The GNOME team has released GNOME 2.26, the latest release in the 2.x release branch. As everyone knows, GNOME is a multi-platform open source desktop environment. The 2.26 release continues GNOME’s policy of incremental updates to a stable base, and as such, it comes packed with a boatload of new features.
GNOME 2.26 includes the Brasero CD/DVD burning tool as the default burning application. Even though GNOME already supported burning capabilities, Brasero brings new features to GNOME such as audio track preview, track splitting, volume normalisation, full multisession support, integrity checks, a cover editor, and support for multiple burning backends. Note that the previous method of burning is still part of GNOME.
Work on GNOME’s mail and groupware suite, Evolution , has focussed on users migrating from Windows. Evolution now supports importing Outlook .pst files, as well as support for Microsoft Exchange’s MAPI protocol. This makes GNOME much more suited to work with Exchange servers.
There are also a few media-related improvements, such as the automatic subtitle downloader plugin in Media Player. There’s also a new volume control applet that makes full use of PulseAudio’s advanced audio features. The old Gstreamer mixer is still available to those who aren’t using PulseAudio.
Other new features include, among others, video chat in Empathy, better multi monitor support, and fingerprint reader support. GNOME 2.26 will find its way to your distribution of choice soon enough, but if you can’t wait, you can build it yourself.
Great release! Each release GNOME gets *a bit* better. Looking forward to install next Ubuntu here. All partitions are prepared. GNOME development is accused to lay on the stagnated side, but I much prefer this than the competitors. Well, no wonder all major distros ship it as the default desktop.
Maybe I’m biased, but I always thought Slackware was one of the “major” distros.
As for the GNOME vs X debate – I’m not even going to bother getting into DE flamewars when the whole point of Linux is freedom to choose.
Slackware’s usage has been declining over time, and its remaining usage is mainly for servers, where users aren’t using any desktop at all, or even X.
I used Slackware back in the 1990s.
You say that, but little more than 1 years ago, Slackware was my primary desktop
openSUSE doesn’t have a default. I’m not sure about Mandriva. It either uses KDE by default or has none. (I’m talking about the DVDs. The CD versions alre always either GNOME or KDE, sometimes others as well.)
It also depends how you see Kubuntu. The Kubuntu community sees itself as a separate destro that just uses Ubuntu as a base (similar to how Linux Mint sees itself). Same with Xubuntu, but I don’t know if Xubunu has many users (Kubuntu has many, Xubuntu probably not).
Xandros is also a big distro — it’s just without any communiy involvement and it’s targeted towards OEMs.
When you’re trolling, don’t do it with a claim that’s so easy to debunk.
When you’re trying to project confidence, don’t act so defensive.
The top ranking distributions, according to Distrowatch by page hits:
1 Ubuntu 2339 – GNOME is default
2 openSUSE 1683 – KDE/GNOME equal
3 Mint 1524 – GNOME is default, but KDE4 version is in work
4 Fedora 1369 – KDE/GNOME equal
5 Debian 1258 – KDE/GNOME equal
6 Mandriva 1042 – KDE is default
7 PCLinuxOS 1009 – KDE is default
8 MEPIS 689 – KDE is default
9 Puppy 666 – JWM is default
10 CentOS 654 – KDE/GNOME equal??
11 Sabayon 628 – KDE is default
12 Arch 595 – GNOME is default
Sorry … no soup for you.
GDM is the default in Debian. GNOME is the default login. You have to dpkg-reconfigure kdm and set KDE as the default, after you’ve installed Debian.
So, yes, GNOME is default in Debian.
Do you even know what default means? it means that if you do a default install of the said operating system – what have they setup as the default desktop to install. Ubuntu, OpenSuSE, Mint and Fedora all default to GNOME by default; if you went ‘next, next, next, next’, you’ll find that GNOME is installed by default.
As for who is default; it doesn’t matter because quite frankly the choice of desktops is an individual choice and the number of distro’s tell me more about the distribution communities preferences than any sort of declaration being made on which is superior.
