Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
GNOME GUI Upgrades BSD Linux

GNOME 3.0 Delayed Until March 2011 201

Posted by timothy
from the so-little-time-until-2012 dept.
Julie188 writes "GNOME 3.0 was scheduled to be released in September but during the developers conference, GUADEC 2010 in Den Haag, the organization had to face facts: the much ballyhooed GNOME Shell really wasn't ready. The Shell is supposed to bring 'a whole new user experience to the desktop.' So now, in September, what users will see is GNOME 2.32, distributed as a new stable release. Next target date for 3.0: March 2011."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GNOME 3.0 Delayed Until March 2011

Comments Filter:
  • Smart (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:33PM (#33060526)

    Better than releasing the Gnome equivalent of KDE4.

    • Re:Smart (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:42PM (#33060672) Homepage Journal

      Better than releasing the Gnome equivalent of KDE4.

      ...unless it ends up as the Gnome equivalent of Vista - late and not what anyone wants.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Beelzebud (1361137)
      That's what I was thinking. No need to rush it out. If they feel it needs more time in the oven, then so be it.
    • Re:Smart (Score:5, Informative)

      by jadrian (1150317) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:33PM (#33061366)

      They wish they had something even remotely close to KDE 4.0. All they have is a new desktop shell.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Esospopenon (1838392)

        They wish they had something even remotely close to KDE 4.0. All they have is a new desktop shell.

        You have to remember there is more to Gnome than what meets the eye.

      • Re:Smart (Score:4, Insightful)

        by akanouras (1431981) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @05:08PM (#33061784)

        Devil's advocate here - two things they have over KDE are:

        1. Telepathy
        2. gvfs-fuse

        Apart from these two, I'd prefer they took the HIG and the other design principles and built a new GNOME over KDElibs.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by DrXym (126579)
          I'd prefer KDE took the HIG and implemented it on their own desktop. KDE is a usability travesty which might explain in no small part why GNOME has gained the upper hand.
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by akanouras (1431981)

            Funny you should mention that - a lot of the newer apps are definitely influenced by it.

            Apart from that, I think KDE should keep aiming for flexibility in the UI just as GNOME aims for extreme minimalism - both have their place for different types of users.

          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by Walzmyn (913748)
            I don't aim to start a flame war (Lord knows we've got enough of them around here). But I feel just the opposite. Every time I'm stuck in Gnome I can't find anything. In KDE it has always (with only a few hicups during the KDE4 upgrade) been very intuitive. Obviously you have the opposite experience; 'm just saying it's a personal thing.
        • by arose (644256)
          So that we can all be stuck with a non-maintained set of libraries when Qt 5 comes out?
        • Re:Smart (Score:5, Informative)

          by diegocg (1680514) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @06:07PM (#33062604)

          Telepathy

          Kopete is being ported to work on top of Telephaty

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by healyp (1260440)
          I don't know if I'd call Telepathy an advantage. Once it's actually implemented it will definitely kick ass, but right now it sucks and only supports the full feature set of 1 protocol(jabber) out of the 16 it's supposed to be able to use. In fact I couldn't even get empathy to do something as simple as display an AIM buddy profile. Maybe I'm just an idiot, but as far as I can tell telepathy gives no distinct advantage to Gnome.
        • Re:Smart (Score:5, Informative)

          by the_womble (580291) on Thursday July 29, 2010 @02:12AM (#33065612) Homepage Journal

          gvfs-fuse

          For what I want to do (mount remote file systems) KIO works better.

      • by V!NCENT (1105021)

        Yes. Gnome is about to get Gnome 3 but that will not be comming even remotely close to KDE SC 4.5.

        However just the shell is not entirely true. Gnome also gets Gtk 3 and semantic desktop search.

        Still a joke though...

    • Re:Smart (Score:4, Insightful)

      by shawn(at)fsu (447153) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @05:50PM (#33062348) Homepage

      What was wrong with releasing KDE 4.0? Yeah it sucked but it's not like once they sent out KDE 4.0 they also removed KDE 3.x from 'the internet'. You have to make a choice at some point esp in an open source product where you you should send it out so at least you can get user feedback on it. I like how OpenSuse handled it. You could install KDE3.x and KDE4.0.

      If you try to make it perfect and keep putting it off and putting it off you run the risk of it becoming vaporware.

