GNOME 3.16 Released 196
kthreadd writes Version 3.16 of GNOME, the primary desktop environment for GNU/Linux operating systems has been released. Some major new features in this release include a overhauled notification system, an updated design of the calendar drop down and support for overlay scrollbars. Also, the grid view in Files has been improved with bigger thumbnail icons, making the appearance more attractive and the rows easier to read. A video is available which demonstrates the new version.
Obligatory Discussions (Score:2, Informative)
blah, blah, Systemd, blah, blah, KDE, blah, blah...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
To be fair, Gnome 3.x sucked before the systemd abomination.
Re: (Score:1)
Of course it did. It was built on Gnome 2. Garbage in, Garbage out!
Re:Obligatory Discussions (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, but Gnome 2 was usable. Gnome 3 switched me to Cinnamon.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure... once you install an additional application to access what is basically a knockoff of the Windows registry (Why the F anybody would want to copy that shitty design...)
Then you go in and change pretty much every default setting because the defaults all suck...
You get something that meets a minimum definition of usable.
Re: (Score:3)
Better than the command line? I hardly think so. Bash, KSH, and even csh (as much as I hate csh) are heart of the ability to use and administer a Unix host, incredibly flexible and have decades of refinement behind their usability. Gnome is off on a rampage to remove features and force someone else's idea of how you should do your work down the throat of ever gnome user. If I had to make the choice, I'll take a serial console over an X desktop running Gnome.
Re: (Score:1)
So that they can be bigger idiots? You feel lonely?
Re: (Score:2)
Because Macs suck even more? The Dock isn't fixed position so you can use memory to start the pointer to the correct spot. Can't get normal alt-tab to work. Can't get menu bars on the actual window. Maximize doesn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure what you mean, computer memory or brain memory? I use folder shortcuts on the right-hand side of the dock and set the view to "list." Then I click in the same spot each time and start typing the name of the item I need. Very efficient.
All I know is that by default the applications change position on the bottom of the doc as you open up files and programs. Dislike.
Again, not sure what you mean. I have no difficulty using Command-tab to switch applications and Command-~ to switch windows. I hate using Exposé and trackpad gestures.
How nice for you. After 20 years using windows and linux systems I can't change my muscle memory to use both command-tab and command~. I want command-tab to cycle through open windows and that apparently isn't configurable. I've tried on and off for a year to adjust to the Mac way and just isn't happening. This is a blocker and I don't know why I even tried to get use to it. Com
Re: (Score:2)
We agree the dock is fundamentally broken and that Macs don't do what I need them to do because of muscle memory (and surely this impacts others) and I can't say that Macs suck? Of course they suck. Those are all easy preference settings. And Windows should have the same preference settings for Mac refugees so Windows sucks too. But I'd happily pick Windows over Apple or GNOME.
Re: (Score:2)
> Hopefully someone shoots whoever is responsible for Gnome 3
Shit storm about death threats in the Linux community in 3.. 2.. 1..
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't tap my screen; I remember what application I want, and go directly to it. Rather than Applications:Graphics:Krita, I just type "Kri" and click the Krita icon. I can also drag the Krita icon to a space between desktops, spawning the window there. I can also type "image" and have all the image viewing and editing software appear in front of me.
Rather than a single view of a hierarchical database of applications and operations, I have the ability to declare what I want and have it given to me in
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't tap my screen; I remember what application I want, and go directly to it. Rather than Applications:Graphics:Krita, I just type "Kri" and click the Krita icon. I can also drag the Krita icon to a space between desktops, spawning the window there. I can also type "image" and have all the image viewing and editing software appear in front of me.
Great, so you mean I can put both hands on my keyboard to type "Kri", and then switch one of my hands to the mouse to click and icon on my screen... rather than, say, typing "krita" and hitting enter, all on the keyboard, at the 80wpm I type on a keyboard. That's amazing, I can actually make myself slow down with your new and improved methods!! Even better, you can type "image" and have all your image viewing/editing software in front of you, rather than perhaps having those icons in a folder marked "ima
Re: (Score:1)
So, now it's "flamebait" to say that Gnome 3 is pretty good. Hahaha.
