Cinnamon Gnome-Shell Fork Releases Version 1.2 81
New submitter Novin writes with exciting news from the Cinnamon project. Quoting the release announcements: "Cinnamon 1.2 is out! All APIs and the desktop itself are now fully stable! I hope you'll enjoy the many new features, the desktop effect, desktop layouts, the new configuration tool, the applets, changes, bug fixes, and improvements that went into this release. This is a huge step forward for Cinnamon."
The release reintroduces desktop effects, fixes a slew of bugs, and introduces a new applet API (fixing a number of issues intrinsic to shell extensions).
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I resent that comment. Nothing about GNOME/Linux/Cinnamon is well-polished!
Re: (Score:3)
On the contrary. The GUIs these days (cinnamon included) are looking very polished.
For some reason, the most vocal people here on /. are the ones that hate them, but no-one can deny, they look good.
Re: (Score:3)
Hmmm, I respectfully disagree.
I hated the initial incarnations of gnome-shell (buggy as hell) but I've been using it for about a month now, and find I quite prefer it to ye-olde gnome2 panel interface. I like the fact that it relegates a bunch of stuff to the normally-hidden-but-realllly-easy-to-invoke "activities" screen (I use the screen-corner hotspot, so I can just shove my mouse into the corner of the screen and suddenly everything appears). I think in general it's a better design than the old gnome
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, I actually like Gnome3.
Disclaimer: I spend most of my time in a Windows environment (not by choice, it's the work I need to do) so when I use one of the modern Linux GUIs it's mostly just to try it out or on friends or relatives' PCs. I've used them, but not for months at a time. I do enjoy them though.
FWIW, if you don't like any of the new stuff and prefer ye olde Gnome2, then Debian [debian.org] is still happy to provide you with an excellent OS.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Enjoy your.... (Score:5, Insightful)
One advantage of Linux is you have full access to any turd you wish to polish, versus being stuck with someone else's fecal offerings!
great to see a UI centered on most user needs (Score:5, Interesting)
Clem has a fantastic mindset compared to many UI developers today, he knows what most users want, he actually reads user forums and responds with attitude of user experience being important. He'll make GNOME3 a useful base desktop
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
More importantly, he doesn't want to add needless features simply out of developer restlessness.
Re:great to see a UI centered on most user needs (Score:5, Interesting)
Plus a new Window Manager (Score:3)
Agree, and he's done a great job with Cinnamon. I hope he doesn't suffer from burnout. Trying to do all that while doing the coding must be a lot of work!
And as part of this latest release he's just forked Mutter - the fork is called Muffin. This for me is by far the most interesting aspect of this release.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course if Henry Ford was doing that he'd have been just trying to make the horse go faster.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:great to see a UI centered on most user needs (Score:5, Insightful)
Clem has a fantastic mindset compared to many UI developers today, he knows what most users want, he actually reads user forums and responds with attitude of user experience being important. He'll make GNOME3 a useful base desktop
It still has this weird thing about UIs of late (not just in Linux, Windows is doing the same thing), where they fix the menu size regardless of how many entries you have, and then provide you with a scroll bar if you have entries over the menu size. I don't get it. Why is the menu going up to only 1/3 of my screen? If I have all that vertical screen space still available, USE IT.
Scrolling is a necessary evil. Whenever it can be avoided, it should be.
Re: (Score:1)
While I don't disagree with you necessarily, I think the issue is a little more complex than you are thinking. When reading, it is easier to locate information if your eyes don't have to scan. To demonstrate this problem, open up a piece of text on a large monitor full screen and try to read it. Now shrink the window horizontally so that the width fits in your field of view and read it. The second time it is a lot easier. That's why we have columns in a newspaper.
The same thing is true vertically, espe
Re: (Score:2)
I think the fixed sized menu is useful. A good portion of the menu stays exactly where it was no matter what. We find things on the computer spatially. When I hit that "start" button. I pretty well know where things will be located.
The real problem there is the way many menus are laid out. Most linux desktops get it right. A menu should have less than 10 items on it.
Accessories
Graphics
Internet
Office
Programming
System
Utilities
Is a pretty good layout.
