Gnome 2.10 Sneak Peek 436
spectre_be writes "Davyd Madeley wrote a Sneak Peek at Gnome 2.10, scheduled for release on the March 9, 2005. Looks like the new release-policy is starting to pay of, as several existing utilities get enhancements and a couple of new ones are added. Also (finally) a mozilla-stylee type-ahead find has been implemented in Gnome's Open/Save dialog. Together with OpenOffice.org 2.0's scheduled release and Novell's Mono coming up to speed, will 2005 prove to be the year of Gnome?" Update: 01/18 01:40 GMT by T : Oops - the "2-point" got chopped off in the headline; still a while until GNOME 10.
Big difference.... (Score:3, Informative)
Thank you gnome for not adding the "XP look" (Score:2, Interesting)
Why not embrace Linux for what it is (UNIX), and not try to make it something it is not (fisher price).
Well done Gnome.
Re:Thank you gnome for not adding the "XP look" (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you mean "|" ?
Re:Thank you gnome for not adding the "XP look" (Score:2, Insightful)
And who says Linux=KDE anyway, just don't use it if you don't like it.
Re:Big difference.... (Score:5, Funny)
Ummm... you misspelled "Fischer-Price".
Re:Big difference.... (Score:3, Funny)
Lol... I meant "Fisher Price".
Re:Big difference.... (Score:2)
For some reason I've always gravitated to *dark* colors on the screen, the white backgrounds hurt my eyes after awhile. I've only had a few problems with a couple linux programs, contrasted with many windows programs.
Re:Big difference.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Personally I think it looks really smart, clear and uncluttered and of course it is easier to downlaod and apply your own themes than windows which should appeal to the average home user.
I tend to change my theme every so often so as not to get bored, but on windows it was a case of blue, silver or classic and I would argue that all of them arn't as nice as industrial or gartoon in gnome
Re:Big difference.... (Score:3, Funny)
Futuristic!?! You're saying that one day the teletubbies with invade and conquer Earth?
Oh Cmon! (Score:3, Informative)
Windows XP looks like a Fisher-Price toy unless you alter it to something better.
The default WinXP gui freaks me out like few other interfaces. I'll rather have the CDE-gui than the deafult WinXP-gui. No flamewar intended, but the WinXP gui really, really looks like it was designed for a 2 year old to play with, not for people to work with.
"A new exiting interface" my ass...
/oldschool
Re:Oh Cmon! (Score:2)
Re:Oh Cmon! (Score:2)
The recently used programs list that I think only shows in the new Start Menu though is a killer feature of the new theme, so even if I wanted to switch I wouldn't.
Re:Big difference.... (Score:3)
That's subjective dude.
My Linux Desktop looks *much* nicer than my XP one. I think XP is butt-fugly. Really, really horrible.
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
Cheers
Stor
Re:Big difference.... (Score:2, Funny)
OpenOffice? (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, the header is soo misleading (I thought I had done timejump or something)
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:2)
More seriously, I still miss the command-line style tab expansion from ye olde days. It's the only thing that *really* worked for my mp3 collection, at least given the current state of the iTunes clones.
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:2)
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:2)
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:2)
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:2)
Re:OpenOffice? (Score:2)
Gnome '10' huh? (Score:5, Funny)
maybe... (Score:2)
Re:Gnome '10' huh? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Gnome '10' huh? (Score:2)
Harvey Corman directs!
Re:Gnome '10' huh? (Score:2)
And I sent in a correction! (Score:2)
Re:Gnome '10' huh? (Score:2)
Java 1.0
Java 1.1
The following release was a significant upgrade, so Sun thought it should deserve a special designation. However, because Sun apparently doesn't know about the major version number, it was called...
Java2 1.2 [No, not Java 2.0 or even Java2 1.0]
Java2 1.3
Java2 1.4
Again, the next version was a major upgrade. However, instead of doing something sane, or even sane conside
Gnome 10? (Score:2, Funny)
wow (Score:5, Funny)
Re:wow (Score:2)
Oh what the hell: KDE rules!
~phil
Re:wow (Score:3, Informative)
Re:wow (Score:3, Informative)
Kleedrac
Re:wow (Score:2)
~phil
Re:wow (Score:3, Informative)
Re:wow (Score:3, Funny)
go use AOHell on your interweb!
n00B!
____________
Hackers unite!!!
Re:wow (Score:2)
finding files! (Score:2, Insightful)
Why can't the GNOME one get better? The 2.4 and pre series was a JOKE and this new one, even with all it's vaunted HIG stuff, is still horrible imho. Why can't I see thumbs? Previews? A decent file tree? Bleh.
Re:finding files! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:finding files!-Storage. (Score:2)
Re:finding files!-Storage. (Score:2)
I'm convinced the spacial thing only came about because they didn't feel like fixing the tree view sidebar. [curtman.mine.nu]. There's just no other reasonable explanation.
