Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Former Compiz Developer: Free Software Desktop Might Enter A Dark Age

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

  • #11
    A dark age for Unity8, but only if the community doesn't step up to maintain and further develop it. Otherwise I actually beleive this has the potential to -LIFT- a dark age off of linux that Canonical threw over it. Mir, which was founded on the premise of lies. And convergence, which was founded on the premise of profound misunderstanding. With those two things gone a new light can shine and finally allow Canonical to actually begin to innovate again.

    Comment


    • #12
      I understand being blinded by being too close to your project and all, but he couldn't be more wrong.

      Unity WAS the dark age. Its death should be rejoiced by all, ushering in a return to the light!

      Unity was Canonical's Windows 8 Metro interface, but they started it earlier and held on to it later than Microsoft did. When even stubborn Microsoft have abandoned an approach you know it's time to kill it off.

      Unity is the reason I switched away from Ubuntu and haven't used it since 2011.

      Sometimes you just have to realize you've been working on a turd, and kill your darlings!

      Gnome 2 hit gold on the most usable desktop interface of all time, and while further developments of it, like Mate and more modern work-a-likes like Cinnamon are very welcome, any deviations from its general interface are not welcome in the slightest.

      Comment


      • #13
        Or a golden age. Shuttleworth said "I’d like to emphasise our ongoing passion for, investment in, and commitment to, the Ubuntu desktop that millions rely on", so there will still be canonical engineers working on the desktop. That could mean more developers working on things like wayland and GNOME. I assume that they will try to bring the best features of Unity to the GNOME3 shell (even if only as extensions). The result might even be enough to tempt me off MATE.

        Comment


        • #14
          I personally got the "desktop dark age" feeling when Gnome2 and the old Compiz died (basically the opposite of what Sam is talking about here). The whole desktop/tablet convergence thing didn't appeal to me. It didn't turn out so bad, though.

          Although I prefer desktops like xfce/MATE, I'm really interested to see what Ubuntu is going to do with Gnome Shell. Are they going to keep it closer to stock look/feel, or are they going to add in a bunch of extensions to make it feel more like Unity? It would be funny/ironic if they tried to customize it and came to the same conclusion that Mint did (it's easier just to make a separate desktop than to try and radically customize Gnome Shell).

          Comment


          • #15
            One desktop loses its corporate backing and we are entering a dark age? seems a little pessimistic here

            Comment


            • #16
              I understand that he feels pissed but I don't see any dark age. I see the chance to make it better. And I saw the Linux marketshare growing over a stable 2% in a short time. This year it might hit the highest point ever. Ubuntu may be the most widely used desktop distribution but it's still one distribution and it's easy to make the Debian/Devuan - base user friendly. There is just some shift of priorities.

              Comment


              • #17
                I don't think the desktop is going into a dark age, quite the contrary. The desktop is already in a dark age and Canonical's decision is likely to make this darkness a little less dark. There was technically no contribution to desktop from Canonical since 13.10 or maybe 14.4, so stopping what's already stopped isn't gonna make a big difference. The contribution to desktop that was coming from smaller independent teams was actually way more than what Canonical has been contributing in the past few years (Pantheon, Budgie, etc) and the steady progress happening on other DEs actually rendered Canonical's desktop efforts redundant. On the other hand, dropping Mir means the Linux desktop is no longer fragmented which means it will be easier for app developers to target Linux than it would've been if Canonical continued with Mir.

                EDIT: By desktop contribution I am referring to contributions towards a desktop environment. Canonical didn't stop contributing to the rest of the stack (drivers, package managers, etc) but that part won't change whether Ubuntu is using Gnome or Unity.
                sarmad
                Senior Member
                Last edited by sarmad; 07 April 2017, 05:25 PM.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by DanL View Post
                  Although I prefer desktops like xfce/MATE, I'm really interested to see what Ubuntu is going to do with Gnome Shell. Are they going to keep it closer to stock look/feel, or are they going to add in a bunch of extensions to make it feel more like Unity? It would be funny/ironic if they tried to customize it and came to the same conclusion that Mint did (it's easier just to make a separate desktop than to try and radically customize Gnome Shell).
                  Cinnamon was made when Gnome Shell API was considered unstable at that time. Unity can be treated as extended Gnome Shell where components can be easily adapted to extension. The switch to GTK3 from MATE only highlighted what Gnome Classic already has. Frankly, unnecessary duplication and forks are what slowing down the adoption of Linux operating system as consumer desktop.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by fhuberts View Post
                    So much hate going on. What the heck are your problems?
                    As
                    DanL
                    Senior Member
                    DanL said in so many words: Michael L is basically a professional shit-stirrer at this point. (Yes, there are legitimate issues here, but they won't be solved on Phoronix.)

                    EDIT: Oh, and basically none of the people who are posturing around here haven't the least clue what they are talking about[1]. All they have are opinions. Out.

                    [1] Though I feel obligated to point out that some actually do. How can you tell the difference without being an expert yourself? I don't know, other than always doing your Source Criticism properly.
                    fabdiznec
                    Junior Member
                    Last edited by fabdiznec; 07 April 2017, 03:14 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      KDE can benefit from stronger backing. Some things (like KDE Telepathy and Telepathy in general) take forever to move anywhere.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X