However, having the option to change it to behave to take u
Re:great to see a UI centered on most user needs (Score:5, Insightful)
I noticed the other day he's also now listed as a MATE developer. He must be doing more than just about anyone else to bring our 'sane interfaces back', one way or another. Cinnamon looks an awful lot like what Unity should have been, an alternative shell for Gnome 3 that doesn't alienate the established user base. Neither Canonical nor the core Gnome 3 team seem to have fully realised the enormous power of natural selection in the Linux 'ecosystem' (apologies for the appalling term). MS can get away wih imposing stuff like the infamous Ribbon because they have a largely captive audience. Linux users are quite happy to jump ship at short notice rather than switching to a new and (in many cases) unwanted 'desktop paradigm'. The operating system should adapt to the user, not the other way around. I suspect Mint has a bright future.
Re: (Score:1)
The Gnome crowd is one of the most conservative around. The interface didn't have anything but small incremental changes for about 10 years. These are the people you least want to spring something big on since they have no interest in new concepts or anything bleeding edge.
But luckly, even if Gnome 3 turns out to be a dead end, because of all of the forks that are out there, one can be chosen to be the new official Gnome 4. I personally really don't mind Gnome 3 though. The use of the Windows/Meta key i
Re: (Score:2)
you forgot Unity at the head of your list. with HUD 12.04 will be a Loathsome Turd Sandwich (LTS) edition.
Re:2012 Year of the Linux UI? (Score:4, Interesting)
What are you looking for in a UI? There are many options-- menu-driven (where gnome2 really is fantastic, auto-organizing stuff), KDE (not a big fan, seems powerful), Gnome-3/unity (which i can start to see the appeal of if they can polish it some more), and scores of other DE / WMs.
TBQH, ive always preferred Gnome2 over OSX, but that may be because im more used to Gnome2. OSX always makes me feel lost, and inefficient, and stupid.
Re:2012 Year of the Linux UI? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
That might have made a difference. My experience has always been in a business setting, and ominous music would always start playing when i started trying to do actual work on it.
Its also possible that im just not cool enough for Macs.
Re: (Score:1)
That's always possible. Do you shop at GAP? Not doing so could be your problem. Our coporate philosophy has always been to make people look like Justin Long.
-Sent from my Iphone. Tim
Re: (Score:2)
I think I'm with you on this. I've used a few OS's*, and so far, I find Gnome 2 to be the most productive. I'm not saying it's perfect, and there are some great features in Gnome 3 and Unity which I would dearly like in Gnome 2 (type to open application, shortcuts for running applications, snap to top/sides) and I like Ubuntu's idea for application-specific menu searching, too.
But, for me, there are reasons that gnome 2 remains better. I can move the mouse around the whole screen without any surprises.
Re: (Score:2)
I like something that stands between OS X and Gnome (or KDE). In Linux since the late 1990s, I've used FVWM 95, Window Maker, AfterStep, GNOME 1.x, KDE 2 ~ 4.something, then back to GNOME 2.x because of some specific weaknesses in KDE which seem to have since been fixed. At work, I use a Mac (mostly) and a Linux machine running Ubuntu 10.04/GNOME.
I like the OS X dock a lot and use Avant Window Navigator on my Linux machines. I also moved the window buttons to the other side (Mac-style) for consistency. Any
Re: (Score:3)
I see you ate your herpaderp-ohs this morning.
The KDE3, Gnome2, and XFCE desktop UIs are very useful, and can be quite nice looking. The problem with is (1) lack of applications that are readily accessible to most users (i.e. many Application UIs suck, or aren't sufficiently tailored to novice and sub-novice computer users), (2) Application quality - sorry while some apps (Audacity comes to mind) have pretty damn good quality, others are just too much of a hassle for the desired features (any good video edi
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
A good GUI is easy to find. Here goes my recommendation:
1. Are you willing to undergo a learning curve? if yes, then you probably want a window manager like awesome. I've never heard anything but praise for tiling window managers from those who actually use them.
2. If not, try one of the boxen. I recommend fluxbox. It's nice because there's almost nothing to learn. No UI paradigms pushed on you. Add a panel and it has all the GUI complexity of Win95 (which I'm putting forward as a good thing).
