Linked by Howard Fosdick on Tue 17th Jul 2012 04:53 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Like Ubuntu's Unity interface? Great. If not, you can easily change it to look and act like Ubuntu used to. This tutorial shows how.
Thread beginning with comment 527116
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: My complain about unity
by Alfman on Tue 17th Jul 2012 14:12 UTC in reply to "RE: My complain about unity"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Gone fishing,

"As for your grandmother load five applications on the launcher and she will find it easy to use even if she doesn't use the interface to its full potential."

Clearly which is best it's a matter of taste and workflows. What's frustrating though is that these changes were pushed upon all existing users, for some of whom the new OS brought dubious benefits, regressive features, and had no easy way to revert to previous configurations.

Choice has traditionally been the forte for linux distros above all other operating systems. I think it's a shame to see this kind of partial totalitarian shift among the leading distributors of open source software. Lucky it is still open source, and even though Mint only has a fraction of the resources Ubuntu has, they have been phenomenal in their commitment to standing behind the choices of users.

Edited 2012-07-17 14:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

kateline Member since:
2011-05-19

What's frustrating though is that these changes were all pushed upon all existing users, for some of whom the new OS brought dubious benefits, regressive features, all without an easy way to revert to alternative configurations.


Canonical has become like Microsoft, pushing its dubious changes on users without asking them.

With their commmitment to Mate and Cinnamon, the Mint team has taken on the role that Cannonical once fulfilled.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

What's frustrating though is that these changes were pushed upon all existing users, for some of whom the new OS brought dubious benefits, regressive features, and had no easy way to revert to previous configurations.


Change happen, deal with it. Ok, that's a bit harsh but really, it's not like Ubuntu didn't tell anyone about their intentions ahead of time.

Choice has traditionally been the forte for linux distros above all other operating systems


And we still do with Fedora, Suse, Mint, (X|L)ubuntu etc etc all being available.

I think it's a shame to see this kind of partial totalitarian shift among the leading distributors of open source software.


I dunno about that. I kind of like that they're driven by a person (or company) with a clear vision of what they want.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: My complain about unity
by Alfman on Tue 17th Jul 2012 16:24 in reply to "RE[3]: My complain about unity"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Soulbender,

"Change happen, deal with it."

Respectfully, it is a terrible excuse to justify anything. You could say the same thing about government surveillance, etc. It's right to stand up against change when it is contrary to your freedoms. Yes, Ubuntu (and Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc) have a right to do what they want with their products, but the resulting criticism is never going to be appeased by a line like "change happen, deal with it". This line is as though someone is disappointed with criticism, but lacks a better rebuttal, you can do better!


"And we still do with Fedora, Suse, Mint, (X|L)ubuntu etc etc all being available."

Yes, it's great to have alternatives. We're fortunate in this case to have some. Most Ubuntu users could immediately switch to Mint, assuming they know about it in the first place.


A little quid pro quo... ;)

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Edited 2012-07-17 16:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

Gone fishing Member since:
2006-02-22

I don't think your being serious. To say that Unity is being imposed in a totalitarian manner is bizarre. Firstly Canonical had little choice, as Gnome 2 is being depreciated by Gnome (not Canonical). Canonical then had to make a choice and they decided to develop Unity and this seems to me to part of a vision that Canonical has for its OS - now considering lack of vision is claimed to be a Desktop Linux fault it seems unfair to criticize Canonical for it - it also shows Canonicals commitment to develop something.

As for not having choice - you want the old desktop no problem sudo apt-get install gnome-session-fallback you want Gnome 3 sudo apt-get install gnome-shell the commandline too difficult its in software centre. You want Fluxbox, blackbox no problem. Or install Kubuntu etc. How easy do you want it to be to change you windows manager?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: My complain about unity
by Alfman on Tue 17th Jul 2012 20:59 in reply to "RE[3]: My complain about unity"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Gone fishing,

"I don't think your being serious. To say that Unity is being imposed in a totalitarian manner is bizarre."

I actually said "partially totalitarian" (which sounds contradictory given that partial<>total, however it's not contradictory in my meaning). In light of that it should be less bizarre.


"Firstly Canonical had little choice, as Gnome 2 is being depreciated by Gnome (not Canonical)."

It's true that Canonical wasn't directly responsible for ending Gnome 2, but never the less they could have continued to offer it and encouraged third parties to continue it's development instead of snubbing it completely given that it had such a large user base. It's true Mint has stepped up to the plate, but that isn't a good reason for Ubuntu to drop the ball, IMHO.


"As for not having choice - you want the old desktop no problem sudo apt-get install gnome-session-fallback you want Gnome 3 sudo apt-get install gnome-shell the commandline too difficult its in software centre."

I actually tried, I couldn't get it working by messing around with packages, so I gave up and went to Mint. Maybe I could have gotten it working eventually but at some point you have to ask why users should have to work so hard at restoring previous functionality.

Anyway, it's history now. Ubuntu is big enough to survive the gaffe, and I'm still glad that they're here. Maybe I'll give them a shot again, but honestly I don't know what they have now that Mint doesn't?

Reply Parent Score: 3

spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

Gnome is actually Red Hat, Novell and volenteers.
http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2010/07/28/gnome-census/
Of course canonical have no say in the direction GNOME takes. If they hired some developers to work with GNOME they would have the power to choose where they go.

Reply Parent Score: 3