Linked by Anonymous on Wed 21st Dec 2011 23:38 UTC
Gnome "Clement Lefebvre, the Linux Mint founder, has started working on a GNOME Shell fork called Cinnamon, which tries to offer a layout similar to GNOME 2, with emphasis on 'making users feel at home and providing them with an easy to use and comfortable desktop experience'. Among the features that we'll probably see in Cinnamon are GNOME2-like notifications and systray icons, option to change the panel position and other panel options like autohide, etc. Some of these features are already available through Mint GNOME Shell Extensions (MGSE), but their functionality is pretty limited."
Thread beginning with comment 501091
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by mieses
by MacMan on Fri 23rd Dec 2011 18:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by mieses"
MacMan
Member since:
2006-11-19


Very strange comment. All you do is right click and add from menu. Whenever you do an install of an app, it shows up in the menu.


Oh really???

Might be true for an app somebody that is in the package manager, these are typically relatively old versions.

What if I install an app NOT in the package manager. Say I install a new version of Eclipse, first have to copy Eclipse somewhere, then to get it in the Gnome menu, have to open the menu editor, choose the path of the app, fill out what command line to use, then have to browse around to find an icon. Ridiculous!!!

On Windows 95, 15 freaking years ago, I could just take an app, drag it to the start menu, drop it in the place I wanted and it worked.

Its absolutely ludicrous that I need a "menu editor" to change the Gnome menu, and that it does not support drag and drop editing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by mieses
by Alfman on Fri 23rd Dec 2011 19:16 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by mieses"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

MacMan,

"What if I install an app NOT in the package manager."

"On Windows 95, 15 freaking years ago, I could just take an app, drag it to the start menu, drop it in the place I wanted and it worked."

Ah the good old days when all apps were self contained directories, even office would run just by trivially copying it's directory. I really miss that in all operating systems. What was once simple has evolved into into complex system-wide dependency trees.

Sure it's still technically possible to distribute self contained application archives, but for the most part computing has "evolved" away from that - both for linux and for windows.

How do typical MacOS applications handle installs? If they've resisted the urge to scatter files throughout the file system, such that "Delete directory == Uninstall", then I'd see that as a huge plus for the platform.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by mieses
by Neolander on Fri 23rd Dec 2011 20:14 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by mieses"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

OS X has mostly resisted the trend, although being an UNIX it still stores user settings in home folders. Which is nice for backups, but not so nice for clean uninstalls. Compromises, compromises...

Reply Parent Score: 1