Re: (Score:3)
Funny that, Gnome 3 is kind of an improved Windows 3.1. Afterall, you manage windows (mostly full screen but sometimes not) and there's no task bar. But instead of minimizing windows to icons, you hide them somehow and you find them back by zooming out. Program Manager is replaced by going top left to open the Dash menu or whatever it's called. Top bar is a bit useless but I suppose it's here so that people do not get lost (you need a bar anyway if only to display a handful tray icons)
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes, to go forward, you go back. Thing is, the Program Manager was a modal dialogue containing all windows, and could be minimized; you selected program by opening windows containing icons of programs to select. The Gnome Shell eliminates that modal dialogue and moves the icons to an interface off to the side; the current desktop shrinks into the shell's entire display area, allowing you to move to another desktop containing other windows.
In short, windows are brought inside, rather than moved outs
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes you've just gone backwards...
Re: (Score:1)
FUD FUD FUD. Systemd is not a hard requirement of Gnome. Gnome developers have chosen to focus on using systemd-logind at this moment, but there's no reason why ConsoleKit couldn't be updated and maintained for use on other platforms. Gnome developers with their finite resources have chosen not to work on ConsoleKit, but you certainly could.
From the Linux Voice interview:
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I actually found during a recent fresh Jessie install that, while there is still plenty of cruft pulled in, it has been easier to peel away some of the crud (byebye avahi, and pulseaudio, may we never meet again) from GNOME than in the past. FWIW. The biggest problem with it right now is that there are no knobs to tune a lot of really retarded crap to "off" or if their are knobs, you have to hunt for them in obscure tweak tools or buried in a theme or in some pathologically treeified config database or in
Re: (Score:2)
Bassi ripping someone a verbal new one in 3.. 2.. 1..
Re: (Score:2)
And those of use with large screens and would like to have vertical scroll bars don't get a choice to use them because GNOME knows best. And small devices always trumps those of use with large screens. Huzzah.
Re: (Score:2)
What wouldn't be difficult would be a preference box (which I would leave as off, but whatever on the default). Want to wager if that will happen? ;-)
Your claim that auto-hiding scroll bars work perfectly for everyone needs a citation. I don't believe there has been any usability testing.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want my desktop with its two large monitors acting like your touch screen mobile device (which doesn't have scroll bars, so I don't know why you claim they validate auto-hiding). So I think I'll stay with the tried and true desktop metaphor instead of letting you decide what options I should even have to look at. With scroll bars this leaves me... just about everything but GNOME.
And scroll bars aren't the real issue with me. I want alt-tab to work the same way it has worked for me the last 20 years
Re: (Score:2)
Because I can quickly without touching anything see the percentage I am in a webpage which I can't with auto-hiding scroll bars. Moreover, scroll bars are at the side of the screen which cost me nothing on a large widescreen monitor as those spots are otherwise dead space.
Moreover, what I'm saying is that the stuff that worked for the last 20 years shouldn't be mucked about with without a good reason. You claim they are improving things, I can claim with as much evidence that they are screwing things up. Gi
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the reason I find auto-hide scrollbars inane is because I often want to go over to the scrollbar and grab/drag the scroller. And if it's hidden I have to mouse over to it under it appears, then mouse up or down to grab it. FWIW. Super annoying.
Re: (Score:2)
So no user interface testing on auto-hiding scroll bars and will not be an option.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So far as I know, gvfs is dependent on udev, not systemd. There are versions of udev still available out there that are not part of the systemd. On systems running systemd, udev is going to be provided by systemd-udev.
So if you could rebuild your packages with a different udev implementation like udevil, gvfs could be build against it possibly.
Re: (Score:1)
So far as I know, gvfs is dependent on udev, not systemd.
