GNOME 3 — This is the end, maybe
Mar 26, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
“Gnome 3 - This is the end, it seems” is an interesting review of the new GNOME 3. Having recently tried the latest Fedora 15 alpha myself, which features GNOME 3, I found reviewer’s mini summary quite apt, if not a little harsh:
Totally counterintuitive, inefficient, not really productive, the lack of panels and right-click functionality is a sore, annoying loss. Power users will find the polished, rounded looks nothing more than a costly distraction to their work.
I actually quite liked the look ‘n’ feel of Fedora’s GNOME 3 implementation, it was very polished and professional in appearance; however, after using it for an hour or so, I knew it was not for me. This realisation was not much of a revelation as I have not used GNOME 2 in a long time, so I kind of already knew that I would probably not find GNOME 3 suitable for my needs.
Anyhow, what I found really interesting about the review, was that there was no mention of Xfce. The reviewer briefly mentions KDE as a potential replacement, but does not mention Xfce, which to me seems like a much more obvious alternative. In fact, with the latest panel and Thunar features available in version 4.8, I can foresee Xfce attracting many GNOME refugees.
In related news, I mentioned that I have been trying the latest Fedora 15 alpha releases. I have only been doing this out of curiosity and with no intention of actually switching from Debian, but I have to say, the Fedora Project is currently doing some amazing work. I was super impressed with their Xfce spin, which was one of the best Xfce implementations I have seen in a long time.
13 responses to “GNOME 3 — This is the end, maybe”
Add your comment
Use the form below to add your comment. Markdown syntax is available. Note, all comments are moderated.
Mar 27, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
Xfce would seem the obvious alternative, but I have to admit to a lot of personal bias in this case. The last time I tried using KDE, it felt like driving a car with 12 different steering-wheels, all with over-lapping areas of control. No thanks.
The last few test-drives of OS’s have all been of an Openbox or Xfce version because they elegantly manage the needs of a windows manager, and then get out of my way. And while Fedora made good utilization of Xfce, there were a few Debian-based command line tools that I decided I couldn’t do without.
Maybe Gnome is feeling the same pinch as the Ubuntu people; make the next six-month cycle release something stand-out so people sit up and take notice. I think even Microsoft got a marketing boost with Windows 7, simply because it wasn’t the running tragedy that Vista was.
Mar 28, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
I’m sorry that you pointed us to a sneering, uninformed and even preposterous review. That rubbish hopefully will not dissuade anyone from using Gnome 3 and Shell. The basis for their design is amply explained here:
http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/
Mar 28, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
@Hu, ample explanation or not, the reviewer found GNOME 3 unsuitable for his needs. The reviewer was entitled to publish his thoughts, just as I am entitled to provide a link.
Also, I can guarantee that some people will not like GNOME 3. Instead of just dismissing them as “sneering, uninformed and even preposterous”, it might be better to listen to what they have to say, before having an informed discussion. :)
Apr 5, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
I actually emailed the (same) reviewer, and, reading into his review and taking into account the values he expressed, suggested that he might be pleasantly surprised looking at XFCE 4.8, which is everything Gnome would be had they not gone off on this path. I also suggested him looking at #!.
He replied and said he is interested in checking them both out. XFCE + #! is for folks like us who don’t particularly want our computers looking like a smart phone :)
Apr 7, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
I’m running fast in the direction of Xfce at the moment after a brief experience of the Unity interface on a netbook and reading up about Gnome shell. Anything that ships as default with Gnome-shell or Unity is off my list of desirable linux distributions.
As a sign of how far the Open Source giants have fallen, it looks like in terms of UI design even Microsoft are doing better. Although the default Win7 theme is awful at least you can select a classic NT-like UI with a few mouse clicks and quickly turn off all the unnecessary animated eye candy. Not terribly nice but remarkablely clear and easy to use when compared with the current crop of ‘paradigm shifting’ UI’s.
Apr 7, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
Stan wrote:
Those are 2 words for it. **chuckles**
Apr 14, 2011 (about 1 year ago)
Xubuntu is also nice polished XFCE distro with more visual consistency than Fedora spin. E.g. there is no icon bugs here and there like in Fedora (http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-November/387314.html). And Nodoka theme makes me sick, why not to stick with default XFCE window theme? Also, this is personal preference, but I like more Xubuntu’s selection of apps than Fedora’s XFCE spin.
Jun 18, 2011 (about 10 months ago)
I think you all maybe jumping to the conclusion “this is it forever”
From what I have seen there will become many gnome-shell extensions, that eventually will make main stream options in the repos.
Here is a great example of open source and what the new gnome3 flexibility can offer and provide you with the typical gnome style menus
http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/extensions/index.html
Trouble is.. in finding that I am now comfortable again with what I am used to… but should I be comfortable or get used to the new gnome 3?
