GNOME 3.2 Released 205
supersloshy writes "Today marks the release of the latest edition of the GNOME Desktop for Linux-based operating systems. There are numerous fixes and improvements in this release such as smaller title bars (for small screens), the integration of GNOME Contacts and GNOME Documents for easy data management, web application integration, many more configurable settings, and other updates such as a more unified appearance and better chat integration."
For those of us who prefer a video (Score:4, Informative)
Quick search reveals an 8 minute overview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnxvRr-3MSA [youtube.com]
Thought it might come in handy; TFA only contains a few shots.
I think overall it looks better, it's great. But there is still something about the icons that needs to be improved. Maybe too colorful? The shape? It becomes more apparent when compared to an OSX desktop (or other simpler desktops, if you like that kind of style)
Re: (Score:2)
I see no taskbar in that video...you need to zoom out to pick up windows in the same workspace?
Re: (Score:2)
I see no taskbar in that video...you need to zoom out to pick up windows in the same workspace?
But it's so much cooler than just clicking on the taskbar.
Re: (Score:3)
I have to agree with you though, I find a desktop environment close to unusable without a task bar.
Re: (Score:3)
Also "cairodock" is a great taskbar replacement; I've used it for a while instead of the gnome2 taskbar.
It can be easily configured to be more "OSX like" or more "taskbar like", though it tends towards the former.
Re: (Score:3)
You can have a task with an extension if you really want one.
That said, you really have to try the overview-style. Whack the windows-key, and you very quickly have almost the entire screen used to select windows, meaning you can see which one you're interested very easily and go to it. It takes some getting used to.... but the added bonus of the zoom-out view being live updates means you get the ability to monitor many windows simultaneously for interesting updates, without needing to throw in a different u
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Window handling in GNOME 3 is plain retarded - i highly reccomend Docky [go-docky.com] if you need something more usable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For really large alt-tab lists, it's better to (hold)ALT-tab, then while holding ALT you click on the desired window.
Re: (Score:2)
And "pluggable" desktops, too :) That's the power of Linux!
I am/was a fan of fluxbox + gdesklets and that kind of mods. Most beautiful desktops I have ever customized :)
Re: (Score:2)
That video just demonstrates why I'm sticking with 2.30.2. No traditional taskbar method of switching between applications is a deal breaker.
The classic GNOME Panel is still part of GNOME 3. If the GPU allows it, GNOME Shell is just default. It can be reverted to Panel at any time.
Re: (Score:2)
Please allow me to disagree. The taskbar is useless if you have two or three of windows open: just alt-tab or click on the windows to switch among them. When you have 20 windows and you know where they are (which desktop, which position, just buried under other windows) the compiz cube and the taskbar are handy. I get seasick with the screen zooming in and out and all the windows moving, and I don't get seasick at sea. Furthermore, the gnome way of switching between windows is a plain loss of time. It's a v
Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (Score:1)
And, of course, user-defined window manager. Seriously, how do those people expect anyone to use this?
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't Gnome the window manager already? So picking Gnome is the user defining the window manager? Or did you mean something else?
Re: (Score:2)
Gnome is a desktop environment, of which a window manager is only a small part.
Re:Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell? (Score:5, Insightful)
Gnome is a tablet environment. Without the touch.
Re: (Score:2)
OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)
In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.
Re: (Score:2)
OS -> X11 (or equivalent) -> GDM (or equivalent) -> Gnome (or equivalent) -> Metacity (or equivalent) -> Nautilus (or equivalent)
In the above, 'Metacity' would be the window manager, I believe. I may be wrong on the above though. I'm not a Gnome fan, so my usage is fairly basic.
Incorrect. Metacity was the Window manager in Gnome 2. In Gnome 3 the developers just stabs you in the eye. Can you tell I switched to KDE?
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm. Metacity -> Metastasize. Interesting how close they are, no?