It depends on libudev1. libudev1 doesn't even depend on udev.
libudev1 and udev come from the same source package as systemd. Maybe people think they can catch cooties from it?
Re: (Score:1)
libudev1 and udev come from the same source package as systemd.
Renaming something doesn't take away the fact that it is systemd.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, that's not udevil. That should be traditional udev, or eudev.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
At least on Debian the GVFS has a hard requirement on systemd.
R U Sure?
Nope, no depenancy on systemd.
I get tired of saying this, but it's true. The only Debian package that depends on systemd is gummiboot.
Re: (Score:2)
The Debian package for libudev1 [debian.org] is built from the systemd source code. Says it right on the page: "Download Source Package systemd".
Re: (Score:2)
So what?
libudev1 doesn't depend on systemd. It installs perfectly well om machines were systemd isn't installed and it runs perfectly well on machines where systemd isn't pid 1.
Why do you care what directory the source code is in?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
libudev1 is a systemd library and maintained by the systemd maintainers.
libsystemd1 is a no-op if systemd is not installed. What is your problem? Do you think you'll catch systemd cooties if the name of any package on your system contains the letters d, e, m, s, t or y?
Re:Obligatory Discussions (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've read some good criticisms of systemd by another init system developer. He had valid things to say and put them on his blog in a nice point by point way that can be responded to and rebutted.
Rather than bad-mouthing Red Hat on slashdot, why not put up a direct, technical critique of systemd on your own web site (or post it here). I know many people would appreciate having a point by point critique. You say their code is a "mess" but what does that even mean? Please provide examples (such examples ca
The 'primary' - define and discuss (Score:5, Insightful)
Dispite desparate attempts of the linux user base to move to alternatives and avoid wholesale changes to the linux userspace, distribution leadership and paid developers continue their push toward 'unification and control'.
When gnomish developers develop on macs to produce a desktop centric operating system in the hope of capturing the windows/mac market, where mac users are happy with macs, windows users are happy using windows and all the linux users go anywhere else the question becomes 'who is going to use it?'
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
the question becomes 'who is going to use it?'
The paid developers (you mean Red Hat mainly) are funded by enterprise software sales and service. That's why their bosses want control of the stack. And without radical changes, those developers and designers don't have a way to become king of the mountain. So, change for change's sake, and enterprise users will have to choke all that bloated dick down, while the rest of us either put up with it or move away. Systemd's borg-like spreading is an attempt to make it difficult to get away from this corporat
Re: (Score:3)
Change is fine IF AND ONLY IF it can actually outperform the incumbent. Being different doesn't automatically make it better. Nobody complains that we should completely redesign current bicycles merely because they're old. They haven't
Re: (Score:3)
It comes down to people not wanting to do janitorial stuff, but want the glitz and fame of making something new.
This is further compounded by the tech press fawning over changes and "new", resulting in the mentality that a project that is not introducing massive changes or new features constantly is a dead project.
This seems to be a offshot of the eternal growth mentality of Wall Street, where the moment a market segment (say Laptop computers) are not showing some quarterly growth it is all doom, gloom, and
As a Former Supporter of Gnome.... (Score:3)
I am looking forward to this code to be ported into Cinnamon.
Really, I wish Cinnamon, Gnome, and XFCE could all be merged, each giving meaningful input for Desktop, Tablet, and Lightweight.
It's time to get it together!
Meh. (Score:2)
Big far Meh.
So GNOME, unlike even Motif and Athena lacks an arbitrary filter on file selection dialog boxes specified by the user. This makes finding spefic files in a large directory hard. If you have usability regressions compared to Athena and Motif, you have fucked up royally.
Re:Meh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why bother. Gnome developers have been on the path of removing, not adding functionality since they started version 2. Why would you expect them to accept a patch that adds a good feature?
Contributing is the worst thing to do. (Score:1)
When facing badly broken software like GNOME 3, submitting patches is the worst thing you can do.
