PDA

View Full Version : Gnome Shell



forsaken_pariah
December 27th, 2009, 12:08 PM
So I was reading a little about the next generation of Gnome (3.0). I decided I'd try out Gnome Shell...


sudo apt-get install gnome-shell
gnome-shell --replaceThese were the thoughts, in this order, that went through my head when I saw the mess on my screen:



Where is my window list?
Where is my main menu?
What the heck is going on here?
Three finger salute.
sudo apt-get purge gnome-shell && sudo apt-get autoremove

These people can't be serious. Is this really going to be the default behavior of Gnome 3.0? Are they really going to do away with the Gnome panel? I'm outraged. If this is the future direction of the best desktop environment I've ever used, then I think I'll have to learn to live with KDE.

myusername
December 27th, 2009, 12:19 PM
You can't really judge pre-alpha software. Thats like hating a baby because it might grow up to be the next Hitler. Just wait, then hate.

Sahkolihaa
December 27th, 2009, 02:15 PM
It's not coming out until September 2010. Don't judge what isn't finished.

RiceMonster
December 27th, 2009, 02:36 PM
It's not coming out until September 2010. Don't judge what isn't finished.

+1

It never ceases to amaze me how people will make a final decision about an unfinished product.

Keyper7
December 27th, 2009, 03:01 PM
There are a lot of valid criticisms against gnome-shell, but preconceived notions simply based on what you are used to are hardly valid.

Case in point, I don't use the window list (I use the scale plugin instead) and I don't use a main menu (I use gnome-do instead)

If I ran away screaming like a little girl everytime I saw something different than what I am used to, I'd never have started using Linux in the first place.

Psumi
December 27th, 2009, 03:03 PM
It's actually quite finished as-is actually. The only need to add an integrated ALT+Tab replacement basically and applet toolkit for devs, as the metacity/GTK alt+tab doesn't work across non-similar programs.

Anyway, as for the window list, it's there. If you hover your mouse over (or click) the activities button in the upper left, it'll open GNOME Shell, and when it does, look to the left where it says Recent Programs or something. Each program that is open will have a blue dot/glow to it. If there is more than one window open for that program, there will be more than one blue glow/dot.

Your main menu is there as well. It just can't access Software Center for some reason.

GNOME Shell I believe REQUIRES compositing to even function (with mutter.) Some computers CANNOT and WILL NOT handle this, even if their graphic card is supposed to handle it. *cough IBM T4#cough*

pwnst*r
December 27th, 2009, 03:05 PM
You can't really judge pre-alpha software. Thats like hating a baby because it might grow up to be the next Hitler. Just wait, then hate.

yeah, it's just like that.

alakazam
December 27th, 2009, 04:40 PM
These people can't be serious.

:)
Gnome 3 (shell) is the creation of one (1) person, widely thought to be trying to make a name for himself.

As for Gnome 3 I don't mind it. Would work well as a touch screen.

orlox
December 27th, 2009, 05:03 PM
Besides, the gnome-shell that's in the repos is very outdated. Right now it's fundamentally the same, but it is much more faster than it used to be, and it has some little tweaks.

hoppipolla
December 27th, 2009, 05:13 PM
So I was reading a little about the next generation of Gnome (3.0). I decided I'd try out Gnome Shell...


sudo apt-get install gnome-shell
gnome-shell --replaceThese were the thoughts, in this order, that went through my head when I saw the mess on my screen:



Where is my window list?
Where is my main menu?
What the heck is going on here?
Three finger salute.
sudo apt-get purge gnome-shell && sudo apt-get autoremove

These people can't be serious. Is this really going to be the default behavior of Gnome 3.0? Are they really going to do away with the Gnome panel? I'm outraged. If this is the future direction of the best desktop environment I've ever used, then I think I'll have to learn to live with KDE.

IMO KDE is totally epic, but I dunno I can see that some people don't like it (is it mostly to do with the way it's developed or?).

As for Gnome... yeah I find Shell a little random as well. I'm not a fan of the interface, I can't use it with Compiz or Kwin and... does it even function without 3D rendering and stuff on? Oh well, I mean whatever the Gnome devs do with their project is their own business, but no as it stands Gnome Shell isn't really for me either.

