MATE Desktop 1.2 Released 194
An anonymous reader writes "For those of you who still feel GNOME 2 is the best desktop environment, but don't want stick to old distros, MATE is a fork of GNOME 2, with all the names changed to avoid clashes with GNOME 3. Version 1.2 brings fixes, but also new features such as undo/redo in the file manager."
This release features better freedesktop standards integration, adds a few missing utilities, and merges new features into the file manager. The project has a new wiki; the roadmap has a few details on future goals, including porting things to Gtk 3 and using bits and pieces of modern GNOME 3 infrastructure where appropriate.
Excellent (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Informative)
Without MATE, Linux Mint 12 wouldn't even be an option for me (I'd stick with 11).
I might say the same for Ubuntu 12.04 (though to be fair, I could also live with Xfce). I just installed MATE 1.2 on the latest 12.04 beta and it works like a charm, as here:
http://www.howtogeek.com/110052/how-to-install-the-mate-desktop-go-back-to-gnome-2-on-ubuntu/ [howtogeek.com]
For my money, Gnome 2/MATE is still the best available desktop for Linux. I've tried the other approaches to taming Gnome 3 (Cinnamon, the classic 'fallback mode' panel, even Unity) and all currently seem lacking in comparison, with more limited features, or lower performance on resource-limited systems, or (in the case of Unity) annoying design choices. The benefits to developers of building a desktop on the Gnome 3 foundation (ease of maintenance, etc.) are all very well, but as an end-user, I'm going to go for the more responsive, fully-featured alternative. The situation may be different in a year or two, but right now MATE remains my top choice.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I never understood why when things were getting nice and stable both KDE and GNOME would suddenly shitcan all that work. i mean what was wrong with them? They both looked nice, ran fine, were low resource, so what was wrong with what they had? Could they just not live without an assload of bling like OSX and Windows has gotten?
That is soooooo true. Imagine if all the resources would have been put to polishing KDE3 and GNOME2 instead. We might not have the latest whizbang innovation UI, but a good solid, basic desktop. That's exactly what Linux needs, not another broken mess. And those two both have Compiz support so you get some eye-candy spices too.
BTW for those that prefer the KDE way of doing things Vector Linux [vectorlinux.com] has a "KDE Classic" edition based on 3.5.10 that is nice.
And there's, of course, the Trinity Desktop [trinitydesktop.org], which is a similar project to MATE, but it bases on KDE3.
Doomed, try cinnamon. (Score:2, Interesting)
This approach is doomed to failure. The better approach is Mint's Cinnamon project. There they maintain a gnome2 like desktop environment, but it rests on gnome3. There are ppa's (https://launchpad.net/~merlwiz79/+archive/cinnamon-ppa) that let you install it into official Ubuntu distros, so no need to install a full-on mint distro. It would be even better if canonical moved these packages into universe or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is how long can the limited Mint development team support both MATE and Cinnamon? One would think that eventually, one is going to have to go and since Gnome 2 had a ton of programmers, it doesn't seem possible that MATE is going to be sustainable in the long run.
Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (Score:4, Informative)
MATE is independent of Mint and has its own team (Clem is a member, but Mint ddidn't start and doesn't run the project). The MATE team is small, but their goals are much more modest than Gnome's - they (thankfully!) have no ambitions to design a new 'desktop paradigm'.
Re: (Score:2)
MATE is independent of Mint and has its own team (Clem is a member, but Mint ddidn't start and doesn't run the project). The MATE team is small, but their goals are much more modest than Gnome's - they (thankfully!) have no ambitions to design a new 'desktop paradigm'.
I stand (or type) correct. That said, one of the issues with prompting the shift to Gnome 3 was that the code base for Gnome 2 was unwieldy. Hopefully, they will be able to maintain it. My real concern would be with the other gnome applications (evolution, brassero, etc.). Will these all be forked or will the G3 versions be used and if the G3 versions are used, trying to integrate them into G2 may be a monumental task.
I wish the MATE team all the best.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, one of the issues with prompting the shift to Gnome 3 was that the code base for Gnome 2 was unwieldy. Hopefully, they will be able to maintain it.
