What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

Master One · 2007-03-20 17:30:39

I am actually playing around with Gnome 2.18 (the Foresight VMware image, that is linked from the Gnome website). As a long-time KDE user, I am not a Gnome fanboy, but my curiosity made me try a lot of different WMs lately, as well as XFCE4.4.0 and now Gnome 2.18, because I am not fully satisfied with KDE any more (wish, KDE4 were already available, KDE3 just seem too cluttered and in some way outdated due to the bunch of partly old and unmaintained different apps clued together). I really like most of what I have seen and tried, even the spartan WM's like dwm & ion3 (although they are not really practical for me, because I don't live in the console world), and I am really stuck right now, because I just can't decide which WM or DE I should stick with.

I think it looks nice, but I am not familiar with it, and missing configuration options make me wonder how to get the to desired results (for example: How to tell Epiphany, to open a torrent file with Sancho, or an IRC-link with XChat?). I like the Gnome/Tango iconset very much, as well as the "Thunar" look of Nautilus, which is very practical and pleasing to work with. One very annoying thing is, that windows can not be vertically or horizontally maximized by middle- or right-clicking on the maximize-icon in the window-titelbar (anybody knows, if this can be changed?). Reading the release note, it seems there hasn't changed much from the previous version. The Seahorse GnuPG frontend seems to be nice, but that functionality is nothing new, if you used KDE before. Something was mentioned about Epiphany improvements, but it seems very spartan, if you are used to Konqueror or Firefox.

I'd like to gather some opinions, especially from people how are actively using Gnome as their DE. Can you switch from a WM, XFCE 4.4.0 or KDE to Gnome 2.18, and be fully satisfied?

god · 2007-03-20 18:55:19

Generally speaking, most applications in Gnome have almost as much (if not as much) configurability as their KDE counterparts, but those options are hidden. It's presumed that, since you're a more advanced user, you'll be able to locate them (almost all can be altered using the Configuration Editor). Typically, though, the principal of "sane defaults" rules Gnome application design.

To have Epiphany open torrents in Sancho, simply set Sancho as the default handler for torrents. You can do this by right-clicking on a torrent file and setting Sancho as the default sink. The same goes for any file or link.

Your criticisms of Metacity (the WM for Gnome) are well-placed, since it is very basic. However, you may use any WM (even KDE's!) within Gnome with no problems whatsoever. Many use OpenBox and similar light and fast WMs, although the performance gain is (in my experience) negligible. I've never really had any problems with the window management in Gnome, though, so I'm a bad resource for that gripe.

And while Epiphany may appear to be as spartan as Metacity, it actually boasts a surprising amount of flexibility and configurability. It has a built-in Python scripting interface and a myriad of plugins that take advantage of this, replicating things like Firefox's Adblock, Gestures, Greasemonkey, etc. (see Epiphany Extensions or search for them using Pacman).

You're right that Seahorse's functionality isn't anything new for KDE users, but it's also old news to Gnome users. I believe the Gnome team has simply adopted Seahorse into the platform and will be integrating it further into existing applications and tasks.

In conclusion, yes, you can switch from KDE to Gnome and be fully satisfied. I have and, as much as I try to experiment with KDE, *Box and XFCE, I always come back to Gnome. The amount of effort I put into making XFCE usable for me (although 4.4 is a massive improvement and a wonderful DE), made it just as heavy as Gnome, with none of the little side benefits (platform integration, central configuration, etc.) that come from a bigger DE. KDE was -- and is -- too cluttered for me. Gnome seems to be a happy marriage between giving you the functionality you need without getting in your way.

That all said... I'm a bit biased (but still very excited for KDE4). Good luck

detto · 2007-03-20 18:59:38

To make it really short (got to eat now )...
I was in same situation as you just 2 weeks ago. I was full time KDE user, and still love its functionality in some ways. But as you mentioned its too cluttered and more. So installed GNOME 2.18.0 and at first loved nautilus, just because of its nice arrangement of icons/symbols, overall look and its preview thumbnails....At some points (metacity,panel) i preferred and wanted back the KDE way of configuring it my way. But then again i would miss nautilus and the gnome feeling.
So, atm im still with Gnome, and more and more i don't have the feeling to want KDE back, everything looks and acts properly, is fast configured and works as expected. It looks nice and feels nice, thats enough for me to drop the configuration-plus that's in KDE.
Oh and btw: Gnome + openbox totally kicks ass. you get a much more faster gnome experience as well imho. menus popup faster, window movin/resizing and your maximazation horiz/vertic works too.

So, my tip to you (omg, long again :roll:) is to use Gnome a while, configure it your way and work with it, maybe then even try with openbox. I think you'll have a better viewpoint then.

cheers,
deTTo

edit:

god wrote:

The amount of effort I put into making XFCE usable for me (although 4.4 is a massive improvement and a wonderful DE), made it just as heavy as Gnome, with none of the little side benefits (platform integration, central configuration, etc.) that come from a bigger DE. KDE was -- and is -- too cluttered for me.

Exactly!

Last edited by detto (2007-03-20 19:02:47)

cactus · 2007-03-20 19:21:35

I use gnome+openbox too.
yay!

god · 2007-03-20 19:35:18

I hope nobody took my Gnome + Openbox bit as a slight against the combo. I just never noticed the vaunted speed difference on my new Thinkpad. It might also have something to do with all the massive speed improvements that came circa Gnome 2.16 (and there are a few in 2.18, if I'm not mistaken).

Perhaps I'll give Openbox a try again, though...

Master One · 2007-03-20 21:34:54

Is there any disadvantage in using OB instead of Metacity in Gnome?

I read about that possibility on the OB website and in the Arch Wiki, but I failed to see the benefit. Metacity does not seem to be any worse than any other WM, except the mentioned vertical/horizontal maximize functionality.

cyprinus · 2007-03-21 00:00:56

Master One wrote:

Is there any disadvantage in using OB instead of Metacity in Gnome?

As I read: disadvantages - none. Advantages - speed up, but it's only my opinion.

Arch Linux

#1 2007-03-20 17:30:39

What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

#2 2007-03-20 18:55:19

Re: What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

#3 2007-03-20 18:59:38

Re: What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

#4 2007-03-20 19:21:35

Re: What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

#5 2007-03-20 19:35:18

Re: What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

#6 2007-03-20 21:34:54

Re: What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

#7 2007-03-21 00:00:56

Re: What do you think of Gnome 2.18?

Board footer