[GNOME 3] First Impressions?

Cluckyx · 2011-04-29 17:22:51

I just read through this thread and it's made for some very interesting reading.

After my half fatigued idiot dance excuse for an installation attempt (See Newbie Corner) I have everything up and running and I am withholding the majority of judgement for now to give it a few days to settle in. But I have made the following observations.

1. By my very nature of being a Linux user, and more specifically an Arch Linux user. I am someone who does not like being told what I can and cannot do by my OS. Consequentially "No. You can't remove that accesibility Icon" irks me. It irks me because it is something so inconsequential that they have specifically neglected to give me the power to tweak. And as an OS philosophy. I just don't like it, Gnome has always been very "Gnome knows best", and so far they have been content with making things they don't think their users should be tinkering with "awkward". But actively saying "no" just frustrates me.

2. Normally when setting up a distro over the last few years, the first 3 things to happen are "install gnome" "install compiz" "install emerald". But besides it being a little fat-assed, I really, really like the new theme. It's slick, it's clean and it's subtle. I can see myself keeping it for a while.

3. The lack of min/maximize buttons isn't bothering me nearly as much as I thought it was, in fact, I would degrade that further to "it isn't bothering me at all". Using multiple desktops is not something I really got into the habit of, but I can see I was missing a trick. I can see this really helping to improve my workflow.

4. Wine is suffering, at least from my end, Gnome-Shell is recognising every Wine application as a new window of the same app and it is making managing multiple wine apps a damn nightmare. Am I missing something?

5. Mandatory Pulseaudio. God dammit. Really?

Ok that's all for now. I got to keep playing with this thing.

Sloshy · 2011-04-29 17:40:55

Cluckyx wrote:

Consequentially "No. You can't remove that accesibility Icon" irks me. It irks me because it is something so inconsequential that they have specifically neglected to give me the power to tweak. And as an OS philosophy. I just don't like it, Gnome has always been very "Gnome knows best", and so far they have been content with making things they don't think their users should be tinkering with "awkward". But actively saying "no" just frustrates me.

It's technically possible to do (google it ), but they didn't give you the option to remove it simply because there might be a situation when you might need to use it, just to be on the safe side. If it really is that inconsequential, then it shouldn't bother you, yes ? And I wouldn't quite say that they "know best" either, but remember that this is only 3.0, and that 3.2, with lots of fixes (and more configuration options) is coming soon. GNOME 3.0 is not really intended for enterprise use at this point, and is meant more for early adopters that can live with some inconsistencies, but 3.2 and 3.4 are set to improve on the formula.

Don't forget that GNOME 2.0 got it's share of complaints, but GNOME 2.32 is, today, regarded as a very mature and stable desktop (hence it being used for the latest RHEL release). GNOME 3 needs a little time to mature

Cluckyx wrote:

5. Mandatory Pulseaudio. God dammit. Really?

It's not bad. The only applications that I know of that don't work with it are open-source DOOM engines (but that might be something else entirely). A good deal of the Pulse FUD was spread because of Ubuntu's really bad implementation of it. Other distros did their homework when putting it in, but Ubuntu didn't do it right so it was buggy and awkward. Now, as long as you install libflashsupport-pulse from AUR and blacklist snd-pcm-oss, you should be good to go for almost anything with Pulse. Oh, and don't use the ALSA daemon with pulse; it's not necessary

Edward.H · 2011-04-30 02:26:44

Gnome 3 just is a semi-product,this is my opinion

jocheem67 · 2011-04-30 03:38:00

Oh, and don't use the ALSA daemon with pulse; it's not necessary

Yeah, I noticed that one. Actually it gave me a couple of permission warnings during shutting down my daemons array. Disabling the alsa daemon fixed that and kept sound. Nice...
Maybe something for the wiki???

caseyjp1 · 2011-04-30 10:59:08

Gotta chime in a 'yepper' to Wonder's info on pulse audio. I've been a PA user for quite awhile, and love it. The one thing I do NOT like futzing with is audio...and in that regard I'm a "just work damn you to hades" type....and for me, PA for quite awhile now has been less memory intensive and much MUCH less cpu intensive as well as the aforementioned "just work damn you!" bits.

Already there are things occurring with "extensions" and such that means customization is on its way again...just being patient with a "1.0" type release...but I gotta say, the more I use gnome 3, the better I'm liking it. (on the big screen.)

So far while gnome 3 is winning my attention on the big box, I'm still loving ubuntu/unity on my samsung n150Plus though. Snappy and no crashes.

This is where I wish gnome3 would have gone with ubuntu regarding compiz. I LOVE compiz bling stuff. Just do.