    • Re:Smart (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Etriaph (16235) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @06:36PM (#33063026) Homepage
      KDE has never been impressive during it's initial releases of new major versions, and I admit that as a KDE user.  However, overall, once you reach a stable KDE version I find that KDE is miles better than GNOME.  I've tried, many times, to get into GNOME to see what others find special about it and all I ever find is that it's still the same old GNOME.  The only single benefit I credit to GNOME over KDE is speed; however, on a modern PC the only noticeable speed increase in GNOME over KDE is startup time.

      If you haven't yet, download Kubuntu 10.04 and patch up to the latest version of KDE.  Once you see how the plasma desktop can be configured I'm confident that you'll begin to reconsider.
  • Not a huge loss... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sheetrock (152993) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:33PM (#33060530) Homepage Journal

    I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

    I've been playing around with soft lighting in the GIMP, and I think one innovation I'd like to see come up (in X-windows or wherever) would be to allow users to "tint" the whole desktop with a particular color scheme and pattern... something that can hit the windows and wallpaper evenly not unlike the sun is currently hitting my monitor, only not so bright, blurry and distracting.

    Think looking at a monitor with the faint reflection of light hitting rippling water... ahh, soothing!

    • by nyctopterus (717502) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:58PM (#33060928) Homepage

      I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

      The market for Linux is not mostly made up of newbs who want Windows that isn't Windows, but of power users and people who care about free software. These people are already trying to move AWAY from Windows. Making Linux more Windows-like is no good for usability or differentiating Linux. Gnome should move in it's own direction.

      • by MBGMorden (803437) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:08PM (#33061044)

        Making Linux more Windows-like is no good for usability or differentiating Linux. Gnome should move in it's own direction.

        While true, I also think that it shouldn't go in a different direction just to be "different" from Windows. Windows isn't like the anti-christ. Sure, it's got some things wrong with it from both a technically and political standpoint, but as an OS it also does many things right (as painful as that might be for many of us to admit).

        Those things that it DOES to right I have no issue with doing the same way in Gnome/Linux. Afterall, the whole POINT of OSS is sharing ideas and avoiding reinvention of the wheel. We can't do that with Windows' code, but we most assuredly can do it with good UI elements (same with UI elements from MacOS). If what they're doing works, then our own direction should be the same way they're going.

        • > While true, I also think that it shouldn't go in a different direction just to be "different" from Windows.

          Well windows is a moving target as they think it's better to reinvent the wheel by making changes to UI to increase the psychological cost of switching to other platforms. Since windows is different from windows, I hope gnome doesn't share that kind of philosophy. If something needs to change let it change, otherwise keep things familiar- familiarity makes users gain time.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by socrplayr813 (1372733)

        That depends on perspective. Personally, I would love for Gnome to be completely unique (as long as its usability is good). However, among the people that I help with computer issues, there has been a lot of interest in free (no cost) software and I've fairly easily transitioned them to open source Windows apps. A 'close enough' interface for Linux would let a lot of them switch without a significant learning curve, which would reduce their computer problems, make my life easier, and possibly extend the

      • by LWATCDR (28044) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @05:02PM (#33061690) Homepage Journal

        How about this.
        I want an UI that isn't totally different from Windows, Gnome, and OS/X?

        Frankly I am begining to feel that OSs are getting to much eye candy at the expense of usability.
        What I want from an OS is really simple.
        Fast
        Reliable
        Launches applications
        Manages files
        Handles IO.

        Wall paper is nice and attractive icons are also nice.
        Clean readable fonts is a must.

        Oh and use the CTRL and ALT keys and not some stupid Windows or Apple key to do stuff. If you start using a stinking TUX key for commands like copy and paste I may have to hurt people!

        • Oh and use the CTRL and ALT keys and not some stupid Windows or Apple key to do stuff.

          Principally I agree with you but the problem is that on 99.9 percent of all keyboards the control key is in the wrong place for no apparent reasons except historical ones. Even worse, I've seen keyboards on which the left shift key is smaller than the capslock key, which just doesn't make sense unless you're a Modula-3 programmer who lacks a decent text editor. To make a long story short, I'd like UI designers to think about alternative keyboard layouts from time to time and not just accept the status quo.

      • The market for Linux is not mostly made up of newbs who want Windows that isn't Windows, but of power users and people who care about free software.

        If you want Linux to get more users (which I am sure the Gnome people do), then you need to make the transition reasonably easy.

        Similar enough to Windows by default to make it feel familiar, preferably better, but easy to customise is the way to do.

    • by afabbro (33948)

      I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

      Yeah, that's always held Apple back.

      Of course, we can always go back to FVWM95 if you want...

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by SpaceAmoeba (1159183)

      I understand the concern, but I wonder if being Windows-like is becoming much less important as people do more on netbooks and smartphones. Gnome Shell strikes me as having some inspiration in the interfaces of those devices so it may actually attract people away from Windows. One can always hope!

    • by grcumb (781340) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @05:22PM (#33061998) Homepage Journal

      I've been playing around with soft lighting in the GIMP, and I think one innovation I'd like to see come up (in X-windows or wherever) would be to allow users to "tint" the whole desktop with a particular color scheme and pattern... something that can hit the windows and wallpaper evenly not unlike the sun is currently hitting my monitor, only not so bright, blurry and distracting.

      I've been doing this for years: PNG wallpaper with an alpha layer running through the entire image. Graduated background fill in the colour that suits your mood on any given day. For bonus points, script a slow colour transition that matches the time of day.

    • by Teun (17872)

      I like the looks of the new interface, but am rather concerned it might put people off by being too different from Windows.

      You seem to imply Linux is or should be a follower, I'd rather see Linux as a leader.

      That's not to say Linux should ditch good ideas even from Microsoft.

      To come back on topic, Gnome's problem has always been it's lack of integration and I doubt they can on that front catch up with KDE.

    • by dunng808 (448849)

      Being different from Windows is a good thing. I use Gnome because I was looking for a clean, simple UI, like an old Mac, for other people to use. I actually prefer Enlightenment and all those beautiful game-like looks. I am all in favor of creativity.

      http://www.enlightenment.org/p.php?p=about/e16 [enlightenment.org]

      http://e17-stuff.org/ [e17-stuff.org]

      http://www.enlightenment.org/ [enlightenment.org]

    • by Ankh (19084)

      See http://www.stereopsis.com/flux/ [stereopsis.com] for software that does something like this already (although not with patterns), and can also change the colour temperature of your monitor based on time of day.

  • Codenamed "David"
  • by SlashdotOgre (739181) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:37PM (#33060582) Journal

    I truly hope the Gnome folks observed the KDE4 fiasco and learned some good lessons. They really need to make sure the product they release is stable and doesn't include significant feature regressions (although knowing Gnome, they'll probably call them usability enhancements...). There's certain types of software that can be unstable, and a desktop environment isn't one of them. I'm very much in favor of them holding off as long as it takes.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by IrquiM (471313)

      I don't see KDE4 as a fiasco. It was clearly stated by the developers that they didn't recommend using it in any distro.

      The failure wasn't by KDE but the people maintaining the distros!

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Tetch (534754)

        Well ... yes ... but KDE4 did carry on being a fiasco for rather a long time, which has freaked a lot of people out. It's only just reaching a decent state around about now (V4.4.5 / V4.5) - which has been unfortunate - and many of its users consider the many allegedly release-quality previous V4.x versions have been only beta-grade ... and should have been flagged as such.

        Distros which included it did so largely in response to user demand, which itself occurred because users were given the impression the b

      • by JohnFluxx (413620) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @11:28PM (#33064878)

        If you call a product version number "4.0" then people expect a certain level of quality. And people will demand that their distro carries it.

        I'm a KDE developer, and IMHO we should have simply called it "KDE 4 BETA 1". And 'released' that. That would have given a platform for app developers to target, while not putting pressure on distros to provide it.

  • by supersloshy (1273442) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:42PM (#33060666)

    Another reason they're pushing GNOME 3 back is that Shell's design isn't quite usable yet. I would know because I frequently use daily builds [gnome.org] of GNOME Shell for testing purposes. I mean, look at it. It's so... blah and thrown-together. The design team is working on the design, and the final design will look much different. If you clone the gnome-shell-design git repository [gnome.org], you'll get the most current mockups. Here's a link [dropbox.com] to those of you unable to use git including the latest mockups as of today. These mockups look amazing and make the shell much easier on the eyes as well as usable. Ever since they announced this new design, I've been looking forward to it much more than I already have.

