Comment gnome2, e17 and LiteStep (Score 0) 550
I installed gnome2 last week on a P3 600MHz and I must say I wasn't very pleased.
All the hype about this new version of the famous desktopenvironment as gone in a second.
The main thing gnome did wrong was integrating nautilus. Why not build something real instead of using this slow desktopmanager. Nautilus has also moved to gtk2 and has indeed increased it's performance. The problem is that Nautilus needs to be about 100x faster than it is today. It's unusable. The only good thing about it is that it looks good on screenshots but that will not do any good.
Back to gnome2. Gnome 1.x was bloated, fact. But I have absolutly no idea how they removed so many options in the same time as they made it slower and more resourcedemanding.
The article has a few good points when it states that gnome2 isn't goodlooking by default. It's in fact really ugly by default. The icons in the panelmenues and overall the default look. Why didn't they put someone with design experience on this part? Even if I dislike KDE I think they made a lot better than gnome did when they relased KDE3. It looked good.
Well this will probably be the last time I use gnome and I think many gnomeusers will do as I and leave gnome for good.
There are good alternatives. I installed FVWM a while ago and I'm more pleased with that than I am with gnome2. How can gnome2 use that much ram?
FVWM is probably too minimalistic to most of the linuxusers but there are a really good projekt going on att www.enlightenment.org. The next version of E, E17.
This is what I call new thinking. A opengl accelerated environment. I can't wait to see the final version of E17.
And at last.. LiteStep. I know it's for windows but i have to give it credit. Before i switched to linux I was using this wonderful windowmanager for Windows. Maybe it was a bit unstable but it was extremely configurable. You could do anything you wanted with it. Missing a feature? Just code a module that fits your wishes.
A linuxversion och litestep and I would know exactly what I would run.
All the hype about this new version of the famous desktopenvironment as gone in a second.
The main thing gnome did wrong was integrating nautilus. Why not build something real instead of using this slow desktopmanager. Nautilus has also moved to gtk2 and has indeed increased it's performance. The problem is that Nautilus needs to be about 100x faster than it is today. It's unusable. The only good thing about it is that it looks good on screenshots but that will not do any good.
Back to gnome2. Gnome 1.x was bloated, fact. But I have absolutly no idea how they removed so many options in the same time as they made it slower and more resourcedemanding.
The article has a few good points when it states that gnome2 isn't goodlooking by default. It's in fact really ugly by default. The icons in the panelmenues and overall the default look. Why didn't they put someone with design experience on this part? Even if I dislike KDE I think they made a lot better than gnome did when they relased KDE3. It looked good.
Well this will probably be the last time I use gnome and I think many gnomeusers will do as I and leave gnome for good.
There are good alternatives. I installed FVWM a while ago and I'm more pleased with that than I am with gnome2. How can gnome2 use that much ram?
FVWM is probably too minimalistic to most of the linuxusers but there are a really good projekt going on att www.enlightenment.org. The next version of E, E17.
This is what I call new thinking. A opengl accelerated environment. I can't wait to see the final version of E17.
And at last.. LiteStep. I know it's for windows but i have to give it credit. Before i switched to linux I was using this wonderful windowmanager for Windows. Maybe it was a bit unstable but it was extremely configurable. You could do anything you wanted with it. Missing a feature? Just code a module that fits your wishes.
A linuxversion och litestep and I would know exactly what I would run.
