Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GNOME 3.8 To Scrap Fallback Mode

Comments Filter:
  • by Ian Alexander (997430) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @03:53AM (#41940595)
    my permanent move away from GNOME. I am learning to like XFCE!
  • by Weaselmancer (533834) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @04:01AM (#41940623)

    Will they fork, or will they stick with the dippy new interface? Because I have to say I tried the new interface. And I find it doesn't help me much. First thing I do on a new system is to "sudo apt-get install gnome-session-fallback" and login under the old system.

    Oh, and don't think I'm in curmudgeon mode and simply don't like new things. I really tried to like the new system, I really did. But having to right click on Terminal and select "open new session" to get a second shell up is ANNOYING AS FUCK. Come on guys! You know that's not how we work. If you don't have half a dozen command prompts up you're not busy. Why make it harder to do that?

    So for me, this is the end of Gnome. I need something that helps me work, not gets in the way of work. I like the system but if you ditch the "classic" aka "useful" mode, well sorry. Gotta go find something else.

  • by blind biker (1066130) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @04:07AM (#41940657) Journal

    At first I thought it was creative editing on the part of the submitter, so I did the unthinkable, and RTFA - and it's fucking there, right smack at the beginning:

    Matthias Clasen on the behalf of the GNOME Release Team has announced that they have decided to eliminate GNOME's "fallback mode" with the upcoming 3.8 release

    Ya know? KDE is looking better every day, thanks to the Gnome developers.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10, 2012 @04:38AM (#41940741)

    Maybe it "just works" for you, but every time I've tried to use MacOS X, I had to give up in a short time and go back to KDE. This thing is just too infuriatingly dumbed down. For example I need focus follows mouse and absolutely detest the "active window is top window" mode. It always amazes me how "power users" can actually stand the MacOS X desktop, but I guess everybody is different.

  • Re:idiots (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sjames (1099) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @04:47AM (#41940771) Homepage

    And it was STILL more useful than the full mode.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10, 2012 @04:51AM (#41940783)

    Some users (especially shortcut-heavy users) just want to get the cursor out of the way and focus follows mouse effectively wrecks that.

  • by aglider (2435074) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @05:33AM (#41940891) Homepage
    Not just of CPU/GPU/WPU cycles.
    It's a waste of user attention to the things that matter!
    How often in a day do you "enjoy" your 3D desktop with 3D rotating/rolling/whatevering windows and gadgets?
    Maybe I'm an outsider, but a have no more than 3 windows on the screen: 1 is the web browser, 1 is a local terminal, 1 is a remote terminal on the development server.
    I don't see any need for 3D stuff here.
    How many windows do you have in use at the same time? How often you switch among them? How much fun you have in waiting for the fancy 3D stuff to complete?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10, 2012 @05:45AM (#41940937)

    Which is why real OSes allow the user to choose how their UI works, rather than forcing the "best" configuration on them.

  • by jonadab (583620) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @06:16AM (#41941067) Homepage Journal
    > Quit complaining about something you don't even use anymore.

    The complaining stems from the fact that something really genuinely good has been deliberately taken away from us. Gnome 1.x was much better than any of the other options. It did everything we wanted a desktop environment to do. It had all the features we wanted, and every single one of them was fully configurable.

    Then someone decided "options are bad" and started taking it all away. At first we thought it was just because of the rewrite (when they rewrote 2.0 to use the new GTK), so we hung in there, thinking we'd eventually get our features back... but then they started taking away more and more and more. By the time we realized what was going on, it was too late to fork 1.x, because it would no longer compile against contemporary libraries. (Gnome has always had eleventy bajillion dependencies.)

    Then in the 3.x series they started inserting more and more *unwanted* features. I don't just mean unnecessary features that I personally don't have any need for; it goes beyond that. I'm talking about features that are actively intrusive and cannot be turned off, like the way it now insists on popping up extra windows you don't want while you're in the middle of trying to work on other things, and this behavior cannot be disabled. Gnome has become so horrible, it beggars the imagination to realize that every release they still manage somehow to find a way to make it yet worse.

    It's really sad. Gnome used to be something I could not just use but also happily recommend. Now it's so awful, I can't imagine anyone actually liking it.
  • by Taco Cowboy (5327) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @06:20AM (#41941079) Journal

    Quit complaining about something you don't even use anymore.

    You sound very much like someone from the central politburo committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
     
    Luckily the CCP has no say in the Linux Scene, or I would be starting to re-learning to use Microsoft Windoze.

  • by epyT-R (613989) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @06:33AM (#41941127)

    1. it's ok to have an opinion
    2. it's ok to express that opinion regardless how it impacts others' feelings.
    3. free doesn't exempt something from critique

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10, 2012 @06:40AM (#41941151)

    Works perfectly well for me, and this 3 year old hunk of crap can't even do OpenGL 2.0, sports a measly 1 GB of RAM, and a 1.8 GHz dual core; It was practically rubbish the day I got it.

    To be honest, how few resources KDE uses and how efficient it is with them really surprises me.
    It's much lighter than GNOME, resource wise, and it's far more gentle than XFCE is on my battery life.

