Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RHEL 7 Linux To Use GNOME 3 Classic Mode

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by Honton View Post
    More stupid than funny. Gnome is doing fine. Nobody said everyone should love it. But hating it and bad mouthing Gnome for being RHELs choice? Not cool. Be happy for Gnome, when they make progress like this.
    Wrong, the choice isn't there even in the OSS world since most of the devs will just follow the crowd or will just get disinterested and leave.

    It's like saying that having a few million distros is somehow progress, newsflash, it isn't because there is so much duplication of effort that it kills any chance of innovation.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by liam View Post
      You need to understand, and this is something others in a better position than I have said as well, that RH gives its employees a lot of freedom. Especially the people doing community oriented work (like the Gnome folks). It's a price of doing business. That's why it bugs the hell out of me when people talk about RH as some monolithic entity with nefarious intents towards the open source community. You literally couldn't be further from the truth.
      So what it seems happened was that the Gnome folks stayed in their world and developed what they wanted without wider considerations. This meant that serious user testing wasn't used early on in the process, and, according to the Register's report of Summit, it did enter in when Classic Mode was being developed (at that point I believe more than just the Gnome devs were involved, so I'd imagine they'd have less influence on the end result, but that's just speculation). It really has been to Gnome's detriment that they didn't take advantage of the UX people in Fedora to really help shape Shell from an early period.
      As for the execs, I'd imagine they're using CSB (corporate standard build, a.k.a. RHEL), or Windows, or Mac (depending on what exactly they're doing).
      Thanks for the info. I wasn't accusing Red Hat of any wrongdoing.

      It's like saying that having a few million distros is somehow progress, newsflash, it isn't because there is so much duplication of effort that it kills any chance of innovation.
      There's not a fixed amount of development effort that will get split among a variable number of distros. There are people and corporations that want to do certain things, and they do them however they want. A lot of people split off because the folks they'd ideally like to work with have incompatible goals, stricter or less strict quality controls, or they just can't get along. If we banned every distro except Debian and every DE except Gnome, that wouldn't mean that all the work Clem has done on Cinnamon would be in Gnome instead. It probably would mean that Gnome would have rejected his submissions and he would have gotten frustrated and stopped developing.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Chaz View Post
        Thanks for the info. I wasn't accusing Red Hat of any wrongdoing.
        No, you didn't. I just took the opportunity to clarify things as they've been explained to me.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
          Oh my god, it is so old, how can anyone dare to use it?
          Seriously, because it is a proven way to do things on a computer and is not changed just because some developers meant that they have to try something new because the old stuff is so boring.
          Don't try to turn the argument in the opposite direction. I replied to a claim that no one likes or needs GS.
          GNOME Shell is a modern UI and therefore is flexible enough to support a traditional DE layout through extensions. Same with Plasma Workspaces.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
            People with PowerVR chips. Which are of course horrible to begin with, but hey, they do exist!
            In PC hardware only through Intel and Linux drivers are available.

            Originally posted by liam View Post
            Neither has been quite right, IMHO, but the attempts are laudable (though I so much wish Gnome had been more experimental and imaginative).
            The essence of actually modern DEs is extensibility. PW and to a slightly lesser degree GS allow very novel interaction concept to be implemented through extensions/widgets and scripting.

            Comment


            • #51
              I actually ran Gnome 3 Shell + extensions. I switched to mate because of the insane memory requirements not being able to work on my Ancient Radeon 9600 with 64 MiB ram. I do have to say, with the right extensions, it works really well.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                In PC hardware only through Intel and Linux drivers are available.
                Only that the available drivers have no 3D support.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                  Only that the available drivers have no 3D support.
                  So the closed source drivers with accelerated OpenGL are gone?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                    So the closed source drivers with accelerated OpenGL are gone?
                    They only work with some ancient Ubuntu versions.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                      Hallelujah! It's obvious this mantra of letting the employees do whatever they want doesn't work. The execs must have a coherent vision and the programmers must execute. Not let programmers run around because even if most of them may be good programmers, they suck at having anything related to a vision. Sounds cruel but most people don't have good ideas no matter how good are at their job.
                      Well, this non working mantra is at least 150-MUSD-net-income obvious.
                      Last edited by erendorn; 06-14-2013, 10:39 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Honton View Post
                        Let us assume the extra maintenance cost is insignificant. Why did no one show up to do the work? I think it is very understandable that the existing maintainers did some adjustments in order to keep the workload low and predictable. Anyway I know some of the missing features might be coming back. And that is with a vengeance. Opacity for every app, cool snapping to mimic panes for every app.
                        Has nothing to do with maintenance burden. Its easier to leave it alone altogether, which is what they should have done.

                        What it is, is the gnome way.... copy apple. Ever wonder why gnome3+ menus look just like apple? Its because gnome are morons.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                          Will they be using the GNOME Classic Session which has deprecated by GNOME, or will they use GNOME Shell with the new classic extensions?

                          Either way, I am a fan of Classic Session, and not found of gnome-shell at all.
                          I hope Red Hat makes it great.
                          You're getting your terms wrong (and I think a lot of people are confused about this, so getting it wrong only makes that worse).

                          The thing that existed prior to 3.8 was never called 'classic'. It was called 'fallback mode'. 'Classic Mode' is the new thing in 3.8 that replaces fallback mode. It did not exist prior to 3.8. That is what RHEL 7 is using, *not* 'fallback mode'.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Chaz View Post
                            So, it was Red Hat devs who led the way on the new interface in Shell in the first place, right? Why is Red Hat paying people to develop something they don't actually want to use?
                            Red Hat is committed to supporting development of F/OSS as a whole. Red Hat spends a whole bunch of money developing stuff that RHEL does not use by default or even at all (we have several paid staff working on KDE). I've been saying this forever, but apparently people insist on believing RH only develops stuff that RHEL uses

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Chaz View Post
                              But of course if RH execs use Fedora then they would have been exposed to Shell ages ago. I'm stumped.
                              Jim Whitehurst has several systems running Fedora, including pre-releases...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by iniudan View Post
                                Red Hat is not really one to look after legacy desktop hardware, it not their market.
                                Clearly, that's why we're paying people to write llvmpipe.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X