Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

tech.slashdot.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#21

Post by kamechan »

jsnell wrote: post #17
thristian wrote: post #3

I remember reading a computer-magazine columnist back in the mid-90s talking about how Windows 95's interface was too revolutionary and different, and that we should expect Microsoft to have a parallel "Windows Classic" release with the same superior technical underpinnings as Windows 95, but with the traditional Windows interface that their millions of users were familiar with. Obviously that didn't happen, and I do…

Is there any supporting evidence for GNOME 3 being great for most people? My experience with it was so bad that I can't really imagine that being true. And it's much easier to find negative than positive comments about it on the net. Clearly the dislike isn't quite universal, but my impression is that it's the most hated "upgrade" ever. Also, recommending the fallback mode as a solution is disingenous. At least perfo…

i hated gnome3 at first. i even stayed on gnome2 for quite a while to avoid the upgrade.

as it seemed inevitable, i bit the bullet and upgraded. linux is my only OS so i use gnome3 all the time. i have grown quite fond of it. what's best is that it hides so many of the distracting ui elements (either on purpose or simply because so many widgets just don't work) that used to pull me away from my work that i feel i'm actually more productive now. plus i love that my windows key launches the lens (is it called that?).

i think gnome3 is much better than unity.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#22

Post by bkor »

onosendai wrote: post #4

Just to clarify, what the Mint developers are forking is actually just the Gnome Shell, not the entire GNOME 3 platform. In this regard it's no different than Ubuntu's Unity.

Unity is a bit more than just a different shell. They have all kinds of things because of the menubar, libappindicator, etc.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#23

Post by bkor »

keithpeter wrote: post #19
darklajid wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) ~Maybe~. In absolutes, I agree. I don't think it matters much though. 2) Sticking with Windows comparisons: Moving from 98 to XP was different in quite some ways, to Vista and beyond was another change in lots of things. We agree that choice is good. We disagree about whether there's too much choice right now. I see only two technical choices, KDE or Gnome, with the Gnome-Shell/Unity variants for the latter. No id…

Agreed. If "grandma" were to choose Ubuntu, she would have a good quality 140 page manual ready to download and dip into. See the Ubuntu-Manual project on launchpad for the Unity version (currently at alpha). https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/msg02859.html Is there a comparable tome ready for Gnome Shell based workflows? I'd really like to find one.

http://library.gnome.org/, also included in GNOME 3.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#25

Post by keithpeter »

bkor wrote: post #23
keithpeter wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. If "grandma" were to choose Ubuntu, she would have a good quality 140 page manual ready to download and dip into. See the Ubuntu-Manual project on launchpad for the Unity version (currently at alpha). https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/msg02859.html Is there a comparable tome ready for Gnome Shell based workflows? I'd really like to find one.

http://library.gnome.org/ , also included in GNOME 3.

Looks good, somewhere between

https://help.ubuntu.com/11.10/ubuntu-help/index.html

and the paper manual. I especially like the keyboard hints embedded as they go along.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#26

Post by dimmuborgir »

onosendai wrote: post #4

Just to clarify, what the Mint developers are forking is actually just the Gnome Shell, not the entire GNOME 3 platform. In this regard it's no different than Ubuntu's Unity.

"In this regard it's no different than Ubuntu's Unity."

Unity isn't a fork of Gnome Shell. Unity-3D is a Compiz plugin and Unity-2D is written in Qt.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#28

Post by ominous_prime »

jsnell wrote: post #17
thristian wrote: post #3

I remember reading a computer-magazine columnist back in the mid-90s talking about how Windows 95's interface was too revolutionary and different, and that we should expect Microsoft to have a parallel "Windows Classic" release with the same superior technical underpinnings as Windows 95, but with the traditional Windows interface that their millions of users were familiar with. Obviously that didn't happen, and I do…

Is there any supporting evidence for GNOME 3 being great for most people? My experience with it was so bad that I can't really imagine that being true. And it's much easier to find negative than positive comments about it on the net. Clearly the dislike isn't quite universal, but my impression is that it's the most hated "upgrade" ever. Also, recommending the fallback mode as a solution is disingenous. At least perfo…

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I must have been using gnome the same way as the gnome developers, as the gnome3 interface basically gives me a setup I enjoy without the added configuration. I really like the dynamic virtual desktops, and the expose-style overview. Though I haven't written any myself, the framework for writing plugins looks nice as well.

Like the Windows anecdote, we have to account for the inherent confirmation bias. People who find the new environment adequate don't go online to rave about it and counter the negative opinions. The users giving the impression that this is "the most hated 'upgrade' ever", may still be the minority overall.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#30

Post by acabal »

thristian wrote: post #3

I remember reading a computer-magazine columnist back in the mid-90s talking about how Windows 95's interface was too revolutionary and different, and that we should expect Microsoft to have a parallel "Windows Classic" release with the same superior technical underpinnings as Windows 95, but with the traditional Windows interface that their millions of users were familiar with. Obviously that didn't happen, and I do…

I'd definitely disagree with that. While I'm sure there are some people who do like it, I think Gnome Shell is objectively flawed usability-wise. Just to list a couple obvious examples:

-The top bar is almost entirely wasted space; -Having the bar at the top violates Fitt's law access to a window's close buttons; -Again for Fitt's law, the top-right corner is wasted because that menu is rarely accessed by most, and there's nothing in the bottom-left corner; -The messaging notifier thing frequently fails to let me know there are new messages, the accordion effect makes it hard to click individual notifications, and the popup notifications take an obscene amount of space at the bottom of the screen and often overlap with something I'm reading; -There's no way for me to tell at a glance what programs I'm running, so I often forget that I already have a window with work open and my workspaces end up even more cluttered and disorganized.

I could go on but that's just off the top of my head. All of those are objectively bad design decisions when you approach G-S from a desktop use case. Clearly they're trying to shoehorn a touch UI into a desktop UI, but they're different use cases and when an unskilled design team tries to smash them together, you get the worst of both worlds.

I don't think people dislike G-S because it's revolutionary; I think people dislike it because it's genuinely--and perhaps irreversibly given the silly politics Gnome plays--flawed.

The Mint guys seem smart, so if they feel that a fork is necessary then it's probably the only way to do what they want given the constraints. They've shown a good track record of putting quality solutions out, so if they release Cinnamon at some point I'm sure it'll continue to be developed.

Edit: I also find it a bit funny that G-S was developed at all, because with a little customization you can get extremely similar functionality in Gnome Panel. Just install AWN, enable the Scale plugin in Compiz with a hot corner at the upper-left, move your panel to the top, and set a gconf setting to remove minimize and close buttons. There--you've just re-created 80% of G-S functionality and without having to spend years in development.

Post reply on HN