GNOME 2.0 Beta 272
xer.xes writes: "The first public beta release of the GNOME 2.0 Desktop is ready for your testing pleasure! It is available for immediate download here. Please read the release notes first! Due for general consumption in March, the GNOME 2.0 Desktop is a greatly improved user environment for existing GNOME applications. Enhancements include anti-aliased text and first class internationalisation support, new accessibility features for disabled users, and many improvements throughout GNOME's highly regarded user interface." LinuxToday or gnome-announce have the announcement. I don't see release notes anywhere - post a link in the comments if you find them. GNOME is having a bug day today.
Gnome or KDE? (Score:1, Interesting)
The anti aliased fonts, is that the gtk hack that came some months ago? It looked really ugly.
Ciryon
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:1)
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:1)
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:5, Informative)
No, it's the proper, internationalized anti-aliasing that's been in the works for a while. For a good list of all the user-visible changes in Gnome 2, check out Havoc Pennington's "What's New in Gnome 2" page [pobox.com].
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2)
Oops - forgot the screenshot [gnome.org].
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2, Insightful)
To me, it seems more confusing to have something that works and looks somewhat like Windows, but not quite than something that is well-designed and faithful to itself.
But, I'll probably be modded into oblivion, so what's the point?
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:4, Insightful)
Reducing the barrier to entry is a big potential advantage, and I think that you're wrong to underestimate it. Every user interface difference between what people are using now and what you want them to switch to is one possible reason for them not to switch. Integrate over every difference, and you wind up with a big barrier to changing. Of course every beneficial difference is one reason for people to make the switch, so you shouldn't be afraid of making improvements. But there are a lot of cosmetic things that probably should be kept the same just because people expect them to be that way.
The net result is that the "start button" is going to be in the lower left corner, new icons are going to be placed starting in the upper left, etc. There's no fundamental reason that those things have to be in those places, but people are used to them being there from using Windows, so they will automatically look for them there. If that makes it easier for a Windows user to switch desktops, it's more than enough justification for making that the default behavior. And yes, I do realize that the menu bar in Windows can be moved around; the fact that it's still on the bottom with the start menu at the far left on essentially every Windows desktop is simply proof of how conservative most users are.
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2)
The start menu is dumb. The Windows start menu is dumb but we're stuck with it. The start menus in Linux are even dumber because they are so completely decoupled from what's on the system that they're utterly inconsistent across different distros and different peoples' desktops that I don't consider them to be a factor. If nothing, I consider them to be a confounding factor.
Multiple desktops are a great idea. Multiple desktops confuse more people than any other UI feature I have ever seen. By your reasoning, they should be left out.
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2, Insightful)
It's also the reason MS can't make wholesale improvements. Their users would rebel over anything too new, no matter how much better it works. Should window managers then follow the same path, lock into a single desktop model for short term gain and foresake long term development potential. This Windowmaker/FVWM user votes no.
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2)
I just went and checked out some screenshots for Enlightment and WindowMaker. The default screen [enlightenment.org] for E 0.16 looks completely unintuitive. There is obviously a window showing a desktop in the lower left but I have no clue what the window below it does and the window in the lower right is anybody's guess. After years of using Windows I had an easier time of figuring out the Mac and CDE interfaces.
Now let's look at 0.17 CVS [enlightenment.org] screenshot. Without being able to do some test clicking, it looks like a varient of the traditional taskbar. Go here [enlightenment.org] and there is very little to distinguish it from any other WIMP interface.
WindowMaker is different and I used to use it all the time under linux. The Dock is pretty nice. However, it is still just another WIMP interface.
The stuff that really differentiates< sp? > Gnome, E, Windowmaker and the rest from Windows is the ability to do multiple desktops, the abilty to roll-up windows and the like.
A screenshot is only going to tell you so much.
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:2)
"It's still not UNIX, but it's a hell of alot better than Windows 3.1"
I can name about 20 desktops/wm's that are better than win3.1. At least it had speed and stability in it's favor.
With all the new guis, the people working on them should focus on cohesiveness and consistency of action. Don't do this at the expensive of configurability. The thing that Apple has always had in their corner is the Platinum spec. If you're coding for Apple, your program has to adhere to their UI standard. For the most part KDE apps act this way, can't really judge Gnome since I have bad luck with it.
Re:Gnome or KDE? (Score:3, Interesting)
screenshot and this [redhat.com] can be so cool if implemeted correctly.
Any other screenshots along this line?
