDT |
OK, I disagree with just about everything in the original post. First, there are a bunch of people who are writing very positive things about GNOME3. This has clearly divided the community but I'm not exactly sure why. There are lots of desktop alternatives. If you don't like where GNOME is going then choose another one. Second, I'm not at all sanguine that any of these forks will survive or do anything exciting or meaningful with the GNOME2 desktop, just as I think Trinity is a dead end for people who are stuck on KDE3. It seems to me that projects like MGSE (Mint GNOME Shell Extensions) which restore the GNOME2 functionality to GNOME3 are a better way to go. Yes, I know it would be better and perhaps more efficient to have the code internal to GNOME, but that clearly isn't going to happen. Xfce and LXDE aren't cutting it? Give me a break! There are lots of users of both desktops who are perfectly satisfied with them and aren't about to give up on them. I've used Xfce as my desktop of choice for something like six or seven years. It just keeps getting better. Why should the GNOME foundation apologize for anything? Do you pay their bills? Do they work for you? No desktop project is going to satisfy anyone. The fact is that the GNOME developers owe you absolutely nothing. If you don't like where they are going then use something else. Demanding an apology is ridiculous. |
| r_a_trip Dec 22, 2011 5:45 AM EDT |
First, there are a bunch of people who are writing very positive things about GNOME3. This has clearly divided the community but I'm not exactly sure why. There are lots of desktop alternatives. If you don't like where GNOME is going then choose another one. I don't care about positive things written about Gnome Shell. In it's pure form it is a moronic environment. It's either too much mousing or, if you are so inclined, learning a set of new keyboard shortcuts and program names by heart to type in. I thought the raison d'etre of a GUI was efficient point and click. As a point and click interface it is a regression in comparison to Gnome 2, as a CLI it can't hold a candle to the terminal. Why the Gnome community is split? I don't know. Blame the people who accept any old brainfart from the Gnome "designers". Let me throw in a bad car analogy. When I pre-order a car, I expect to get a car that is equiped with fairly common characteristics. If the manufacturing company suddenly decides they "need to follow future trends" and they ship a Quad to me, I won't be happy. From Gnome 2 we are thrown into a completely different (and not for the better) desktop product. Yeah, I know, I didn't pay for Gnome, so I should be eternally grateful for any bones that project throws my way. KDE, LXDE, XFCE, etc. are all very fine environments, but they are not Gnome 2. People happy with the Gnome 2 experience are now without their comfortable environment. We trusted the Gnome team to come up with an improvement on Gnome 2, not Gnome 3 Shell. If MATE, Cinnamon or MGSE survive... Too early to tell. I sure do hope that the way forward with Gnome 3 is not solely Gnome Shell (or Unity). Disclaimer: The above is my own opinion. Just in case that wasn't clear. |
| rahulsundaram Dec 22, 2011 5:57 AM EDT |
"I don't care about positive things written about Gnome Shell. In it's pure form it is a moronic environment" I dont think you can ignore the positive things. It clearly shows some people like it. If you don't, just pick a different option. There are plenty of choices after all. No point in trash talking. |
| cabreh Dec 22, 2011 6:44 AM EDT |
"There are plenty of choices after all. No point in trash talking" People who (somehow) like Gnome 3 keep saying this. Well guess what? I've tried the others and they just don't work for me. The Gnome 2 interface was what worked closest to the way I do. Now they've changed it. Fortunately in my quest to get away from Unity I tried Pinguy OS and got used to the docky interface they use. Now I'm trying their (forever?) beta version using Gnome 3 with a LOT of extensions. It's almost as good as their Gnome 2 version. This is probably where I'll end up. But it at least isolates me from the mess that is Gnome Shell. Just too much clicky-clicking to get things done. |
| r_a_trip Dec 22, 2011 7:08 AM EDT |
No point in trash talking. I'm not going to silence myself, just so the people who bend over backwards to find Gnome 3 Shell the best thing since sliced bread, can have a cheering party undisturbed. My opinion is worth as much or as little as any opinion of any other bald monkey on this planet. Shell is a mouse and/or short-cut intensive environment with a lot of view switching. It simply does take more steps to do the same things in comparison to the Gnome 2 desktop environment. I like a lot of what is in Gnome 3. It's just that I think Shell should be taken behind the shed and shot (over and over again). |
| r_a_trip Dec 22, 2011 8:42 AM EDT |
