Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Network transparency, object component model, semantic indexing, unified PIM storage shared between all your applications, standard components and APIs ready for rapid application development, consistent configuration mechanism for all your apps, consistent DBUS-based communication, etc. KDE and GNOME offer all these things because their aim is to provide a complete desktop environment, not just a WM and a panel.

    XFCE is a very basic desktop environment. Nothing bad with that, mind you. If you don't need the additional stuff a desktop environment provides, then you will be happy with lighter setups.
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Network transparency, object component model, semantic indexing ... consistent configuration mechanism
    ohh they're all brick-and-mortar features that add a lot of free value and synergy

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    unified PIM storage shared between all your applications
    ew

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    standard components and APIs ready for rapid application development
    Only matters to developers. Newb developers.

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    consistent DBUS-based communication
    I guess I can give you that one, doesn't create any drawbacks for me personally, but I can see some people enjoying more expansive app/session intercommunication.
    Also, Xfce has been getting enhanced in this area with recent releases.
    Last edited by korrode; 01-25-2013, 07:43 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by korrode View Post
      ohh they're all brick-and-mortar features that add a lot of free value and synergy
      No, they are features that some people like and want to have.

      I didn't say that YOU have to like them or care. KDE and GNOME have always tried to give you a consistent, complete desktop which allows you to do all your daily work efficiently. And the requirements for desktops have grown in the last 15 years. Some people like more minimalist stuff, and that's OK.

      Personally, I don't use most of that. But network transparency is a must-have feature, IMHO.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by varikonniemi View Post
        So back with F15 they decided to switch to GS, back in the day when touch screen laptops were nonexistent.

        Now when even Microsoft ditched the traditional "desktop" paradigm in win8, now when touch enabled laptops/tablets are ubiquitous, now they say they want to move back to the traditional desktop.

        WTF Fedora?
        Are you serious? They don't plan to switch from gnome shell. Someone has written a proposal. The other proposal, that they should support bsd kernel was a parody on this proposal. No one take it serious besides some troll at phoronix forum...

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Akka View Post
          Are you serious? They don't plan to switch from gnome shell. Someone has written a proposal. The other proposal, that they should support bsd kernel was a parody on this proposal. No one take it serious besides some troll at phoronix forum...
          I don't think that they will move away from GNOME Shell, they are the main developer behind GNOME.

          What is more telling is that other major distributions have moved away from it. Ubuntu and Mint, for example, and non-GNOME distros like Mageia and OpenSUSE are also gaining. Fedora is the only major distro where you get GS by default.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            I didn't say that YOU have to like them or care. KDE and GNOME have always tried to give you a consistent, complete desktop which allows you to do all your daily work efficiently. And the requirements for desktops have grown in the last 15 years. Some people like more minimalist stuff, and that's OK.
            It's just hard for me to see it that way. Prior to Xfce, the environments I spent the most time with were Fluxbox and Openbox, I feel non-minimalist enough as it is running Xfce.
            I don't know what your 'daily work' entails, but Gnome, nor KDE, allow me to work any better than Xfce. I will say though, I do quite a lot of deviating from Xfce's default settings and a huge amount of modification to the panels to get them to the state i'm happy with, however, with only one exception, all theses changes are made through the GUI settings areas. (The one exception being the (still easy) task of making the "Run..." entry in the menu use gmrun instead of Xfce's built-in run dialogue. I usually launch my run dialogue with super+r anyway, but I still ofc want the menu entry to work too.)

            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            Personally, I don't use most of that. But network transparency is a must-have feature, IMHO.
            When you say "network transparency", do you mean much other than easy ability to browse SMB shares?

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
              Gnome shell isn't designed for tablets, just because it has a black taskbar on top.
              Yes it was. If you go back and read the initial announcements tablets and touch were the rationale for its development. On top of that, look at the similarities to Android:

              1) Dock. Check.
              2) App Drawer and six little squares for the app drawer icon. Check. Check.
              3) No minimizing. Check.
              4) "Notifications" area. Check.
              5) Optimized for single window. Check.
              6) Open existing instance rather than new instance of apps. Check.
              7) etc. etc. etc.

              It shares more UI elements from iOS and Android then it does from the classic desktop, from which it only kept the application panel. They did this on purpose so don't try to rewrite history.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                I don't think that they will move away from GNOME Shell, they are the main developer behind GNOME.

                What is more telling is that other major distributions have moved away from it. Ubuntu and Mint, for example, and non-GNOME distros like Mageia and OpenSUSE are also gaining. Fedora is the only major distro where you get GS by default.
                Gnome has default status on debian also.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Akka View Post
                  Gnome has default status on debian also.
                  You're right. They were going to replace it with XFCE, but changed their mind in the end.