Re:MacOSX *is* the ultimate *nix desktop. (Score:2, Interesting)
Doubt Apple would like to go into direct confrontation with MS...
Apple is also more of a hardware company than a software company, that's weere they make their money. Sure I would love to have MacOSX on my box home but I doubt it will ever happen unless I buy a mac... maybe in a year or so.. too much debts now!
tada
They sure release often (Score:1)
Re:They sure release often (Score:2)
Caveat: like I say, pretty few bugs are getting filed but it's hard to say if that is because of the number of people using it or the number of actual bugs. We'll know better after the beta.
Re:They sure release often (Score:2, Informative)
Realeasing a beta can hardly be described as rushing software out. Besides, people who prefer KDE won't switch to GNOME just because some new version of it comes out before a new version of KDE. This is also true for people who prefer GNOME.
This is really great (Score:3, Interesting)
It's people like the ones who work on GNOME who are going to make Linux into the desktop OS it has the potential to be.
Re:This is really great (Score:2)
Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:5, Interesting)
Having just broken both my wrists 2 weeks ago while snowboarding (right in 3 places, left in 2) this is suddenly of great interest. (took 10 minutes just to type this in
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:2, Funny)
/Janne
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:5, Funny)
:-)
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:1)
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:3, Informative)
Also, there was a reference to a keyboard that was two pucks that each moved in one of eight direction (64-possibilities) that you could use without fingers! If you can't flex fingers or your wrists, this keyboard might work for you, as it works largely on shoulder and elbow movements.
I'm trying to figure out what having broken wrists would mean. Do you have full use of your fingers, but you can't flex at your wrists? Do you just get to type with a couple fingers? How are you typing?
Also (of course), you could investigate voice recognition systems. Dragon Naturally Speaking (I think that's what it's called) has an entry-level system for about $100.
If any of these sound interesting to you, and you want help digging up further information on them, feel free to ask me. Just tell me which ones to look into for you.
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority... (Score:1)
xvoice.sourceforge.net (Score:2, Informative)
could a port to windows be done? (Score:1)
I think it woul dbe realy cool it it could be done. Ximian for everyone!!!!!
Re:could a port to windows be done? (Score:1)
Re:could a port to windows be done? (Score:1)
many offices still use Windows (if you had not noticed) so how cool would it be tohave your gnome and eat windows too?
Re:could a port to windows be done? (Score:1)
Re:could a port to windows be done? (Score:2)
"I also doubt that anyone but an extremly small minority would go through the trouble of changing the Window UI for something else."
Actually, you're mistaken. There's a fairly sizable Windows shell replacement community. In fact, there's at least one company, Stradock [stardock.com], that makes their living at it. For a ton of links to replacement shell sites check out Desktopian [desktopian.org].
I do agree that it's not something the core Gnome team should be thinking about, though.
Re:could a port to windows be done? (Score:4, Funny)
Jeroen
Re:could a port to windows be done? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:could a port to windows be done? I've got it! (Score:3, Funny)
We could start a project to map xlib calls to corresponding Windows API calls.. But we'd have to name it using a recursive acronym..
I've got it!
LINE - Line is not an emulator!!
Re:could a port to windows be done? I've got it! (Score:3, Informative)
GNOME 2.0 Release Schedule (Score:3, Informative)
Re:GNOME 2.0 Release Schedule (Score:2)
1 beta, 1 release candidate, and then - final version...
Am I the only one to think this schedule is stupid? GNOME 2.0 is a major revision with an entirely new libraries - and yet - 2 releases before final? didn't someone actually think that people need more time to find the bugs???
Or does the GNOME people want to have the same honour as Nautilus (the most unexpensive piece of application I ever tested)?
GNOME 1.0 (Score:1)
Don't you remember GNOME 1.0??
Eye Candy (Score:1)
Re:Eye Candy (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Eye Candy (Score:1)
http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/ (developer.gnome.com)
Some juicy screenshots (Score:5, Informative)
02 [gnome.org]
03 [gnome.org]
04 [gnome.org]
05 [gnome.org]
06 [gnome.org]
07 [gnome.org]
08 [gnome.org]
09 [gnome.org]
10 [gnome.org]
11 [gnome.org]
12 [gnome.org]
please ignore the following text (lameness filter):
* mportant Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
* Try to reply to other people comments instead of starting new threads.
* Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
* Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
* Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.
