Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MATE Desktop 1.2 Released

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MATE Desktop 1.2 Released

    Phoronix: MATE Desktop 1.2 Released

    The MATE Desktop, which is the fork of the GNOME2 package-set, just experienced its 1.2 stable release. Will this be a viable fork to allow GNOME 2.x to live on?..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA4ODI

  • #2
    Without upgrading to at least Gtk3 it's stuck with old app versions too, dead-end. I'd rather use Gnome3 as much as I hate it with up to date apps, rather than Gnome2 with outdated apps.

    Comment


    • #3
      I love how most people threaten to go kde or xfce but in their minds know that their bluffing.
      kde- clusterfuck
      xfce- apps are too feature light.

      Comment


      • #4
        AFAIK, you could just install gtk3 on MATE and still use newer programs. I use KDE and I have GTK3 programs, so I'm not sure what the big deal is.


        Also, what is everyone's problem with KDE? KDE 4.3 and older were a complete utter mess, KDE 4.4 was the first release that was pretty good and didn't have many problems, and today I'd say my only complaint about KDE is how its a little too heavy (with all built-in features on). I'd really like to know what people's problems are with it as of its current release.

        As for GNOME 3, I haven't tried it and I have no intention in using it as my main DE on any of my computers, but from what I've seen, it has plenty of room for improvement but it seems nice - I like how "new" and refreshing it is. It has its own personality in a way.

        As for XFCE, I admit I haven't tried it in over a year but to me, that whole project is a failure. It strives to be lightweight but instead its just as resource consuming as MATE but lacks features.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by garegin View Post
          I love how most people threaten to go kde or xfce but in their minds know that their bluffing.
          kde- clusterfuck
          xfce- apps are too feature light.
          Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
          As for XFCE, I admit I haven't tried it in over a year but to me, that whole project is a failure. It strives to be lightweight but instead its just as resource consuming as MATE but lacks features.
          Exactly, just another wasted effort, it's more useful to everyone to just make Mate/Gnome2 faster then to do a crappy rewrite with half the functionality and no real performance gain.

          Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
          Also, what is everyone's problem with KDE? KDE 4.3 and older were a complete utter mess, KDE 4.4 was the first release that was pretty good and didn't have many problems, and today I'd say my only complaint about KDE is how its a little too heavy (with all built-in features on). I'd really like to know what people's problems are with it as of its current release.
          KDE has always been a clusterfuck and it has the most asinine naming convention ever conceived.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kivada View Post
            KDE has always been a clusterfuck and it has the most asinine naming convention ever conceived.
            Mind explaining your definition of "clusterfuck"? Because to me, that's like saying "this is bad" and leaving it at that, which isn't a reason. I can see why some people wouldn't like the naming scheme of it but what is nice is it lets you know what is part of the KDE suite and what isn't. Besides, do you have a better name for many of the things? For example, kolourpaint. What else are you gonna call it? Colourpaint is just plain boring and you can't call it "Paint" due to confusion with mspaint. GNOME has a similar naming scheme that start with G or GN.

            Comment


            • #7
              I hate KDE looks Gnome atleast looks elegant.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by phoen1x View Post
                I hate KDE looks Gnome atleast looks elegant.
                I dare to say that again. KDE can be tweaked to look like Gnome (be it classic or GShell). Overall it's a better desktop environment.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                  Mind explaining your definition of "clusterfuck"? Because to me, that's like saying "this is bad" and leaving it at that, which isn't a reason. I can see why some people wouldn't like the naming scheme of it but what is nice is it lets you know what is part of the KDE suite and what isn't. Besides, do you have a better name for many of the things? For example, kolourpaint. What else are you gonna call it? Colourpaint is just plain boring and you can't call it "Paint" due to confusion with mspaint. GNOME has a similar naming scheme that start with G or GN.
                  How about KDE Paint?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                    As for XFCE, I admit I haven't tried it in over a year but to me, that whole project is a failure. It strives to be lightweight but instead its just as resource consuming as MATE but lacks features.
                    When your computer is fast enough, you may not notice the difference between gnome2/MATE and XFCE. XFCE is now 4.8 and they have done very well to keep their DE light and useful. xfdesktop and thunar in particular open much faster than nautilus. Also, XFCE have build in a compositor and can handle desktop switching etc. It includes not many features, but just enough common ones so that I do not need to install compiz.

                    As you are using KDE, XFCE is definitely not for you. KDE is full of features.
                    But I guess for Linus and others that like XFCE, simpliness itself is a feature.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      @phoen1x
                      Complaining about the appearance of a modern OS is an invalid complaint, because you can always tweak an OS to look however you want to some degree. If you don't like the default theme of KDE (or any DE for that matter), just change it.

                      This is the same problem with Ubuntu. Some people really hated the orange theme and didn't want to use Ubuntu specifically because of it, which is utter crap because first of all, the orange made ubuntu distinctive and secondly, just change the color if you don't like it.


                      @jayrules
                      I suppose they could call it that, its boring but it works.


                      @Imouto
                      Actually, I used XFCE on a very crappy system and thats how I knew it didn't perform much better than GNOME 2. But again, I haven't used it recently so I'm not sure how much it improved. IMO, LXDE is so much better at doing what XFCE tries to do. Its simpler, cleaner, a lot less CPU and RAM consuming, and more sleek. LXDE does lack many features, but it gets the job done. According to one of the LXDE devs, they said what really separates their project from XFCE is how LXDE tries to operate with as little dependencies as possible. XFCE, from what I've noticed, is littered with GNOME dependencies.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bachinchi View Post
                        I dare to say that again. KDE can be tweaked to look like Gnome (be it classic or GShell). Overall it's a better desktop environment.
                        I prefer default setup and by default KDE looks ugly. That green refresh icon lol who created that crap? control icons in amarok? etc. That stupid kde menu, its look cheap and crappy. I know it can be tweaked but im too lazy for it. Why they can't make it look professional and not ugly by default?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by phoen1x View Post
                          I prefer default setup and by default KDE looks ugly. That green refresh icon lol who created that crap? control icons in amarok? etc. That stupid kde menu, its look cheap and crappy. I know it can be tweaked but im too lazy for it.
                          So.... you have the patience to use linux but you don't have the patience to search for a different theme which might only take 2 minutes? Also whats wrong with the green refresh icon? It looks fine to me. A little bright and distracting but it still has a nice appearance.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'll probably pull the trigger on Unity once Ubuntu 12.04 is finally released. I think eventually the downsides of Unity and Gnome Shell will be ironed out as more people build extensions and hacks, but it's going to take some time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              been using MATE for about 6 months. and im damn happy that i can continue using my old gnome2.
                              since 1.1 there are no big issues anymore also.
                              i do not use compiz tho.
                              some applets not ported to MATE yet, but are easy to compile with the use of migrate script on MATE wiki page.
                              so my dockbarX, panflute and caja-dropbox work fine also and i have all like it used to be with gnome2

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X