It was that GTK+ 2.x code was becoming unwieldly and so GTK+ 3.x started a big cleanup. That principle may have also applied to some other individual packages. But the desktop as a whole wasn't really in that position.
Re: (Score:2)
they wont though because thou shalt not have a traditional desktop, you most have unity because unity is the way of the future and it is the perfect form factor for in Linux in all environments be it desktop phone tablet or tv all must be one and don't you dare ask to put it on the right side it must be on the left.
Re: (Score:3)
(fallout reference)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Do you not know what a reference is?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Doomed, try cinnamon. (Score:5, Insightful)
This approach is doomed to failure. The better approach is Mint's Cinnamon project. There they maintain a gnome2 like desktop environment, but it rests on gnome3. There are ppa's (https://launchpad.net/~merlwiz79/+archive/cinnamon-ppa) that let you install it into official Ubuntu distros, so no need to install a full-on mint distro. It would be even better if canonical moved these packages into universe or something.
You are missing the point! I don't want Gnome3 and I don't want a Gnome2-looking interface stuck on Gnome3. It wasn't the look of Gnome2 that I liked. It was the flexibility and feature completeness. I could drag app links to the bar on top. I could use the bar on bottom as my taskbar. I could put a "widget" on my top bar that showed me my process or usage, RAM usage, network activity, swap activity, CPU temperature, fan speed, CPU speed, case temp, etc, etc, etc, all without adding any special repos. I can't do any of that on Gnome3. Not because Gnome3 doesn't LOOK like Gnome2, but because it's Gnome3.
I don't want Gnome3, period! I run XFCE and KDE now, thank you very much.
Re: (Score:2)
Where did you get the idea cinnamon was a port of gnome 2 stuff?
AFAICT it's a different beast again. A good one, certainly, by comparison to Shell, but a different thing.
Try KDE (Score:2)
I've just been fooling around with KDE because I had some problems with my graphics card, and the builtin graphics don't do 3D. That means no compiz, and no window placement.
That means I was being driven nuts manually bringing down browser windows to the bottom half of my screen where I like them.
So I tried KDE. Turns out I like it. And you can basically set it up the way I had Gnome set up:
-Focus follows mouse with delayed raise
-Choice of keyboard shortcuts for keyboard layout change
-You can set desktop sw
Re: (Score:2)
cinnamon seems the better approach, because much of gnome3 is still what it was in gnome2. so just replace the sucking parts. And this is what cinnamon does ... replacing the shell, but not the rest.
Re: (Score:2)
This approach is doomed to failure.
I just installed MATE on my business laptop, and started using it. I immediately felt happier. That's not a failure... that's a success!
Now, you can argue that in the long run, it's counter-productive to try to keep the old GTK 2.x code base going. I might even agree! I have high hopes for Cinnamon.
But the GNOME 2.x code base represents man-decades of work, and Cinnamon won't reach that smooth, polished level of usability in the short run. So what can we use right now
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe so, But you could be running GNOME 2 in 10 years if you stick with RHEL or CENT OS.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm too lazy to hunt through the gnome website but how hard is it to migrate from GTK+2 to 3?
Most libraries preserve some backward compatibility, whereby between versions you can just drop in the new libraries and re-compile. The new bells and whistles won't show up but it'll still work with the new libraries, even if the features are deprecated.
Clearly this doesn't seem the case, with features removed or changed?
Re: (Score:2)
The real problem they have is the same one that Trintity, the fork of KDE 3 has.
Take any program that ported over from KDE 3 to KDE 4 like Amarok. Amarok is not a core KDE program. They have a small team and they are firmly committed to KDE 4. Yet they will get emails from Trinity users that want support. The Amarok developers are not working on anything KDE 3 related, Amarok 1.4 is the last of the old series. They only want support requests for Amarok 2.0 and above. Projects like K3b, K9copy and Amarok ar
Re: (Score:2)
Great (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Or in this case, change it back!