Re:Some juicy screenshots - how old are these? (Score:2)
Re:Some juicy screenshots (Score:2)
Re:GNOME2 looks like Windows? (Score:2)
Re:Some juicy screenshots (Score:2)
$ wget http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/images/magnifie r.png
$ file magnifier.png
magnifier.png: PNG image data, 1400 x 1050, 8-bit/color RGB, non-interlaced
.debs? (Score:1)
ie: is there any way I can just toss a line into my sources.list?
Re:.debs? (Score:2)
Oops. You're right. I am so used to Gnome mostly being a collection of libraries, that I totally forgot to check for the availability of the desktop software itself.
Martmirrors (Score:5, Informative)
A few of them are:
ftp://ftp.cse.buffalo.edu/pub/Gnome [buffalo.edu]
ftp://ftp.rpmfind.net/linux/gnome.org/ [rpmfind.net]
ftp://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub/mirrors/gnome/ [sourceforge.net]
ftp://ftp.twoguys.org/GNOME [twoguys.org]
Re:mirrors (Score:1)
Debian Packages? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Debian Packages? (Score:2)
http://sinfor.lcs.mit.edu/~cananian/debs, but as another reply mentioned, you'll probably have to wait a little longer for the non-library parts. If anyone wants to do the porting (probably shouldn't be very hard) I'm willing to host the debs at the address above.
You can get a gnome2 version of gnumeric from my archive, since that's what I'm working on.
APT-get the Red Hat packages (Score:5, Informative)
Add the following lines to your sources.list
And if you still don't have apt-get, then visit Freshrpms, download it, use it, and wonder how you ever got along without it. [freshrpms.net]
PS - If any of you have the bandwidth to host a publically avaliable apt repository for Red Hat, then please post to the freshrpms mailing list and tell us all about it.
Re:APT-get the Red Hat packages (Score:2)
http://enigma.freshrpms.net/rpm.html?id=615 [freshrpms.net]
Or, just search RPMFind [rpmfind.net].
GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:4, Interesting)
I am a relative Linux on the desktop newbie (although very comfortable deploying on servers) and still prefer the ease of use and performance of the Windows interface. One day, I installed Linux to try out and had a go at both KDE and GNOME (about a year ago) but didn't like it. Today, I sadly develop on Windows to be deployed on Linux
I found KDE took ages to start up, GNOME was slightly better but Nautilus while featureful was horribly slow. Both were rather confusing with respect to my favourite shortcut keys and mouse commands (especially clipboards and window control) although I hear KDE has a "Windows emulation" mode it wasn't convincing
So the things that are on my mind are:
- Have the environments improved a lot in the past 12 months in terms of usability and performance and startup speed?
- Is it getting much easier for the Windows user like me to get into?
- What are the main goals that GNOME are trying to accomplish over their new releases? KDE?
Otherwise, I guess I'll keep my "desktop environment" to nothing but an xterm console and only use Linux when I have to
Thanks
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:4, Informative)
This one change will increase the speed of Gnome by at least 300% no you dont get the nice-n-integrated everything that Nautilus is but you also lose the one thing that makes gnome slower than tar.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
I'm getting larger HD on my laptop so I can try Linux once again.
Just one thing. I will be using Mandrake (newbie distribution) and last time the darn package manager insists that Gnome requires Nautilus to be installed *and* Nautilus has all those hooks into Gnome
Suggestions always welcome
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Turn it off and Gnome's responsiveness/speed will greatly increase.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, tar is pretty fast--it's bzip2 that makes it seem slow. Try gzip or lzop instead, or don't compress if you are storing compressed files--though maybe cpio is somewhat faster than tar.
(Sorry, couldn't resist)
Sumner
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:1)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Try it out.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
As it is, though, Nautilus2 for Gnome 2 is a big improvement for performance it seems. I tried some Gnome2 development snapshots last weekend and Nautilus was pretty responsive. Heck, 1.0.6 isn't bad, but it could definately use some improvement. What I like about Nautilus though is features, features, features. Lots of good stuff, like the ability to use scripts with Nautilus, and using as an SMB browser (when you get gnome-vfs-extras installed that is). And let's not forget the uber-l33t SVG icons it supports, too.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
That aside, anyone who would claim that gmc offers similar performance to rox needs to try both on a pentium 166 or so and then get back to me...
