Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Apr 2011 17:50 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Gnome The day is finally here, the day that the GNOME team releases GNOME 3.0, the first major revision of the GNOME project since 2002. Little of GNOME 2.x is left in GNOME 3.0, and as such, you could call it GNOME's KDE4. We're living in fortunate times, what, with two wildly divergent open source desktops.
Thread beginning with comment 469308
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Sigh...
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 6th Apr 2011 18:52 UTC in reply to "Sigh..."
Anonymous Penguin
Member since:
2005-07-06

I hate what they did to my GNOME... In a world here user interfaces are standard (close buttons, taskbar, start menu), GNOME 3 will fail harder than KDE 4 did...


I abandoned KDE forever since KDE 4 and I moved to GNOME... And now? Shall I have to abandon GNOME as well?
And then? Move to XFCE4 or forget Linux altogether?
My only regret is that my core i7 laptop PC was 999 Euro, whilst a core i7 MacBook Pro is 2499 Euro.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Sigh...
by danieldk on Wed 6th Apr 2011 19:08 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

Indeed. I switched mostly to OS X full time, but I still loved GNOME on a Linux machine that I use occasionally. The nicest thing about GNOME was that progress was evolutionary, rather than revolutionary. That day has now gone by. You can completely overhaul a user interface, but do it over the course of a few years.

At the very least OS X and Windows don't force a completely new UI down everyone's throats in a whim.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: Sigh...
by phoenix on Wed 6th Apr 2011 19:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Windows 3.11 --> Windows 95: drastically different UI.

Windows NT 3.x --> Windows NT 4.0: drastically different UI.

Windows 2K/9x --> Windows XP: drastically different UI.

Windows XP --> Windows 7: drastically different UI.

Same for their Office suites (Office 2.0 -> 6.0 -> 95 -> 2003 -> 2007).

Yeah, it's great that Microsoft doesn't foist radically different UIs onto it's users :roll-eyes: Especially considering how little benefit there actually is to the new interface(s) compared to the old.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Sigh...
by toblerone on Wed 6th Apr 2011 20:19 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
toblerone Member since:
2008-12-11

There is a group of enthusiastic OS afficianados in Redmond. They have a promising little OS called Windows 7, gets updated regularily and starts to look promising, show them your support. Their website is www.microsoft.com, might be out of date though - so perhaps just google them ...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Sigh...
by marcus0263 on Wed 6th Apr 2011 20:22 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
marcus0263 Member since:
2007-06-02

You don't have to use Gnome Shell, IMO it's going to be as successful as "New Coke". Anyway with Gnome Shell and Ubuntu also going with that crap "Unity" is many reason why to use Linux Mint. They have no plans on moving to either Gnome Shell or that crap interface Unity.

Give it a shot

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh...
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 6th Apr 2011 20:30 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

You don't have to use Gnome Shell, IMO it's going to be as successful as "New Coke". Anyway with Gnome Shell and Ubuntu also going with that crap "Unity" is many reason why to use Linux Mint. They have no plans on moving to either Gnome Shell or that crap interface Unity.

Give it a shot


For that matter I am planning to use Debian Stable for a while. But after that?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh...
by pepa on Thu 7th Apr 2011 15:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
pepa Member since:
2005-07-08

I feared that gnome-panel would be unmaintained in the near future, but apparently it will be available as an option. (?)
Also, it is possible to use the Desktop as a... desktop, I mean, you can put files on it that you are working on (as I do extensively).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Sigh...
by Lennie on Wed 6th Apr 2011 20:33 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

XFCE4 is now pretty high on my list, almost at the top.

I just did a little experiment and an XFCE4 install can look mostly like GNOME in about 20 minutes of tweaking.

I might go back to Debian on the desktop, in that case with XFCE4 if I don't like what GNOME or Ubuntu come up with.

And Thunar is much faster than Nautilus anyway. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh...
by seanpk on Wed 6th Apr 2011 21:54 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
seanpk Member since:
2009-11-17

Xfce has been my main work desktop for 2 years. It is great - I'm still using the 4.6 at work, but have tried 4.8 - which is even better.

With distro refreshes starting to pick up Xfce 4.8, it is a great time to give it a spin!

Or better yet, look at what Mint has done:
http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1725
You get a debian testing base, with whatever Xfce version is there + all the Mint-ism.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Sigh...
by v_bobok on Wed 6th Apr 2011 22:01 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
v_bobok Member since:
2008-08-01

Delicious hackintosh. On i7 it might even work... kinda.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Sigh...
by Anonymous Penguin on Thu 7th Apr 2011 22:05 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Delicious hackintosh. On i7 it might even work... kinda.

