Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Future Of GNOME: Very Optimistic?

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

  • The Future Of GNOME: Very Optimistic?

    Phoronix: The Future Of GNOME: Very Optimistic?

    Following the controversial information this weekend about some viewing GNOME as fading into abyss and losing relevance on the desktop, Christian Schaller has shared his views on the future of GNOME. In general he is very optimistic about the future of GNOME...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE1MDk

  • #2
    so while Apple and Microsoft focus on beating each other in the tablet and phone space, maybe the time is ripe for us to strenghten our positions in the server and desktop markets?
    I perfectly agree, so they should focus on building a rock solid desktop environment which builds on all the traditional ideas everyone is used to, instead of a tablet-style interface which is a pain to use for everyone wanting to get some serious work done.
    Last edited by smani; 07-31-2012, 12:10 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by smani View Post
      I perfectly agree, so they should focus on building a rock solid desktop environment which builds on all the traditional ideas everyone is used to, instead of a tablet-style interface which is a pain to use for everyone wanting to get some serious work done.
      Fun fact: We already had a "rock solid desktop environment" - GNOME 2.2x/2.3x. It's sad to see how things changed.

      Comment


      • #4
        "Christian sees advancing the Linux desktop as working on the underlying components rather than just hacking on the GNOME Shell."

        that is exactly how i best see gnome improving ~ GS is great (for those who think so) and so is every other Shell or DE built on Gnome, but it is the underlying stuff that should be focused on, as the underlying stuff is what will make gnome better and better. I also like Christian's critique (in his blog post) about 'duplicated efforts', using Gnome's Online Accounts vs. Ubuntu's online accounts as an example.

        Originally posted by Weegee View Post
        Fun fact: We already had a "rock solid desktop environment" - GNOME 2.2x/2.3x. It's sad to see how things changed.
        Speak for yourself, rather than asserting your opinion as 'fact'... i prefer Gnome 3 (not using GS) over the old Gnome stack any day of the week
        Last edited by ninez; 07-31-2012, 01:00 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Instead of OpenGL drivers I would rather have a fully MS Office-compatible suite of applications including a full Exchange mail client and a feature-complete Lync-compatible IM client. And all these should work together in an integrated manner just like the Office suite does. I know that Evolution has some bits and pieces of Exchange support, and that Pidgin supports some Lync features such as chat over SIPE, but there is no integration between them.
          Last edited by alien; 07-31-2012, 01:27 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ninez View Post
            Speak for yourself, rather than asserting your opinion as 'fact'... i prefer Gnome 3 (not using GS) over the old Gnome stack any day of the week
            I also use GNOME 3 (GS), and the fact that you are using the GNOME Classic mode just confirms my thoughts GNOME 2.32 was a solid piece of software, and GNOME 3 improved this code base by throwing out deprecated parts. However, in the long run the Classic mode will be abandoned by the GNOME devs (at least as far as I know, llvmpipe and such), and the GNOME devs' lunatic views concerning the future of the GNOME desktop brought me to my statement that it's "sad to see how things changed". I'm sorry for my earlier, rather vague post

            Comment


            • #7
              I love my Gnome Shell Desktop (with Alternative Status Menu & Dash to Dock extensions of course). I really love the Activity management in Gnome-Shell, and the Overview mode is a much better concept than Windows 8's Metro. It's the best DE, IMO, and I hope that other DEs either copy it's approach or adopt it themselves.

              Comment


              • #8
                Glad I'm not the only one who really likes Gnome 3, we seem to a considerably less vocal group...

                I have to use Gnome 2 at work in a VM running on a Win7 host, switching between the two is a jarring experience - going into Gnome 2 is like stepping back in time, and that's compared to Windows which has barely changed in almost two decades!

                Comment


                • #9
                  can we stop bitching around gnome-shell lets make some thread about how bad gnome-shell is, and stop saying its a fact that its bad just because YOU dont like it...

                  fuckin...


                  I love gnome-shell but forget about that so there are many people who love it alone here where only 0.001% of the linux users are some guys love gnome-shell so much must love it or the only 10 people who love it must have completly syncronous brains because they all land here in the same thread...

                  use that what you like more and stop bitching around in each thread about it... it must be a sadistic love hate relationship... I use it I dont bitch always around how much I hate kde/xfce/whatever use it be happy with your alternative and if you liked gnome2 better there are some projects that target that audience in different ways so that all should be happy, you cant force gnome-devs to rewrite gnome2 with gtk-dependencies for you...


                  you dont need to want instead of xy have something else:

                  Instead of OpenGL drivers I would rather have a fully MS Office-compatible suite
                  because most opengl developers will not be good in making office suits better and the same way around the same..

                  But libreoffice does focus very much work on making it more compatible to ms-office... so they are working on your wish, way more that openoffice did ever...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Weegee View Post
                    I also use GNOME 3 (GS), and the fact that you are using the GNOME Classic mode just confirms my thoughts GNOME 2.32 was a solid piece of software, and GNOME 3 improved this code base by throwing out deprecated parts. However, in the long run the Classic mode will be abandoned by the GNOME devs (at least as far as I know, llvmpipe and such), and the GNOME devs' lunatic views concerning the future of the GNOME desktop brought me to my statement that it's "sad to see how things changed". I'm sorry for my earlier, rather vague post
                    erm, actually NO that doesn't 'confirm your thoughts' - you haven't actually established that my desktop even resembles Gnome 2 - which it does NOT - i don't use gnome-panel at all for one, and i also use AWN + Compiz. My desktop behaves much different than the defacto-gnome2 experience. ~ so you haven't confirmed your thoughts, even in the slightest :\ My desktop is more like a Win7/MacOSX experience than gnome2 was.