They don't know gnome panel 3? (Score:2)
It's already ported! It's cleaned up code, GObject introspected (hint: you can write extentions for it with same ease as for GNOME Shell), GTK+3/GNOME 3 technologies ready.
But no, should do your own port, because using native GNOME 3 (just without GNOME Shell) is blasphemy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And Gnome Panel is gimped compared to Gnome2. It may look similar but it doesn't function the same way.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't look similar how? It is similar, it's same code, just ported. Which functions are different? Applets? They slowly returns and everyone can write new ones using Gobject Introspection (that's how all GNOME Shell "Nostalgia" hacks came about). And in the end, it's just code, tweak it more closer to GNOME 2 behavior (no matter how useless I think would be).
It more and more looks like emotional posturing and less real complains about GNOME Shell.
Re: (Score:2)
It won't going away, it just won't be developed further by GNOME official development. No one is forbidden to move forward with it itself, even using GNOME infrastructure.
GNOME Panel 3 is cleaned up, and restructured to be better than GNOME Panel 2, which really uses lots of obsolete hacks and technologies.
And my comment was about that it would be easier to take GNOME Panel 3 than port GNOME 2 - *again*.
Re: (Score:2)
It won't going away, it just won't be developed further by GNOME official development. No one is forbidden to move forward with it itself, even using GNOME infrastructure.
Except, of course, GNOME3 will likely sabotage it just like they sabotaged Compiz by introducing their stupid shell that takes over all windwow management.
Linux Mint Debian Edition will use mate as default (Score:2)
As of update 4 which is currently the Release Candidate.
http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1967 [linuxmint.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they use "testing" not "unstable"
Re: (Score:2)
Forks make me think (Score:5, Interesting)
Now we have MATE from GNOME v2 as a form of dissatisfaction of v3.
We already had Trinity [trinitydesktop.org] forked from KDE v3.5.
Then there's Razor-Qt [razor-qt.org] as "something almost completely new".
And the pletora of "alternative" desktops we all love: XFCE, LXDE, etc.etc. [wikipedia.org]
Is it actually a problem of fragmentation, or is it that some projects after a few years (and some amounts of donated money) just go into technology decline?
I personally tend towards the second option.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice to remember about Trinity. I used it when Debian switched to KDE4, but the new DE wouldn't work with /home mounted over NFS. (Turns up that is a problem of NFS3, everything works with NFS4.)
It seems to be quite active. They are even adding support for QT4. But I won't change back, as I do like KDE4.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple wanted a web browser without depending on Microsoft, so they had to decide between reaching an agreement with Opera, or embrace Mozilla, or use the KHTML engine from KDE. They chose the latter, and forked it because they had to change too much (I guess). Then Google, even though is the main supporter of Mozilla, decides to create yet another brows
Re: (Score:2)
They go into a fanboid mode where there are a bunch of incestuous sycophants that pander to the developers egos in a manner that swamps any rational input. This is similar to how religious cults go so far awry.
You sound all rational but how do you address the irrational nature of gnome3 with rational thought? You don't, you get out of it. In this case it won't cost you your life.
Seriously. (Score:2)
Protip: you can set a "spawn terminal" keyboard shortcut under the key
Plugin repository (Score:2)
The extensions are implemented in JavaScript. You can get a debug console by typing "lg" in the alt+f2 run prompt. The extensions already in the repo includes ones that revert the UI to be more like Gnome 2, as well as at least one system monitor plugin of the type people seem to be pining for. I haven't tried hacking around with this and I don't know how good the API documentation is but people do seem to
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
How is this fragmentation? It's just more choice. Gnome2 is dead as far as gnome.org is concerned. Don't like it? Don't use it.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
One man's "more choice" is another man's "fragmentation".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Simplicity" is just a matter of someone with a big marketing budget making a good selection of software and distributing it.
Flexibility only inteferes because it gives more chances for getting good software at the cost of more labor selecting it.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
One man's "more choice" is an anti-choice idiot's "fragmentation".
FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
One man's "more choice" is an anti-choice idiot's "fragmentation".
FTFY.