AFAIK, that is true for Minti and Ubuntu main distributions, but for Ubuntu there is a variant available called Kubuntu where KDE is the default, and also there is soon to be a variant (it is in beta now) of Mint where KDE is the default.
Fedora and OpenSuse, AFAICR, both ship with both KDE and GNOME as choices, and you cannot simply go ‘next, next, next’ because when you get to the point where it asks what desktop you want, none is pre-selected by default. You must select one or the other before you can proceed with the installation.
Agreed.
However, that observation does not detract from my method of rebuttal of the original statement quoted.
Edited 2009-03-19 03:15 UTC
In the case of OpenSuSE and Fedora, it depends on which version you download; the single cd and desktop version or the dvd ISO
At the end of the day – does it really matter? use what you want to use – distributions make their decisions based on what they as a community think is best for the metaphorical ‘end user’ they’re targeting; for the rest of us, I’m sure we ignore their recommendation and do what we please with our software
Edited 2009-03-19 03:18 UTC
I agree. “use what you want to use”. Precisely the correct sentiment, and very much in accord with open source ideals.
Nevertheless, we can all do without misconceptions as per the original post, which claimed: “Well, no wonder all major distros ship it as the default desktop”. That claim was worth rebutting.
I 100% agree, when I saw the quote I was wondering whether I should reply; when one looks at the tone of “Well, no wonder all major distros ship it as the default desktop”, its a subtle way of saying that “GNOME is better than all the other desktops out there – and distribution support is proof of that”.
Distrowatch lists all variations of Ubuntu separately. So “Ubuntu” ranking highest really means Ubuntu only – with the Gnome deskatop 🙂
http://en.opensuse.org/Image:11_1-install-006.png
So stop spreading lies please. Thank you.
Arch does not have a default desktop. The installer does not even install X server. X server and your desktop of choice have to be manually installed after your first boot.
Gentoo is the same way.
If you look at the distros that businesses actually consider: RHEL Desktop, SLED, CentOS, Ubuntu, and maybe Debian… then its Gnome, Gnome, Gnome, Gnome, and Gnome, respectively.
Don’t get me wrong. I think KDE is a good desktop, and perfectly fine for hobbyists.
By repeating this “KDE is for hobbyist, GNOME for professionals” nonsense you will not make in more true. In my office there are four professionals – in telco business – and all of them use KDE as their desktop. They probably just don’t know.
For instance, KIO for accessing remote servers, very hobbyist feature, I guess.
Businesses consider these as replacements for Windows or OS X desktops do they? Hmmmmm. How many years have we had the year of the Linux desktop, of course, headed by distributions using Gnome as their default desktop ;-).
It’s just a real pity that Windows, and to a lesser extent, OS X users are simply not interested in an open source desktop that has far less functionality than they already have. It’s also a pity that Gnome is so inferior to Windows and OS X for developers that they’re going split their sides laughing at you. Yer, real professional. It’s also extremely ironic that we have a ‘hobbyist’ open source desktop that is a long way ahead here, and has the applications to go with it.
In fact, so professional we will get to Gnome 2.2.334, still be no further foward and still be comparing how high we can piss by talking about various distributors’ choice of default desktop when it’s just a laughably sad method of measuring ‘success’ because it’s all that some people have.
You know, that’s exactly what Windows and OS X users are saying to Gnome users. All three of them. If they’ve even heard of it that is.
And the same is being said, by those same Windows and OS X users, about KDE. In fact, it’s usually generalized to “Linux.” I know you have an axe to grind with GNOME for some odd reason (or is it anything that isn’t KDE?), but really, try to keep some perspective. Most Windows and OS X users view open source desktops as hobbiest. I won’t say whether that is the correct perception or not, but it is there regardless. Most of them have heard of “that Linux thingy” but wouldn’t know the terms GNOME and KDE if they came up and bit them. Hell, most of them don’t even know OS X’s user interface is called Aqua, and they don’t care. They just want to point and click, and do what they have to do. Oh, and by the way, rotating cubes and spinning plasmoids are usually secondary in their minds to getting their work done. Perhaps if both major open source desktops didn’t concentrate so much on that and shored up some gaps in actual functionality…
Edited 2009-03-22 22:23 UTC
Yep it is, but, KDE has the features that Windows and OS X users will be familiar with and the programming platform to be a fair bit more compelling to developers who will create the functionality that will make users use a Linux desktop.