Re: (Score:2)
Why is the thing rendering the borders on the windows so important to people... I never get that?! Did you really run another window manager than Metacity in Gnome2? And how is it different when the Desktop environment handles the window management, from when fwvm2 or windowmaker that was window managers tried to be desktop environment with launchers and stuff?
For 10-20 years (depending where you draw the line) developers have tried to separate the desktop environment and window managers, and still Gimp i
Re: (Score:2)
Don't ask me. I just know that in the latest Fedora release, even our die-hard Gnome zealots are abandoning Gnome 3 for KDE 4 due to it being unusable and destroying performance.
Serious deja vu for me, considering how angry I was for the first few revisions of KDE 4.
Re: (Score:2)
Mutter is the Gnome 3's EGL accelerated window manager.
Metacity with Intel's Clutter EGL library.
Fun fact: Mutter is German for Mother.
Re: (Score:2)
A bit, yes. That's one of the prices of modularity - one of the chief benefits in turn being that you can (for the most part) swap parts out at will.
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't tell you, the last time I interacted with a Mac was in the late 90s.
X11 is the windowing framework. It's very low level. GDM/KDM/XDM are session managers. The session manager handles your login (note, you can log into a remote X11 display!) and starts your specified Window Manager. These are also called "sessions" and GDM/KDM/XDM should have a dropdown on the login screen somewhere to select them.
The Window Manager tells X11 what to do. At that point, the *DM is out of the way.
The "Desktop Enviro
Re: (Score:2)
No worries, though I appreciate that thought!
Re: (Score:2)
If you need a user-defined window manager there are lots of other DEs out there since you probably won't use GNOME3 anyway. It's a design decision, and not a bad one when you consider where GNOME is trying to go. Mutter isn't awesome or Compiz, but it does what it needs to do well.
On that note, Mutter is the *first* compositing WM I've seen that didn't cause video tearing on nVidia. I've been jacking with Compiz/nvidia-settings for years and I still see tearing, and KWin is only a little better. Mutter
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried apt on Fedora?
Re: (Score:2)
I could, but all the useful, well-tested stuff is found in yum repositories.
I don't mind the technology (yum/rpm), and yum itself isn't too bad once you get used to it, but it is a little slower, doesn't seem to handle dependencies quite as well. Mostly I dearly miss synaptic.
Re: (Score:2)
Where the Hell is panel decoupled from shell?
The same place it's been since 3.0 was first released: choose the "GNOME Classic" session when logging in.
Where the hell have you been?
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so lots of comments coming down from this, but is there an answer? Is there a panel available for Gnome 3.2? I have a list of about 3 things that went so far into unusability as far as my workflow went that I kept all my systems at Fedora 14 after some initial tests of F15 with Gnome 3. One of those was the ability to have an always-visible panel with a list of active windows. Seriously, that's not too much to ask, right? I don't even require that it be on by default, just something that I could a
And some people rejoice (Score:1)
GNOME has lost some steam over the time.
From 2001 - 2010 when Microsoft was stuck with XP (dont count vista it was an early beta for windows 7) GNOME had a wonderful opportunity to surpass Windows with a good set of new UI functions. But it laggard and let Apple come up and take the place.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple didn't get ahead by being a better desktop though, they've got ahead through "synergy"/halo effect with iPod/iPhone/iTunes. So much so that my flatmate who loves his iDevices has been considering buying an iMac despite not wanting to touch any other OS than Windows in the past..
Re: (Score:2)
Mac OS X has the most terrible UI in the world.
The GNOME 2.x UI is pretty decent though.
GNOME 3 looks like GNOME for tablets.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that it is a terrible for you and me however not for the general public. If you think about it from a typical users perspective where they don't interact much with the OS, all their programs are available at the bottom of the screen. That's very convenient for them compared to other DEs where applications are hidden within menus.