Re:finding files!-Storage. (Score:2)
Certainly the GNOME storage idea is much like that of Google.. I'd rather type something in Google than look for a bookmark much of the time. But if I can't really remember the name, that's when things like bookmarks and hierarchical structures become usefull. Indeed most of the time, looking at the site favicon in my bookmarks dropdown is what triggers my me
Re:finding files!-Beagle (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, GNOME Storage is a pretty dead project. What people probably want to see screenshots for these days is Beagle [gnome.org]. Beagle gathers metadata and indexes content instead of replacing the filesystem. And it Just Works. Has done so for months.
The major flaw (Score:5, Insightful)
One for the HIG-minded. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:One for the HIG-minded. (Score:4, Interesting)
No, it doesn't. "I don't need this, therefore you don't either" is an incredibly easy line to take. It takes no guts to say it. Nor does it take guts - only time - to put in the effort, research the issue, and find out what your end users (both novices and experts) have to say.
What does take guts is to back down and admit that you were wrong, if your research does not agree with your expectations. And what I see in the GNOME development team - and their detractors - is not guts but religion. The GNOME team worship simplicity. The question they ask of any proposed feature is not "will this be beneficial to our end users", but "does this fit in with our design aesthetic".
I'm not criticising that. Simplicity is a valid goal, and it's one that KDE has not chosen, so it reduces the duplication of effort that so many people used to whine about.
However, it seems somehow implausible that the GNOME team considered this particular feature long and hard; given that it seems like a logical extension of the spatial metaphor, it seems to me that its absence can only suggest that they barely considered it if at all. Can you point to the relevant messages on the appropriate mailing list? I'd be interested to see what research they actually did, and what were their other arguments against making different workspaces visually distinct.
Horrible colors in the text editor screenshot (Score:2, Interesting)
I know it's not *that* important, and represents something that the user could (I hope) change, but the nasty garish colors used for syntax coloring in that text editor screenshot have got to go.
A more muted palette would look more attractive. Drop the saturation a bit, use darker colors than hot pink and neon purple. Muted blues and greens like the ones in slashdot's Developers section and Main section. Those would look nice.
Using the bright colors also makes it look primitive, like it's limited to using
Looks great! (Score:4, Funny)
The problem with slashdot today is... (Score:2)
To all the people asking about Gnome 10... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:To all the people asking about Gnome 10... (Score:2)
GNOME team seems more aggressive than the KDE team (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe it's just me, but it seems like the KDE guys have really missed the boat here. It seems like they are so caught up building a traditional desktop that they haven't realized that their competition is much more aggressive now.
Not trying to be a troll, just noticing that GNOME
Re:Logical dissonance (Score:4, Insightful)
The really remarkable thing is that in spite of having only a fraction of the corporate support KDE is far more usable. Yes, a few things are clumsier than I would like, but they seem to have avoided the completely idiotic design decisions that GNOME has made (the spatial browser, the hideous file selector, eliminating user-visible preferences to an extreme).
Re:Logical dissonance (Score:3, Interesting)
The really pathetic thing is that GNOME and KDE today are pretty much duplicate efforts. This situation has become a terrible waste of community res
Re:Logical dissonance (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm certain these developers that volunteer their time are eagerly awaiting your consent as to what projects they may work on.
Re:Logical dissonance (Score:3, Interesting)
Not really. Gnome is written in C, KDE is written in C++. Gnome uses GTK+, KDE uses Qt. What makes you think that Gnome-hackers would be good KDE-hackers, or vice versa? I mean, the two are technologically quite different. And what makes you think that Gnome-hackers would even want to work on KDE, or KDE hackers on Gnome? Each group has created a deskto
Re:Logical dissonance (Score:3)
Re:Logical dissonance (Score:3, Informative)
But hey, if you really want to use as little as RAM as possible, how about something like Ratpoison? Or Fluxbox? Or Xfce?
Re:GNOME team seems more aggressive than the KDE t (Score:5, Informative)
With Novell (who also owns Ximian) via SUSE and other large companies like IBM. The default desktop for *all* of the commercially successful desktop distros (commercially successful, since you're talking about commercial alliances). Connected to state contracts with national governments like Germany's Kolab project.
KDE does have plenty of connections, as does Gnome. I'd hardly say that either is ignoring that aspect of their projects. Both have excellent people working toward commercial advocacy.
--
Evan
Not until they lose that ugly color... (Score:2, Troll)
They are both great desktops. KDE's latest offering (3.3) even added convenient single-file theme packages (*.kth) which strangely hasn't seemed to generate even a tiny bit of buzz. That means its fully themeable without any complicated packages! Just import your best friends theme and use it.
Which all mean I don't understand the Linux communities relationship with their desktop
Re:Not until they lose that ugly color... (Score:2)
Actually, KDE does. In fact, KDE has for years.