People who value trivial choices are the idiots. I'm reminded of Steve Jobs, and his decision to fill his wardrobe with identical blue jeans and black turtlenecks as a way to eliminate such from his head space.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
Steve Jobs probably liked blue jeans and black turtlenecks, and made that choice out of thousands of options. He did not go out to make it the only option for everyone. See that essential difference? In fact, it's pretty much similar to those who want to stick with MATE instead of choosing between following Gnome's antics or switching to another desktop.
So yeah, using MATE fragments Linux like black turtlenecks fragment fashion, and it takes away annoying and trivial choices like wearing the same takes away choices. What were you trying to say again?
Re: (Score:2)
Steve Jobs probably liked blue jeans and black turtlenecks, and made that choice out of thousands of options. He did not go out to make it the only option for everyone. See that essential difference? In fact, it's pretty much similar to those who want to stick with MATE instead of choosing between following Gnome's antics or switching to another desktop.
So yeah, using MATE fragments Linux like black turtlenecks fragment fashion, and it takes away annoying and trivial choices like wearing the same takes away choices. What were you trying to say again?
To you, it's an essential difference. To Steve, whos head was full of larger concerns for world domination, it probably wasn't. If he had a wardrobe full of black work pants and blue zip up sweaters, it probably wouldn't have made much difference to him. It would have been beneath him to dwell on such trivialities.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Steve would have walked through a fire to get jeans. I doubt it.
I do know it's beneath me to dwell on such things. Being confronted with trivial choices stresses me o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Really? There are a few frameworks that work across pretty much all desktops...
Re: (Score:2)
You can run Qt programs in GNOME and Xfce, and you can just as easily run GTK+ programs in KDE.
I was recently surprised how well this actually works. The widgets are quite nicely adjusted to match the look of the DE in use.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps this is true... in a DICTATORSHIP.
Look. The fact is, the whole point is free as in freedom (as well as free as in beer). The public has cried long and loud about the direction GNOME3 has taken. People respond with "don't like it? don't use it!" Well, when someone actually takes them up on it, someone else calls it "fragmentation." Can't win?
Fact is, GNOME is not listening to its users. It's a problem. We know what happened when XFree86 didn't listen... we've gone to X.org and flourished because of it. Now we have people bringing life back to the Gnome2 DE and I expect a lot of user interest will follow... my own as well. (As soon as I find out how easy it is to install and run it under the latest Fedora... right now, I am on CentOS 6.x because Fedora has failed me...) Maybe I can go back with MATE 1.2... CentOS is good but takes a lot of effort to tweak it the way I want it... moreso than Fedora of whatever version CentOS most resembles.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you forgetting about Cinnamon? It's basically the same thing but starting from gnome3 and working back to gnome2's appearance. As opposed to mate's starting with gnome2's code base, and working towards gnome3's while keeping the apperance the same.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/01/25/1459225/cinnamon-gnome-shell-fork-releases-version-12 [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I'm leaning towards running Cinammon over MATE as my new DE when I upgrade my laptop to 12.04, it seems to have more new features including the super-useful Win7-ish searchable menu.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Informative)
Are you forgetting about Cinnamon? It's basically the same thing but starting from gnome3 and working back to gnome2's appearance.
It's not the appearance that's an issue, but the functionality.
Like working support for multiple buttoned mice, multiple displays and display orders, overlapping windows with focus-follows-mouse and user controlled Z order, multiple sessions of the same programs whether or not the apps themselves provide an "open new instance" functionality, remote X logins, adjustable DPI (for wysiwyg DTP this is a must)...
Most people seem to complain about panel apps, but to me, that's a minor thing compared to how basic functionality has been sacrificed. The fallback mode is nothing like Gnome 2, and changing the looks to get it more like Gnome 2 will accomplish diddley squat.
The first Gnome 3 dev who has guts enough to say "dudes, we fscked up this one, bad" will get my respect.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Interesting)
The first Gnome 3 dev who has guts enough to say "dudes, we fscked up this one, bad" will get my respect.