Most users simply want to use their programs for some simple basic computing and that's why OSX is in some ways a good UI for their target market. I don't think the same hol
Multiple Monitor Support? (Score:1)
Have there been any fixes to how it handles multiple desktop setups? I've been using Gnome 3 for a while and applications like libreOffice still show the splash screen split across both, and the second monitor limited to a 'sticky' surface common to every desktop is irritating.
It would be really nice if the second desktop darkened like the primary in the overview, displayed a similar thumbnail view as the primary but on the left side (when the secondary monitor is on the right it would look cool, and when
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively run the two screens under different copies of X instead of twinview (or similar) - on nvidia you tick boxes to do it, elsewhere cut and paste bits from a HOWTO into your config file. That has the advantage/disadvantage that keeps apps on the screen they were started from. That's good for keepi
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I did it that way to run full screen WoW.
It switches when you go off the edge of the screen into the space occupied by the other screen and keyboard focus switches at exactly the same time and not any other time because it ignores anything on a different X session that tries to grab the mouse on it's own. There are "edge resistance" settings you can turn on in just about every window manager made since 1994 as well which c
I don't understand... more configurable settings?! (Score:2, Funny)
Last I heard, configurable settings were bad -- they scare, confuse, and intimidate users, and they open the possibility that someone might choose to configure their desktop wrong, which is antithetical to the GNOME way.
Seriously, is this a new direction? Did they make a public announcement or something? Or is this just a one-time concession to reduce the GNOME 3 backlash, perhaps as an experiment so 3.4 can replace all the new options with a selector amongst the most popular configuration for each of deskt
Re: (Score:1)
Last I heard, configurable settings were bad
Someone lied to you or you misheard. Go read the original article by Havoc Pennington.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone lied to you or you misheard. Go read the original article by Havoc Pennington.
You don't read what someone writes, you look at their actions. The behaviour of the Gnome project over the years says otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd suggest reading the interview with Jon McCann [derstandard.at], who heads up GNOME3 development and who brought us the "user configuration is bad, because the user will do evil things" gnome-screensaver. Note particularly the following:
"And I think there is a lot of value to have that experience you show the world to be consistent. In GNOME2 we didn't do that particularly well because everyone's desktop was different."
Re: (Score:2)
You know it all went to shit when GNOME developers release a tool [gnome.org] to tweak "advanced options" like how the laptop behaves when you close the lid, font sizes or if the shell clock shows date or not.
Go away, geezers (Score:2, Interesting)
Its a bait and switch approach. They did it during the 1.x era and then again during the 2.x era.
There is not going to be a 3rd time. Ditch gnome. The whole project has jumped the shark, all they they care about are non existant users.
GNOME is the only major Linux desktop for which all of the following points are true.
o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord
o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns
o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.
KDE fails the non-geek user test - it's both obtuse and verbose. XFCE is like a crappy, featureless GNOME 2/Windows mashup with a hint of Sharp
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
o it's developed entirely in the open without a single corporate overlord
What is Red Hat again?
o it's trying out bleeding-edge design concepts instead of rehashing old interfaces and patterns
So you like being treated like a Guinea Pig??
o it's successfully targeting non-geek users AND proving quite usable for technical users.
non-geeks already have choosen the apple or microsoft way, because these have something gnome 3.2 still doesn't have: IT WORKS and the desktop IS INVISIBLE (Read: designed to help you, not get in your way)
KDE fails the non-geek user test - it's both obtuse and verbose.
True
XFCE is like a crappy, featureless GNOME 2/Windows mashup with a hint of SharpE.
Is minimalist, true, but at least you look at this and you already know where to go from it.
GNOME 2 is like a weird Windows/OS X mashup - functional, but nothing new there.
And that's was their beauty: It was _FUNCTIONAL_, and at the same time, well balanced for non-geeks users.
Unity is slick and crufty at the same time (quite the feat), and its direction is dictated by Canonical.