First it means you have to deal with this broken software's source code. If you aren't a C programmer already, you're out of luck. If you want to become one, it'll take a while before you're proficient enough. Even if you know C, you will have to waste a lot of time learning the code base.
Then you have to waste your time getting a development environment set up, and then you have to waste more time making and te
Re: (Score:1)
dickheads "reviewing" your code
Other developers daring to review your changes to their projects?
The very nerve!
Re: (Score:2)
Primary desktop environment? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, well, aren't we full of ourselves...
Re: (Score:3)
Well, it's only until they manage to ensure that it isn't plug-replaceable.
Like the systemd logging system.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, GNOME is the GNU project's primary desktop (Score:5, Informative)
The GNU project has two desktop environments: GNUstep and GNOME. Of the two, GNOME is the primary one.
For the history: in the late 90s, the KDE desktop was getting popular but it required people to install non-free Qt libraries. Two GNU projects were launched to counter this problem. One was Harmony, which aimed to be a Qt replacement, to allow KDE be run without installing non-free software. The other was GNOME.
Years later, when GNOME was successful, the Qt libraries were released as free software.
There was a third GNU project which aimed to make a graphical desktop, but they decided to first focus on a Scheme scripting engine. This effort produced GNU Guile, but no graphical desktop got made.
I think there was even a fourth project, but I can't think of it right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I was about to post the same thing. I am responsible for no less than 160 Linux desktops, laptops, and servers at work, home, family, etc.. Not a SINGLE one of them is using Gnome desktop. And based on a rough estimate at our Linux/Unix user's group, I would say perhaps less than 10% use Gnome on any of their machine.
Now, if they said "popular" desktop or something, fine. But "primary"??? Give me a break.
Speak Marketing Much? What hubris! (Score:3, Insightful)
Version 3.16 of GNOME, the primary desktop environment for GNU/Linux operating systems has been released.
The "primary desktop environment for GNU/Linux"? Really? Does the poster just speak Marketing as your primary tongue, or is this a simply characteristic of the arrogance of a project that has loudly shouted down every rational discussion about the merits of its interface design, the merits of requiring systemd to the exclusion of all else (not really true despite what the gnome developers say: Funtoo Linux, a Gentoo derivative manged by drobbins, has gnome3 ebuilds and straightforward patches that allow gnome3 to work flawlessly with openrc instead), and the merits of embedding splashscreen code into an init system?
I suspect the latter, given the broader context, but really. Gnome isn't any more the primary desktop environment for GNU/Linux than KDE is, or any number of other desktops. Just because Red Hat's marketing department says so doesn't make it so. In my work at numerous Linux shops (including large banks like Deutsche, and smaller Red Hat shops that will remain nameless to protect the innocent), nearly everywhere a Linux desktop is run the choice has defaulted to KDE, with a small minority of users choosing to run Gnome instead, or other less common desktops (Mate, etc.).
The sheer hubris of a project claiming to be "the primary desktop environment for GNU/Linux operating systems" in their press release, regurgitated mindlessly by slashdot, boggles the mind.
Gotten better (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to hate GNOME 3!
I tried out 3.14, and I have to say, it has gotten a lot better.
Also you can install GNOME shell extensions, to get it more in line with the classic GNOME 2. :)
Also you need get a new shell theme. But its possibly to get GNOME 3 pretty nice.
Re:Gotten better (Score:5, Insightful)
So, if you replace basically the whole interface, you can make it relatively usable? As opposed to earlier Gnome 3 releases where you couldn't fix the suck?
Re:Gotten better (Score:5, Funny)
OSX (Score:3)
Again, new Gnome features match OS X stuff introduced years ago:
3.16 introduces a new style of scrollbar for GNOME 3. Instead of being shown all the time, these new overlay scrollbars are only shown when needed
Re:OSX (Score:5, Interesting)
And it was a bad idea when OS X did it, and it's still a bad idea. I hope they can be disabled (this is actually a GTK thing, not a Gnome thing). I can see how this is useful on a very small screen with a finger as the pointer. But not a mouse on a desktop. We've really gone backwards in usability on computer desktops generally in the last 5 years. Perhaps this coincides with the rise of the "user experience" field of thought, rather than focusing on intuitive "user interfaces."