He would be a hero. A voice of reason. A voice of intelligence. A voice of sanity.
The sad thing is, he would be shunned and likely ejected. The Gnome usability experts have all, already told the Gnome 3 developers they are fucking up very badly. The gnome 3 developers told them they didn't have the intelligence to understand their visionary thinking. In other words, according to the gnome 3 developers, if you disagree with the gnome 3 developers, you are an idiot. This is not hyperbole. This is straight from the mailing list. Its disgusting.
At this point in time, either you've drank the koolaid and have long since turned off your brain, growing like a mushroom, or left gnome 3 development. Otherwise, according to the gnome 3 developers, you're an idiot and not likely unqualified to contribute to the project.
It isn't going to happy because it already happen, in mass, and the gnome 3 developers labeled them idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the appearance that's an issue, but the functionality.
Say what you will about these folks, but putting Undo/Redo in a file manager is so frakkin clever.
Re: (Score:2)
The Undo/Redo file manager functionality was backported from GNOME 3. Good for them for merging new features from GNOME 3, but it's not like they developed the feature.
Re: (Score:2)
Kudos to MATE and Cinnamon!
Mate, yes. Cinnamon, no - that's a Gnome 2 user-experience-compatibility layer on top of Gnome 3, which won't make it any more CPU/GPU/memory friendly - rather the opposite.
Mate, on the other hand, is Gnome 2.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fragmentation is not a bad thing. Think of it as natural selection in the open source software world. This is the mutation that may result in a new or different product.
Fragmentation is a terrible thing (Score:5, Funny)
I went to the Citroen garage to pick up my roof rack the other day, and do you know what? They had *five* different models of van. Five! Talk about fragmenting the market! Obviously everyone should all just use a Relay dually, because fragmentation is bad.
It gets worse though, because on the way out of there shocked by the fragmentation of five different models, I drove past the Peugeot garage - and *they* had five different models too! Then I drove past the Ford Commercials garage and my Transit-identifying neurons melted.
Fragmentation! Aaaaaargh!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Transit-identifying neurons? Fragmentation ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: (Score:3)
Not quote.
Windows reigns supreme over Linux because it was deeply entrenched by the time Linus even started. Windows "reigns supreme" because it is effectively this years version of MS-DOS.
Re: (Score:2)
because it is effectively this years version of MS-DOS.
Do you mean that as a sort of metaphor, or do you think Windows 7 (and 8, shortly) actually is MS-DOS based?
Allow me to explain the metaphor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.netmarketshare.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9 [netmarketshare.com]
Sorry, reality says something else. Only unawareness of alternatives can not explain it.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is EXACTLY why Windows reigns supreme over all the 2^42 versions of Linux. You know exactly what you are getting into.
Yes. You can choose:
XP Home
XP Pro
XP 64
Couple of other varieties of XP
Various server versions of Windows
Six or so varieties of Vista
A dozen or so varieties of Windows 7, 32-bit or 64-bit
And soon, Windows for Tablets on the Desktop
People complaining about Linux 'fragementation' and then using that as an argument for running Windows are highly amusing. I can't even remember all the different versions of Windows you can run with different features and radically different UIs.
Re: (Score:2)
Still, they have binary compatibility.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gnome is like a nirvana of choice compared even to Windows, don't paint them with the same brush as the Appletards because they like the keep things simpler than the KDE crowd.
Re: (Score:2)
This is pretty much 2 extremes - either offer only 1 choice, of offer a gazillion. I like the idea about freedom and all that, but let's look at what we have in the choices category:
Re: (Score:2)
So what? If this one dies, that one will hopefully survive.
That was his point, I think.
Re: (Score:3)
is this fragmentation or diversity? we talk about how having diversity is a good thing in meatspace why is it supposedly bad in computing?
Re: (Score:3)
As long as all of the actual applications are using the same underlying libraries, there really is no "fragmentation". These idiots whining about fragmentation are just clueless and superficial. What shell you happen to use is not the sorts of problems that "fragmentation" are supposed to represent.