Because it’s just plain inferior, that’s why. No more, no less. If it wasn’t we wouldn’t keep getting this.
I’m not the one trying to give the strange impression that we’re stuck with Gnome in the open source desktop world because of the number of distros it is the ‘default’ desktop on because I know I can’t talk about features, developer tools, functionality or applications or anything that actually matters to people ;-).
It’s an untrue myth I’m afraid. That’s what CDE thought when Windows 95 and Mac OS moved on in the visual department, and look where that got it. Graphical and visual improvements also have spin-off benefits such as resolution independence.
When users or a group of decision makers see Windows Vista or 7 and OS X when compared with a distro running Gnome as the default alongside it they’re just going to laugh – and that’s just a visual inspection.
“Inferior,” is very subjective. Honestly, you complain about GNOME fanboys, but it takes a fanboy to know one I suppose. Look at the crap you’re spouting out and realize you’re simply the same as they are, you’re just on the other side of the fence.
What is inferior to you may not be inferior to me. For my purposes, for example, KDE is very clearly inferior to GNOME. Stop trying to force your view on others. It won’t work, you’ll inevitably piss people off, and then you’ll be pissed off and repeat the cycle. KDE, GNOME, whatever. Let’s just have all of them continue to thrive, competition is nothing but good, and agreement will never be reached on a topic as subjective as this.
I did not say visual improvements were not important. But there’s a point when it goes beyond improvement and simply becomes a toy, of no real practical purpose. What, exactly, does a spinning cube bring to the desktop experience, other than the five seconds it takes to go wow, ok that was cool now what? Maybe I’m just jaded and sick of every Linux fanboy zealot pointing out the spinning cubes as a productive feature. Some of the visuals are features, others very clearly are just eye candy. Further, I wouldn’t say CDE died because of lack of visual effects, it died because at the time it wasn’t usually practical for the average home user to run UNIX, if they even knew what UNIX was or cared. CDE fell off, in short, when better desktops like GNOME and KDE came on the scene and replaced it, they were more open and had new ideas, thus attracting a wider community around them.
You’re getting far too defensive and you’re in danger of proving yourself to be the fanboy that you want to accuse me of being. Inferior is not subjective once you start rattling through a list of bullet points, and that’s quite possible what you don’t like.
What’s inferior to me or to you is irrelevant. What’s inferior to Windows or OS X users, and especially developers, is.
I look at what keeps people on Windows, and to a lesser extent OS X, technologically and I see far, far less with Gnome than I do with KDE, be it developer tools, architecture, functionality or the wide range of applications in the KDE world. Even that isn’t enough itself though, because there is a ton of stuff to do beyond just the desktop itself. It’s high time we just accepted where we are.
Based on what? Like I said, what’s inferior for your purposes, or mine, is irrelevant.
Where’s the common architecture that won’t piss developers off? Where’s the development tools that don’t piss developers off – apart from Mono? As much as I’ve had a go at Mono it is still the best way of getting into GTK and Gnome development. Where’s the applications with the functionality of things like Amarok and DigiKam? Where’s the educational applications? Where’s the resolution independence? Where’s the next generation of graphical applications going to come from? Where’s the platform they will be built on? How can small desktop applets be developed to extend the functionality of the desktop and attract users? How can people develop them? How can users install them?
People try and paint what Windows Vista/7, OS X and KDE behind it are doing as some king of ‘spinning cube’ thing that no one needs, but it will all fall on deaf ears. Desktops have always moved along visually, as sure as eggs is eggs, and they bring along with them new applications and new functionality. Is it a crime to want something to look nice? We could all get along without font anti-aliasing and smoothing, but we don’t.