JB
Jul 10, 2011 (about 10 months ago)
When KDE and Gnome first came out I started off using Gnome (1.4). When Gnome 2 came out with its dumbed down interface I switched to KDE3 and happily used that for many years. I recently switched back to Gnome2 when KDE was going through its 3 to 4 transition. Gnome2, whilst it doesn’t compare with KDE 3’s level of quality, features and ability to change it to do what you want it to, did about 85% of what I wanted and added a few new things that I liked on the side. It has always looked very good and polished. This has always seemed to be the trend with Gnome, make it look good and polished, and then perhaps hopefully people won’t notice the lack of customisation/usability options. Just when they manage to get Gnome 2 into a state where it can begin to compete favourably with KDE 3 they then have to start all over again, making the same mistakes as they did last time with Gnome 2 but even more so.
The Gnome project should realise that the main user base is a productivity user base, intelligent people, and not your average computer illiterate finger pressing 4G mobile `wow me with your graphics’ member of the public. Fine by all means have a snazzy compiz-tastic mobility interface, but as WELL as the practical productivity one. This is where the Gnome project have seemed to have badly missed the point.
XFCE has come a long way and now offers more of what I want out of a desktop than Gnome does and at a fraction of the resource usage, Plus they don’t treat their user base as being too stupid to want anything more. Well done XFCE.
Well I suppose looking on the bright side the desktop wars are finally over. KDE will take the high-performance bells and whistles market and compete with other OSs and XFCE will take on the light weight productivity role. Nice to see the better product win for a change :-)
But seriously, one of several things will happen:
It will be as stated above, Gnome will be relegated to the mobility market rather than the desktop one, with KDE and XFCE taking over.
The Gnome project will get there finger out, stop patronising their user base and realise that they have alienated a lot of them and will put in place the necessary plugins and extensions to make it a useful desktop again.
Gnome 3 with wither and die and Gnome 2 will carry on.
Linus does get quite a few things wrong but of Gnome he hit the nail on the head: `If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it’. It’s as if the project desperately want to prove him right.
Well I’m sure the KDE and XFCE projects are looking for new developers… A pity as Gnome 2 could have gone places. Oh well.
TC.
Jul 20, 2011 (about 9 months ago)
It didn’t take long before I stripped-off Fedora 15 in favor of Mandriva. Ubuntu is ugly, but at least they made the unity interface functional. The reason I use Gnome is because it’s lightweight, simple, intuitive and original. I don’t like KDE because, despite its features, it still looks like a cheap spin-off of Windows.
Gnome 3 has just demonstrated why traditional Linux will never go mainstream.
Aug 10, 2011 (about 9 months ago)
I use Debian with GNOME-Shell, and I’m really impressed by it.
IMHO, most of the problems some users have with GNOME-Shell are results of not being familiar enough with it. Take this example: Linus has said that he can’t open a second terminal by clicking on the terminal icon on the favorites bar. That’s true. But he could easily drag and drop the terminal icon into any workspace and have a second instance IF he didn’t want to use the right-click menu or just to click and wait a second until a menu for opening another terminal shows up.
Or someone might say that switching between workspaces is difficult in GNOME-Shell because every time you have to move the cursor to the hot spot. But not only there is a workspace switcher extension that works with the mouse wheel, you could add another hot spot to the top right corner of the screen with an appropriate extension IF you don’t want to use keyboard shortcuts.
I could add to this list. All in all, not only have I no problem with GNOME-Shell but I’m so comfortable with it that I left Compiz. Especially, the dynamic number of Desktops is what I’m really happy about.
Aug 17, 2011 (about 9 months ago)
I have enjoyed using Gnome 3 so far and from what I have seen gnome-shell will end up with very useful extentions. The performance of it is also pretty damn good for all the eyecandy it comes with. At first I was just going to switch my desktop to gnome3 and keep my gnome2+xmonad setup on the notebook, but I can do everything I want in gnome3. Performance on my humble aspire one is also good.
What I like about gnome 3 is the minimalistic and highly standardized approach they’re taking. Their approach to configuration focuses on useability even though some important configuration tools are still lacking. Probably my favourite gnome 3 “feature” is how the interface fades away nicely so you can focus on the task. BUT if that task involves many windows, you have to be very organized and gnome does too little to help you organize it all.
Funnily enough gnome 3 has encouraged me to optimize my workflow and reduce the number of windows I have on the same workspace because it deals so poorly with them. It has even affected my favourite programs. I now use guake a lot more heavily and to take notes I have switched to vimwiki (byebye tomboy/gnote with your stickynote windows nightmare). In the end I am now more productive than I was before (gnome2 with xmonad). Bit of an odd way to argue for gnome 3, but I believe the concept behind gnome 3 is right. It just needs some more work.
Some examples of what annoys me:
I have used Xfce in the past and it’s ok, but prefer gnome 3.
Sep 22, 2011 (about 7 months ago)
I actually made the switch to XFCE before I heard Linus’s remarks and I completely agree with him. I tried gnome 3-shell and couldn’t stand the activities and workspaces. XFCE is essentially what Gnome used to aspire to become. Radical changes require more clicking and reduces my productivity. I need a DE that has everything in front of me at once to maximize my productivity. Why couldn’t they have just added a search applet to the Gnome-Panel next to the menu? That added to Gnome 2.x pretty much accomplishes everything Gnome 3 brings to the table, but in an easier, more accessible way. If they really wanted to work on something, they could have made a default dock that integrates better with the overall DE than universal docks. Just my two cents, I am not by any means a pro with linux, but I like to think I represent what the average user would want on linux.