Re:OSX (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What about visual clues? The release notes say 'it unclutters your window and you can focus on the content", but i now no longer get a visual clue the window is actually scrollable.
So the solution is to always use your mousewheel quickly once, just to find out if the window is scrollable or not.
It escapes me on how this is a better solution and impoves my focus on the content.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least on OSX, you can turn scrollbar hiding off ...
Re: (Score:2)
Windows, OTOH, is designed with the notion that you will use the UI provided by Microsoft and is not as easy to change. Add that to the fact that I really don't like the direction Win10 is going and I honestly don't know what I'm going to use once Windows 7 is too old, i.e.: Doesn't play nice with new hardware
Re: (Score:3)
It's like when the Wii hit. Lot's of people like it, and hats off to you. But going from the NES, SNES, N64, and Gamecube... and then being stuck with "casual" games on the Wii was like a slap to the face. It's like they said "There's no
New Customers (Score:2)
How's that working for GNOME? Year of Linux on the Desktop? *sigh*
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't Ubuntu introduce that crap years ago too? Ubuntu 11.04, which came with both Unity and Gnome 2 out of the box.
Meanwhile, these days I'm having an always-visible scrollbar but without the up and down button. Which will only suck very slightly if some day I'm stuck without a scrollwheel.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, they put that crap into Unity a few years ago. It's one of the reasons I gave up on Ubuntu.
Re: (Score:1)
Is this the same overlay scrollbar that maintains hard-coded list of incompatible applications [launchpad.net]?
Perfect (Score:2, Insightful)
All you need to know about the mirage of "Linux on the Desktop" can be seen in recent GNOME releases. The developers spend far too much time either not adding things people desperately need and want (like a really first-rate file manager, instead of the toy versions various distros leave on users' doorsteps in a flaming paper bag), or screwing up things that do work at least reasonably well.
"Linux on the Desktop" is almost entirely a "solution" that only works for hardcore hobbyists/ideologues and those wi
Re: (Score:2)
Linux on the desktop works just great for people who choose KDE instead of hitting their head on a wall and trying to make Gnome work just because they keep reading people mindlessly regurgitate the idea that Gnome is the primary Linux desktop environment.
Gnome is really the worst thing that could have happened to the cause for Linux on the desktop. Somehow they got everyone to buy into this idea that Gnome is just the default and you shouldn't try anything else, they got distros to all adopt it as the sta
Re: (Score:2)
I'm very much a fan of "it's easier to make the tool you need than it is to convince someone to make it for you."--even if it would be easier for someone to modify their own project than you having to learn all specifics, they're normally so resistant to ideas that it's almost impossible to get a dev to care about a feature you do.
Re: (Score:3)
In recent years the big backer of one particular variant of "Linux on the desktop" is the US military.
They seem to finally figure out that using Windows for things like cruisers are a no-go, and has adopted Linux as the replacement as they can then still shop around for hardware.
This is why we are getting all kinds of replacement for working subsystems, because they are not "secure" in the eyes of the military. Funny thing is that their enemy may well be their own troops more than anything else, as seen wit
Have they fixed the invisible file mgr borders? (Score:3)
I posted the text below almost as-is for the 3.14 release, only later finding out that no, this bug is still present. So here goes again....
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
It's mainly on the file manager (that I've found) but you can click OUTSIDE the window and still interact with the window. For example if you have two file-managers close to each other with another window below them both and visible in the gap then you can't click the lower window directly even though you can see it and put your mouse over the visible part of it. All you do is focus one or the other of the file manager windows.
You can also hold down the windows key and click outside the file manager window and drag it around the screen just as if you had clicked inside the window (I can't remember if I changed the default key from alt to windows in my settings but the point applies).