  • by mrbluze (1034940) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @07:55AM (#41941361) Journal

    I've been satisfied with MATE, having been introduced to it by Linux Mint.

    Yes, Linux Mint with Mate is the most usable Linux distro I have found at the moment (ie: user friendly, community supported, easily recognizable), so it's what the family uses, but for productivity I have settled with KDE especially since it now has proper color management. I can actually understand where Gnome is going with its user interface. Hands-on displays are probably going to become the norm which does require a rethink and general overhaul of the interface, and the mouse will gradually become redunant. People (like me) who are used to the mouse and keyboard might find it hard to see how productivity can improve without the two, but if you imagine that in a year or two there will be large (A4 or even A3 size), high resolution displays that sit horizontally on a desk or a lectern, which have multi-touch interfaces plus pressure sensitive pen devices, then a mouse is totally redundant and a keyboard an optional extra. At that point we could finally say that computers are a true paper replacement.

  • by dna_(c)(tm)(r) (618003) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @09:58AM (#41941841)

    [...] Yes, it is a bold departure, but I find it makes me more productive all in all.[...] The quick gesture of ramming my mouse into the corner to arrange work-spaces works great.

    Until someone decides that particular gesture opens your email in the newest, bold departure from convention.

    The problem many people have with Gnome 3, KDE 4, Unity, Wayland, Windows Vista, Windows 8 etc. is that people keep changing stuff dramatically. Nobody complains about a new color scheme, we complain in great numbers about removing helpful features we like to use and replacing those with dumbed down stuff (let's call it Toddlerization of the UI) that emulates the latest cool overpriced toy.

    I use computers for other stuff than hitting the screen roughly in some spot in a 4x6 coordinate system to start an "app" that is in 97.23% of the cases just another un(sup)portable spyware "website".

    Those people taking these decisions are often more concerned about what they'd like to do or what they find Kooool. Rather than considering what is easy and agreeable to use for the actual user. It's their prerogative to do so, but don't complain when users start complaining and then start leaving in droves...

    I'm aware that in FOSS you can always express your discontent with a fork (instead of a knive). I'll probably turn away from Ubuntu

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 10, 2012 @11:00AM (#41942205)

    There are good reasons for much of the whining. Read this article for more information: GNOME (et al): Rotting In Threes [wordpress.com]

  • by 0123456 (636235) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @01:38PM (#41943413)

    People (like me) who are used to the mouse and keyboard might find it hard to see how productivity can improve without the two, but if you imagine that in a year or two there will be large (A4 or even A3 size), high resolution displays that sit horizontally on a desk or a lectern, which have multi-touch interfaces plus pressure sensitive pen devices, then a mouse is totally redundant and a keyboard an optional extra.

    Yeah, because we're all going to sit hunched over a huge touchscreen lying flat on our desks, pressing on the screen to create Excel spreadsheets.

    Tech like this has been available for years (I had an interview for a company producing large touchscreen panels like that in the early 90s) and it's never taken off because, outside specialist uses and TV shows, it's simply retarded.

  • by afgam28 (48611) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @01:44PM (#41943491)

    The movement against excessive options started with an article by Havoc Pennington that describes why Linux desktops had such bad user interfaces back in the 90s and early 2000s:

    http://ometer.com/free-software-ui.html [ometer.com]

    You have to read it with the proper historical context in mind. Some examples he gives of the state of the desktop at the time are:

    * Emacs having a broken-by-default cut and paste feature, and you had to go into the preferences dialog to make it standards-compliaint
    * Gnome 1.x used to have 5 different clock applets, and during usability testing people would asking why are there 5 clocks to choose? More of a problem was that they assumed that there was a good reason for having 5 clocks, and would then spend a lot of time thinking about which of the 5 clocks was right for them.

    It wasn't so much an idea that "options are bad" but rather that "options have a cost", and so excessive options are bad and that the default option should be something reasonable. There should never be an option to "unbreak" something like clipboard standards.

    You could argue that Gnome 3.x takes it too far (I disagree, but that's just my opinion), but there are good reasons to remove the fallback mode. The fact is, no one uses it. The people who the fallback mode is targetted towards have already (very vocally!) moved to KDE/XFCE. So why bother developing something for users who aren't going to use it anyway?

  • by unixisc (2429386) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @02:02PM (#41943637)
    For netbooks or other weaker laptops, Razor-qt would be a good alternative to KDE-netbook option
  • by MSG (12810) on Saturday November 10, 2012 @05:03PM (#41945093)

    Then someone decided "options are bad" and started taking it all away.

    The guiding thought is that every option MULTIPLIES code complexity. Options tend to interact with other options, and testing is required to verify that all options work together, or that the system provides a means of preventing options that don't from being used together. The drive to simplify interfaces is intended to reduce the number of bugs present in the system.

    As a secondary effect, removing optional behavior forces developers to make sure that the normal behavior is sane and doesn't need dozens of radio buttons on a configuration app.

Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp

Working...