Last edited by caseyjp1 (2011-04-30 11:00:32)

jeff story · 2011-05-01 09:06:18

Well, after spending a total of a few hours or so, me thinks Gnome shell is REALLY REALLY different and kinda pretty, but I'll select FUNCTION over fashion EVERY time!!

Seriously, this thing just doesn't feel right on my desktop. Perhaps a 7 inch smart phone screen or something, but ... a desktop?!? Part of my problem may be, unlike most here, I actually like my mouse, and only reach for my keyboard as required, Gnome 3 / shell seems to require far more clickity click click clicks to do simple things.

After putting it in fall back mode, and using alt + right click to move and modify the panels, I got it to function similar to my Gnome 2 desktop. Unfortunately, in fall back mode, everything looks pretty bad and a lot of configuration and functionality is missing.

I believe over time will come the ability to configure settings, change themes, and possibly even a few Gnome shell alternatives. With these changes, could Gnome 3 possibly surpass Gnome 2 in some areas? My thinking at this point is how could one improve on the perfection that is Gnome 2?

Any way you look at it, this would be a tough job, even for some of the best developers and programmers out there!! It may not be for me, but I do have to congratulate the people behind the changes for keeping it very intuitive and easy, despite the radical changes!

So in summary, for this old guy fast approaching 50, I think I'm just too set in my ways to really appreciate such massive change. I'll stay with Gnome 2 as long as possible, and possibly consider a switch to Xfce, Openbox, KDE4, etc in the meantime. Fortunate thing is as a Linux user, there are so many other UI options out there :-)

Awebb · 2011-05-01 10:33:50

I knew they had to upscale icons and such... but this is way out of proportion:

fijam · 2011-05-01 12:34:53

I have used Gnome3 for some time and posted my impressions here: http://fijam.eu.org/blog/?p=117. I don't mean it as a plug, it is simply not suitable for a forum post and yet it may be of some interest for Archers.

manzdagratiano · 2011-05-01 22:46:27

Ok... I uninstalled compiz, and went with the -Syu while in Blackbox, logged out... blackness.... and then a pristine new GDM...

I log in, and look around for a few minutes... and...

I FFFFFIIIIINNNNNN' LOVE Gnome 3!!!

This is EVOLUTION!!!

I am very very content... The old desktop was becoming boring anyway. Now there's Unity in Ubuntu and Gnome 3 in Arch... Old Gnome 2 in Debian for the time being... Very VERY content...

To the future!

Pawlerson · 2011-05-02 15:01:33

Sloshy wrote:

It's technically possible to do (google it ), but they didn't give you the option to remove it simply because there might be a situation when you might need to use it, just to be on the safe side.

Sorry, but this is just ridiculous! They should keep their dirty hands off as far as possible from dictating users what they are allowed to do or not. Are they some kind of babysitters now? I know better if I'll need some option or not. Now I see they're called interface nazis not without the reasons.

hoobastank · 2011-05-02 15:08:25

Is it possible to use Gnome 3 (gnome-shell) with in a sandbox environment (virtualbox)?

Last edited by hoobastank (2011-05-02 15:08:44)

Pawlerson · 2011-05-02 15:22:33

Sloshy wrote:

It's rather insulting to the GNOME 3 devs when you say they did no usability testing, which contradicts what a simple Google search could tell you. They didn't change for the sake of it, but they changed because they sincerely felt that GNOME 3, for them and all of their test subjects, was, as a whole, more usable.

I don't know what this usability is aimed for, but I'm sure it's not aimed for desktops. I consider gnome shell makers have no idea about usability. To prove this it's enough to check KDE, Windows and OS X usability guidelines. The basic stuff like changing fonts, themes, doing system restart without holding a key is a must. It seems you didn't follow disscusion at lwn. There are many posts by (ex)gnome users who consider gnome devs made a change just for the sake of it.

If you could point out exactly what problems it has that make it so bad, I'd love to hear them. It's completely keyboard and mouse navigable, it's minimal and doesn't get in your way, it only provides functionality when you ask for it instead of breathing down your neck about it... I love it.

At first it's so minimal it's hardly usable. Like I mentioned before it lacks of basic, important stuff. A mouse should be enough to use DE in comfortable way. There are no excuses for removing options and features. If they want to keep it "minimal" they should just hide stuff somewhere (not in gconf of course) and not remove it!

Simply because you don't enjoy it does not mean that they "did no usability testing". And of course it wouldn't qualify for "some" usability guidelines;

Try something like this with writing code. If you won't follow guidelines you'll be kicked.

none of those are set in stone though, and they certainly don't contradict GNOME's definition of usable.

Thus gnome is simply not usable for me and for newbies. The "normal" usability guidelines are aimed mainly at newbies and gnome don't respect them.

