"Back in November we started sharing some of the exciting features planned for the GNOME 2.22 and 2.24 releases, and now that the first GNOME 2.22.0 Beta release is planned for later this week, we have taken another look at the packages set for inclusion and the changes that have actually been made. While nothing groundbreaking will be introduced in GNOME 2.22, this desktop environment does have some moderate changes worth noting. In this article are eight interesting packages that either have noticeable changes since GNOME 2.20 or are new to GNOME. This list isn't all-inclusive or ordered in any particular fashion, but just eight changes that had caught our attention."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-08-29
Am I the only person who has never had a problem with the fonts in linux?* The GNOME fonts look just the same to me as they did when I started using it 3 years ago - they're prefectly readable, and can be easily configured for speed, readability, monitor type or hideously overdone anti-aliasing.
Those screenshots are hideous, but that's because of resizing and/or compression - I don't even think it's even possible to configure it to blur like that, and the compression artifacts are highly visible; jpeg sucks at text.
* Well, except when the Ubuntu monkies changed the X11 font paths, and that time OOo somehow exploded.
Member since:2007-06-21
It definitely seems to be one of those things that is different for each person. Speaking a person that is very sensitive to fonts looking (and not looking) good, I find basically every distro that I have tried has fonts that are blurry, have poor spacing, and weird shapes. Given the number of posts on various support forums by people crying out as to how they can improve their font situation, it seems that I am not alone.
Member since:2007-06-21
I would whole heartedly agree that Gnome is great within certain usage scenarios, especially given the number of friends whose Windows computers I have fixed by paving the hard drive and putting on Ubuntu. It's simple -- they can click on the web browser icon and a web browser pulls up. That's about all they need... as for email and other functionality, they are generally set by using web-based things. I am finding that people in this scenario rarely seem to use much else.
Although I prefer having more robust and flexible usability in a desktop, the 'padded walls' approach of Gnome is generally a win for this particular case.
Member since:
2005-07-06
I definitely have to agree with you in general sentiment. Fonts made me cry for the longest time. One aspect of that is getting used to the fact that fonts are different between Windows, OS X, and X11/Gnome, but now I don't see font rendering as a specific weakness in x11, just a difference to get used to. They really have improved that much in the last 18 months.
Re: the lack of spit and polish- that sums up my experience quite well. I *do* like many aspects of the OSS desktops I've used, but I've never been able to use them as a complete replacement for any other environment due to the fact that software is in a state of perpetual (my perception) incompleteness. I have found certain OSS projects to be excellent. The desktop environments just don't cut it however. GNOME, especially, I find is excellent within certain usage scenarios, but it's just not fleshed out enough, and given enough love to make it really robust.
KDE has attempted to tackle most usage scenarios, but tolerating its rough edges is the price you have to pay for the relative
So to put it succinctly, I see GNOME as being developed with a narrow usage model in mind. Within those bounds, it's wonderful to use, but outside of those bounds, it's all wilderness.
KDE, on the other hand, attempts to cover everything, and has become a jack-of-all-trades, master of none.
With regard to TFA, I hope to see GNOME pick up steam. I think it's making progress at a slower rate than the other major environments.