Gnome 3.0

Spewns · 2009-12-28 15:51:38

I tried out gnome shell a couple weeks ago. Honestly, when I first heard of it and saw videos, I was very excited to see that there are folks out there actually trying something new in the Desktop department. Regardless of what your opinion of gnome shell is, I think it's healthy that minds are at least attempting a fresh vision of what a desktop could be without being weighed down by the legacy design of "desktop with icons and a panel or two at the bottom and/or top."

Having said that, gnome shell definitely wasn't anywhere near ready when I recently tested it. On my netbook, it was very slow, ugly, and provided nothing of value to me. (Granted, I'im not a gnome user to begin with, so it didn't help that I also wasn't really used to any other aspect of the DE at the time.)

And I know this is probably off-topic, but in response to the mindset that KDE is bloated and slow, I run KDE stable on my netbook (ASUS Eee 904HA), and it's nothing but blazing fast (with compositing) and extremely efficient when it comes to screen estate (when easily tweaked to be so). I used to be one of those who used minimal wms (never even with any type of panel), but got tired of dealing with quirks, lack of cohesion, and general ugliness. (Yes, I'm starting to appreciate visuals.) GNOME is the DE that feels slow to me. GTK in general feels slow and unresponsive and looks outdated and primitive when compared to QT. Gnome shell suffered from this.

Anikom15 · 2009-12-28 16:41:13

Why don't you go tell them rather than whine here?

Tyriel · 2009-12-28 16:51:24

Anikom15 wrote:

Why don't you go tell them rather than whine here?

You can't... soon after the initial release of the concept or prototype videos the developers stopped accepting feedback due to the mixed reactions of the community.

They basically stated that those opposing gnome shell are wrong and should wait until they use it before judging. However they are not interested in feedback as they already stated this is the direction they will take in any case no matter what the community thinks.

That was one of the main factors of what got me to try KDE as they are constantly encouraging feedback and make changes accordingly.

cb474 · 2009-12-29 09:05:54

Spewns wrote:

I tried out gnome shell a couple weeks ago. Honestly, when I first heard of it and saw videos, I was very excited to see that there are folks out there actually trying something new in the Desktop department. Regardless of what your opinion of gnome shell is, I think it's healthy that minds are at least attempting a fresh vision of what a desktop could be without being weighed down by the legacy design of "desktop with icons and a panel or two at the bottom and/or top."

I like innovation in the desktop too. I was also excited when I first saw the videos. But I also believe, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Gnome Shell looks cool at first and seems different. But in actual practice it's offers nothing new. Workspaces aren't new. Creating workspaces on the fly I suppose is new, but as I said above that actually makes using workspaces on a regular basis more of a pain and I consider it a deprecation. Universal search for launching applications and files isn't new (Gnome-Do already provides this). Gnome-Shell just animates things that are already in Gnome, in an eye candy way, that quickly shifts from looking cool to being annoying. It's like someone took their favorite Compiz plugin and decided to impose it on everyone.

Tyriel wrote:

You can't... soon after the initial release of the concept or prototype videos the developers stopped accepting feedback due to the mixed reactions of the community.
They basically stated that those opposing gnome shell are wrong and should wait until they use it before judging. However they are not interested in feedback as they already stated this is the direction they will take in any case no matter what the community thinks.

That does no surprise me. After I first saw Gnome-Shell I looked for a way to provide feedback and couldn't find one. To me this is a classic case of innovating for the wrong reasons. Confusing what looks slick, with user friendliness and newness. And changing something for the sake of changing it, not because there are any useful new ideas. The Gnome desktop as it is may be a bit boring, but it's functional, for me. I like that it has resisted the gee-whiz eye candy features and looks of OS X, Vista/7, and KDE. Sometimes it takes the most courage not to change.

Last edited by cb474 (2009-12-29 09:06:43)

zodmaner · 2009-12-29 09:41:12

Even the creation of new workspace (or desktop) "on the fly" is nothing new. Openbox have been providing shortcuts for creating/removing desktop "on the fly" for quite sometimes now (look in the middle click menu).

Last edited by zodmaner (2009-12-29 09:52:53)

linuxgod · 2009-12-29 15:57:12

hahaha, use pcmanfm, lxpanel and compiz instead

Anikom15 · 2009-12-29 19:39:53

What about GTK 3?

Firepower · 2009-12-30 04:56:23

The menu system is not logical at all.

I mean, you have to go to a centralized place where all your desktops are shown just to open a program? I mean, Gnome-Do is a much better idea than this.

Just integrate Gnome-Do or something. It's trying too hard.

Janarto · 2009-12-30 12:36:12

i agree, we need a search bar for everything (lets admit it, like in windows 7 where it works well) for : software, files, web searches ..

what gnome needs is certainly speed and performances improvement to be more snappy and integrated

Hund · 2011-03-01 22:14:42

I havent read the whole thread, so my question might be answered already. Is it true that GNOME 3 will be GNOME Shell only? No classic desktop with windows á la Metacity etc?

Wintervenom · 2011-03-02 01:43:55

Hund wrote:

I havent read the whole thread

That explains why you're posting in a long-dead thread.

Hund wrote:

Is it true that GNOME 3 will be GNOME Shell only? No classic desktop with windows á la Metacity etc?

No, it is optional.

Last edited by Wintervenom (2011-03-02 01:44:21)

Hund · 2011-03-02 09:55:48

Wintervenom wrote:

Hund wrote:
I havent read the whole thread
That explains why you're posting in a long-dead thread.
Hund wrote:
Is it true that GNOME 3 will be GNOME Shell only? No classic desktop with windows á la Metacity etc?
No, it is optional.

LOL! This was the thread that first came up when I searched.

Then I was right from the begining. Some people told me I was wrong.

wonder · 2011-03-02 10:50:28

the primary thread that you should follow is https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=79706

tomk · 2011-03-02 11:03:59

Closing, refer to the gnome-unstable thread linked above.

Arch Linux

#126 2009-12-28 15:51:38

Re: Gnome 3.0

#127 2009-12-28 16:41:13

Re: Gnome 3.0

#128 2009-12-28 16:51:24

Re: Gnome 3.0

#129 2009-12-29 09:05:54

Re: Gnome 3.0

#130 2009-12-29 09:41:12

Re: Gnome 3.0

#131 2009-12-29 15:57:12

Re: Gnome 3.0

#132 2009-12-29 19:39:53

Re: Gnome 3.0

#133 2009-12-30 04:56:23

Re: Gnome 3.0

#134 2009-12-30 12:36:12

Re: Gnome 3.0

#135 2011-03-01 22:14:42

Re: Gnome 3.0

#136 2011-03-02 01:43:55

Re: Gnome 3.0

#137 2011-03-02 09:55:48

Re: Gnome 3.0

#138 2011-03-02 10:50:28

Re: Gnome 3.0

#139 2011-03-02 11:03:59

Re: Gnome 3.0

Board footer