Feature-wise, I like ROX a hell of a lot better. Many more hooks for keybopard and shell like cpaabilities than gmc. It doesn't have as much eye-candy as Nautilus, but icons are still well done. The one thing I do kinda miss occasionally is the tree view for directory navigation, but the respnsiveness and the well done keyboard interaction make it worthwhile.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
I'm pretty happy with my setup, Windows on the dekstop and Linux on the server side is the perfect balance for me. I got the best of both worlds.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:1)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Linux's flexability and it's tendency to force me to understand what I'm doing is what sells me on it. Oh, and it's free
If Linux doesn't do what you need in order to make it a viable desktop OS, that's cool. If you could lend a hand in improving things, that would be good
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
I don't want to be "forced to understand" what I'm doing. I already know what it's doing behind the scenes. I'd rather it stay behind the damn scenes where it belongs.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:1)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:1)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:1)
I really have faith in them. That's why I stick with GNOME.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2, Informative)
I'm a big fan of Ximian Gnome. [ximian.com] Its much less clunky and more attractive than vanilla Gnome IMHO. I recommend it.
I also liked Windowmaker and Blackbox when I used them, they're much more lightweight than running a whole Gnome or KDE environment.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
I really don't understand why Nautilus needs to have so many features, ie web browsing and themes. On my installation, Red Hat 7.1, Ximian Gnome 1.4, Gnome starts, sets my background, then Nautilus starts and sets my background. I click on the slashdot link on my desktop, Nautilus starts and loads the site in its file pane and then in the left pane asks if I want to open it with Mozilla, Opera, or Galeon. Now Galeon is associated as my html default viewer. In my opinion Galeon should load the website and Nautilus should not even execute at all. Perhaps this is all resolved in 2.0. Other than Nautilus, I am very impressed with Gnome.
KDE is nice too. I used both for a while until I decided I liked one better. It's nice having more than one desktop option. What kind of influenced my switch to Gnome was Ximian's Red Carpet. I always had dependancy hell when keeping KDE up to date on Red Hat. Gnome was easy to update using Red Carpet so I eventually removed KDE.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
This is why I don't run Nautilus -- because I don't think emulating Windows Explorer is the right way to go, especially considering the amount of resources required. File management nerdvana, for me, was Directory Opus 5 on the Amiga... nothing else even comes near it.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
This is why Windows has a thumbnail mode, you can browse through a directory full of pictures by visual cues rather than archaic file names which may or may not have anything at all to do with the actual content of the file. Like I said it is going to be easier to find a picture I took if I can see them all rather than just names of pictures. I guess its just me in this case, I use Nautilus and Explorer to browse through my files which are mostly pictures and music files and the occassional bits of source code. Actual management of files isn't really my prime concern when I open up Nautilus or Explorer. I don't need to go in an rearrange them very often.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:2)
Macintosh HIG are good, but I find the Macintosh Finder too restrictive for the more powerful tasks. This is why I liked DOpus 5 -- regex-like multiple renames, great for renaming multiple pictures, etc. Also things like filetyping by a multitude of file attributes -- extension, name, size, bytes in file headers, etc. All that and an extensible API, so others could write archive browsers, FTP modules, etc. that fit into the same space... some of this is old hat now, but wasn't at the time.
The Macintosh GUI always felt to me like a very carefully dumbed down interface. The best thing about many Amiga programs was that they were usable on that level, but if you went looking there were layers of complexity that were well designed and didn't mess up the entire user experience. (Not all programs were that good, of course, but a larger percentage than on any other platform, I found).
Anyway, I don't know why I'm bothering to mention it... just preaching an aesthetic of usabilty *and* power that few people seem to be able to combine well
Contrary to popular belief... (Score:2)
Unix is an excellent server platform, but a poor desktop[1], while Windows/Mac are decent desktops, but not something I'd put on a server[2].
Otherwise, I guess I'll keep my "desktop environment" to nothing but an xterm console and only use Linux when I have to
That's what I do, as SSH and a web browser are pretty much all that's required to admin my FreeBSD box.
C-X C-S
[1] X bites no matter how many layers you drop on top of it.
[2] Servers don't need framebuffers.
Re:GNOME vs KDE for the newbie (Score:3, Informative)
Merge! (Score:1, Redundant)
can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:2, Interesting)
consistent keystrokes that can copy and paste between apps -- is that so much to ask?
Re:can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:2)
So, what you talking bout willis?
Re:can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:2, Informative)
1. highlight the url
2. click
3. read.
-Michael
Re:can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:5, Funny)
Dude, that would be, like, taking freedom of choice away from the people. Every application needs to be free to negotiate data transfer with other apps as it sees fit.
What if an application knows that it handles data better than anyone else? Why should it give up its data to some inferior process? Why should it accept data from some flawed source? Remember, it's Garbage In, Garbage Out. Apps need to be able to protect themselves from other people's garbage.