Besides, if anything is going to cause "fragmentation" it's the new stuff that no one really wants rather than the old stuff that most people are content to keep on using (including Windows users).
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't bad in computing, those who complain about "fragmentation" are implicitly promoting the One True Way, and therefore, promote curated (walled-garden) computing, whether they realize it or not.
Re: (Score:3)
Not choices! I hate when I have the ability to replace something I hate with something I love. I'd be much happier with Linux if I was forced to use ${your favorite desktop environment}.
New hotness draws resources away from updates (Score:2)
I hate when I have the ability to replace something I hate with something I love.
I see your sarcasm. The problem comes when the new hotness draws resources away from keeping one's favorite desktop environment patched with security updates and compatibility with new applications and hardware support frameworks.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem comes when the new hotness draws resources away from keeping one's favorite desktop environment patched with security updates and compatibility with new applications and hardware support frameworks.
And your solution to this is what? Require all software developers to maintain free software forever? These developers are leaving ${your favorite project} anyway, there's no point in complaining that they started a new one to replace it.
Re:More Linux fragmentation... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing wrong here. If a Mac user doesn't like the way Mac OS X is going, they're choices are to use old and unsupported software or bitch and complain. If a Linux user doesn't like the way things are going they can fork.
Re: (Score:3)
Nothing wrong here. If a Mac user doesn't like the way Mac OS X is going, they're choices are to use old and unsupported software or bitch and complain. If a Linux user doesn't like the way things are going they can fork.
I think you are confusing users with developers and that is part of the problem with linux in general. An end "user" cannot fork a damn thing because they don't know how to program.
If a developer on OS X does not like something, they can write their own extensions/plugins or applications that publish a "service" that can be used in other programs via the services menu in any cocoa application. You can replace the "finder" with a third party replacement like Pathfinder or write one yourself and license it ho
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a developer either. But I'm glad that those who have coding skills can fork software. If a piece of software no longer does what I want it to, I just drop it and go on to the next piece of software.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Undo/Redo (Score:4, Informative)
to be fair gnome had this for awhile. then removed it due to them thinking it 'confuses' people, back when gnome 2.0 was under their direction. they are just putting it back in.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? File manager Undo/Redo is a feature in GNOME 3.4 that they've back ported.
Re:What's the point? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, I haven't actually tried it, but Gnome3 won't run on my system. So I'm rather glad that Mate is producing something that will be usable when Debian stable incorporates Gnome3.
(And the Gnome3 fallback to Gnome2 fallback mode is so eyetearingly ugly that I installed the stable branch, replacing the testing branch, to get away from it. Of course, what I'd really prefer is KDE3, but pearson seems to be rather slow in making that usable [under the name trinity], so I may end up with Mate. Or possibly LXDE or some such. I tried it for awhile, and it's usable, but I much prefer Gnome2.)
Re:What's the point? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.
Can you put a weather widget on the top bar on Gnome3 Classic? How about a CPU temp sensor? How about a graph that shows CPU, RAM, swap, and network usage? Maybe a sensor that shows the CPU speed for each core with the ability to change them to ondemand or performace? Can you put the taskbar on bottom bar? Can you put just a gnome foot (start button) on the bottom left like Windows and the full menu on top (Gnome-foot, Places, System)?
The last time I tried Gnome3, none of these things were possible. These were not an option on Gnome3 Classic either. I want my old Gnome2 back, not the "look" of Gnome2 stuck on top of Gnome3. I don't want "New Coke" in an "Old Coke" can.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.
Can you put a weather widget on the top bar on Gnome3 Classic? How about a CPU temp sensor? How about a graph that shows CPU, RAM, swap, and network usage? Maybe a sensor that shows the CPU speed for each core with the ability to change them to ondemand or performace? Can you put the taskbar on bottom bar? Can you put just a gnome foot (start button) on the bottom left like Windows and the full menu on top (Gnome-foot, Places, System)?
The last time I tried Gnome3, none of these things were possible. These were not an option on Gnome3 Classic either. I want my old Gnome2 back, not the "look" of Gnome2 stuck on top of Gnome3. I don't want "New Coke" in an "Old Coke" can.