But is still more functional than gnom
Re: (Score:3)
Not fighting Gnome, here. I'm just abandoning it. Why, you ask? Well - among my machines, I have an Athlon 5300+ with 4 gig of memory installed. As time passes, that memory usage tends to go up, but it was more than adequate until I finally tried a distro with Gnome3. I've already posted this in another discussion, but here goes again.
Sabayon Linux version 5 and 6. Grab the CD/DVD's and do an installation with each. You want Sabayon 5 Gnome, Sabayon 6 Gnome, and Sabayon 6 Enlightenment.
Sabayon 5, whi
Re: (Score:2)
Although I do like the functionality of Gnome 2.x and have been a long-time Gnome user, I recently switched my Linux boxen to LXDE (Fedora and Lubuntu).
LXDE is fast and configurable.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I know, 8 gig of RAM only costs about $150 to $200 these days.
FYI, your pricing is seriously out of date. Here's a set of standard 2x4GB modules for 53$ [newegg.com], 38$ if you count the mail-in rebate. The problem would be more mobile form factors and other places you can't update than the desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a recent machine 8GB is indeed cheap. If you have a slightly older machine that takes DDR2 and supports 8GB (not all DDR2 based systems do) it's about twice as expensive. If your machine is any older than that you are most likely looking at replacing the motherboard and quite possiblly the CPU as well to get 8GB.
Re: (Score:2)
ahh yes.. you're the geezer stereotype that clings to every new thing that comes along without any balance or perspective for critical analysis because he's so desperately trying to stay socially relevant.
the whole ipad on pc trend is shit..plain and simple.
Re: (Score:3)
Simple (Score:3)
I'm sure there are some real advantages to using a desktop environment that I'm just not getting, so please educate me.
No problem. The advantages:
- Applications written for a DE are better integrated with each other.
- Apps written for a DE tend to use the same toolkits and work in predictable ways.
- Desktop environments tend to have collections of blessed applications. Less hunting.
- Desktop environments tend to have communities filled with like-minded people.
- DEs are installed by major Linux distros, providing a standard interface.
- Commercial support is available for some D
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I appreciate the reply, but I don't think I understand it. I like my setup because it saves me time; I don't fret over what color the close boxes should be, because my windows don't have any close boxes.
The only one of your items that means anything to me is your mention of the apps being "better integrated". But whenever I've looked at this it seems to mean I need to use the apps that, as you put it, are "blessed" by the DE, and those are inferior to the programs that I prefer to use. I was really looking
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
#1
"Most people don't want 'bleeding-edge', they want something that works. If you're pushing something new, then we want something that's, you know, better than what we already have."
How they will know that it is better if they don't even try, because it looks so alien and...where is my desktop pager? People don't like to retrain motor skills, they *don't* like new stuff.
And for your knowledge, in GNOME 3 you launch application just pressing meta/windows key (or throwing key in top left corner, if you're ca
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Today - do I have fingerprint by default? Hell no, but it is "integrated with the rest of the user experience". Quite disappointing.
Fedora 15 has fingerprint authentication by default, and I've had it for years with a bit of work (fingerprint readers weren't so common 6 years ago). This kind of integration is usually a distro-specific thing.
Gnome is ambivalent in design (Score:1)
The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.
KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.
The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.
Re: (Score:1)
The icons are ugly and the styles never seem to get there. The layout does though.
KDE has the same issue. So many things done right, but missing the polish.
The two should really merge and create a desktop that doesn't suck. KDE 4.x is buggy, and mediocre at best. Gnome 3 is, from what I have experienced, trying to hard. Both rip off OSX instead of ripping off KDE 3.5 and Gnome 2x.
This is all that is wrong with KDE and Gnome projects. Trying to rip off OSX or Windows.
Why don't they embrace 100% the unix/linux philosophy. No mainstream application (except for Gimp) nowadays uses multiple windows on linux (why ? because of trying to copy Windows).
No shit, they even want to do away with focus follows mouse.
Damn, if I wanted the windows or osx experience I would be using a damn windows pc or a mac.