It's like saying that a new style of food packaging doesn't go by standard food packaging guidelines because it isn't exactly how the old food packaging was, regardless whether or not the new design of the packaging is any easier to open and dispose of.

No, it's like serving different food in a different package.

What did they leave out? You can switch programs, launch programs, change settings, it's usable on desktops as well as netbooks and touch devices... Simply because it isn't infinitely customizable or because it doesn't do things the exact same way as everyone else does not make it bad.

What settings? I can do the same easier in different DEs. That's one of the problems with Gnome. Btw. in such discusions we shouldn't base only on our personal feelings, but we should look at the bigger picture - KDE, Windows, OS X.

virusso80 · 2011-05-02 19:21:51

Anyone knows something about screensaver?

frix · 2011-05-02 20:11:00

virusso80 wrote:

Anyone knows something about screensaver?

I don't use a screensaver, so I wouldn't know, sorry... I don't even know how to use a screensaver in Gnome 2

hoobastank wrote:

Is it possible to use Gnome 3 (gnome-shell) with in a sandbox environment (virtualbox)?

Of course, why wouldn't it be possible? It'll probably be very slow, though. I tried with VirtualBox before upgrading my Arch, and the compositing didn't go well with virtualized OpenGL

Anyways, I've tried Gnome 3 for the past hours while working, and I must say that it integrates quite well with my workflow. I've seen a lot of people blaming Gnome for the design issues, but I actually think they got the thing right, at least for me. Even in Gnome 2, I only had a dock (Gnome-Do), an empty desktop (save for a small conky) and a small panel at the top.
The ability to switch workspaces, or make a window switch workspaces, or start an application, all with the keyboard, are what I used most in Gnome 2, and it's still there, so, no problem for me.

On a side note, the new Empathy desktop-integrated IM is awesome, but I'll still use Pidgin for now, because I don't really like Empathy. It would be great to add that kind of feature to some kind of Pidgin extension.

What I don't like, however (but it's still very new, so it'll probably improve with the time) are a few annoying bugs and shortcomings. I'll start with the less annoying ones :
- First, the new default font is a pain to read on a very high resolution. I like the previous one much better, so I switched it back.
- Conky doesn't work with all the shortcuts. Why? I still don't know. But when Conky is up, the Logo/Alt-Tab keys don't work. Again, it'll probably be fixed by replacing the old Conky with a Gnome-Shell extension, but someone still needs to do it, and that can take time...
- A few bugs and crashes, but nothing too annoying

But as far as I am concerned, what I miss the most is being able to customize my desktop. I already had problems understanding where the hell Gnome 2 put its configuration files, how to change it, and so, but there were a lot of options in the GUI. It's even more messy here...

Pawlerson wrote:

If they want to keep it "minimal" they should just hide stuff somewhere (not in gconf of course) and not remove it!

That would indeed be the best path! Not being able to change anything except in gconf-tool brings me back in time when I was using Window$ 98, with all the messy registry hacks and stuff... It's kind of unbearable.

Aside from that, I only noticed that app search can be quite slow, taking ages to show a list after each key press, while Gnome-Do used to do it seemlessly. Overall, the desktop is still somewhat a little bit slow on each click. Again, I hope someone figures out how to make it a little bit snappier. If I have the time, I'll look into it, but I've never touched Gnome code, so I might not be very successful!

The Unabeefer · 2011-05-02 21:30:56

Pawlerson wrote:

Sorry, but this is just ridiculous! They should keep their dirty hands off as far as possible from dictating users what they are allowed to do or not. Are they some kind of babysitters now? I know better if I'll need some option or not. Now I see they're called interface nazis not without the reasons.

Yeah!! You should at LEAST be able to set the panel to auto-hide. KDE4 SUCKS!!!

Oh, sorry... flashbacks.

the C.L.A. · 2011-05-02 21:33:56

Sloshy wrote:

Cluckyx wrote:
5. Mandatory Pulseaudio. God dammit. Really?
It's not bad.

Ah, yeah... Really!?

I've been fiddling more than half a day to make it work with my HDSP 9652, but it still won't function the way I expect it to.

I'm totally pissed!!!

cubeist · 2011-05-03 20:40:03

manzdagratiano wrote:

.
I log in, and look around for a few minutes... and...
I FFFFFIIIIINNNNNN' LOVE Gnome 3!!!
This is EVOLUTION!!!
I am very very content... The old desktop was becoming boring anyway. Now there's Unity in Ubuntu and Gnome 3 in Arch... Old Gnome 2 in Debian for the time being... Very VERY content...
To the future!

I agree completely. This isn't just a step forward in desktop computing, it's a huge leap.