You can do all those things in gnome fallback (though you need to hold alt when right clicking on the panel). The same applets are available: http://omgubuntu.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/gnome-fallback.jpg [amazonaws.com] Besides you seem to be missing my point. I never said that gnome classic is great. But if you want to maintain a traditional desktop it would be better to start with gnome classic rather than taking on the huge job of modernizing gnome 2 since most of the effort has already been done.
Re: (Score:2)
Modernizing GNOME2, yeah, that'll be a massive job man, what with it being so ancient and all, I mean the devs stopped working on it way back in 2010.
Gnome 2 was created some 10 years ago and while it has been improved and updated it still carries a lot of cruft.
Seriously, sure it should be updated to GTK3 at some point, but the GTK2 libs will still work until get around to it. So they can either take the GNOME2 codebase and update it in a piecemeal fashion as their resources allow, or they can completely reimplement all the GNOME2 features on top of GNOME classic which should only take them a few years. Now which is the best option for someone who wants something GNOME2-like now.
As I said, most of that work has already been done. Gnome classic is a port of the gnome 2 desktop, not a reimplementation.
Use XFCE (Score:4, Informative)
All of that can be done with XFCE, but without the bugs and sluggishness the gnome developers never cared to fix.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not improve the gnome classic desktop from gnome 3 instead? This zombie-gnome2 effort seems like a waste of time to me.
Can you put a weather widget on the top bar on Gnome3 Classic? How about a CPU temp sensor? How about a graph that shows CPU, RAM, swap, and network usage? Maybe a sensor that shows the CPU speed for each core with the ability to change them to ondemand or performace? Can you put the taskbar on bottom bar? Can you put just a gnome foot (start button) on the bottom left like Windows and the full menu on top (Gnome-foot, Places, System)?
The last time I tried Gnome3, none of these things were possible. These were not an option on Gnome3 Classic either. I want my old Gnome2 back, not the "look" of Gnome2 stuck on top of Gnome3. I don't want "New Coke" in an "Old Coke" can.
All but the cpufreq applet part is possible with Gnome Shell Extensions and I am pretty sure there is actually an extension out there for cpufreq that I just haven't found useful yet. Now I am generally in flavor of a lightweight base and add feature via plug-in approach...Only if Gnome3's base was actually lightweight.
Re: (Score:2)
All but the cpufreq applet part is possible with Gnome Shell Extensions and I am pretty sure there is actually an extension out there for cpufreq that I just haven't found useful yet.
Here you go: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/47/cpu-frequency/ [gnome.org]
Re: (Score:2)
To me, that suggest that the Gnome 3 developers are the root of the problem. They are not functional and should be replaced.
Since this can't easily be done within the Gnome organization, a fork seems the right way to go.
Re: (Score:2)
A small group of developers starting on a fresh (to them) project, which is often the most productive time, have shown that they can add a couple minor features, fix a few bugs, and do some renaming. You can always do something. The question is how effective you are. How much would they have accomplished if it was a nice clean codebase?
Plus, this is free software we're talking about here. Working on messy code is something we do for money, but even when it's fulfilling, make no mistake, working on messy cod
Re: (Score:2)
That's not to say the MATE guys are wrong or wasting their time, either. Trying to force them to work on GNOME 3 would be just as stupid as trying to prohibit the creation of GNOME 3.
Re: (Score:3)
Really, it's OK to go decades without significant changes.
This is why I drive a car with a four-stroke engine, four wheels, a steering wheel for steering and pedals for gas and brake.
Presumably the Gnome developers use jet powered cars that slide on teflon pads, tap the windshield for steering and let the car decide the speed. Because different must be better.
Re: (Score:2)
I really wouldn't use Joel's blog as a reference. Joel often gets the right idea (a small and simple one) only to bury it under loads and loads of bad ideas and misinformed opinions.
Apparently work for Microsoft permanently damages person's thinkingy. Just looks at his main product FogBugz.
Re: (Score:2)
s/thinkingy/thinking/ of course.