I am an administrator of the largest hackintosh forum and, believe me, hackintoshing a laptop is not a great idea. That is because, contrary to desktops, you can't choose the most compatible parts one by one.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Sigh...
by lemur2 on Wed 6th Apr 2011 22:57 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"I hate what they did to my GNOME... In a world here user interfaces are standard (close buttons, taskbar, start menu), GNOME 3 will fail harder than KDE 4 did...
I abandoned KDE forever since KDE 4 and I moved to GNOME... And now? Shall I have to abandon GNOME as well? And then? Move to XFCE4 or forget Linux altogether? My only regret is that my core i7 laptop PC was 999 Euro, whilst a core i7 MacBook Pro is 2499 Euro. "

You could try a move back to KDE. KDE 4.6 is the best current desktop system out there, bar none. The one and only problem was KDE 4.0 wasn't ready for ordinary users, the developers said so, but distributions shipped it anyway. KDE has recovered from that fiasco ages ago now.

Such a shame if you won't even give the best desktop system available to you right now a try. Your loss, though.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh...
by Aragorn992 on Thu 7th Apr 2011 07:44 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
Aragorn992 Member since:
2007-05-27

The one and only problem was KDE 4.0 wasn't ready for ordinary users, the developers said so, but distributions shipped it anyway.


I've seen that argument used alot in the past few weeks. If it wasn't ready for ordinary users then why did they call it KDE 4.0 and not KDE 4.0 BETA?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Sigh...
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Apr 2011 10:34 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Windows 7 and MacOSX are better ... it is purely subjective topic. If he doesn't like it ... he doesn't like it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Sigh...
by kaiwai on Thu 7th Apr 2011 04:26 in reply to "RE: Sigh..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I abandoned KDE forever since KDE 4 and I moved to GNOME... And now? Shall I have to abandon GNOME as well?
And then? Move to XFCE4 or forget Linux altogether?
My only regret is that my core i7 laptop PC was 999 Euro, whilst a core i7 MacBook Pro is 2499 Euro.


The one thing that always confused me with the open source world is that they'll strike a perfect idea and then completely f--k it within a few releases. GNOME 2.x in my books is a great desktop and if GNOME 3.x was merely some refactoring underneath components with GTK+/GLIB/ATK given an overhauling, speed improvements, refinement in the interface for better consistency and improving the individual applications that make up GNOME it would be a strong 3.x upgrade. What have we got with GNOME 3.x? it as though those who were designing simply decided to be different for the sake of being different - "its a big number revision we better do something that shows things have really changed!".

Mac OS X and Windows haven't stagnated, the developers at said companies have realised they're onto a good thing and now in the process of refining and smoothing out the rough edges - why couldn't GNOME developers do the same thing? GNOME is already a good desktop, why was the time wasted in re-inventing the wheel when it could have been better spent on improving the bundled applications for starters.

As for the MacBook Pro - I learned long ago you purchase what works for you and if it means you pay a few extra dollars for something that allows you to keep your sanity then so be it. Btw, price for price comparisons are meaningless - if you were in New Zealand I'd take you down to Dick Smiths and show you the obvious problem with saying, "but the MacBook Pro is more expensive!" without actually having a look at the device and using it. Going off on a tangent, two things that come to mind for example are battery life and build quality - how many of these i7's are chocked full of desktop components with a giant screen which are little more than 'desktop replacements' rather than being actual laptops - when I purchase a laptop I want to use it for 5+ hours on battery rather than being told that I should be satisfied with a 2-3 hour battery life. The build quality is also important - go through the local big box store and check out the amount of cheap plastic garbage being sold and a tonne of bling clipped on to give the appearance that it less cheap looking than it really is.

Edited 2011-04-07 04:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Sigh...
by tuma324 on Thu 7th Apr 2011 07:21 in reply to "RE[2]: Sigh..."
tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

"I abandoned KDE forever since KDE 4 and I moved to GNOME... And now? Shall I have to abandon GNOME as well?
And then? Move to XFCE4 or forget Linux altogether?
My only regret is that my core i7 laptop PC was 999 Euro, whilst a core i7 MacBook Pro is 2499 Euro.


The one thing that always confused me with the open source world is that they'll strike a perfect idea and then completely f--k it within a few releases. GNOME 2.x in my books is a great desktop and if GNOME 3.x was merely some refactoring underneath components with GTK+/GLIB/ATK given an overhauling, speed improvements, refinement in the interface for better consistency and improving the individual applications that make up GNOME it would be a strong 3.x upgrade. What have we got with GNOME 3.x? it as though those who were designing simply decided to be different for the sake of being different - "its a big number revision we better do something that shows things have really changed!".
"

The GNOME 2.x interface is dated, GNOME 3 provides a new and innovative interface.


Mac OS X and Windows haven't stagnated, the developers at said companies have realised they're onto a good thing and now in the process of refining and smoothing out the rough edges - why couldn't GNOME developers do the same thing?


Because GNOME is not Mac OS X or Windows. In a few years you will probably realize that moving forward with the GUI is also important.

Learn to adapt yourself to changes, it's not that hard, it will only do you good.

Edited 2011-04-07 07:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1