Linked by David Adams on Sat 31st Jul 2010 06:38 UTC
Gnome Yesterday it was announced that GNOME 3.0 is delayed till next year. The extra time has given the Shell Developers some more time to play around with new concepts and they have come up a new mockup. Here are the new mockups.
Thread beginning with comment 434946
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Now its gnome's turn...
by leos on Sat 31st Jul 2010 19:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Now its gnome's turn..."
leos
Member since:
2005-09-21

"Gnome is now well on track to do the same thing, but worse.

Nope, Gnome is actually doing pretty well.
"

By what measure?

They haven't changed much of the underlying infrastructure of Gnome 2, just the user interface. KDE 4.0 failed because it was a complete rewrite with all new technology.


The user interface is what everyone sees. KDE had plasma which wasn't ready, and Gnome has their new shell, which isn't ready. The rest of the KDE framework didn't cause problems.

"Gnome will also have a fundamentally new design

Gnome Shell is really the only major fundamental change in Gnome 3. And it's just a window manager. The apps are largely the same.
"

So the thing that users interact with every day all day is fundamentally different. Just like KDE's plasma. The apps most people use (Firefox, Openoffice) didn't change there either.

"The desktop environment has stagnated and that's a good thing.

No, it's not. The desktop needs something new.
"

Why? Just cause? What precise problem would that solve? How exactly will a new desktop paradigm solve problems for users? Will it make them faster? Different just cause you're bored with the standard is not a good reason for change unless you're making a toy.

KDE 4 is probably the most impressive desktop right now, and it's still just the basic taskbar, windows, widgets, etc. There is a lot out there that has not been explored.


Many many things have been explorer and discarded because they didn't work. You developers see the status quo and think no one has tried anything else. People have tried tons of different things and they didn't improve the situation so they were dropped. But if you don't actually go and read the research and history you would never know.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Now its gnome's turn...
by Zifre on Sun 1st Aug 2010 00:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Now its gnome's turn..."
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

By what measure?

Well, just that in my own tests, it seems pretty stable and fairly usable. They certainly have a lot of work to do, but I like the concept and I think that it will be pretty good by the time Gnome 3.0 is released. However, many people disagree, and hate Gnome Shell in general. I don't really know how well it will do in the end.

The user interface is what everyone sees. KDE had plasma which wasn't ready, and Gnome has their new shell, which isn't ready. The rest of the KDE framework didn't cause problems.

Most people pay a lot more attention to the apps than the window manager (although I strongly disagree with the common statement that the OS isn't important and should only exist for the users to use the apps).

And Plasma wasn't the only problem in KDE 4.0. Many of the apps had huge instabilities too. Thankfully, Gnome 3.0 shouldn't have that problem, at least with the apps.

Why? Just cause? What precise problem would that solve? How exactly will a new desktop paradigm solve problems for users? Will it make them faster? Different just cause you're bored with the standard is not a good reason for change unless you're making a toy.

I should have been more clear. I don't think that the desktop needs a fundamental redesign. I'm just a little bit sad that so little attention is payed to it anymore. Phones, netbooks, and tablets are what is new and exciting right now, and there are certainly a lot of people who dismiss the desktop as old and something that only power users need anymore.

That's not to say that there aren't exciting new developments. KDE 4, Windows 7, Gnome 3 are all really nice. I just think that the rate of innovation is slowing. Overall quality is greatly increasing though.

Many many things have been explorer and discarded because they didn't work.

True, but many more ideas have not been tried at all.

You developers see the status quo and think no one has tried anything else.

For one, developers are the ones who try the new ideas in software.

Also, many ideas have been tried but failed due to uncommonness, not merit. For example, attributes and queries in BeOS/Haiku are something that I would love to see on every OS. They didn't "fail" because they were bad. They "failed" because few people use BeOS/Haiku.

Reply Parent Score: 4

monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

Congratulations! You know how to jump down someone's throat via the anonymity of the internet! You think your opinion means crap! You have the social graces of colicky, diaper-clad fuss-pot!

You're special!

Well guess what? I can condescend, too.

"
Nope, Gnome is actually doing pretty well.


By what measure?
"

By whatever measure the author chooses, smartass. I'll pick a few for you, though: stability, rapid prototyping, community involvement, popularity.

"Gnome Shell is really the only major fundamental change in Gnome 3. And it's just a window manager. The apps are largely the same.


So the thing that users interact with every day all day is fundamentally different. Just like KDE's plasma. The apps most people use (Firefox, Openoffice) didn't change there either.
"

But get this: Nobody's gonna make you use Gnome Shell! Isn't that crazy?! It's actually a new piece of software. They're giving you choice (stick with Metacity + Gnome Panel or try Gnome Shell). In fact, you could just as easily run Gnome with any window manager.

Novel, huh?

Of course, you know what this means: You're bitching about nothing. Not nothing, even. You're bitching about additional choice in an open source project (which is currently desperately soliciting direct feedback and contributions from the community) on a distant forum, far removed from the people who could or would care, and you don't even have the courtesy to use a constructive tone. Ingrate.

If you should win the lottery, do you see yourself whining about the size of the check?

"No, it's not. The desktop needs something new.


Why? Just cause? What precise problem would that solve? How exactly will a new desktop paradigm solve problems for users? Will it make them faster? Different just cause you're bored with the standard is not a good reason for change unless you're making a toy.
"

Leap to conclusions much?

Perhaps the desktop needs to be revolutionized because 40% of the screen real estate on my netbook is monopolized by redundant toolbars and rarely-used buttons.

Perhaps tabbed applications have finally made multi-tasking accessible and comprehensible to the masses, and they're now ready to unite task management paradigms.

Perhaps pervasive search has rendered the classic "navigate to your document and double click" task flow irrelevant, wasteful, and unnecessary.

Perhaps there are more needs and opinions on these things than just your own.

" KDE 4 is probably the most impressive desktop right now, and it's still just the basic taskbar, windows, widgets, etc. There is a lot out there that has not been explored.


Many many things have been explorer and discarded because they didn't work. You developers see the status quo and think no one has tried anything else. People have tried tons of different things and they didn't improve the situation so they were dropped. But if you don't actually go and read the research and history you would never know.
"

"We developers" have every bit as much of a view of history as you (probably more, given your uninformed opinion thus far). Your reasoning is so circularly idiotic, I'm going to have difficulty explaining it to you without actually hurting my own intelligence in the process, but I'll keep it bite-sized: Improvement necessarily involves change. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. By not changing, GNOME ceases to become technology and stagnates.

Or are you actually suggesting that technology is driven forward by... not changing anything? Because if that's the case, you're free to use (literally free) the existing versions of GNOME that work perfectly for you. Nobody's twisting your arm to upgrade your free desktop environment.

Reply Parent Score: 2