I bet the next versions of MacOS and Windows will be blatant copies. (Both the finder and explorer are getting very long in the tooth without a major overhaul)

For me, the first 10 minutes I was confused and resisted the change, but now I could never go back to a Gnome 2 type environment. I feel like I have a refined control over my workflow and iv'e even learned to love some of the minor annoyances.

Also, I have been an exclusive dark theme user for 5 years+, but feel refreshed by the default theme and have no desire to change.

Well done devs!

Pawlerson · 2011-05-03 22:18:38

cubeist wrote:

I bet the next versions of MacOS and Windows will be blatant copies. (Both the finder and explorer are getting very long in the tooth without a major overhaul)

You've got to be kidding! They will be finished. Windows and OS X does follow their own concepts and not such experiment like Gnome 3.

sultanoswing · 2011-05-05 23:06:58

After using Gnome 3 (and specifically gnome-shell) for a few weeks now, I would like to see a hot corner in the top right of the screen providing easier access to the desktop selector. It seems unnecessary mouse-movement is needed to go to the top left to launch the activities panel then swing all the way over to the right side of the screen to select (by click or mouse wheel) another desktop space.

Yes, I know you can select desktops with ctrl+alt+up/down arrow, but I would like to see mappable hot corners a la OSX.

lucke · 2011-05-05 23:21:39

You can also drag the background in the overview mode to change the desktop.

jakerules · 2011-05-06 14:39:19

I thought I was one of the few people really enjoying gnome 3.

My only problems with it are that my gnome-shell has a memory leak (starts up at like 20megs, 6 hours later it's at around 600megs) and I constantly need to reinstall it, otherwise I get that "oops, something has gone wrong!" error every couple of reboots. Right now I'm just chillaxing in fallback mode until I can find some sort of solution.

Oh, and my screen dimming/turning off during movies despite myself telling vlc not to do that is kind of annoying as well. > : ( I really have no idea why it does this.

Other than that, it's a great operating system really. I mean if you ignore the memory leak, it's still beautiful and rather snappy as long as you have a computer from within 5 to 6 years.

siriusb · 2011-05-06 15:09:52

You don't need to reinstall, Alt+F2+r will throw you back to the initial state. Known bug. With gnome-shell 3.0.1-3 the situation is slightly better as I see.

From time to time I always have this screensaver issue with vlc, recently I switched to smplayer and it works flawlessly.

jakerules · 2011-05-06 15:23:05

Definitely going to try out smplayer Thanks for the tips. : )

bwat47 · 2011-05-06 16:33:30

I'm actually loving it on my laptop. Just wish fglrx would work with it. It seems very polished and fast. Mutter seems a lot less buggy than compiz. My main issue is the lack of options by default, but it seems like more and more options are coming in in the forum of extensions and the gnome tweak tool. I am in love with how empathy is integrated, the notifications and quick reply is amazing.

Its a pleasure to use with my laptop's 15 inch screen, but I can definitely see how its not ideal for desktop usage with a big monitor and/or dual monitors and why some people dislike it so much.

jocheem67 wrote:

Oh, and don't use the ALSA daemon with pulse; it's not necessary
Yeah, I noticed that one. Actually it gave me a couple of permission warnings during shutting down my daemons array. Disabling the alsa daemon fixed that and kept sound. Nice...
Maybe something for the wiki???

lol I just installed arch for the second time and accidently skipped over the sound part of the wiki and didn't even think anything of it until now. My sound is working wonderfully doing nothing more than installing pulse audio

Last edited by bwat47 (2011-05-06 16:38:38)

bwat47 · 2011-05-06 16:37:56

EDIT: oops

Last edited by bwat47 (2011-05-06 16:38:29)

Arch Linux

#151 2011-04-29 17:22:51

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#152 2011-04-29 17:40:55

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#153 2011-04-30 02:26:44

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#154 2011-04-30 03:38:00

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#155 2011-04-30 10:59:08

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#156 2011-05-01 09:06:18

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#157 2011-05-01 10:33:50

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#158 2011-05-01 12:34:53

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#159 2011-05-01 22:46:27

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#160 2011-05-02 15:01:33

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#161 2011-05-02 15:08:25

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#162 2011-05-02 15:22:33

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#163 2011-05-02 19:21:51

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#164 2011-05-02 20:11:00

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#165 2011-05-02 21:30:56

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#166 2011-05-02 21:33:56

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#167 2011-05-03 20:40:03

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#168 2011-05-03 22:18:38

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#169 2011-05-05 23:06:58

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#170 2011-05-05 23:21:39

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#171 2011-05-06 14:39:19

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#172 2011-05-06 15:09:52

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#173 2011-05-06 15:23:05

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#174 2011-05-06 16:33:30

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

#175 2011-05-06 16:37:56

Re: [GNOME 3] First Impressions?

Board footer