                    As far as i know from talking to several Gnome-devs / redhat employees who work on Gnome - classic mode wasn't to be dropped for some time - but i also don't even know how they plan on doing that being as there are multiple Shells for gnome, so taking out the functionality that allows that all too work, would seem unlikely to happen. Generally, what your are saying just sounds like FUD. Plus, how do they plan to enforce this? - i mean mutter/gnome-shell are just 2 components listed in your .session file, if you want gnome-shell. if you don't want them, you just write (a new session file, like gnome-fallback.session or compiz.session, etc) or just remove them from 'RequiredComponents=' and replace those components with one you do want.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by rrohbeck
                      Servers generally have unaccelerated graphics with *old* graphics graphic controllers and IPMI and I don't see that changing any time soon.
                      Which means that RHEL will not use Gnome3 in its current state.
                      You mean that you don't think they will use Gnome-Shell (which is the part of gnome 3 that needs a decent PGU). I doubt RHEL and friends will be using GS anytime soon, but when they do switch to Gnome3 - there is no reason why they can't use fallback/classic mode.

                      Originally posted by rrohbeck
                      I expect RedHat/Fedora to switch to Mate pretty soon.
                      And then Gnome will have a bright future indeed.
                      That seems more like fantasy than reality. While it is true that MATE will be available in the repos (for fedora), as far as i can tell they don't have plans of making it the default (anymore than fedora having plans to make Unity the default). I also don't see how you believe 'gnome will have a bright future' - with MATE - when that project doesn't have anything to do with gnome, other than being a fork of deprecated Gnome software.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by rrohbeck
                        Servers generally have unaccelerated graphics with *old* graphics graphic controllers and IPMI and I don't see that changing any time soon.
                        Which means that RHEL will not use Gnome3 in its current state.
                        Using a GUI on servers? Why? Even on Windows that is somewhat frowned upon these days.

                        In any case, fallback mode exists, intel is including good enough graphics (you don't need much) and llvmpipe works well enough.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ninez View Post
                          "Christian sees advancing the Linux desktop as working on the underlying components rather than just hacking on the GNOME Shell."

                          that is exactly how i best see gnome improving ~ GS is great (for those who think so) and so is every other Shell or DE built on Gnome, but it is the underlying stuff that should be focused on, as the underlying stuff is what will make gnome better and better. I also like Christian's critique (in his blog post) about 'duplicated efforts', using Gnome's Online Accounts vs. Ubuntu's online accounts as an example.



                          Speak for yourself, rather than asserting your opinion as 'fact'... i prefer Gnome 3 (not using GS) over the old Gnome stack any day of the week
                          As usual I agree with you. Gnome made huge strides with the move from 2->3. Gtk itself has seen big improvements (like the rather long running project width-for-height), and gdk looks to become more modern by incorporating clutter (the actual way this will be achieved seems unclear, though). Cairo is always improving, and harfbuzz might officially replace the pango shaper. The strength of Gnome is that it is built in a unix like way. The problem for devs is that it has been built in a unix like way but not well enough abstracted so a dev ends up having to understand various libraries that were not developed with tight interoperability in mind. That is the advantage Qt brings. Of course Qt is rather monolithic and it makes the most sense to stay in that ecosystem rather than search out best of breed components. The later is something Gnome should be striving for (the best example I can think of would be offering up skia rather than cairo).
                          Regarding duplication of effort, you mentioned goa and ubuntu online, but apparently kde has its own version as well. Does that not seem like a good fdo project? I would love to see fdo work on more standards so we can really reduce this wasted design effort and focus on implementations, or even standalone xplatform .so's if at all possible.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by rrohbeck
                            I think Mate with Gtk3 and some selectively merged Gnome3 changes/apps would be the right thing to do for RedHat.
                            Gnome3 classic is unusable at the moment. *Maybe* if they put some real work into it and re-introduce the features they cut out (and get rid of the non-features.)
                            explain this idea of being 'unusable'?!? I could log into classic mode right now, and be able to use my computer just fine - comparably to if i was to use Gnome2 in CentOS at work. but interestingly as someone else pointed out - why do you need gnome on your server? (ie: i never use a GUI on my servers, nor does any other anyone else that i know).

                            I think it would make more sense for Redhat to stick with Gnome3 and not be concerned about Mate Desktop, at all. :\ sure, if there is a feature or two that may be needed, re-implement them or provide an alternative. What is even the point of porting Mate to gtk3 - to duplicate work that was already done over the last couple of years? with the time they spent fixing build errors, renaming software to stop conflicts, while also making small changes to nautilus - they could have written the missing components they wanted for Gnome 3 and had time to spare ~ Fork gnome-panel, add a few missing features, etc. Mate at best is a band-aid.

                            I highly doubt we will see Redhat take it on, rather than improving Gnome 3 for their purposes.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by rrohbeck
                              Intel graphics? Modern servers have IPMI which excludes built-in Intel graphics at the moment AFAIK.
                              How about Matrox G200? ATI ES1000?
                              Could you first answer the whole post instead of being selective.

                              Why use a GUI on a server? Why ignore llvmpipe? Why ignore fallback mode?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X