                  However, Debian (like Slackware, Arch and Gentoo) is a distro where defaults don't matter much, IMHO. I've never met anyone who runs Debian defaults. It gets replaced and configured very soon.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by korrode View Post
                    It's just hard for me to see it that way. Prior to Xfce, the environments I spent the most time with were Fluxbox and Openbox, I feel non-minimalist enough as it is running Xfce.
                    I don't know what your 'daily work' entails, but Gnome, nor KDE, allow me to work any better than Xfce. I will say though, I do quite a lot of deviating from Xfce's default settings and a huge amount of modification to the panels to get them to the state i'm happy with, however, with only one exception, all theses changes are made through the GUI settings areas. (The one exception being the (still easy) task of making the "Run..." entry in the menu use gmrun instead of Xfce's built-in run dialogue. I usually launch my run dialogue with super+r anyway, but I still ofc want the menu entry to work too.)
                    That's fair enough. XFCE is in a happy middle between a full-blown DE and a "window manager + bunch of apps" setup.

                    TBH, my KDE is tweaked to hell too. I'm a heavy keyboard user, have no visible panels (all on autohide) and spend much time in the terminal and vim. I've been with KDE since KDE 1.1.2 and RedHat 5.2 I've run a number of window managers over the years: Enlightenment, Window Maker, Afterstep, FVWM, etc. In the end, I always come back to (heavily tweaked) KDE. For me, it's not the panels, or the menu, it's the apps. And if you're running stuff like digikam, amarok, k3b, etc, you're running KDE anyway.

                    I can be perfectly happy with a different setup too, but I've found that I tend to gravitate towards KDE, because it lets me set things up exactly how I like them.

                    When you say "network transparency", do you mean much other than easy ability to browse SMB shares?
                    I mean that every KDE app can open things using any protocol available as a KIOslave. So you can fire up an editor, then from the file open dialog browse straight to your webserver via ftp, and edit file as if it were local, when you save it, it's saved onto the server via FTP. Same with SMB, or any other protocol.

                    You don't have to start gftp, transfer the file over, open it in an editor, save it, then start gftp again to make the transfer. All apps speak FTP natively, for free. That's quite cool.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                      You're right. They were going to replace it with XFCE, but changed their mind in the end.

                      However, Debian (like Slackware, Arch and Gentoo) is a distro where defaults don't matter much, IMHO. I've never met anyone who runs Debian defaults. It gets replaced and configured very soon.
                      I suppose the default status is important to catch newbies. But besides that I don't think it matter so much outsides of ubuntu and mint(I get the impression that their user bases culture is different from the rest of the linux distros in that they are "loyal" to the default software in higher degree)

                      In Arch Linux its look like gnome shell is installed in around 24.5 % of the computer that has the "pkgstats" package installed. kdebase-plasma is installed in 26.5 % of the computers. xfdesktop has 24.5 %. Openbox 24.5 %, i3-wm 6.5%
                      Besides the low number for i3 I think the number is as expected. Kde is biggest but it almost even with gnome and xfc.
                      https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                        It's absolutely hilarious how little fanboys get their panties in the bunch that some people out there do not like their "official" and "only correct" desktop. If you prefer something else, you are wrong and evil There are no two ways to skin a cat, only the GNOME developers' way, or the electric chair. Just use it if you like it and let other people use what they prefer, FFS.
                        I am sorry, but have you even read this thread? What you are seeing is a witch hunt against Gnome and Gnome Shell users. It is the critics who are saying it is there way or the highway, not the people defending it. I am an Xfce user primarily, but even I can see the level of hate here is bordering on the bigoted. Your main message is fine, I just wish some more of the people here would take it to heart.
                        Last edited by Hamish Wilson; 01-25-2013, 10:15 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Akka View Post
                          In Arch Linux its look like gnome shell is installed in around 24.5 % of the computer that has the "pkgstats" package installed. kdebase-plasma is installed in 26.5 % of the computers. xfdesktop has 24.5 %. Openbox 24.5 %, i3-wm 6.5%
                          Besides the low number for i3 I think the number is as expected. Kde is biggest but it almost even with gnome and xfc.
                          https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics
                          There's a change - honest to god numbers. You can always argue how such things are gathered, but still.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                            You're right. They were going to replace it with XFCE, but changed their mind in the end.

                            However, Debian (like Slackware, Arch and Gentoo) is a distro where defaults don't matter much, IMHO. I've never met anyone who runs Debian defaults. It gets replaced and configured very soon.
                            As I understand it was it only a proposal. It got to little support and was voted down. I got the impression this "they switch to xfc" thing was mostly a media hype?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
                              There's a change - honest to god numbers. You can always argue how such things are gathered, but still.
                              If you install the package pkgstat it send your package stat in some interval. If you use <pkgstat -s> you get a print about what would be sent from your computer.

                              and as it partly topic, according to the stat cinnamon has a installation base at 2.3%. Not completely fair comparison thought as cinnamon only is on AUR
                              Last edited by Akka; 01-25-2013, 10:56 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by jan1024188 View Post
                                If you don't like it, why spill hate on it. Its not like you are stuck with it. You can install any other desktop.
                                Well if everyone took that sort of logic, no one would complain and Gnome (which I feel strongly about due to having used and loved it for many years) would be much less likely to have any changes reverted.

                                Originally posted by jukk View Post
                                I kindly replied to kickback999 and told him that it is possible to launch an application in Gnome in this way.
                                That isn't my only problem with the interface. Its not even the worst by far.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X