Generally I'm OK with Gnome3 (providing you get the right extensions) but these invisible borders are such a fundamental breakage of the basic concept of a graphical windowed user interface.
Re: (Score:2)
Notifications in calendar (Score:2)
Oh it now displays notification history in...the calendar?
What.
Who thought that was a good idea? what's next? Calendar inside WiFi settings?
Re: (Score:2)
Does that mean you no longer get a pop-up?
Because if that's the case, putting it in the calendar might be better. Not good, but better than a pop-up. What I'd really like to do is disable notifications entirely, or at least selectively be able to disable various functions' abilities to display notifications. Like printing.
You run a script to print out a hundred or so separate files and the side of your desktop fills up with announcements of files that have been printed. Why?
Re: (Score:2)
Add a notification that you've received a notifitcation, and you might have a notification bomb.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, in KDE4 if you do that, you just get a single notification that scrolls messages gradually and doesn't get in the way. I think it's a good (not perfect) system.
You are still notified about...well, notifications, and it doesn't take up much space. Filling the screen with notifications is overdoing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of my notifications are clearly not associated with time in any way shape or form. You are also locking notifications into a particular calendar program. If you are using a different calendar it seems a bit hostile to force you to use GNOME's.
Terminal notifications looks nice (Score:3)
Everyone is all down on it, but the terminal notifications thing looked sweet.
ref: http://fedoramagazine.org/terminal-job-notifications-in-fedora-22-workstation/
Pronunciation (Score:3)
I can't take this anymore. And that, my friends, is why I use KDE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean your Jeef collection stored in Sequel on a Scuzzy drive?
Heretic, burn his pronunciation!
Re: (Score:2)
There is no acceptable alternate pronunciation for SQL and SCSI,
Usage is what matters (thus I'm calling you ignorant), and beyond that, Wikipedia has two pronunciations for SQL.
SCSI was regionally pronounced as "sexy" which frankly is a fine pronunciation and anyone who disagrees is a G8r.
Re: (Score:2)
Agh! It's even ambiguous in their video. Is it pronounced "Nome", or "G'nome"? The female narrator in the video says g'nome at the beginning, and then makes the 'g' silent toward the end.
I can't take this anymore. And that, my friends, is why I use KDE.
Errr...is the "K" silent?
primary desktop? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I use MATE, anything is better than Gnome 3.x. It's a shame, Gnome 2.x was great.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard this before and finally looked up old Slashdot threads to confirm or deny.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org] and most of the highest rated comments are positive.
What I'm still missing is KDE 3.5 but maybe I'll give Trinity a try.
Re: (Score:2)
This is GNOME 3.16. Why would I compare a .0 with the 8th release?
Frankly I think a lot of the criticism in 2.0 was justified and it isn't this blink hate of GNOME from slashdot that gets portrayed in the GNOME community, which looking at later releases of GNOME 2 adequately demonstrates.
Personally I find DEs with overview mode hostile to those with ADHD. And some of the bugs with regressions are simply too painful to fathom. I use minimize to change the order of alt-tab. This was impossible in GNOME for we
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, Gnome 2 / MATE has little advanced configurability, yet it has basic configurability. Want to add an icon, drag'n'drop the icon to where you want it on the bar, how easy can that be.
Most visible part that gets maintained/updated : the file manager.
Applications/Places/System : corresponds to Programs, Favorites and Settings in the classic start menu from Windows 98 (and perhaps 95 + Internet Explorer shell) and XP. It's not convenient to add your own application shortcuts to the app menu though, so t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is an interesting, though rather off-topic conversation starter. I'll toss in my view:
To address the last point first, the consequences of "the community" being accepting of openly misogynistic people is possibly that the FOSS community gains a reputation (which it's already fighting) of being a haven for such people, and that anyone involved with it is like this. This isn't very good for the employment prospects for anyone who is prominently involved in FOSS, or attempts to evangelize its use in the