Re:can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
IE: cut in gnumeric and paste into gedit. Not a big deal. But cutting text in xarchie (the original) and paste into say, gimp? I don't think so. Or maybe, but it won't be the same way as it works for other apps.
The other thing I miss is cut/paste of non-text elements. I'm not talking full OLE, but why can't I cut an image in the gimp and paste it into abiword? That's what I want from gnome
non-text paste (Score:2)
Re:non-text paste (Score:2)
But OS X doesn't run an X Window System by default.
What would be interesting to know is if cut & paste on OS X also works between X applications using different toolkits and between X applications and Aqua applications when you run a rootless X server in parallel to the Aqua desktop. If that does work, than Apple's system might indeed be interesting for Linux as well.
Re:can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:2)
prevents cut/copy/paste of non-text data (or even -say- RTF text).
X itself doesn't care what kind of data you cut/copy/paste. It's only the apps that do.
Re:can it copy and paste between apps yet? (Score:2)
I guess part of the blessing and the curse of free software is that you can use whatever you want. You can use bobstoolkit for your gfx routines if you'd like, regardless of the fact that it doesn't support functions x,y,z.
Windows never has this problem because they use one toolkit, and one API, and it's all built into that api. Maybe the cut/paste functions that are in the gnome/kde API need to support more than just text (or they should enforce cut/paste ability to applicable widgets, instead of leaving it up to the programmer to remember to write the code to make it happen).
I'm sure part of the problem is programmer laziness. If the toolkit(s) that people programmed in had all this done for them already, in such a brain dead way that they didn't have to worry about it, there would be far less bitching (IMHO). Of course, it might already be in there and easy to do, but is it so easy that the program doesn't have to do anything to it? If so then great, now make it work for pictures, and other data types
#include
/* yes, I am a programmer, no I'm not a gtk/kde programmer, yes I know I shouldn't bitch and I should just do it myself. */
It still looks like... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm just wondering what's innovative about Gnome 2 -- what makes this something special or different? And why did it need to be incompatible with apps written for previous versions? I can still run old Win 95 apps on Win 2K, for the most part.
I'll appreciate polite and informative answers...
Re:It still looks like... (Score:3, Informative)
Why dont they release in one big file (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate having to download and install 23092039 diffrent files, ill never update gnome.
Re:for existing GNOME applications? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:for existing GNOME applications? (Score:3, Informative)
I can't really comment on comparisons with KDE, as I'm not familiar with KDE's accessibility. However, accessibility has been a driving force in GNOME2 development. Sun, in particular, has been very active in this area. See, for example, their work on the Accessibility Toolkit (ATK) or the GNOME on-screen keyboard or the screen-magnifier (see here [gnome.org]). You can find more about the GNOME Accessibility Project (GAP) here [gnome.org]. All this is being designed for GNOME2; so, we'll see more of the implementation of the accessibility stuff with this release onward.
As for the question of who is using GNOME2, well, the developers are using it mostly -- which you might expect since GNOME2 beta just came out!
Cheers!
Re:for existing GNOME applications? (Score:2)
I had a look at the GNOME2 stuff a while back, but it looked like you couldn't (easily) install python-gnome without breaking all existing python-gnome (and pygtk) apps from 1.2. Has this changed yet?
The problem is that, while the Gtk developers renamed the libraries (with a 2 suffix), the python bindings still call the package 'gtk'.
So, 'import gtk' could get you either version, and the APIs are totally different (even more than between the C APIs).
Re:oh, dear (Score:3, Funny)
It says:
This is a box. -- the ad is inside a border (a box)
Then it says:
You may think outside of it. -- And what is outside of the box? Well the Slashdot page is.
MS might want to rethink that ad.
Re:Cut and paste? (Score:2)
Re:Cut and paste? (Score:2)
>wonderously speedy select middle-mouse paste
Depends on what you do. Middle-mouse paste is sure speedy sometimes, but one thing that isn't addressed in X is its single selection buffer - I still cannot paste to replace a selection - as soon as you make the selection, your previously-copied stuffs are *gone*.
A universal deployment of the clipboard concept would be great - the clipboard content should *NOT* be identical to the current selection.
Re:Cut and paste? (Score:2)
This feature has been removed in 2.0, due to fears that it would confuse users coming from Windows. Ctrl-U could be used to remove the existing text up to Gtk+-1.3.13, but that seems to have gone too now (at least in 1.3.14; not sure if this is a bug or not).