PDA

View Full Version : Good that Ubuntu chose Unity not Gnome3



forcecore
October 5th, 2011, 11:44 AM
I really like that Ubuntu chose Unity for future not Gnome3 because Gnome3 worst part is that in 2D desktop is different(fallback), maybe Gnome3 devs are ignoring that everyone has no luxury to own fast GPU-s and some do not even have 3D support working correctly. Example: i know peole who has laptop/pc that only work with 2D driver.

Unity is future because desktops are 100% same in 2D and 3D and very easy to use, even child can use Unity without messing something up.

Ubuntu devs in next release should add some Unity expert configuration menu that can configure panel positsions(unlock and move), effects, plugins etc...

klim8
October 5th, 2011, 11:57 AM
maybe Gnome3 devs are ignoring that everyone has no luxury to own fast GPU-s and some do not even have 3D support working correctly.

Old integrated Intel GPUs are good enough to run GNOME 3...

lucazade
October 5th, 2011, 12:00 PM
Ditto!

I'd add that Qt4, on which Unity-2D is built upon, is a wonderful toolkit, it is able to run fast also using the simple vesa driver.
Unity-2D just need to reach feature parity with the 3D version and to be less buggy.

MacUntu
October 5th, 2011, 12:09 PM
I think it's important that they are configurable the same way. So you don't have to use ccsm/dconf-editor for one and gconf-editor for the other. Maybe a centralized single configuration module should be added to System Settings in P?

chrisccoulson
October 5th, 2011, 12:33 PM
Ditto!

I'd add that Qt4, on which Unity-2D is built upon, is a wonderful toolkit, it is able to run fast also using the simple vesa driver.
Unity-2D just need to reach feature parity with the 3D version and to be less buggy.

What features are missing in 2D? I actually use this as my default session now, as I prefer it much more than the 3D session (I prefer the design of the dash in 2D, which is much cleaner with it's nice, crisp icons and dark background).

lucazade
October 5th, 2011, 01:14 PM
What features are missing in 2D? I actually use this as my default session now, as I prefer it much more than the 3D session (I prefer the design of the dash in 2D, which is much cleaner with it's nice, crisp icons and dark background).

I was referring especially to customization features like resizable dock, backlight control of launcher tiles, snapping windows (hard to see implemented in metacity), draggable windows in workspace switcher, active blur behind dash (with the qt4 opengl backend it should be possible), launcher reveal point..
Mostly the bug reports marked as "delta".

buzzmandt
October 5th, 2011, 01:17 PM
Ditto!

I'd add that Qt4, on which Unity-2D is built upon, is a wonderful toolkit, it is able to run fast also using the simple vesa driver.
Unity-2D just need to reach feature parity with the 3D version and to be less buggy.

Unity is future because desktops are 100% same in 2D and 3D and very easy to use, even child can use Unity without messing something up.

qt4 is also what kde4 is built on, and kde4 with and without 3d effects look and work the same way

disclaimer: please note this is not a VS post, this is a ALSO post in favor of qt4 toolkit.

chrisccoulson
October 5th, 2011, 01:18 PM
Oh, I don't really miss any of those (especially the ability to customize launcher behaviour), but the aero-snap feature from 3D would be nice.

I never really noticed the lack of active blur either, but i do notice that scrolling in 2D is significantly more fluid in 2D than in 3D. If that's due to the lack of active blur, then I think I'd prefer to keep the smooth scrolling ;)

sartic
October 5th, 2011, 01:25 PM
Unity is good as option but not it as default desktop, desktop for mass. Plain users do not like it. Canonical should choose another way, writing good desktop apps for existed desktop (Gnome3, KDE, etc). They decide to write another window manager on top of G3 jee.

makitso
October 5th, 2011, 01:53 PM
While I like Unity I prefer the Gnome 3 and AWN. And, I am very happy that Ubuntu developers provide thd G3 option. There are a couple of quirks with Unity that I don't like but will wait to see if they are resolved by 12.04 timeframe.