Yo
Re: (Score:3)
I'm a very happy user of xmonad tiling window manager, but there is indeed a big learning curve and a lot of keyboard hitting. I've seen screenshots of beautiful xmonad setups but mine is quite dull and I'm not willing to invest time in learning config-fu to beautify things.
It would be fantastic if someone could make a tiling window manager based distribution ("XMonabuntu"? :-)) that just works out of the box and has some point-and-click configurability and theming support.
Re: (Score:2)
1993: Year of whining that 'ordinary users' will never be able to use a Linux desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, let's avoid the issue. [computerworld.com] This was from October 2010.
4. Fragmentation
Bad news for Oracle with its "new" Linux: businesses don't want any more Linux choices. On the other hand, this also doesn't bode well for LibreOffice, the OpenOffice fork.
It's not that businesses don't appreciate choice between vendors -- they do. But there's not interested in choosing between half-a-dozen different Linuxes, two or three is much more their speed.
I don't see this as being a big concern. The last important Linux distribution to arise was Ubuntu back in 2004. I don't see any other major new Linux distributions arising in the future for either the desktop or the server. Mobile devices and tablets may be another matter. Android is doing well, but MeeGo may yet turn out to be an important portable Linux, and, who knows, perhaps another one will emerge or an Android or MeeGo variant will emerge.
Well, that's true. Ubuntu is still on top so that's easy for people to pick, right? [kubuntu.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Linux has always had a great UI. (Score:1)
Probably the main reason I use linux is the completely awesome UI. It's beautiful - look at the clean elegance of ':(){ :|:& };:' for example!
A lot of people won't ever be able to master a truly powerful user interface. But not everybody can fly a fighter jet! Some people can barely manage tricycles. And there's nothing wrong with that, you know. If you can't fly a fighter jet, or paint masterpieces in oils, you don't need to feel inadequate.
But it's not sensible to claim that an OS is inferior jus
Re: (Score:1)
No, that's not true at all. KDE 3.x was a quite good UI. KDE 4.x has (finally) matured to the point of being >= 3.x (at least in every area that matters to me). Gnome 2.x is decent out of the box, and let's me tweak it to be really good. My only beef there is that the tweaking is harder/requires more expertise than it should. Fortunately, I have that expertise. A new user might not, or even know where to find the info.
With GNOME 3, it's not that it's necessarily a bad UI per se. It has some interesting i
Map / categorization (Score:5, Interesting)
Does anyone have a map/categorization type product of the seemingly uncountable UIs?
To the best of my limited knowledge theres a huge correlation in "the UI gets in your face" with CPU/memory/size requirements. There are very few (no?) UIs in the corners of "just gets out of your way but uses huge resources" and "kinda like a 3-d screensaver except its not a screensaver and it uses no resources".
"Usefulness" / "Productivity" seems to correlate with absolutely nothing at all on a global scale, although individuals scream for their own specific favorite.
The continuum of UIs, in order of light to heavy seems to be:
CLI dash and emergency recovery statically linked shells, etc
CLI screen and bash in virtual consoles
CLI emacs in virtual consoles
Ratpoison (I'm toying with RP, it is Very nice)
XFCE (my current desktop of choice)
(I think cinnamon goes in this spot, not entirely sure)
Gnome
KDE
99% of my work (no exaggeration) both at work and home currently is "something small and nearby" with XFCE running a tabbed console/terminal which is SSHed into "something really big and far away" in one virtual window/tab/whatever and another virt window/tab/whatever with firefox + a lot of FF addons/extensions, although I've used everything in the list above at some time in the past 18 or 19 years of linux. Yeah that emacs era was a little awkward...
Did I put cinnamon in the right spot in my little 1-d graph? I'm curious if its actually lighter than XFCE.
Too complex... (Score:2)
'lighter' oversimplifies things. I don't think Cinnamon is any 'lighter' than Gnome shell, it's largely the same compentry with a different UI philosophy applied. Similarly, KDE v. Gnome is a debatable topic as well.
Also, there is WindowMaker, blackbox/derivatives, lxde, e, and tons tons tons more out there too.