It’s the Linux fanboy zealots who can’t see that how your desktop presents itself visually is important, has implications for the functionality you can present and the kind of applications that can be developed. Applications are the lifeblood of any desktop. To ignore that is to retreat into the sad world of CDE and the old Unix desktops and repeat all the same mistakes in the 90s.
Yes. Both Gnome and KDE looked better, were more functional and had better applications. What does that tell you?
KDE isn’t default in Mandriva. KDE and Gnome is equal.
Debian on the other hand doesn’t threat KDE and Gnome equally, it’s more like they have Gnome as a semi default.
This whole discussion on different distros and their default DEs is stupid but I nevertheless have to add something.
After some 7 years with SuSE/openSUSE, I recently switched to Ubuntu — and I like it. However, one of my laptops is Ubuntu with KDE 4.2 (i.e., also Gnome installed but never used) and the other plain Kubuntu with KDE 4.2. I guess I’m an Ubuntu user in your statistics and thus give a point to Gnome. I don’t mine, the default Ubuntu DE looked cool but I just happen to love KDE and didn’t bother learning another one.
To me, more interesting is that the distro doesn’t matter that much: KDE4 does everything and is pretty much the same everywhere. What’s special with Ubuntu (compared to older openSUSE at least) is the xorg configuration — or the lack of it. The system detects your screen automatically and everything just works! (In fact, you need to increase the virtual screen size to use a big external monitor but that’s trivial compared to what it used be. And, yes, I also *have* noticed the different package system but that wasn’t the reason to switch.)
What? Gnome is the default desktop on Arch? Arch is a command line distro. You can then add X.Org, KDE, Gnome or whatever after the install.
Red Flag Linux defaults to KDE. I don’t know how many people in China use it, but given the size of the market there, I would consider it a major distro. As far as I know, OpenSUSE does not have a default desktop, you have to select one (either Gnome or KDE, others are also possible).
I wouldn’t be so sure this version is so good:
http://np237.livejournal.com/22014.html
Did you even bother to look at the URL you just submitted? It speaks of GNOME 2.24, we’re talking about GNOME 2.26.
Yes, and look how far we’ve got with it in terms of wider Linux desktop usage.
It’s all a bit sad really as we’ve had this for years. When you have nothing else left to talk about that will make people use Gnome over Windows, OS X or even KDE, start talking about it as the ‘default’ and give the impression that we’re stuck with it.
Edited 2009-03-22 20:58 UTC
WEll, if we want Linux to succeed on the average desktop, the desktop environment itself is the least of the issues right now. Perhaps we should get the lower level stuff stable first–audio, drivers, kernel ABI (so drivers are compatible across kernel versions), a modern graphics subsystem (ditch X.org), etc. After that the GNOME vs KDE vs Enlightenment vs whatever-the-hell camps can hash it out, but until all the lower level stuff integrates and is easily configurable (try to set up your surround speakers with a few clicks, for example), it just isn’t happening. These lower level things don’t seem all that important if taken individually, but put together they are much more important than they appear. The average home user should never have to touch a configuration file themselves, for anything at all. If that concept stays foremost in the minds of desktop developers, it might get somewhere.
Compared to these broader issues, the whole GNOME vs KDE bs is pointless.
Any chance of do getting integrated into base gnome? IMO it is the best launcher I have ever used on any OS, miles better then the “deskbar” applet
Gnome-Do is a Mono application.
Certain parties would LOVE to see Gnome-Do in base Gnome.
Gnome itself has, however, been insisting for some time that Gnome does not depend on the Mono libraries. In this statement they are correct … currently.
So is it likely that Gnome will do an about-face and make Gnome depend on Mono?
You do the math.
Meanwhile, there is always Krunner …
Edited 2009-03-18 23:28 UTC
didnt realise that, but it not being there makes sense now.
It is also a Quicksilver ripoff. Krunner at least has a bit of originality.