Can't we throw away these designers in a fire and get some people that know what they're do
Re: (Score:2)
What you'd get is a DE with ugly icons and no polish.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see much that these DEs can do that XFCE can't. Maybe a few eye-candy tricks during window switching like Expose or zooming out on your desktop wall. Of course there are a few more eye candy hacks that you can't do. XFCE even has its own compositor, though it's not hugely useful. And in my experience, xfpanel is the most stable and full-featured panel out there (it's not a dock, but you could certainly add one).
But I guess, since it hasn't been endorsed by a major distro, it's always gonna be the pe
external monitor only on laptops? (Score:2)
I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached? With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.
I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).
I'd much rather the
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached?
I read this one quite often and no it does not suspend if an external monitor is attached. 3.0 didn't either.
With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.
I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).
You know, you can just select which one is the primary display in the settings. Not sure what's wrong with your setup but all you describe works fine fore me. (using: Fedora 14, sandy bridge cpu/gpu 24" external monitor with desktop spawning both displays or built-in one deactivated; suspend on lid close - if no external monitor attached as well)
I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.
It's not like the intel driver developers are writing c
Re: (Score:3)
I complain about Gnome because it's the one that doesn't work.
I don't have any problems with Kubuntu or Fedora's KDE spin. I use xrandr to get the setup the way I want, but doing that under gnome locks the whole system up tight. I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well.
The sad thing is, I actually find the Gnome 3 interface appealing in a lot of ways, even though it's pretty different from what I'm used to. It's really innovative and I think it coul
Do they have the basics down yet? (Score:2)
Like a working desktop pager?
Re: (Score:2)
The workspace switcher in the overview remains expanded by keeping its full width displayed when you are using more than one workspace.
So it's still broken? (Score:2)
If I wanted a GUI with hidden/broken workspaces, I'd use windows or OS X.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It looks to me like it's still hidden in the overview, not visible on the primary view.
Does not work on nVidia-based machines (Score:2)
Gnome 3.0 does not even start up on most systems with nVidia-based graphics cards. I've been trying to get it started to no avail. Nobody seems to know or care about the problem. I've had to switch to xfce.
Makes no sense to me; KDE4.x works fine, so does Gnome 2.x. X itself has no problem either for 2D, 3D or sound. Hope they have fixed this in 3.2.
Re: (Score:2)
Works fine on this machine. F15 with gnome-3 and NVIDIA. This is a really nice workstation.
*shrugs*
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, you'll need to install the hardware vendor drivers for best performance. Nouveau isn't quite ready yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Livna is Nvidia's binary driver packaged for Fedora//RH.
Much more productive (Score:5, Interesting)
The new shell is absolutely fantastic. The flow between the apps and tasks is incredibly smooth. It's really too bad that Ubuntu didn't see the potential and decided to go their own way. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for competition but it would be really nice to see Ubuntu join the GNOME shell effort. Unity is just getting in the way when it's trying to get out of the way ironically. If you haven't tried the new GNOME shell, you're missing out on a really cool experience. I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
If you haven't tried the new GNOME shell, you're missing out on a really cool experience. I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago.
+1
I wouldn't go back to the old gnome if you paid me.
Awesome! (Score:4, Funny)
Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.
Hey bashers, take note! :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I waited a couple of weeks after it launched too. I had been reading Rob's Chips & Dips religiously and knew months before that it would become Slashdot. My UID really should be -42 or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Everyone, please note that a slashdotter with a 4 digit UID likes GNOME 3.
Hey bashers, take note! :-)
Wow, that's almost as good as having Linus's endorsement!
Re: (Score:2)
may that happen because he has a fullscreen terminal window opened by xinit and not much else? :D
Re: (Score:2)
"I haven't this happy with my desktop since I ran a very customized AfterStep about 10 years ago."
Get a rope. Don't forget the gall and spikes and do this crucifixion up right. /humor
PS. Robes and torches optional.
