Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MATE Desktop 1.4 Offers GNOME2 Improvements

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

  • MATE Desktop 1.4 Offers GNOME2 Improvements

    Phoronix: MATE Desktop 1.4 Offers GNOME2 Improvements

    MATE Desktop 1.4 has been released for those using this fork of the GNOME2 package set as their desktop environment...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE1MDY

  • #2
    They badly need GTK3 if they want this project to survive.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by scottishduck View Post
      They badly need GTK3 if they want this project to survive.
      +1

      It's good that people who hate Gnome Hell and who were satisfied by Gnome2 have some sort of replacement. But GTK2 is no longer valid. GTK3 is the future + I can't see any reason why they couldn’t make MATE with GTK3.

      Also (NO flame please), can somebody explain the advantages of MATE (Gnome2) over XFCE? I never really understood the need for two almost exactly the same looking DEs.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
        +1

        It's good that people who hate Gnome Hell and who were satisfied by Gnome2 have some sort of replacement. But GTK2 is no longer valid. GTK3 is the future + I can't see any reason why they couldn’t make MATE with GTK3.

        Also (NO flame please), can somebody explain the advantages of MATE (Gnome2) over XFCE? I never really understood the need for two almost exactly the same looking DEs.
        I also agree, with both points. Based on what I've noticed, XFCE at this point has pretty much obsoleted gnome2. Which brings me back to the point I always make - XFCE is not lightweight!!!! GNOME 2 when it was still the latest was considered a heavyweight DE. Today I'd consider it middleweight, as it does perform significantly worse on crappy hardware compared to LXDE. That being said, while XFCE could be a little more optimized than GNOME 2, it definitely surpassed GNOME in terms of function and features, so it is at least a middleweight DE.

        Comment


        • #5
          gnome-session-classic

          I just use GNOME 3 with the gnome-session-classic package (it uses gnome-panel instead of gnome-shell) then it looks and behaves pretty much like GNOME 2.

          Except that they're now making Nautilus retarded (backspace don't work, directories not sorted before files, etc).

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by scottishduck View Post
            They badly need GTK3 if they want this project to survive.
            The MATE devs realize that, since they have the goal of migrating to GTK3 on their roadmap, althoguh it's on "future release" so no exact version number yet
            http://wiki.mate-desktop.org/roadmap

            Right now they seem to be focused on resolving conflicts with gnome, and forking all the gnome projects that were abandoned, as well as general small improvements here and there.

            Also, they're pretty lacking in developers right now, so it might take a while for them to migrate to GTK3

            Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
            +1

            It's good that people who hate Gnome Hell and who were satisfied by Gnome2 have some sort of replacement. But GTK2 is no longer valid. GTK3 is the future + I can't see any reason why they couldn’t make MATE with GTK3.

            Also (NO flame please), can somebody explain the advantages of MATE (Gnome2) over XFCE? I never really understood the need for two almost exactly the same looking DEs.
            As a longtime gnome 2 user, when I was forced to switch to XFCE.. it just didn't feel the same. Sure it was similar, but there are many things that felt "missing" in it. I can't explain very well, and it's been a wihle since I used XFCE, but in general I got the impression that XFCE is like "gnome lite".. it just didn't feel like a "complete" experience, compared to gnome 2. I'm mainly referring to integration, the quality of the applications (thunar vs. nautilus for example), and things like that.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 9a3eedi View Post
              As a longtime gnome 2 user, when I was forced to switch to XFCE.. it just didn't feel the same. Sure it was similar, but there are many things that felt "missing" in it. I can't explain very well, and it's been a wihle since I used XFCE, but in general I got the impression that XFCE is like "gnome lite".. it just didn't feel like a "complete" experience, compared to gnome 2. I'm mainly referring to integration, the quality of the applications (thunar vs. nautilus for example), and things like that.
              And wouldn't then be better to make XFCE better and reduce these "akward" things rather then waste resources on Gnome2 fork?

              Again I do not want to create flame I just want to be convinced that MATE is worth of recommendation to other users. Right now I always recommends XFCE.

              Comment


              • #8
                Thunar and xfdesktop are the weakest links when considering Xfce right now. In both of these areas Nautilus remains superior. Other than that though, Xfce generally delivers a better more thought out experience when one forgets about such things as previous usage and nostalgia.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
                  And wouldn't then be better to make XFCE better and reduce these "akward" things rather then waste resources on Gnome2 fork?

                  Again I do not want to create flame I just want to be convinced that MATE is worth of recommendation to other users. Right now I always recommends XFCE.
                  same way you like XFCE, some like LXDE, others like KDE, some others want Gnome 3 and a few other prefer MATE...
                  how can someone that likes a certain DE waste resorces?
                  Last edited by solo2101; 07-31-2012, 04:32 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
                    +1

                    It's good that people who hate Gnome Hell and who were satisfied by Gnome2 have some sort of replacement. But GTK2 is no longer valid. GTK3 is the future + I can't see any reason why they couldn’t make MATE with GTK3.
                    oh that is easy... gnome 2 is gtk2, and a lot of people like it... take the name add MATE and you have the same thing that you had before.... why reinvent the wheel?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by solo2101 View Post
                      same way you like XFCE, some like LXDE, others like KDE, some others want Gnome 3 and a few other prefer MATE...
                      how can someone that likes a certain DE waste resorces?
                      Yes, but look at the screenshots. XFCE and MATE are virtually the same. And in my opinion more people develop for XFCE, so why should they split the resources?
                      Originally posted by solo2101 View Post
                      oh that is easy... gnome 2 is gtk2, and a lot of people like it... take the name add MATE and you have the same thing that you had before.... why reinvent the wheel?
                      Upgrade is not "reinventing the wheel". There is nothing wrong with GTK3, it's just an improvement, so why should they stick with GTK2? Some apps are not even developed in GTK2 anymore!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        According to this Wikipedia article, it seems that Nautilus has two modes (but the defualt mode switched at Gnome 2.30)! Couldn't they just include a patch to make Nautilus behave a tiny bit more Gnome 2 like (isn't that what Cinnamon does with Gnome Shell)? I thought the only point of Mate was that they hated Gnome Shell not all of Gnome 3.

                        Also, instead of maintaing Gnome Panel, why doesn't Mate just use Cinnamon? Doesn't Cinnamon already use GTK 3?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Redi44 View Post

                          Upgrade
                          isn't that what gnome 3 is?
                          i dint said that there was something wrong in gtk3... actually is one of MATE goals... some application are still using gtk2... for example firefox, libreoffice... and others...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by solo2101 View Post
                            isn't that what gnome 3 is?
                            i dint said that there was something wrong in gtk3... actually is one of MATE goals... some application are still using gtk2... for example firefox, libreoffice... and others...
                            I understood it as Gnome2 = GTK2 > people want this.

                            BTW LO have GTK3 too...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
                              I understood it as Gnome2 = GTK2 > people want this.

                              BTW LO have GTK3 too...
                              Yeah, the goal is to cherry pick the few bits of GTK+3 that are actual improvements and add them to the Mate codebase.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X