Shpongle
December 27th, 2009, 05:56 PM
You can't really judge pre-alpha software. Thats like hating a baby because it might grow up to be the next Hitler. Just wait, then hate.

well said

donniezazen
December 27th, 2009, 09:42 PM
Is there a way to start Shell as soon as you login (as if it is your base interface) and not as a startup program?


SK

Psumi
December 27th, 2009, 10:33 PM
Is there a way to start Shell as soon as you login (as if it is your base interface) and not as a startup program?


SK

Not currently, no. Startup application is currently the only way to do it.

koleoptero
December 27th, 2009, 10:43 PM
You can't really judge pre-alpha software. Thats like hating a baby because it might grow up to be the next Hitler. Just wait, then hate.

Although gnome-shell is more like a 7yo kid that reads Nietzsche, so you can't blame people who think it's the next Hitler.

NCLI
December 27th, 2009, 11:21 PM
Although gnome-shell is more like a 7yo kid that reads Nietzsche, so you can't blame people who think it's the next Hitler.

Being religious, I doubt Hitler would've liked Nietzsche. Maybe Stalin.

Is there a way to start Shell as soon as you login (as if it is your base interface) and not as a startup program?


SK
Use the gconf-editor to change /desktop/gnome/session/required_components/windowmanager to gnome-shell.

Keyper7
December 27th, 2009, 11:23 PM
gnome-shell is more like a 7yo kid that reads Nietzsche

Well, I...

...

...

...

...

...

...Wait, what?

chris4585
December 28th, 2009, 03:54 AM
I agree with the OP... I don't see any reason for gnome-shell to change much within the next few months, so what will make me like it much then if I don't like it now?

gnomeuser
December 28th, 2009, 04:18 AM
Wow.. zero to Godwin in 2 posts.

Exodist
December 28th, 2009, 04:36 AM
It's not coming out until September 2010. Don't judge what isn't finished.
I would hope not that soon, by now they should have an idea of the direction they wish to carry gnome into. But this so far is all they have shown.
If "THIS" is the alpha, then much will not change other then a prettier interface update along with performance and bug fixes. But the over all model will remain the same.
So for the love of god lets hope Gnome Shell was some sick joke the devs let loose to keep us wondering what Gnome 3 will really be like.

markinf
December 28th, 2009, 04:38 AM
Gnome-Shell is from what I seen the "major" change on Gnome 3. And It's sucks. Did I say that it sucks? It seems more like a totally personal project from a dev, rather than something that peopple will like it.

IMO Gnome (Project) is a mess right know, and they need better design goals than the defined (here - Gnome 3.0 PLAN (http://live.gnome.org/ThreePointZero/Plan)). Uhu for KDE organization and goals is far superior than Gnome organization (KDE Fanboy here).

Anyway I'm an avid KDE fanboy. KDE RULEZ!!@11! Maybe my opinion is not the best :), since I don't like a lot of gtk and gnome apps.

Exodist
December 28th, 2009, 04:39 AM
OMG! LMAO.. :P

Gnome Shell, Hitler, Stalin and Nietzsche all on the same thread. This topic is on a ice berg collision course!

chris4585
December 28th, 2009, 04:44 AM
I wouldn't have a problem with gnome-shell if it wasn't trying to replace gnome we have today. If it was just trying to be another desktop/shell then so be it, but its not.

EDIT:

If gnome-shell was improved a little bit I would indeed consider using it.

the yawner
December 28th, 2009, 05:09 AM
Wow.. zero to Godwin in 2 posts.

So... Case dismissed? Heh.

gsmanners
December 28th, 2009, 10:12 AM
From what I've read, it enhances usability and thus increases productivity. This is good news if you are the manager of an office, but I think we may have hit a plateau as far as usability is concerned with the general layout of things as they are.

I don't always work at my computer, so productivity isn't an issue for me. I find that digital metaphors for the way a sports car works is probably the most appealing thing I can do to my desktop. That is to say, desktop controls should be at the bottom and maybe a few indicators at the top.

Psumi
December 28th, 2009, 10:17 AM
I don't always work at my computer, so productivity isn't an issue for me. I find that digital metaphors for the way a sports car works is probably the most appealing thing I can do to my desktop. That is to say, desktop controls should be at the bottom and maybe a few indicators at the top.