Re: (Score:3)
What I recommend when you want lightweight but powerful: Don't use a graphical login manager, boot to console and use startx (run it from
conky &
xfce4-session
For a network manager use wicd with the curses frontend, this way you also have wifi in console mode. My desktop idles at ca. 80 MB of memory usage, and I have all the rest of my
Re: (Score:1)
What I recommend when you want lightweight but powerful: Don't use a graphical login manager, boot to console and use startx (run it from
conky & xfce4-session
For a network manager use wicd with the curses frontend, this way you also have wifi in console mode. My desktop idles at ca. 80 MB of memory usage, and I have all the rest of
Re: (Score:2)
I will deliver a bootable installer medium (cdrom, usb, whatever) that let's you choose your options from gnome3/ kde4 down to tailored desktop systems like the one I set up for me.
It will be easier to use than any current windows, linux or bsd installer available (mac os excluded, because it has the privilege to be only used on selected hardware). Tailored systems for everyone, on cheap hardware.
All it needs is a GUI.
Re: (Score:2)
you forgot to include Enlightenment & Fluxbox, and if you are into that sort of thing instead of using the command line, the ROX-filer.
Just technical question (Score:5, Interesting)
Disclaimer: yes, I'm using GNOME 3 with GNOME Shell as devs intended to and I have some ironic laughts about claims that "GS/Unity devs are screwballs and don't know nothing". However, everyone uses tools best for him, so...just use it, don't go around claiming that it's best desktop for now.
However, I have purerly technical question - why not improving GNOME 3 Panel? It's ported, code cleaned up, it's introspectable (you can write JS extentions like for GNOME Shell) and you can still keep all the goodies, including having compiz and friends.
Re:Just technical question (Score:5, Informative)
Clem stated that they tried to talk to gnome devs, but seems they didn't care about integrate the needed modifications to allow a desktop like cinnamon offers, because it goes against their vision of the desktop they envision. Look in the cinnamon page, the response is given "January 23, 2012 at 11:27 pm"
Re:Just technical question (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, no one forbids him to take GNOME Panel and support it. GNOME devs care about GNOME libs and GNOME Shell. But they don't deny anyone keeping legacy software alive if someone says and does so. Trust me, I know these guys.
Re: (Score:1)
Gnome guys have said that the panel will be discontinued once everyone has working 3D drivers, and that is likely soon (never thought I'd be saying that about Linux).
Re: (Score:2)
Or, alternatively, a soft-3d render path which is really perceived as the goal that will be hit...
Re: (Score:2)
And there's problem with taking GNOME Panel under your wing and provide some development and direction how? It could be a little more taxing, and require initial investment, but in nutshell, where's problem?
Cinnamon... (Score:2)
"It's cinnamonnamony!"--The Swedish Chef
Re: (Score:3)
What is Croonchy Stars?
I'll take obscure breakfast cereals for $400
"Cinnamon Gnome Shell Fork" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Most headlines these days are utterly bizarre nonsense, even the ones that are easy to understand.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh damn, there goes my password!
http://xkcd.com/936/ [xkcd.com]
Can we find a way to get a news story about a Correct Horse Battery Staple next?
Re: (Score:2)
You must have retained some of your sanity, because I had to re-read it several times trying my hardest to see what it would mean if I wasn't a linux-geek.
Oh dear.
Re: (Score:2)
Finally some sanity returns (Score:1)
And there are third party packages for Fedora and Ubuntu!
I don't want to get into the debate of whether or not gnome-shell is an improvement over the traditional desktop. Either way, it was wrong for them to push it unfinished on unsuspecting users. Now I can start promoting linux again, something I've had to stop doing because of all the coolaid drinking that has been going on in the UI space. My wife has been on Fedora 14 and now I can upgrade her without her killing me.
Re: (Score:3)
And there are third party packages for Fedora and Ubuntu!
I don't want to get into the debate of whether or not gnome-shell is an improvement over the traditional desktop. Either way, it was wrong for them to push it unfinished on unsuspecting users. Now I can start promoting linux again, something I've had to stop doing because of all the coolaid drinking that has been going on in the UI space. My wife has been on Fedora 14 and now I can upgrade her without her killing me.