No point in trash talking. As an aside, trash talking is insulting the opposing team with hyperbole and put-downs. Guess what, I'm a Gnome user. So there is no opposing team and instead of labeling my discontentment as trash talking, maybe it would be an idea to see why I'm so negative. By now it must be clear that it isn't solely shell shock (no pun intended) over the new desktop in itself. There still is a lot of negative commentary and we are well under way to the third iteration of Gnome Shell. There is a fork of Gnome 2 and there is now even a fork of Gnome Shell in the works. Maybe this isn't just a case of "Haters gonna hate." It seems like Gnome had an oversight in a particular group of users, with a certain kind of workflow. Either they try to accomodate them or not. But if not, please tell us to FOAD. Then we know we definitely need to look elsewhere. |
| GERGE Dec 22, 2011 1:15 PM EDT |
I never liked Gnome 2, only managed to use it for a week or two. I used my own Openbox setup for years, then spend some months using KDE after 4.2 release. It was very good but too much bloated for my Openbox-tweaked mind. Then came Gnome 3. It made me stop using Openbox. It was great. Perfect balance between customization, eye-candy and minimalism. So, I am a moron I guess. Then, I could also claim that everyone who don't think like me and want Gnome 2 are morons too. Stop trash talking, it is only cute if you are still in your teens. You can speak without it too. By the way, I am trying Cinnamon right now. Seems cute and stable. |
| r_a_trip Dec 22, 2011 1:41 PM EDT |
Well, if you Shell lovers really wanna hear it, so you can just write me off as an inconsequential nut job, why don't I make your day. Gnome Shell users are moronic, brainless amoebas. There, I just made the argument ad hominem. So now you can all go back to singing the praises of an interface, that is more of an ill fit on the desktop than a tutu on a blue whale. To be on topic for once: Cinnamon looks like a massive improvement. For something that saw the light of day pretty recently, it works above expectation. The package description in Synaptic really made my day: Cinnamon redefines user interactions with the GNOME desktop. In particular, it offers new paradigms for launching applications, accessing documents, and organizing open windows in GNOME. Later, it will introduce a new applets eco-system and offer new solutions for other desktop features, such as notifications and contacts management. Cinnamon is intended to replace functions handled by the GNOME Panel and by the window manager in previous versions of GNOME. Cinnamon has rich visual effects enabled by new graphical technologies. |
| caitlyn Dec 22, 2011 1:54 PM EDT |
In my book people who resort to name calling and talking trash about people who disagree with them do so because they have no rational argument to make. The comment directly above this one is a case in point. You don't like it so anyone who does is a moron? Hmmm... |
| albinard Dec 22, 2011 2:27 PM EDT |
Wow, check out all the peace and love this holiday season! |
| GERGE Dec 22, 2011 2:33 PM EDT |
We don't have Crismast (don't even now how to write it without spell-check) here, so I have an excuse =) |
| caitlyn Dec 22, 2011 2:37 PM EDT |
Peace and love is overrated. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 22, 2011 3:02 PM EDT |
I've used other window managers in the past, but I've pretty much fallen into being a GNOME 2 user over the past year or so. Last week I decided to spend some time in Fvwm2, a window manager I have a lot of experience with but haven't used much since I've been running GNOME. I lost a lot of productivity not being in GNOME. Sure, I could spend many hours setting up Fvwm2 or Fluxbox -- and I very well might -- but I still have GNOME 2 (I'm running Debian Squeeze, which will be supported through early 2014 if Debian keeps its recent release rhythm). I'm one of those people who have spent a little time in GNOME 3/Shell (in Fedora 16's live environment). I didn't find it so objectionable. It has a lot of good things along with the head-scratchers. What would make me happy? Give me a panel where I can put icons that lead to my most-used applications and requisite number of virtual desktops (I have six right now, though I acknowledge that GNOME Shell's way of focusing on individual apps and switching between them makes it easy to work without as many virtual desktops). If you can't do that now with GNOME shell extensions, I'm sure you'll be able to do that soon. Otherwise there's still Xfce, another desktop environment I've used quite a bit -- and which I like. I could never get Gigolo to work on FTP, but now that network connectivity is baked right into Thunar, that problem should be solved. I'm not crazy about the Mousepad text editor and the Xfce terminal (though I used to love them), but there are dozens of alternatives out there. At some point, Xfce will probably upgrade to GTK 3, and even with a GTK 2/3 mix you can bring in all the little GNOME bits you want/need (GNOME terminal, NetworkManager, Gedit, etc.) but stick with Xfce. If the backlash against GNOME 3 (and Unity, for that matter) continues to grow, I bet we'll see distributions and packages that seek to offer an "enhanced" Xfce experience, or a more GNOME 2-ish GNOME 3. And the code is there to be forked, so if there's the will, that's the way. |
| r_a_trip Dec 22, 2011 3:39 PM EDT |
Caitlyn, woosh! Do we really need sarcasm tags? Or are you so glad that I did exactly where people were trying to push me to, that the context doesn't matter anymore. I said Gnome Shell is moronic, I never said people using it were moronic. Anyone who wants to infer that, be my guest. FOSS, where every piece of code not monetary remunerated is above criticism. Yeah, come on, just tell me to use Windows or Mac. I'm expecting it. Holiday cheer? Not with the current human condition. The world is crazy, I'm just joining in. |
