Yet another comment about the end of Gnome 2

[ibexslam]

I know it's been said many times, and I know it wasn't Ubuntu's decision, but I want to add my voice to the chorus: getting rid of Gnome 2 is idiotic!

Gnome 2 works...really well. Gnome 3: you can't even power off without knowing the secret handshake. This is completely asinine. Unity isn't much better, as I understand it. You have to memorize the names of all your applications so you can hunt for them? Are you kidding me?

I feel sorry for anyone who's been using Ubuntu "in the enterprise," as they say. Nothing like pulling the rug out from under your employees to help morale and productivity. "Everything's going to be different now, team. Don't like it? Tough!"

I can understand moving to a tablet/phone type interface as a new option. But throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

I'm sticking with 10.04 LTS 'til the bitter end. Then I'll probably have to switch to XFCE.

The Gnome team says they had to change because the code base for Gnome 2 was a mess. Who's fault is that?

Pitchforks, torches, etc.

I.

[ingeva]

I know it's been said many times, and I know it wasn't Ubuntu's decision, but I want to add my voice to the chorus: getting rid of Gnome 2 is idiotic!
Well I never had a chance to get an opinion about Gnome 3, because I didn't come beyond the ugly, clumsy and totally inefficient Unity interface.

Unless Ubuntu re-introduces the Panels that we had in Gnome 2, there will be no more Ubuntu for me. I've tried Mint 11, but it's derived from Ubuntu (11.04), so who knows what will happen in the next revision? Will they change to Unity too, offering no alternative?

I could just as well purchase a Mac - but what's the use of nice colors and a lot of bling if you can't actually USE the damn thing?

I use the computer for serious work like development, and I have no time for <snip>
I spent serious time (like a whole week) to get to know Ubuntu and get rid of silly Windows, and here we go again!

I hate it. Look at my signature. It's not a joke.

[sisco311]

Thread moved to Recurring Discussions.

[kellemes]

I've tried Mint 11, but it's derived from Ubuntu (11.04), so who knows what will happen in the next revision? Will they change to Unity too, offering no alternative?


Offering no alternative?
I really don't understand remarks like this.. you can install all window/desktop-managers available for Linux (including *buntu or Mint) with a couple of clicks or "apt-get install".
The day Ubuntu doesn't offer alternatives.. Ubuntu is dead. That won't happen.

[danbuter]

I recommend xfce via xubuntu. It's great!

[ingeva]

I recommend xfce via xubuntu. It's great!
I'm planning to try that.

[3rdalbum]

Gnome 2 works...really well.

It works, but "really well" is probably an overstatement. Remember your panel icons rearranging themselves after playing a full-screen game? Remember trying to perform a file search and not finding any results, even though you know the file exists? How about the inconsistent behaviour with notification area icons, where you're never sure what the left or right mouse buttons will do to it?



Unity isn't much better, as I understand it. You have to memorize the names of all your applications so you can hunt for them? Are you kidding me?

Chuck them in the big bar on the left of the screen. Or remember their names - are you sure you don't remember the names of your programs? Those you forget can easily be located using the Filter Results function of the Dash.


I can understand moving to a tablet/phone type interface as a new option.

Unity is an option. Just because it's the default doesn't mean that you can't easily install one of the other options. Install Gnome Fallback Session if you want.

[Merk42]

Well I never had a chance to get an opinion about Gnome 3, because I didn't come beyond the ugly, clumsy and totally inefficient Unity interface.

Unless Ubuntu re-introduces the Panels that we had in Gnome 2, there will be no more Ubuntu for me. I've tried Mint 11, but it's derived from Ubuntu (11.04), so who knows what will happen in the next revision? Will they change to Unity too, offering no alternative?

I could just as well purchase a Mac - but what's the use of nice colors and a lot of bling if you can't actually USE the damn thing?

I use the computer for serious work like development, and I have no time for <snip>
I spent serious time (like a whole week) to get to know Ubuntu and get rid of silly Windows, and here we go again!

I hate it. Look at my signature. It's not a joke.
I think you're confused on some things.

Like ibexslam said, the discontinuation of GNOME 2 was not Ubuntu's decision. Look at my signature. It's not a joke.

GNOME 3's default interface is actually GNOME Shell (http://www.gnome.org/gnome-3/) (which isn't the panels either).

Switching to another (GNOME based) distro won't solve anything since GNOME 2 itself is discontinued all GNOME distros will eventually use either GNOME Shell or Unity for their interface.

If you don't like either option, your only choice* is really to switch Desktop Environments, as mentioned by danbuter, xfce is the most like the GNOME panel

*a much better choice would be to go into the Ayatana (Unity) or GNOME Shell mailing lists and be constructive there

[Perfect Storm]

You could try using AWN or cairo-dock as panel(s).
If you wait until late spring (next year), there'll be a third 'shell' available for Gnome3: Pantheon (elementary OS).