Testdrive GNOME 3.2 (Score:2)
If you wanna try out without waiting for official distribution releases like Ubuntu Linux 11.10 (with apt-get install gnome-shell) and Fedora 16 (full GNOME 3 desktop by default), try Fedora 16 Desktop Live CD nightly builds from here: http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/ [fedoraproject.org] (As currently available alpha is way behind in fixed bugs sense). Drop it on Flash USB and you are set. You can even install it on hard drive if you like what you see. Click on 'Desktop' Spin and use ISO file from Output.
I love Gnome! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought you were gonna say ratpoison or xfce.
I do like ratpoison on my development box... I need a nice terminal prog to attach to my screen sessions, and a way to toggle to web browser occasionally. Thats about it.
Re: (Score:2)
"I thought you were gonna say ratpoison or xfce."
That's funny, I'd rather swallow ratpoison than use GNOME3.
Re: (Score:2)
xfce is bloated. I use LXDE not as bloated but more featured than fluxbox.
Re: (Score:3)
How is gnome 3 anything even remotely like windows? Windows has a taskbar. Gnome has zooming/search + the alt-` behavior. Windows has it all in a pop-up menu like fluxbox. Gnome-3 bravely got rid of the taskbar. If you're looking for a window, try the meta key and start typing. 3 letters is usually sufficient and a lot quicker than grabbing the mouse, a-la pop-up menus. Windows and fluxbox have desktop icons. Gnome 3 got rid of them (never used them anyway.. the desktop is where I put my windows. T
Re: (Score:2)
As a Debian user, of course I do. When they decide to migrate to Gnome 3 then I'll make the switch to something else.
Re: (Score:2)
I moved to GNOME 2.x after the KDE 4 disaster (okay, I stuck around until 4.6 to give them a chance). Once 2.x (or "classic" mode) stops being supported I will move to something else. Possibly XFCE or LXDE *sigh*
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone still use gnome?
Depends. Did they change the annoying menus behavior? Meaning, even after the gtk-menu-popup-delay=0 custom, sub-menus that were never opened take 1~3 seconds to appear when the mouse goes over the main expendable menu.
Re: (Score:2)
"Just start typing for whatever you want?"
That's what I have been doing in my little terminal window for 15 years already with tab completion.
It pretty much seems Gnome is trying to combine the shortfalls from the command line with the shortfalls of the GUI. Make a GUI that is supposedly "optimized for touch" and then you have to "type" to get to stuff?
Good thing I already fled to LXDE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
See, this is the misery of the Gnome developers (pun intended). They can't understand - worse: they can't accept - that different people have different concepts. I for one feel that a taskbar was the worst invention in UI-land since ... MS-DOS. So I don't want one. Point taken. But now, I want anything but Gnome. It is plain crap, though it does not have / need a taskbar. And the nail in the Gnome coffin should and will be that the developers still know exactly what I want.I have tried and Gnome 3 is about
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait! this is linux...
Linus said that Gnome 3 sucks and he's switching to a sane UI. So don't blame him.
Re: (Score:2)
So don't blame him.
I didn't know Torvalds was on the gnome development team.
Re: (Score:2)
Because point and click is slow. Hell, I'd already long since switch to launchers like quicksilver on mac, and gnome-do in previous versions of gnome. Even Unity is better--super key+three letters+enter almost always gets me the right program faster than I could even move the cursor to the menu with my touchpad.
Any desktop manager that forces me to do every task the slowest possible way should be considered a failure. I use my computer to get work done, not to waste my time dragging my finger across the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're wrong, though you're better than your -1 as of now.
Have those who modded you down see the crap of windows placement in the video? Totally top left. Huuh. I though we had been over this in the last millennium. And then Forefox pops out in the centre. No idea, why we need the extra 'window' around its window?? I mean, what is is good for when you open a Firefox to have it centered with real estate margins? And then he opened the system information, and - up popped a ridiculously large grayish area with