MacUntu
October 5th, 2011, 01:56 PM
crisp icons

Hehe, you never fail to mention that (but I too hope the drunk mode goes away in P). :D

Trapper
October 5th, 2011, 03:47 PM
Unity is future because desktops are 100% same in 2D and 3D and very easy to use, even child can use Unity without messing something up.

There are many people that rabidly disagree with your logic. Unity is quite limiting. I'm not surprised a kid can use it. That's what it's for. Unfortunately, Gnome3 leaves much to be desired too. I suspect there will be some major changes forthcoming in it though. It's a semi-flop as it is.

We're sitting on U 10.04 until April 2013. Between now and then we hopefully find something that fits our needs and we can transition to it. Ubuntu apparently is not going to be a player in all of that. I'm not even sure linux is going to be, at this point. I really didn't think I'd ever see the day that I'd be saying that.

We're not robots. We need something with professional versatility in it.

sgage
October 5th, 2011, 03:56 PM
I've tried hard to like Unity, but I don't - I vastly prefer Gnome Shell, and find myself a bit disappointed that Canonical felt they could do better. But I'll stick with Ubuntu as long as they provide a good GS experience.

(Shouldn't this thread be in the Cafe or something?)

Merk42
October 5th, 2011, 04:01 PM
Ooh boy, let's watch as people ignore the OP's point and this devolves into yet another Unity thread.

leeper69
October 5th, 2011, 04:06 PM
I sure am thankful that Linux has so many different desktop,s to choose from. I prefer Gnome or KDE over unity.

MacUntu
October 5th, 2011, 04:06 PM
Ooh boy, let's watch as people ignore the OP's point and this devolves into yet another Unity thread.

What point? The "XY sucks because I have a bug that makes it slow on my system" or the "I say GNOME 3 when I mean GNOME Shell"? >:P

philinux
October 5th, 2011, 04:10 PM
Moved to recurring discussions. ;)

forcecore
October 5th, 2011, 06:37 PM
Yes same good thing is about KDE that it runs on 2D with effects, i just made good point about that desktop must be same always 2D-3D.

NB: No Unity wars or Gnome wars here thank you.

crdlb
October 6th, 2011, 03:44 AM
Supposedly, llvmpipe will be fast enough to run gnome-shell in software, which would make this issue less prominent.

pjd99
October 6th, 2011, 04:12 AM
Ooh boy, let's watch as people ignore the OP's point and this devolves into yet another Unity thread.
<MrMackey>
Now, why do you suppose that is?
</MrMackey>

wolfen69
October 6th, 2011, 06:11 AM
Old integrated Intel GPUs are good enough to run GNOME 3...

I agree. What the heck, are people running Pentium 3 level stuff? If you spend hours a day on your computer, it's well worth it to spend a few dollars and get something you're happy with. I've seen incredible deals on craigslist that would blow your mind. You just need to be the first person to get there and buy it. ;) People give away great computers everyday, that could be reused for linux or whatever.

Merk42
October 6th, 2011, 03:47 PM
<MrMackey>
Now, why do you suppose that is?
</MrMackey>


...desktops are 100% same in 2D and 3D...

I should have moved the thread to recurring when I posted, oh well.

beew
October 6th, 2011, 05:21 PM
Old integrated Intel GPUs are good enough to run GNOME 3...

I find that both Unity and Gnome shell run fine on very old and limited hardware like 6-7 year old laptops with maybe 1G of ram. I don't know where these complaints about resource usage come from, probably people who are still running machines from the 1990s.

Oh if you have a very old Nvidia card it may be a bit tricky because the proper driver may not exist (Nvidia drops support and the open source drivers apparent have problems with these very old cards) but it has nothing to do with resource requirement,

BigSilly
October 6th, 2011, 05:34 PM
I'm a massive fan of Gnome 3's own Shell, but I have to say I think Ubuntu's Unity is also pretty neat. I agree it was a good decision for Ubuntu/Canonical to create their own shell as they have different priorities, though ideally I would have liked them to collaborate. Splitting effort like this is always a shame, especially when fundamentally they are very similar.

Gnome 3's Shell to me though is just a bit more of an elegant flowing system in everyday use, and I prefer it generally. But I do love Unity a lot and will definitely be using it soon with 11.10. :)