| rahulsundaram Dec 22, 2011 3:58 PM EDT |
If other choices don't work out for you there are plenty of choices again in the distros that will continue to support GNOME 2.x for like 10 years. I seriously doubt calling anything moronic is advancing the conversation. If you insist, feel free to. I just dont see the point. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 22, 2011 5:17 PM EDT |
If only RHEL/CentOS/Scientific Linux had the desktop support in terms of applications that Fedora has ... |
| caitlyn Dec 22, 2011 6:25 PM EDT |
There are some pretty good third party repositories for desktop apps. EPEL and RPMFusion come to mind immediately. |
| Steven_Rosenber Dec 22, 2011 7:29 PM EDT |
EPEL and RPM Fusion are nowhere even close to offering what's in Fedora (or Debian or Ubuntu). EPEL baffles me -- there's barely anything there: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/6/x86_64/repoview... RPM Fusion is great for codecs, but as far as apps go, it's not all that: http://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/el/updates/testing/6/x86... You really don't have anywhere near the flexibility on the desktop that you have in the average desktop distribution (Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc.) or even BSD project (FreeBSD, OpenBSD). |
| skelband Dec 22, 2011 11:31 PM EDT |
I must admit to being a bit baffled by the Gnome Shell and the users that the environment is aimed at. Are they trying to make a pitch for the touch crowd on tablets? If so, they don't seem to be making a direct play for that section of computer users. Are they trying to make traditional desktop use more efficient? That's patently untrue, since it is less efficient on a number of fronts. As stated by others before, standard tasks require more effort than on Gnome 2. Sorry, I just don't see what problem the Gnome developers are trying to solve with their Gnome Shell and in the end have created something that suits no-one. Desktop users generally come down to two camps: consumers (mail, youtube, etc, etc) and developers. Consumers tend to spend most of their time on the web: they will be superficially impressed by the glitz of the compositing features but for the most part will not actually have much need of a "useful" desktop. Developers tend to have many windows and desktops open at once and are constantly moving between them. Efficiency in this regard is paramount. Any slight friction in this process is noticed and leaves a bad feeling for the user. For me as a developer type, Gnome 2 was ideal. It doesn't get in the way, my way of working is modelled very closely with the way it works. The Gnome Shell does not satisfy this type of user and so is not for me. -- @caitlyn: "Why should the GNOME foundation apologize for anything? Do you pay their bills? Do they work for you? No desktop project is going to satisfy anyone. The fact is that the GNOME developers owe you absolutely nothing. If you don't like where they are going then use something else. Demanding an apology is ridiculous." Whatever the rights and wrongs of the matter, Gnome "belongs" to the community at large. The Gnome Foundation may technically own the code (and I'm not entirely sure that is actually true, I stand to be corrected on this) but just because you look after it at some point in time doesn't make you God, and it certainly doesn't necessarily make you right. If you like Gnome Shell, then good for you. What is true however, is that something that a great many people loved (yes I do mean that) has been unceremoniously killed and replaced with something else that is not. |
| caitlyn Dec 22, 2011 11:40 PM EDT |
Business users fit neither your definition of consumers nor your definition of developers. I think you are way overgeneralizing. You need to read a copyleft license (i.e.: the GPL) more closely. The GNOME developers do own their code and they can develop it any way they see fit. You have the right to take the old code you loved and fork it, which is what the MATE developers did. You have no right whatsoever to dictate to the GNOME developers what they should or should not do. The community are users and, quite often, freeloaders who give nothing back to the developers. The idea that they somehow own the code is laughable at best. |
| skelband Dec 23, 2011 4:22 AM EDT |
Isn't that indeed part of the problem with the model that open source gives us? The Gnome Foundation is answerable to noone but themselves. Therein lies the rub. We embrace open source software to free us from the tyranny of proprietary software and here we find ourselves at the beck and call of another set of meritocratic masters. The free software movement of Stallman's dreams is more than just a method whereby you can see the source. It is also about a social movement to better and benefit the community and human world at large. I doubt he was envisaging a system whereby a group wold take control of a significant part of the free software eco system and hold it hostage to the fulfil some fanciful wet dream of one of their glorious leaders. And the most intellectual thought that they (and caitlyn might I add) can muster is "if you don't like it, you can f*** off" then I have wonder whatever happened to Mr Stallman's brave new software world... |