Currently, GNOME Shell requires a dock of sorts to have the most usability. GNOME-Do/Docky however is NOT recommended, as it doesn't have the GNOME Menu. Hence why I believe the controls are at the top.

forsaken_pariah
December 29th, 2009, 07:08 AM
This is good news if you are the manager of an office, but I think we may have hit a plateau as far as usability is concerned with the general layout of things as they are.

+1

I am personally quite satisfied with the UI the way it is. I hope that, if this crap does actually make it into GNOME 3, they make some sort of fork or something that keeps the same basic functionality...

But I must say, as it stands, I will never use Gnome Shell or anything of the sort.

Exodist
December 29th, 2009, 07:41 AM
From what I've read,..........
Thats the key, "you read". You didnt install and try it out. Not hatin' on you, just asking for you to install and try it out mate. :)



I am personally quite satisfied with the UI the way it is. I hope that, if this crap does actually make it into GNOME 3, they make some sort of fork or something that keeps the same basic functionality...

But I must say, as it stands, I will never use Gnome Shell or anything of the sort.
I am hoping it comes as an OPTION myself, but not as default by any means. I can see where someone with a 10" screen would love it. But I run dual monitors and freaking hate it. Know what I mean vern...

blueshiftoverwatch
December 29th, 2009, 07:43 AM
The transition from KDE 3.5 to 4.0 is what made me the GNOME user I am today.

The transition from Metacity to Gnome Shell will be what makes me install an alternative window manager.

Exodist
December 29th, 2009, 07:45 AM
The transition from KDE 3.5 to 4.0 is what made me the GNOME user I am today.

The transition from Metacity to Gnome Shell will be what makes me install an alternative window manager.
XFCE is looking really really nice. I have Xubuntu Karmic installed and its very nice.

blueshiftoverwatch
December 29th, 2009, 07:54 AM
XFCE is looking really really nice. I have Xubuntu Karmic installed and its very nice.
From my experience the only reason to use Xfce is if you don't have the processing power to handle Gnome or KDE. Your sacrificing features and customizability for performance. I tried Xubuntu out a year and a half ago and it was faster than Gnome only until I installed a bunch of applications. After that due to all the libraries that needed loading I might as well have been using Gnome. I don't think any of the Ubuntu derivatives with alternate desktop environments are as well integrated as standard Ubuntu with Gnome is. They feel kind of tacked on.

I think I'm just going to stick with Gnome but replace the window manager. With what, I don't know. After looking at my options I have it narrowed down to: Enlightenment, EvilWM, Fluxbox, Openbox, and Afterstep.

Exodist
December 29th, 2009, 07:58 AM
From my experience the only reason to use Xfce is if you don't have the processing power to handle Gnome or KDE. Your sacrificing features and customizability for performance. I tried Xubuntu out a year and a half ago and it was faster than Gnome only until I installed a bunch of applications. After that due to all the libraries that needed loading I might as well have been using Gnome. I don't think any of the Ubuntu derivatives with alternate desktop environments are as well integrated as standard Ubuntu with Gnome is. They feel kind of tacked on.

I think I'm just going to stick with Gnome but replace the window manager. With what, I don't know. After looking at my options I have it narrowed down to: Enlightenment, EvilWM, Fluxbox, Openbox, and Afterstep.
Check out the newest XFCE, the 4.6 releases added a lot more functionality to the point I wouldn't consider it a lite weight desktop environment anymore, just a liter one compared to GNOME. But they even got composting added now.. http://www.xfce.org/about/tour

blueshiftoverwatch
December 29th, 2009, 08:13 AM
Check out the newest XFCE, the 4.6 releases added a lot more functionality to the point I wouldn't consider it a lite weight desktop environment anymore, just a liter one compared to GNOME. But they even got composting added now.. http://www.xfce.org/about/tour
It looks a little bit more robust now than what I remembered a year and a half ago. I'm going to look more into it when it gets closer to the time when Gnome 3.0 is integrated into Ubuntu's default install. Until then I'm completely satisfied with Gnome.

forsaken_pariah
December 29th, 2009, 11:03 AM
From my experience the only reason to use Xfce is if you don't have the processing power to handle Gnome or KDE. Your sacrificing features and customizability for performance. I tried Xubuntu out a year and a half ago and it was faster than Gnome only until I installed a bunch of applications. After that due to all the libraries that needed loading I might as well have been using Gnome. I don't think any of the Ubuntu derivatives with alternate desktop environments are as well integrated as standard Ubuntu with Gnome is. They feel kind of tacked on..

