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 469335
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Tested it for a few hours
by Fusion on Wed 6th Apr 2011 20:30 UTC in reply to "Tested it for a few hours"
Fusion
Member since:
2005-07-18

I thought it was pretty good for a .0 release,

Absolutely agreed here! The GNOME 3.0 release is, by far, more stable and usable than my experience with OSX 10.0 and KDE 4.0...and certainly more pleasing than Windows VISTA was. One really cannot fairly compare GNOME 3.0 against KDE 4.6, OSX 10.6/7, or Win7 (basically Vista "done right")... every desktop *.0 release has significant usability issues... but based on its introduction, the GNOME 3.0 is a good start and strongly positions the platform to be great in the long-term.

The biggest problem for me was that it broke audio entirely, and after a while I got fed up trying to fix it, and switched back to KDE.

That may not be a GNOME-specific problem. Audio stacks are a bit convoluted in Linux, so unless the distro was tailored specifically for GNOME 3, you might find some quirky behavior. I could be wrong.

Some things do need to be fixed, especially in the GUI, as the whole Gnome Shell simply uses too much space.

This is/was my gut reaction as well... reflecting further, however, I think the designers might have done this intentionally. The overall shell design seems to lend itself very well towards tablet and touch-based hardware. I wonder if that (sort of "future thinking") drove this layout. [Though, they probably shouldn't bet the farm on one style. I would have preferred UI elements that adapt to the system being used---standard desktop, Tablet, portable, phone, etc.]

Overall though, component integration is well-delivered; UI is consistent; and notifications are really unobtrusive but usable. Window "snap" functionality is useful (wouldn't mind having keybindings defaulted for this though), and the type-driven app/doc finding functionality brings GNOME more on-par with Win7 & KDE4's app menu and OSX's spotlight.

The biggest hurdle is change: people, by default, tend to not like change. Sometimes benefits are less apparent simply because we're accustomed to working a specific way. And I'm guessing that, in areas where users are unable to adapt, the desktop will be changed to fill that usability gap. Time will provide those fixes... Gnome2.x,KDE4.x, and every major commercial desktop have thoroughly demonstrated that.

Come to think of it, especially with its "just type"-like actions, GNOME 3.0 sorta makes me feel like I'm working on an over-sized Palm Pre/WebOS. haha... so GNOME 3 is like a new cell phone---usability feels rigid at first because I'm used to my old phone; there's a different (but better) UI, and it's full of tricks and cool features that I'll discover over time. I think GNOME 3 will grow on me.

I'm definitely looking forward to see how user feedback, dev enhancements, and new infrastructural implementations land in future releases. I can't wait for 3.1, 3.2, and so on!

Reply Parent Score: 6

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

This is/was my gut reaction as well... reflecting further, however, I think the designers might have done this intentionally. The overall shell design seems to lend itself very well towards tablet and touch-based hardware. I wonder if that (sort of "future thinking") drove this layout. [Though, they probably shouldn't bet the farm on one style. I would have preferred UI elements that adapt to the system being used---standard desktop, Tablet, portable, phone, etc.]

Overall though, component integration is well-delivered; UI is consistent; and notifications are really unobtrusive but usable. Window "snap" functionality is useful (wouldn't mind having keybindings defaulted for this though), and the type-driven app/doc finding functionality brings GNOME more on-par with Win7 & KDE4's app menu and OSX's spotlight.


Actually, what you just described is pretty much exactly what plasma-netbook (the "small screen" desktop shell for KDE4).

Personally, and I haven't played with GNOME Shell much yet, plasma-netbook got things "more" right. Although, you do have to remove the default "launcher" bar and put back the default panel, taskbar, and systray to really make it useful.

I'm definitely looking forward to see how user feedback, dev enhancements, and new infrastructural implementations land in future releases. I can't wait for 3.1, 3.2, and so on!


Anyone tried GNOME 3.0 via an NFS-mounted / and /home? Does it work better than KDE4? Better/worse than KDE3? Better/worse than GNOME 2.x?

Reply Parent Score: 4

No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

"The biggest problem for me was that it broke audio entirely, and after a while I got fed up trying to fix it, and switched back to KDE.

That may not be a GNOME-specific problem. Audio stacks are a bit convoluted in Linux, so unless the distro was tailored specifically for GNOME 3, you might find some quirky behavior. I could be wrong.
"

No, it was of course a PulseAudio problem. I don't think I had PulseAudio installed at all before, and used bare-bones ALSA, which never caused any trouble. When Pulse started on top of it, it seems to have muted one of the ALSA channels, and of course then the mixer didn't quite work and I couldn't see what was wrong. Or at least that's how it seemed after I uninstalled PulseAudio. I'll look into it some more when I reinstall it later. PulseAudio should be mature enough for general use now.

Reply Parent Score: 3