| tracyanne Dec 23, 2011 6:16 AM EDT |
@ skelband, Hear Hear! |
| GERGE Dec 23, 2011 7:03 AM EDT |
I must ask here: What about those who likes it? I gave an example from myself before somewhere here: I started using Gnome with Gnome 3 and hated Gnome 2. Don't I have a right to have and use something I find beautiful, productive and usable? I should first say that my work is about academics in social sciences. Like caitlyn said, I don't fit your classes of users. I have my own needs and Gnome 3 is the first pre-made environment which fulfills my needs. I was using an Openbox setup I cooked myself before it. In order to make a good argument you have to start with this and then explain why you don't think Mate is not promising to offer what you want and therefore Gnome 3 should not be. |
| jacog Dec 23, 2011 7:27 AM EDT |
As I opined in another thread, these things are completely subjective. Everyone likes/wants different things. No one thing will please everybody. So everyone stop arguing about it. Find something you like and use it. If you can't find something that's 100% to your liking, then pretend to be a Linux user and bend it to your will. |
| r_a_trip Dec 23, 2011 7:30 AM EDT |
Some people on this thread are seriously dissapointing. Anyone with 2.5 braincells and no agenda could see the meaning of my Gnome Shell users are moronic, brainless amoebas post. (No I'm not accusing people of being stupid (2.5 braincells), I accuse them of having a pro Shell agenda). I could spell the sequence out step by step, but why bother. Whatever people. Shell just became irrelevant to my world. Rest assured that any machine where I function as the "admin" will get spiced up with Cinnamon. Before anyone accuses me of forcing anyone onto anything (which probably will happen anyways), the machines I admin are used by people who are not enamoured with Shell and are half way happy with MGSE. This freeloading, trash talking pariah will keep donating to Linux Mint. They put the money to good use. |
| helios Dec 23, 2011 1:08 PM EDT |
Ciminun....uh, cimmimom.....ciminim....he!!, I can't spell it any better than I pronounce it...then again, two drams of MacAllan with lunch might have had something to do with that. Regardless of the name, I am greatly looking forward to this project maturing. |
| skelband Dec 23, 2011 2:48 PM EDT |
I'm afraid some of you misunderstand me. If some people like Gnome Shell, more power to them I say and I have no objection to people trying radical new designs. That's how progress is made. Just leave me my old Gnome desktop as well. After all, it is all about diversity isn't it? I look with hope towards Cinnamon and Mate (or even KDE) for my answer. |
| Jeff91 Dec 26, 2011 2:15 AM EDT |
I guess I don't understand the drive behind Cinnamon. Why keep investing in projects that don't want your help when so many other functional desktops out there would odds are welcome you with open arms? LXDE, XFCE, E17, KDE - they all have TODO lists and I'd be willing to be any of the above will accept more code than the Gnome-Grinches will. ~Jeff |
| skelband Dec 27, 2011 3:46 PM EDT |
@myself: "...another set of meritocratic masters." I would contrast the stance of the Gnome Foundation with the Document Foundation. I keep getting mail shots from these guys telling me how great things are going and numerous variations of "How can we make it even better for you? Let us know!" That's how it's supposed to work. |
| fewt Dec 27, 2011 4:36 PM EDT |
@Steven - Quoting:If only RHEL/CentOS/Scientific Linux had the desktop support in terms of applications that Fedora has ... What's wrong with Fuduntu? It's modern, and it uses GNOME 2. @Jeff91 - Quoting:I guess I don't understand the drive behind Cinnamon. Why keep investing in projects that don't want your help when so many other functional desktops out there would odds are welcome you with open arms? In my opinion, the mentality is that we had a desktop that worked and worked well. The GNOME team completely devastated it in the name of "improvements". Cinnamon aims to take the bad in GNOME 3 and replace it with a classic interface, it is exactly what it needs. Beyond that, Clem probably views the remainder of GNOME 3 as a step forward. The interface is what keeps us using GNOME 2 at Fuduntu. We evaluated other options, and the community unanimously chose to keep GNOME 2 rather than try to shoe horn something that wasn't ready onto their desktops. If Clem can solve the interface usability issue with Cinnamon, more power too him. I'll be first in line to test viability at Fuduntu when it's ready for primetime. @Thread - I'm not a GNOME 3 fan, but my biggest complaint is that they created the new environment without some form of "classic" mode (fallback mode did not really count). H#ll, even Windows 7 still has the classic Windows 95 look and feel for those few people that want it. There is absolutely NO legitimate reason for killing off the classic desktop look and feel as an option in GNOME 3 other than the GNOME developers wanting everyone to use their shiny new shell. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!