    • by MBGMorden (803437) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:00PM (#33060946)

      Totally agree. It's like they all got together and said "Alright guys. People think Gnome is boring. Lets do something REVOLUTIONARY!!!!!". And they then set off to make something that was as "different" as they could. Not useable, not actually "revolutionary" - just different. Personally, I have no qualms with using an old desktop metaphor if it works well, and the current one does. Refine what works - don't topple the whole thing just to try to build a better one.

    • by xxdinkxx (560434) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:20PM (#33061208) Homepage
      Granted, these mocks look awesome. However, could they possibly rip off OSX any harder? I am really surprised that Apple hasn't tried to sue Gnome.
      • I am really surprised that Apple hasn't tried to sue Gnome.

        Probably because they aren't infringing on any of Apple's property if I remember correctly. I prefer the term "inspired by" instead of "ripped-off". Does GNOME 3 use Mac's icons, sounds, artwork, themes, etc.? If not, they aren't doing anything worse than OpenOffice.org "ripping-off" MS Office or Firefox "ripping-off" IE/Opera/Chrome.

  • Lets face it, the windows on a desktop with icons experience pretty much hit it's peak with Windows 3.0. Everything since then has been, well, more windows on a desktop with icons.
     

    • by mweather (1089505)
      I use KDE4, you insensitive clod! There are no icons on my desktop.
    • by Blakey Rat (99501)

      First of all: Windows 3.0? Seriously? Never used a Classic Mac?

      Secondly: Saying "oh the WIMP interface is so old and tired" is really, really easy. Coming up with something better enough to displace it? Now that's fucking hard. It's been tried many times, and never gained any traction so far.

  • What about GNOME 3? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by assertation (1255714) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:47PM (#33060748)

    I haven't kept up on it. What will be special about GNOME 3, particularly from an end user's perspective?

    • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:53PM (#33060830)
      It's magical and revolutionary as long as you don't click it in the wrong way.
    • It would make Linux Environments less scary.

      You might chuckle at this notion, but the longer the thought sits there, the more it creeps in and you know it's right.

      • by H0p313ss (811249) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:27PM (#33061280)

        It would make Linux Environments less scary.

        You might chuckle at this notion, but the longer the thought sits there, the more it creeps in and you know it's right.

        Sometime around Christmas I showed my brother gnome-shell running on Ubuntu 9.10 ... my brother is a mech. engineer and really couldn't care less about operating systems but does care about computing in general since trying to be a physical engineer these days without a computer is like trying to live on the far side of the moon.

        I have never seen him react to anything from Linux in that way: "Damn that's cool... "

        I strongly believe that it will be a game changer for Linux desktop UI.

        • by jadrian (1150317)

          I have never seen him react to anything from Linux in that way: "Damn that's cool... "

          I strongly believe that it will be a game changer for Linux desktop UI.

          I got that same reaction all the time when showing off the Desktop Cube a couple of years ago. So what...

    • by doti (966971)

      the gnome shell [wikipedia.org], basically.

    • by afabbro (33948) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:25PM (#33061264) Homepage
      It's not hard to "keep up" [gnome.org].
    • Time travel, and it runs in Emacs now.

  • by MBGMorden (803437) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @03:54PM (#33060842)

    I'm a pretty dedicated Gnome user, but I'll admit that the new shell isn't something I'm looking forward to. It's too non-traditional IMHO. Some basic designs have evolved in the computer UI world because they work very well, and this seems to be trying to shake things up for the sake of being different.

    IMHO, the current Gnome UI with the taskbar replaced with a dock (I use Docky for this) is nearly perfect from a useability standpoint. Rather than major UI shakeups, what I want is polishing work. Smooth out the eye candy. Font rendering. Better artwork on default themes and icons. Performance tweaks. More work on specific apps.

    All in all, the BASIC system is is perfect. Now's not the time to be changing it. Focus on the little things.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by natehoy (1608657)

      All in all, the BASIC system is is perfect.