[ibexslam]

It works, but "really well" is probably an overstatement. Remember your panel icons rearranging themselves after playing a full-screen game? Remember trying to perform a file search and not finding any results, even though you know the file exists? How about the inconsistent behaviour with notification area icons, where you're never sure what the left or right mouse buttons will do to it?

I can't say I've had any of those problems.


Chuck them in the big bar on the left of the screen. Or remember their names - are you sure you don't remember the names of your programs? Those you forget can easily be located using the Filter Results function of the Dash.

I don't want to have to do any of those things. I also don't want to have to explain them to other people I've turned on to Ubuntu. There will be unpleasantness. Believe me.


Unity is an option. Just because it's the default doesn't mean that you can't easily install one of the other options. Install Gnome Fallback Session if you want.

When I say "option," I mean optional in addition to the original. Fallback Mode isn't the same, is it?

[3rdalbum]

I don't want to have to do any of those things. I also don't want to have to explain them to other people I've turned on to Ubuntu. There will be unpleasantness. Believe me.

If people can't deal with a bit of a change, then probably Ubuntu was never the right choice for them. Ubuntu changes very quickly. It always has, and I expect it probably always will.

Maybe something like Debian (stable?) will be more appropriate.


When I say "option," I mean optional in addition to the original. Fallback Mode isn't the same, is it?

Fallback Mode is not the same, but it's as close as you'll get.

It's simply not possible to install Gnome 2 and Unity (Gnome 3-based) at the same time. Gnome 3 is actually NOT a rewrite, it's a continuation of the architecture of Gnome 2 - so you can't mix the two for the same reason why you can't mix Gnome 2.32 and Gnome 2.30.

You can, however, have Gnome 3 Shell, Gnome Fallback Session, Unity 3D, Unity 2D, KDE, XFCE, LXDE and Openbox Session installed at the same time and switch between them at the login screen.

[BrokenKingpin]

I recommend xfce via xubuntu. It's great!
++

As a long time Gnome 2 user I found the migration to Xfce was pretty easy. It has the Gnome 2 feel to it with it being GTK based and using the standard panel layout. All of the applications and utilities that I used under Gnome 2 play just as nice under Xfce.

I do understand what the OP is saying though, such a drastic change all at once can be very frustrating, and migrating to a new DE can be painful. I tried 4 different DEs before landing on Xfce.

[bruce89]

The Gnome team says they had to change because the code base for Gnome 2 was a mess. Who's fault is that?

The passage of time. There was some stuff that couldn't be fixed in any 2.xx series while still being compatible.


It's simply not possible to install Gnome 2 and Unity (Gnome 3-based) at the same time. Gnome 3 is actually NOT a rewrite, it's a continuation of the architecture of Gnome 2 - so you can't mix the two for the same reason why you can't mix Gnome 2.32 and Gnome 2.30.
Not quite true (3.0 had a fair number of architectural changes). However, it'd be like complaining when 3.2 comes out that 3.0 is no longer supported.


I can't say I've had any of those problems.

I certainly remember them.


When I say "option," I mean optional in addition to the original. Fallback Mode isn't the same, is it?

No, and it's not supposed to be. The reason why it's called Fallback mode is because it is for falling back to if the hardware support isn't there. Nothing to do with the mythical perfection that was 2.32.

[malspa]

If people can't deal with a bit of a change, then probably Ubuntu was never the right choice for them. Ubuntu changes very quickly. It always has, and I expect it probably always will.

So true.

[TBABill]

http://blog.linuxmint.com/

Anyone who just can't deal with losing the desktop of Gnome 2 and insists on retaining it, or at least keeping the desktop as close to it as possible, check out the blog link above. The Mint team is working with a group that has forked Gnome 2 and created a new desktop called MATE. Plus the team has developed MGSE, which is Mint Gnome Shell Extension. It's basically to work with Gnome 3 and give you almost an identical desktop to Gnome 2 within the Gnome 3 environment. Cool stuff and all because they listened to so many users who don't like Unity or Gnome Shell.

So now you have MORE choice....especially since Mint is built on Ubuntu!

[dniMretsaM]

Unity isn't much better, as I understand it. You have to memorize the names of all your applications so you can hunt for them? Are you kidding me?

It's not like that's a horribly daunting task. I could tell you the name of any program that I use on my system (and some that I don't use). As a matter of fact, I use the search function exclusively (I don't use panels). I'm sure you can handle it (unless you use like 300 different programs).

[KBD47]

http://blog.linuxmint.com/

anyone who just can't deal with losing the desktop of gnome 2 and insists on retaining it, or at least keeping the desktop as close to it as possible, check out the blog link above. The mint team is working with a group that has forked gnome 2 and created a new desktop called mate. Plus the team has developed mgse, which is mint gnome shell extension. It's basically to work with gnome 3 and give you almost an identical desktop to gnome 2 within the gnome 3 environment. Cool stuff and all because they listened to so many users who don't like unity or gnome shell.

So now you have more choice....especially since mint is built on ubuntu!