I once tried out XFCE a few years back (I believe it was Xubuntu 6.10), and that's what I remember seeing too, but I just recently installed Xubuntu Karmic on an elderly computer for a friend of mine and, in addition to it being impressively fast, it also seemed much more robust and integrated than I remember. Come to think of it, that's what I'll switch to if Gnome does end up forcing the shell upon us... I might even put it on this computer when we buy our new one...

gsmanners
December 29th, 2009, 02:33 PM
Thats the key, "you read". You didnt install and try it out. Not hatin' on you, just asking for you to install and try it out mate. :)

I'll try it out in April or May. I don't really think trying it out now is giving it a fair test of its true capabilities. OTOH, if they don't have Gnome Shell mostly working as intended by then, it'll deserve a poor rating.

kevinatkins
December 29th, 2009, 04:26 PM
Well, even allowing for the fact that Gnome Shell is unfinished, I've given it a try and I can't say I'm that impressed, either...

Gnome 2.x is a terrific interface - intuitive, well laid out and thoroughly pleasant to work in. My only real complaint with 2.x is that it's starting to look rather dated, at least in the case of a default configuration... So what I was hoping of Gnome 3 was perhaps a tidying of the interface, a bit of polish - I'm no Windows fan, and the MS interface is inferior to Gnome (and inferior to Mac OS for that matter), but Windows 7 does look pretty to my eyes..

But what do we get instead? Gnome Shell... From a usability standpoint, as it is now it stinks.. As one small example - It's all very well moving the mouse into the top-left corner and having some fancy overlay appear, but just to switch windows, this is time-consuming and, well, it gets in the way of work.. Sure, I know you can use Alt-Tab, but I like having my open windows arranged on a task bar, that I can click... It's an old paradigm that works very well...

I will keep my eye on GS over the next few months - it needs some serious improvement, and on the basis of what I've seen, I will mourn the passing of Gnome 2.x...

taslinux
January 19th, 2010, 11:21 PM
Re Xfce 4.6:

I recently jumped from Ubuntu 9.10 with a much-tweaked Gnome to Xubuntu 9.10 with a less-tweaked Xfce 4.6 on the same machine. Xfce runs everything a bit faster, including Wine-hosted Windows apps, Gedit from Gnome and Kexi and K3b out of KDE.

My Gnome basics have perfectly good Xfce equivalents. Thunar is to Nautilus as a racing yacht is to a tanker, and it has the amazing Bulk Rename. The Xfce panel applet Date/Time is more configurable than Gnome calendar but doesn't have the Locations drop-down from the (same) calendar. Xfce4-terminal is just as good as gnome-terminal. (I prefer Gedit to Xfce's Mousepad mainly because of the syntax highlighting in G.)

I don't mean this to be a sales pitch for Xfce. It's just that for me personally, I couldn't imagine a fairer test than the one I've done. Xfce wins and I'm no longer worried about Gnome 3.0.

MooPi
January 22nd, 2010, 04:31 AM
I installed gnome-shell tonight and was frustrated at first. Just took a little reading and discovery to crack the shell (pun intended). Used synaptic to install and started first time
gnome-shell -rI disabled gnome-panel with
chmod -x /usr/bin/gnome-panel I then added gnome-shell to start up applications with gnome-shell -r. I restarted and crossed my fingers that everything would work. It did and I think that gnome-shell is very nice and easy once you are familiar. One small complaint is the documentation is lacking. Would be nice if you could find all the tips and tricks without looking at every source on the web about the shell. PS a mouse click on the upper right hand corner of the desktop will reveal the System preferences, Lock desktop, Logout, Shutdown.http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/ss36/MooPii/2010-01-21-194958_1680x1050_scrot.png