      Crap, we were going for FORTRAN. Thanks for the feedback. Back to the drawing board, boys!
        - Gnome Development Team :)

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by oatworm (969674)
      I actually kind of understand the need to rework the UI. The file/folder metaphor was a good starting point back when the contents of a computer system were simple enough where you could organize them by hand. Nowadays, it's pretty trivial to have enough documents, music, videos, photos, and so on lying around where the whole metaphor breaks down because there's just no way you can keep track of everything. Consequently, ditching the file/folder metaphor and instead pushing forward with a "what type of stuf
      • by MBGMorden (803437) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @04:58PM (#33061646)

        Think about it this way - does it really matter where things go specifically, so long as you can get there easily? Do I really care that I can find and open a picture at ~/Documents/Pictures/2010/07/28 in seven double-clicks and nearly as many context changes, or do I care that I can go to "Pictures"->"Sort by date"->double-click on today's photo in four mouse-clicks and get a more holistic view of what's on my machine at a given moment? Do I care that I can find some music at ~/Documents/Music/Artist/Album/trackname.ogg, or would I rather just be able to "Play all songs in album Foo by artist Bar"?

        What you seem to be describing is a meta-data based filesystem. Believe me, I have NO issue with that. The filesystem itself I see as outdated. HOWEVER, that's not what Gnome will be acheiving with this. They're shaking up the desktop metaphor, and needlessly IMHO.

        I mean, seriously, look at this:

        http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/GNOME_Shell.png [wikimedia.org]

        Do you realize how much of that screen is wasted by unneeded UI clutter? And none of it is really doing some great revolution in the way we store or perceive our data. It's just goofing around and shaking things up.

        As to your statement about the different between the way we perceive information on the net vs locally, I've always viewed that more as a side effect of the limitation of HTML pages. I know that personally, I can typically find something much faster, and have it presented in a cleaner fashion, if it's on my local system vs a web page. Granted, I like the centralized storage options (hence, I do use Gmail), but that goes but so far.

        • by oatworm (969674)

          What you seem to be describing is a meta-data based filesystem. Believe me, I have NO issue with that. The filesystem itself I see as outdated. HOWEVER, that's not what Gnome will be acheiving with this. They're shaking up the desktop metaphor, and needlessly IMHO.

          True, but a metadata-based filesystem isn't going to make much sense if it's presented in a file/folder context because it's not file/folder-dependent. GNOME Shell, at least from what I'm seeing (including your screenshot) is an attempt at prese

        • by Fwipp (1473271)

          That entire left panel isn't there most of the time. Most of the time, you have your top bar and your active window (of which there are four showing on the right).

        • by arose (644256)

          Do you realize how much of that screen is wasted by unneeded UI clutter?

          Do you realize what the screenshot shows?

      • by HBoar (1642149)

        Think about it this way - does it really matter where things go specifically, so long as you can get there easily?

        Yes. It does.

        OK, for some people, maybe it doesn't. But that doesn't mean that a nice organised file/folder structure shouldn't be maintained. If I'm looking for a photo of my house for example, I'm not going to know what date it was taken, I probably haven't tagged or named it at all. How is a search based system best for that? I just want to know where it is and use the file manager to have a bit of a look. Some people may not want to deal with file systems, but I (and a lot of other people) ALWAYS wi

        • by oatworm (969674)

          OK, for some people, maybe it doesn't. But that doesn't mean that a nice organised file/folder structure shouldn't be maintained. If I'm looking for a photo of my house for example, I'm not going to know what date it was taken, I probably haven't tagged or named it at all. How is a search based system best for that? I just want to know where it is and use the file manager to have a bit of a look.

          Easy - run a search on all images and look through their thumbnails. That's pretty much what you're doing when

          • by HBoar (1642149)
            All that is fine, but functionality should still be retained for people like me who know how to, and want to, maintain a good tidy filesystem. I don't think OSX or windows 7 has done this well.
      • by Risen888 (306092)

        Do I care that I can find some music at ~/Documents/Music/Artist/Album/trackname.ogg

        I definitely do. It means when I put it on my mp3 player, I just throw it into the Music folder and everything's already in order and I don't have to hunt around for anything. I have a hell of a lot of music on my machine. If it's not in sensible order it's lost forever.

        would I rather just be able to "Play all songs in album Foo by artist Bar"?

        That works great as long as all your metadata is in order. Which, especially once

  • I've been using gnome-shell off and on again since f12. It's real easy just yum install gnome-shell

  • by Zombie Ryushu (803103) on Wednesday July 28, 2010 @05:24PM (#33062028)

    Does anyone know if more of Gnome will support LDAP auto configuration?

I have not yet begun to byte!

Working...