+1

[Merk42]

http://blog.linuxmint.com/

Anyone who just can't deal with losing the desktop of Gnome 2 and insists on retaining it, or at least keeping the desktop as close to it as possible, check out the blog link above. The Mint team is working with a group that has forked Gnome 2 and created a new desktop called MATE. Plus the team has developed MGSE, which is Mint Gnome Shell Extension. It's basically to work with Gnome 3 and give you almost an identical desktop to Gnome 2 within the Gnome 3 environment. Cool stuff and all because they listened to so many users who don't like Unity or Gnome Shell.

So now you have MORE choice....especially since Mint is built on Ubuntu!I really like this blog post, because it explains why any GNOME distro can't just stick with GNOME 2 and that MATE isn't a completely flawless option either.

[beew]

I really like this blog post, because it explains why any GNOME distro can't just stick with GNOME 2 and that MATE isn't a completely flawless option either.

+ 1 to that.

Even though I quite like Unity and wouldn't consider Mint any time soon, the blog post is very well thought out and balanced. While embracing new technologies in the long run it also demonstrates a flexibility and willingness to listen to user concerns as well as concrete steps to address them. The Mint Shell is a pretty nice idea that should keep most people happy.

Unfortunately this understanding and flexibility is sorely absent from Mark Shttleworth and his team with their we know what is best and it is our way or the highway approach. I have a lot more problem with this attitude than Unity itself.

I wish them (Mint) well.

[KBD47]

+ 1 to that.

Even though I quite like Unity and wouldn't consider Mint any time soon, the blog post is very well thought out and balanced. While embracing new technologies in the long run it also demonstrates a flexibility and willingness to listen to user concerns as well as concrete steps to address them. The Mint Shell is a pretty nice idea that should keep most people happy.

Unfortunately this understanding and flexibility is sorely absent from Mark Shttleworth and his team with their we know what is best and it is our way or the highway approach. I have a lot more problem with this attitude than Unity itself.

I wish them (Mint) well.

I 100% agree. If Shuttleworth had taken this moderate, and dare I say humble, approach regarding Unity, the ability to configure Unity, and just overall handled the concerns of users better, Ubuntu would be in much better shape today.
KBD47

[TBABill]

Worst part is the mention by Clem (Mint's lead dev) that their user base grew by 40% mostly because of users migrating from Ubuntu after Unity from 11.04 and 11.10. I use both Mint and Ubuntu and I've certainly noticed the growing number of "new to mint" users introducing themselves on the forum.

I really hope to see a turnaround on the Ubuntu side that starts to attract users again who may have left out of frustration or dislike.

[bruce89]

I really like this blog post, because it explains why any GNOME distro can't just stick with GNOME 2 and that MATE isn't a completely flawless option either.

Well indeed, MATE is going to be saddled with old 2.x era code, whilst GNOME forges ahead improving it for years to come.

[Paqman]

I 100% agree. If Shuttleworth had taken this moderate, and dare I say humble, approach regarding Unity, the ability to configure Unity, and just overall handled the concerns of users better, Ubuntu would be in much better shape today.
KBD47

The Unity dev team have stated that more configuration options are in the pipeline (and always have been (http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/11/ubuntu-desktop-designers-clarify-on-configurability/)). They just planned (quite sensibly) to get the core functionality working properly before adding all the bells and whistles.

There is no dreadful conspiracy. Unity will have lots of nice configuration options soon enough.

[MarkC3pO]

This doesn't look bad. http://www.linuxmint.com/tmp/blog/1851/linuxmint12-preview.png

Mint with MGSE looks to be more functional. To bad there isn't an alpha we could try out.


__________________
Paleo Diet (http://youtu.be/heWprUncqIw)

[beew]

The Unity dev team have stated that more configuration options are in the pipeline (and always have been (http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/11/ubuntu-desktop-designers-clarify-on-configurability/)). They just planned (quite sensibly) to get the core functionality working properly before adding all the bells and whistles.

There is no dreadful conspiracy. Unity will have lots of nice configuration options soon enough.

Well that sounds good, but if you read the exchanges on launchpad with Shuttleworth a lot of the inflexibilities that people complain about are design decisions rather than the result of lack of manpower and different priorities.

[Paqman]

Well that sounds good, but if you read the exchanges on launchpad with Shuttleworth a lot of the inflexibilities that people complain about are design decisions rather than the result of lack of manpower and different priorities.

I'm sure they are, but trying to be all things to all people is always a bad design decision. Mark Shuttleworth is a pretty opinionated dude though, and seems to be a fan of the "restrictions = discipline, discipline = productivity" school of thought. Time will tell, I suppose.

TBH Linux users are a pretty impossible bunch to please, so I don't envy him. Whatever Canonical did people would slate them for. The Open Source community isn't happy if it's not wailing and gnashing it's teeth over this week's storm in a teacup.

[bluexrider]

Its all good. Remember that water finds it own level.