Most Linux geeks just like to pick and choose their wallpaper, toolkit theme, and window decorations. I know I do.
x.org transparencies? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:x.org transparencies? (Score:2)
Re:x.org transparencies? (Score:2)
Oh. My. God. (Score:2)
It also looks like they've fixed a long standing gripe of mine - namely the fact that creating Samba shares under Gnome is (was(?)) a pain in the neck.
I cannot wait to get my hands on 2.10. Does anyone know if Ubuntu Hoary is going to use it?
If this preview is anything to go by, the UI offered by Gnome as it matures and its feature set becomes complete will be a serious contender gainst the other major GUI's (namely KDE, Windows and Aqua).
Kudos to the Gnome team and keep up th
Get a new phrase! (Score:5, Funny)
Goobox? (Score:2)
Dey took ahr jawbs!
Gpdf anyone? (Score:2)
Anyone knows if, say, Evince is going the way kpdf is?
Edit the Menu (Score:2)
Internationalization and IME (Score:2)
Can anyone shine some light on it?
Stupid Question: release policy (Score:2)
I've been asleep. Can someone point me to the release policy mentioned or precis it for me?
Amusing Linux Choice-ability (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet, somehow, I use them all on my KDE desktop.
No flamewar is necesary. I guess thats part of the beauty of linux. Maybe we can all get along after all.
Cheers,
Adolfo
Re:Amusing Linux Choice-ability (Score:3, Interesting)
And in exchange, I still use K3b and Kbabel at my GNOME desktop
Epiphany has better extensions support (Score:5, Informative)
Unmentioned on that page: Epiphany extensions can now be loaded/unloaded on-the-fly. The epiphany-extensions package comes with an extension which lets you do this. And the adblock extension is coming, dammit!
And there's also "pyphany" in CVS. It lets you make extensions using Python. Included in the CVS module: a Python Console extension, which is probably the best way to prototype extensions (you can, say, connect a signal to change the zoom, with just a couple of lines of code).
Re:Gnome 10? (Score:2)
Re:Gnome 10? (Score:2)
Re:Gnome 10? (Score:2)
I guess anything that Sun touches has to have messed up version numbers -- just look at SunOS vs. Solaris version numbers.
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:5, Informative)
Not according to the Gnome website. [216.239.63.104]
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:3, Funny)
gnu Audio pronunciation of "gnu" ( P )
Pronunciation Key (noo, nyoo)
The "g" is silent, just like in gnome.
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, and the G in gnome stands for gnu, therefore is pronounced in the same way.
of course, i dont actually care either way, but you were on a high horse...mine is higher.
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:2)
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:2)
So, in the sense that you are completely, utterly wrong, yes, that was an insightful post.
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:2)
Re:Pronounciation for y'all (Score:2)
While the animal gnu (also called the wildabeast) is pronounced with a silent G, as is the mythical creature gnome, when you start getting into acronyms (that's what all those capital letters mean) then you're allowed some leeway.
Re:Open dialog still a monstrosity? (Score:5, Interesting)
This regression is probably a result of the GNOME developers simplicity-at-all-costs attitude, and they probably want filtering to be done by the application, eg. the mp3 player shows only mp3s, and using the MIME type system instead of extension. This might seem a superior solution, but actually it is not. The old file selector allowed any combination of wildcards in the search, so you could do things like "*report*" or "Track??.mp3". I think it even allowed regular expressions. This is a much more powerful system, and it didn't confuse newbies because they didn't know it existed.
Re:Open dialog still a monstrosity? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the new file dialog is fabulous, and as I didn't know about the old features, I didn't benefit from them. Whereas I benefit from the new simplicity without having even to think about it.
Re:Year of Gnome? (Score:2)
Right guys?!?! Right?!
Re:GNOME cruft has a bullseye on it (Score:2)
Re:Uhm... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:2.82.10? (Score:2)
it's 2.10, not 2.010 or 2.01
Re:2.82.10? (Score:2)
Ubuntu (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Getting very close to OSX (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:looks a lot like.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Nor, for that matter, are graphic designers.
You probably meant to say that engineers and progammers aren't particularly good, on average, at generating nice looking interfaces, but that's not at all the same as what you actually said (al
Re:Is this GNOME or WinXP with a skin? (Score:3, Insightful)
Really? I mean, really? Here's Davyd's screenshot of the Gnome help browser:
/images/hcp.jpg [microsoft.com]
http://www.gnome.org/~davyd/gnome-2-10/images/yelp -full.png [gnome.org]
Here's some XP help browser screenshots, courtesy of Google image search:
http://www.winona.edu/its/techsupport/images/helpa ndsupport.jpg [winona.edu]
http://www.microsoft.com/TechNet/security/bulletin
Hmm, so they both have Back buttons. Oh, and scrollbars. And look, they both display formatted text! Those