Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
GNOME GUI Open Source Software

GNOME 3 To Support a "Classic" Mode, of Sorts 197

Posted by timothy
from the classic-coke dept.
An anonymous reader writes "LWN.net is reporting that GNOME developer Matthias Clasen has announced that, with the upcoming demise of 'fallback mode,' the project will support a set of official GNOME Shell extensions to provide a more "classic" experience. 'And while we certainly hope that many users will find the new ways comfortable and refreshing after a short learning phase, we should not fault people who prefer the old way. After all, these features were a selling point of GNOME 2 for ten years!'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GNOME 3 To Support a "Classic" Mode, of Sorts

Comments Filter:
  • by hessian (467078) on Thursday November 22, 2012 @09:38AM (#42065881) Homepage Journal

    Often, "new improvements" mean surface-level improvements that don't improve use and efficiency at all.

    For example, I think Microsoft's Aero and related interfaces are neat-looking, but they don't help me achieve anything using the computer. They just make it a bit slicker.

    If you turn on the classic Windows interface, you eliminate a fair amount of overhead and get back to the basics of a very functional interface.

    The same seems true of Linux GUIs. I appreciate what they're doing in trying to keep up with Windows and Mac OS X and the glitzy new interfaces those have implemented.

    However, how much of this actually adds to the basic interface? Does it increase efficiency of the the user? I'm not so sure.

    I miss the days of installing a new Linux distro on a ten-year-old machine and finding out that it ran as fast as a new machine with Windows.

  • by EasyTarget (43516) on Thursday November 22, 2012 @09:43AM (#42065917) Journal

    Having used the new desktop for a year+ now I'm quite into it; find it productive and fast, don't need the classic one back thanks.

    BUT the latest builds have by far the most moronic UI regression I have ever seen.

    Pop up dialogs in windows cannot be moved/resized (*).

    If I do a print-preview in (say) Firefox the 'print dialog' appears; and cannot be moved out of the way so I can see the actual print preview itself.

    If I want to print images this huge printer options screen, full of whitespace, can totally obscure the image I want to print! therefore negating the point of having a print preview system in the first place since I'm still printing 'blind'.

    That is a specific example, many more occur in daily use when, for instance, a dialog appears in which you need to reference or enter details from the screen behind it, which it obscures, and prevents copy/paste from operating. Etc. Ad Nauseum.

    An almost daily irritation. I know it is a change made for Tablet Users.. But they are irrelevant to be honest, Gnome is a desktop OS and will remain that way, tablet users have proper tablet OS's to use.

    The Idiot Gnome weiners who argued for this, and implemented it, need to be expelled from the project; only by ridding the project of such incompetence will it be able to proceed.

    (I think these are Modal dialogues, but I'm not a UI expert so apologies if terminology not quite right, I alos remember that Micro$oft dropped this in their UI after Windoze 3.5.. it is a shame Gnome chose to regress back to the late 80's.

  • Re:Good decission (Score:4, Interesting)

    by erroneus (253617) on Thursday November 22, 2012 @09:52AM (#42065983) Homepage

    Not good enough.

    The fallback mode wasn't configurable enough.

    They should just capitulate on this and bring in the people from the Mate project and let users have a complete choice. Go ahead and update Mate to the GNOME3 libraries and let there be two desktop environments within GNOME. Users will choose the mode that is more appropriate for their use.

    Also, stop using GTK+ or fork it to be called something else. For god's sake, the problems I have with newer GiMP and older GNOME just piss me off.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 22, 2012 @09:56AM (#42066003)

    No, this is an attempt to undermine the work of the Linux Mint guys. See, current Gnome devs are control freaks obsessed with preventing anything they think damages their "brand". Theming and users configuring their desktops to their preferences is an anathema to them, and they are rightly concerned that the Mint guys are making a better, more useful Gnome3 than they are. It wouldn't surprise me if upcoming changes in Gnome3 and GTK3 just happen to bollocks Cinnamon, muffin and other Mint components.

  • Re:Can I ask... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by aaaaaaargh! (1150173) on Thursday November 22, 2012 @10:23AM (#42066195)

    XFCE. I switched from Gnome this year and haven't regreted it. It's snappy and simply does what it is supposed to do.

  • by muncadunc (1679192) on Thursday November 22, 2012 @02:25PM (#42067855)
    I agree, it is too little, too late.

    GNOME 3 has been compared with OSX, but it didn't copy the functional aspects that made OSX good- it only copied the cosmetic aspects, which made the desktop broken. It's got something that looks like a menu bar on the top, but it doesn't actually function as a menu bar- it just takes up space. It's got something that looks like a dock, but it can only be brought up through a full-screen launcher. It doesn't even have a persistent taskbar of any kind: You have to perform an extra action just to see a window list.

    There are many ideas in OSX that could be used, ideas that are really good- but cosmetics isn't at the top of the list.
    Global menu bar? Maybe. Some people like it, some don't. It's nice as an option. Unity really screwed up by making the global menu take up space but stay hidden until it's moused over. That's blatantly anti-usability.
    Only one "System Settings" or "Control Panel", with all settings living in logically organized applets. This is something the Mac does really, really well. All "sharing" settings live in one "sharing" applet, for example. Linux still has problems with functionality being duplicated, or split up into different control panel applets because various under-the-hood things are taken care of by different software. The user doesn't care whether window effects and menu fonts are taken care of by different software- they just want settings to be easily found.
    One, universal "system tray" with icons that convey information quickly. OSX does this well, Windows has played catchup but its systray icons aren't quite as readable- Just think of the volume icon, for example. GNOME has tried to do this, but they're all plugins and they aren't compatible with the systray applets that have been in use up to now, hence the hidden floating systray in the lower right for legacy applets. How was this let out the door? It's almost as broken as Windows 8.
    The various software that makes up the desktop should have self-explanatory names. The file manager should be called "File Manager". The text editor should be called "Text Editor". People are rightfully confused when they see "Caja".

    Of course, this is small potatoes compared to the awfulness they've foisted off with Windows 8. As Microsoft abandons the desktop and users look for a proper OS, I'm holding out honest hope for a Linux desktop with some real usability and polish. Just... for everything to feel like it was developed as a whole.

This process can check if this value is zero, and if it is, it does something child-like. -- Forbes Burkowski, CS 454, University of Washington

Working...