I wanted to like it, I really did. I tried it for a while, gave it a long time and forced myself to learn to work with activities, customize the dash, etc.,etc. There are some things that I like about it. Unfortunately, it comes down to usability. While I *can* get stuff done with it, it always takes longer. Too much clicking and moving back and forth in the GUI for the stuff I do. Same complaint I had about Windows Explorer in Windows 7 - it was an improvement, but it requires extra clicks and select
What about the Classic Menu? (Score:4, Interesting)
I've been watching this with interest since it was announced and found myself bitterly disappointed to see that in every screenshot I could find the Cinnamon fork used a variant of the MintMenu. No offense to those who like it, it simply doesn't trip my trigger and I prefer the Gnome 2 menu bar. Is this possible using Cinnamon or do those of us who prefer the old way have to wait for MATE to finish being ported to get "our" desktops back?
Clem, if you're watching these comments, I gotta say that despite vehemently disagreeing with your politics I really appreciate the care you're showing the users of your distro and your willingness to create something that not only works well, but looks good too! Thank you.
--bornagainpenguin
Re: (Score:3)
I have to agree; I've been using GNOME 3 in "Fallback" mode for months now -- it is mostly like the good old GNOME 2 desktop; having to hold down Alt and right-clicking the panels to customize is awkward, but it's not a common enough action to be truly annoying.
As much as I appreciate making the GNOME Shell more usable, I wish there was focus on a GNOME 3 fork that emphasizes the GNOME Panel (fallback/classic, whatever you want to call it) and Nautilus desktop metaphors. I personally feel that the later da
Re:What about the Classic Menu? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh that I could live with! The problem is the last I heard, "Fallback mode" was scheduled to be removed so I never bothered with it. Are you saying this is not the case? Because if it is intended to stick around I can always find a distro doing Gnome 3 and start using the "Fallback mode" without any issues.
The issues come in for me when the developers suddenly decide that everyone has to quit liking what worked well before and what was actually the reason they had any users at all because the new shiny is the now the ONE TRUE WAY....
Sadly enough that attitude seems to be infecting the whole software world of late and there seems nothing end users can do about it besides stick with the previous (unsupported) versions or move on to something else.
--bornagainpenguin
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not currently aware of any concrete plans to remove fallback mode, I've heard several different things from keeping it where it is, hiding the checkbox in system settings (so you'd have to use gsettings to toggle it), or removing it entirely. I don't know what, if any, the official plans concerning it are. At the moment, at least, I can use fallback mode in GNOME 3.
Also I must say, I am aware of MATE, a fork of GNOME 2.32, but it makes me feel unconfortable for chewing off perhaps too much of the desk
Re: (Score:2)
Cinnamon is not configurable to use the Gnome menu? Ugh. I also find MintMenu to be quite irritating, and greatly prefer the Gnome 2 menu bar (or xfce menu). I've tried a few versions of Linux Mint in VMs, and each time that MintMenu turns me off it, and I keep using Ubuntu 10.04, and its Xubuntu variant.
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with LXDE and XFCE (Score:2)
Why is Cinnamon needed. Hasn't LXDE and/or XFCE filled that void?
Re: (Score:2)
Neither of them are as complete as Gnome 2 was. While they're alternatives to Gnome 3, they require losing various features that people liked in Gnome 2.
Of course they also seem to be less buggy and have less retarded design choices copied from Windows.
Speciation (Score:4, Interesting)
My critical path doesn't usually include desktop pro's and con's; my enthusiasm for such questions was exhausted by the great vi vs. emacs crusades in the days of yore.
The recent Canonical debacle with Unity has shaken me out of my complacency. In the early days of desktop linux I flirted with both KDE and Gnome before standardizing on Gnome because it felt easier and I wanted to devote my thought energy to other matters (no disrespect, KDE, it's just how I went on a whim way back then).
And so I stayed for about 12 years. But when I upgraded to oneiric this fall and was slapped in the face by the perversion of nature that is Unity, I tried to revert to Gnome only to find it had atrophied and bloated to near Windows-suck levels. So I started shopping around. Sure, I flirted with the idea of CLI-only, but GUIs do occasionally have value. Then I switched to xfce and haven't looked back. It feels like I got a hardware upgrade.
Some of my peripheral applets are gone, but next to the general performance gain it's a price worth paying.
Once again, my faith in the utter superiority of OSS has been confirmed. In Windoze or Applez land you dance to their tune or else. In Linux, you can be continually born again. Speciation is good.