With the latest release, GNOME-Do is also a Mac Dock ripp-off — well…. Quicksilver and Dock ripped-off and then fused… kinda a Mac mash-up. 😉
Originality doesn’t mean better though. Given the choice between an app that rips of a great app really well and an app that comes up with its own mediocre idea I’ll take the ripoff.
Originality doesn’t mean better though. Given the choice between an app that rips of a great app really well and an app that comes up with its own mediocre idea I’ll take the ripoff.
Very true. Besides, which app nowadays does _not_ borrow (or “rip off”) any single idea from some other app? Every OS also borrows ideas from eachothers.
Point is; it is OK to borrow something or even almost everything if you do it well and it’s actually good for the end-user. If you copy something just to try to benefit something yourself then it’s not.
I happened to have used Slackware back in 1999. It was much more stable than the popular Red Hat 5.2 at that time. Nowadays things changed, Ubuntu cannibalized the masses and now distros like Fedora and SuSE need to be catching up with them. But I really thank Red Hat, the one who pushed Linux installation to a whole another level. Each distro has its own contribution in Linux world, but as in life, some will fade away and some not.
After being an avid KDE user for years, I went over to Gnome about three years ago and have stuck with it because it seemed to be more professional looking than KDE at the time. That being said, Gnome’s development is moving along at the speed of evolution! With all the excitement surrounding the new KDE 4.x, it would be nice to see a little excitement coming out of the Gnome camp about now; albeit not too much excitement mind you. As for Gnome-Do…DON’T!
Edited 2009-03-19 01:36 UTC
Hold on a sec. You switched to GNOME because you liked its look better? Ever heard of themes?
I’m not saying “Don’t use GNOME” or something like that.
If you had said “I prefer the lesser options approach”, “I like the usability of Nautilus”, “I only use GIMP and Firefox and those are better integrated into GNOME” or whatever then these are valid reasons. But its look?
I’m not a big fan of KDE’s default look either (except the icons — they are awesome IMO). Oxygen improved since KDE 4.0, but I use Polyester as widget theme.
Both projects are good by their own merrits and the default theme shouldn’t be the reason to choose one.
You read way, way too much into what I said dude. When I said I switched to Gnome because it looked more professional I mean that to encompass many of the examples you cited as well as its overall feel. My reasons had absolutely NOTHING to do with KDE’s themeing! You’ll also note that I did say “at the time.” Obviously the KDE desktop has come a long way in three years. Nevertheless I still prefer Gnome. Cool your jets before you give yourself a nose bleed!
Then you shouldn’t have used “look” but “feel”, IMHO.
I have both installed. I use apps from both and it works well. Nothing stops me from using Brasero and Totem under KDE and Kdenlive and Kontact under GNOME.
I even made the experiment of running Plasma from within GNOME after I’ve read about it in a blog post. On the first run the two “start bars” conflict with each other (the Plasma systray “steals” a few icons), but once the Plasma bar is removed, it works quite well. The Plasma/KDE logout-button even displays the GNOME logout window.
I have used both KDE (Mandriva) and Gnome (Ubuntu), and I do prefer the way Gnome looks. I can get the work done fast and reliably with fewer crashes and complications. Gnome is the perfect example of when less means more. And besides, there are tons of themes for Gnome including some of those useless dark ones where you can barely read anything.
Look is often more than themes. Layout of dialogs, spacing, positioning of widgets, population of toolbars, naming choices, …
Well, I must say that “excitement” is an interesting word to use. “Spin”, “Propaganda”, and “Hype” seem more accurately descriptive terms to me. You wan’t Gnome to spend 4 years taking 10 steps back and then another year (and counting) trying to catch up to where they were before?
The evolutionary vs revolutionary strategy of Gnome development is part and parcel of the professionalism you refer to.
If you’re going to quote me and then seem to belittle me (as is your usual modus operandi,) please don’t “forget” to include all of my words so as to keep what I said in context. You’ll notice that I said “albeit not too much excitement mind you…” which clearly indicate my desire to see Gnome progress a bit faster but without the major shakeup that took place when KDE moved from 3.x to 4.x.
