Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Wayland 1.6 & GNOME 3.14 Are Shaping Up Well

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    .. But, most (not all) of the linux community are wolves ..
    Really? I got the impression that there are some wolves, some sheep and a lot of clowns supplemented by the occasional noob, eco-dude, no-bul**it-person, I-want-to-get-work-done person, rocker and a somewhat big camp of otaku.

    It's open source and freedom, pretty much the antithesis of uniformity and dictatorship (which I think is cool).

    You might notice that this is not in defense of Canonical for obvious reasons. I'm just convinced that your comparison is way off.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    773

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    But Ubuntu is pushing Mir, while I want Wayland!

    I hope that Wayland 1.6 gets pushed to the upcoming Ubuntu.
    Hmm why would u then not just switch to another distribution? There are so much good alternatives. There is Debian, ok even older than ubuntu, but especialy if you want to use a LTS release for several years anyway, Debian is very good about using a non-current version for several years.

    Opensuse is also good for people that dont want to have the newest stuff but more stable... if you dont like that also mandrake is interesting.

    Also last but not least (the opposite) u have if you want more or less new stuff archlinux and fedora is a option.

    Fedora if you want really "bleeding"-Edge stuff and u love freedom like gpl think about it, fedora is a really great distro. if you want only very stable (only when its upstream stable) stuff, u can use archlinux and it gives you good access to use unfree stuff.

    And even if you really love because u dont know better much about ubuntu, use mint instead, they should switch to wayland.
    Last edited by blackiwid; 06-14-2014 at 05:45 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Porto
    Posts
    169

    Default hm

    Quote Originally Posted by psychoticmeow View Post
    Which is why I and many others use it every day as a desktop environment. Wait what? Oh, never mind it's just an idiot who thinks his opinion is fact.

    gnome 3.12 is not good for full screen games, i move out bacause of it, most of times he crash dota 2 when you minimize, i report the bug for gnome 3.10 for 3.12 and the bug continued, and it's not happen with unity or kde,... and the new directions they mad in this last versions are really bad

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Bulgaria for now
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rikkinho View Post
    gnome 3.12 is not good for full screen games, i move out bacause of it, most of times he crash dota 2 when you minimize, i report the bug for gnome 3.10 for 3.12 and the bug continued, and it's not happen with unity or kde,... and the new directions they mad in this last versions are really bad
    There are bugs in Gnome, some of them are even quite serious. Not sure what this has to do with the Gnome "being designed for tablets" nonsense.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by psychoticmeow View Post
    Which is why I and many others use it every day as a desktop environment. Wait what? Oh, never mind it's just an idiot who thinks his opinion is fact.
    Says the one who needs to insult others for expresing their opinions.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    Fedora if you want really "bleeding"-Edge stuff and u love freedom like gpl think about it, fedora is a really great distro. if you want only very stable (only when its upstream stable) stuff, u can use archlinux and it gives you good access to use unfree stuff.
    Fedora + RPMFusion is perfectly fine for "Nonfree" things like h.264 and the likes. Personally I was a big Arch'er up until about two years ago. Arch... you can see the holes. Like you can SEE that things were put together piece by piece, meanwhile with Fedora it seems more... integrated? You get the impression that its pieces fitting into a whole and that if there was a 'rough' spot that they tried to smooth over it. With Arch there's no smoothing.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Fedora + RPMFusion is perfectly fine for "Nonfree" things like h.264 and the likes. Personally I was a big Arch'er up until about two years ago. Arch... you can see the holes. Like you can SEE that things were put together piece by piece, meanwhile with Fedora it seems more... integrated? You get the impression that its pieces fitting into a whole and that if there was a 'rough' spot that they tried to smooth over it. With Arch there's no smoothing.
    You act like a distro is a layer of icing dude. Every distro is a bunch of various tools placed together, in an assorted fashion. The organization you're talking about just has to be done yourself.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Porto
    Posts
    169

    Default hm

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Fedora + RPMFusion is perfectly fine for "Nonfree" things like h.264 and the likes. Personally I was a big Arch'er up until about two years ago. Arch... you can see the holes. Like you can SEE that things were put together piece by piece, meanwhile with Fedora it seems more... integrated? You get the impression that its pieces fitting into a whole and that if there was a 'rough' spot that they tried to smooth over it. With Arch there's no smoothing.
    the point of arch is you build you system for nothing, with arch unity works well, gnome 3 works pretty well xfce and kde are a dream, ofc nothing is ready out of box, you need to spend a lot of hours make everything working well

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Bulgaria for now
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alazar View Post
    Says the one who needs to insult others for expresing their opinions.
    I'm sorry, you didn't like being called an idiot for doing something idiotic?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    51

    Default

    While I myself think that GNOMEShell is one of the best desktops out there there are many basic things that make DE not optimal for serious work. Lets iterate:
    good:
    -Shell, window manager and settings, they are made very well
    -No phonon.
    bad:
    -Lack of task bar, only available as 3rd party extension. Current window switching makes your head spin if you have open many terminals or editors. minigame "find the one you need".
    -As NPAPI got deprecated by ~good~ browsers you have to hackthru to install extensions.
    -Theming, Adwaita wastes too much space for my taste, and 3rd party themes are borken ~by design~.
    -Customization: dconf-editor exposes all settings but is the same as navigating windows registry.
    -Double menus: one in app and one on task bar. Awesome design.
    -Application launcher icons are too big of r my taste. And no, there is no obvious way to change them.
    -As much as people like calling KDE bloated, empty KDE session takes only 750mb (with 180mb being mysql), while empty GNOME uses 1.5GB (no mysql here).

    As with any DE default apps is a core element of UX.
    gedit
    good:
    -You can type words.
    bad:
    -Rest of basic functionality like identatrion and block-selection etc. are missing.
    -Whats in there got stuffed in one big menu,
    gnome-terminal
    good:
    -Its a terminal.
    bad:
    -No transparency or background picture. Its too hard to maintain I heard. As someone who works alot of time in terminal I need those features to reduce the strain on my eyes. As many others.
    -Looks like "New tab" menu option was too hard to maintain too. But you still can open new tab by shortcut (which you have to know beforehand). Someone explan this design choice to me please.
    nautilus
    good:
    -You can navigate through folders.
    bad:
    -No dual pane view. You can't even open tabs.
    -No compact view. Icons view zoomed out still nothing like it, wastes too much space with many files.
    -You just can't, simply can't open file with application that is not listed in its app list. You can search through app list, but you can't use you own "command %1" if the app you want is not listed there for reasons unknown (I wanted to open .pro file with QTCreator, quest was quite epic). Bad things will happen to you, they think.
    -This one has most severe case of dual menus.

    All in all best DE if you want to chat and surf webs.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •