GNOME 2.10 Beta 1 Screenshot Demo 480
linuxbeta writes "GNOME 2.10 Beta 1 has just been released. There is a nice screenshot demo here. Also known as 2.9.90, GNOME 2.10 Beta 1 is the first pre-release intended for wide public scrutiny before the final release in March. It is packed full of tasty GNOME goodness. This release is a feature frozen snapshot primarily intended for wide public scrutiny before the final GNOME 2.10 release in March. Like the good old days of Linux kernel development, GNOME uses odd minor version numbers to indicate development status. Please check the 2.9 start page for more info. - gnomedesktop.org/node/2138"
What about Nautilus (Score:1, Interesting)
Anyone know if 2.10 can have a tree view for directory hierarcies?
Vectorized graphics (Score:4, Interesting)
Wow! It looks, it looks....(exactly the same?) (Score:2, Interesting)
Volume Control (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about Nautilus (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Truth: The State of Desktop Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
KISS: Ubuntu and Gnome (Score:4, Interesting)
Question? (Score:4, Interesting)
gnomeflexiserver tied in with xscreensaver (Score:5, Interesting)
This has some issues but what would give almost complete functionality right now, would be if the screensaver had an option to run gnomeflexiserver.
The other problem with this though, is if logged in as another user, the other users settings for xscreensaver will kick in after the idle time and bog down the other user(s). I also believe this will take over the 3d functionality of the users card and not allow another user to use it.
Also, I recently set up my
Afaik, this is also a bit of a kludge, tying another Xscreen to a vert terminal similar to some users using ctrl alt f8 for the other X session. I'm not sure if there would be a way to tie multiple users to one Xsession, but I would think it would save resources and potentionally avoid sound/video accel getting taken over by just one login.
I know this is somewhat off topic as I don't believe gdm is being enhanced in the coming future in this regard, but I'd like to know how
Xp and MacX have now had this for ages. The DE's for linux really need to catch up in this regard.
Re:Truth: The State of Desktop Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
Besides, I thought that personal tastes are just that. Personal.
Re:Wow! It looks, it looks....(exactly the same?) (Score:2, Interesting)
In my opinion, Gnome has looked the same since around 2.2 - 2.4. Nothing new, really.
Call me a naysayer if you will, but I'm not impressed.
Re:Difference (Score:3, Interesting)
In English, we "do this to that." That is to say, we apply an action to an object. We don't specify an object and then describe an action. We "open door," we don't "door open."
The nut is that trying to teach people to think object-then-action is a chore. It's a process that has to be learned.
A far, far better paradigm is the gestural paradigm. Click, double-click, click-and-drag. For instance, consider drag and drop. Drag and drop is one of the easiest things to learn. We deal with the same basic paradigm every day. In order to put the banana guacamole in the freezer, I pick it up and put it on the shelf. I don't point to the banana guacamole and then point to the freezer and then give a command. In fact, drag-and-drop is so intuitive that people who have a lot of experience with primitive computer systems often have trouble mastering it. It doesn't seem "natural" to them because they've gone out of their way to learn a different syntax.
Select-then-act has to be learned. Drag-and-drop and other gestural interfaces are far more obvious.
Re:Question? (Score:1, Interesting)
Fonts suck (Score:2, Interesting)
Everything changes but change itself. (Score:3, Interesting)
It's the fonts, stupid (Score:3, Interesting)
Am I the only one left who prefers clean bit-mapped fonts?
Sure, the screenshots shown in the article look pretty snappy from a distance, because the fonts are large. But to get a lot of work done you want small, even tiny fonts. That's the whole point of high screen resolution, right?
Antialiased small fonts look awful. Compare the crisp, clean bitmaps of NeXTSTEP [levenez.com] or even Windows to the small blurry fonts in GNUStep [collaboration-world.com] or the Mac [collaboration-world.com]. With aliasing letters bleed together , the shapes aren't quite right, etc. It gets so tiring to read after a while.
And if you turn off antialiasing they're barely legible (and sometimes even touch each other - I hate it when letters touch each other!) because no one takes the time to produce correct bitmaps for specific font sizes. (OK, to be honest I haven't seen the Mac with antialiasing turned off.) I don't even care about a zillion different sizes, just give me a couple of fixed sizes, small and smaller, that look right.
As much as I hate Windows, one thing it has going for it is that the fonts are very clean and legible with antialiasing turned off. I tried the latest Ubuntu for a while, playing with all the font settings available (even LCD subpixel) and in end couldn't stand it because of the fonts. Such a beautiful OS gone to waste because it's unreadable with antialiasing turned off, and I can't stand it turned on. Isn't readability like half the point of a computer in the first place? Or do all people care about anymore is just getting a pretty "printed page" effect from a blurry distance?
The irony is that font bitmaps are not even copyrightable! Heck, just steal them from NEXTStep! Or even Windows! (The bitmaps, that is.) Why doesn't anyone do this?
(End rant.)
Re:What, does it go to 11 ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure there is.. someone out there needs to invent a volume control that will mute Flash without muting itunes/rhythmbox etc.
Re:Fonts look nice (Score:5, Interesting)
Seen it. Not impressed. Many vertical strokes were anti-aliased to be two pixels wide when they should render one wide. It makes the text look blurry. I've seen that on Linux before too, though it's since been fixed (problem with the font hinting?).
I use Gnome. Looks great on my LCD with sub-pixel anti-aliasing. I suspect the problem with the screenshots is that they use the default fonts (the free Bitstream ones I think). I use the Microsoft fonts, mostly Verdana. Verdana may not be pretty but it's designed for on-screen readability, and renders well.
Animations in GNOME (Score:1, Interesting)
Rashly speaking, why does GNOME's user interface animation suck so much? Is it GTK+ that is the culprit, or is Metacity to blame? And when can we expect animations on par, or better, than OS X or Windows XP in GNOME.
Outside the aforementioned issues, it my opinion that GNOME rocks! Yes, Johnny, I'm a sucker for eye-candy!
Re: It's the fonts, stupid (Score:5, Interesting)
As others have said, you can usually disable AA on your fonts; but if you're running at a reasonably high resolution, on a reasonable quality monitor, with a reasonable font renderer, then it's worth giving them a second try.
no significative change (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:no significative change (Score:2, Interesting)
I agree with you that keyboard shortcuts are important. I'm a keyboard person, not a mouse person, and for the moment it's one of the reasons I stick with KDE. From the desktop, I can do the following to send an email message, just using keyboard shortcuts:
Cntl-M to launch KDE.
Cntl-N to open a new message
Cntl-enter to send it (Cntl-Alt-enter) to queue it for sending later.
Those are all keystrokes I chose myself. Is that what you were looking for?