Hmmm. I guess I can see how it might have been taken that way. That wasn’t the intent. I suspect that we are pretty much in agreement on this topic.
This looks like a good release, some things are what Windows 98 could do, and are long overdue.
The PST import into Evolution is what interests me the most. Now if i could just sync evolution with my P910i, i’d make the switch to a Linux desktop. I’m a C# dev, and monodevelop beta 2.0 looks pretty good so far.
I know they talk about “the year of the linux desktop”, i think once it happened, we will realise. There are things in this gnome release which push us forward to “the year of the linux desktop”.
I don’t believe in a “year of Linux desktop”. I think it will be more of an evolution than a revolution.
With the pst support from evolution that will help a whole lot more with working in a windows environment.
There are also some nice usability updates and any update to epiphany is a good thing. but besides the updates to evolution there’s not much i want from 2.26. Making Brasero a default app isn’t that adventurous either.
for now i’d much rather have nautilus 2.24 in squeeze. that’ll be enough to tide me over until gnome 3.0 in a year or so.
Ok, nice improovements, but why integrate with this PulseAudio shit (or should I call it PulseShit?).
I think PulseAudio is a very good sound system. Although still not as stable as ALSA for the moment, the features are too compelling. I am able to switch to another sink while playing, I am able to integrate a ladspa equalizer, and I am able to silence some applications. Sounds good to me…
The problem is that in doing all of that they’re forgetting that there are a bunch of people who don’t know (or care) what ladspa means and simply want to plug in their headphones and listen to their MP3s and youtube videos.
For the moment? Uhhh, more like for the last year and a half.
It’s incredibly fast how many self-intellectuals jump in here to defend KDE, I did not even mention KDE in my first post.
There’s no denial: GNOME is the default desktop in the major distros. Now read right here: MAJOR. I ain’t talking about Kubuntu, Xubuntu, ArchLinux, Dreamlinux, DamnSmallLinux, GirlLinux, Linspire, DoggieLinux, GodLinux, and still counting…
I am talking about the MAJOR… Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian and SuSE. Distrowatch can’t possibly be the market share meter for these long dated and still widespread distros. Even Red Hat Enterprise counts… Now don’t come saying that GirlieLinux ships KDE as default.
And one more thing to the KDE guys: Who ever is shipping KDE, is shipping KDE-old. The majority of distros is not shipping KDE-new. Don’t know if that is a fact to be celebrated, but since you guys spend all day self-thanking yourselves to have written this piece of crap a.k.a KDE4.x.x time to wake up, KDE4 is not default yet, not only in major serious distros, but even small distros as well have not taken a full step towards KDE4.x.x – and this after MORE than a year after the KDE4 release. Did this happen with KDE3? No…
GNOME please, EAT KDE’s lunch…
Why would you (or anybody else) want that? Why the antagonism? I use XFCE and GNOME, but that certainly doesn’t mean I want KDE to fail. Quite the contrary, I want KDE to succeed and become as amazing as it possibly can. I want it to be become so amazing it makes me want to switch over. Because if it does then I get a better desktop to use, and who wouldn’t want that?
Competition is good. Two desktop environments pushing and helping each other to become better is great. If for some reason one GNOME or KDE would fall by the wayside it would be a loss for all *nix users no matter what your favorite DE happens to be.
Because I can’t stand this stupidity of BREAKING everything apart ruining users experience. It moves the ANGER, and their arguments are so stupid, the facts are so harsh (that there was a huge back off on KDE because of 4th release), compleltely drives anyone mad, making me uncounciousnessly want this whole project to fail. Oh well that’s the human part in us.
Wishing for any project to fail just to make you feel like your choices have been validated is retarded.
Breaking things to make the overall experience better is just progress. Apple went through it with OSX, MS went through it to an extent with WinNT/2K…then again with Vista when it comes to drivers and a shedload of applications.
Sometimes a little revolution is a good thing…you just need some patience. But hey, stick with Gnome if that floats your boat. Nobody cares.