A Fork Of GNOME 2: The Mate Desktop

[elanthis]

But Gnome 3 is all about _taking away_ features. It's a crappy tablet UI that Gnome want to push onto desktop users even though it's a lousy desktop interface.

Again, lecturing the wrong person on how awful GNOME 3 is.

What exactly does Windows 7 give me that makes it more usable and productive than XP? I avoid Windows wherever possible, but I haven't seen a single thing I can point to as a reason for switching from XP.

UI-wise? Not much on a large scale, but an awful lot of little improvements that really add up to a vastly superior experience. The only "major" change you'll notice I think is the task bar, which has more of a Dock feel to it. Technology-wise, it's almost an entirely different beast. It's rock solid (the only BSOD's I've ever seen on Win7 have been caused by hardware failures, compared to Linux which I've seen oops more times than I can count in the last yer alone), it's high performance, and it's just a no-bullshit OS that Just Works in a way that Linux never has and (after 12 years of hoping otherwise) I'm fairly sure never will.

In relation to XP's UI, Windows 7 is just the next series of incremental improvements and polish work on top of that core. Like what GNOME 3 should have been to GNOME 2, but instead it turned out to be a from the ground up rewrite of half the desktop in a language that was never ever meant or designed for use outside of animating web pages and a new toolkit that just means half your desktop now looks and acts slightly differently than all your main applications.

Good luck with the viruses and spyware.

Anybody who isn't a complete moron can run Windows with zero anti-virus and anti-spyware and never have a single issue, even on older versions of Windows. This idea that just visiting some random web page can install a virus on your computer is utter horseshit. You get viruses on your computer the same you way you get them by having sex: by being a dumbass and networking your ports in places and with people you really, really shouldn't.

Plugging an older version of Windows directly into the Internet with no firewall is a baaaad idea, but the same goes for an old Linux. Recall that it wasn't until relatively recently that the "no Internet services by default" became a rule in the Linux world (and is also a rule in the Windows and OS X worlds now too, of course), and Apache and Bind and so on are sure as shit full of security holes if you're not running the latest and greatest. Which incidentally is why I call anyone who brags about Linux server uptime a complete freaking moron: not only does praising your uptime just mean that you haven't patched any of a plethora of security holes, it also means you're advertising that your boxes have them.

Good luck paying through the nose for everything.

Like what? You don't have to pay for anything else any more than you would on Linux. Last I checked, Chrome/Firefix, OpenOffice, Pidgin, and so on are all just as Free on Windows as they are on Linux. Developers can get MSVC Express, Cygwin, MingW, Eclipse, NetBeans, Qt Creator, etc. all for free. Free websites are still free. Pretty much everything you have for free on Linux is there on Windows, just as free. In fact, quite a few things that are free on Windows don't even exist for Linux, so Windows gives you even more opportunities to enjoy software without paying anything for it.

Now OS X, that's a different story. Finding a developer on OS X that doesn't charge for his software is about as easy as finding an M. Night Shyamalan movie that doesn't suck. Possibly it's out of necessity, as one has to pay off the credit debt Apple puts you in somehow, right?

Too bad if your motherboard dies and you get a new one, because MS will want you to buy a new license.

Utter bullshit. I've replaced my entire PC several times and never needed to buy a new license. The activation hoops can be annoying, yes, but generally you just call the line, say "I needed a new motherboard," the operator says, "okay, here's the re-activation code" and you're done. It takes less time to do that than it takes to get usable graphics drivers installed on most Linux distros.

Then it will take days of mucking about looking for serial numbers for all your programs that you have paid for.

Because that never happens for programs you paid for on Linux when you're forced to reinstall the entire OS every six months because the bugfix to one program you use is only released to users as part of the next version of the distribution. (Yes, paid-for Linux apps really do exist, and people really do use them -- shockingly, many people even _buy text editors_ for Linux even though Vim is free! *gasp*! People _buy compilers_ for Linux despite GCC being one of the most mature compilers around! People _buy Linux games_ that don't even fucking run on modern distros anymore and the on-disc installers didn't even manage to still work the month after the game came out!).

In any case, though, I can't remember the last time I needed a serial number for anything. In fact, the only paid apps I even have are games, and those all are managed by Steam. So long as I can remember my username and password for that, I can install any of my games on any computer at any time no questions asked. Pretty much just like installing Linux packages, except it's even easier.

Too bad if you have any old peripherals, they will not work anymore.

Except that they almost always do, unless your peripheral is super old, a one-off piece of crap, and/or not actually used by any sizable portion of the market anymore. But I guess you think that Linux never, ever removes unmaintained code for drivers that no developers are actively using anymore. Ever. Oh, and Linux actually has drivers for all the peripherals you might own. It certainly doesn't have a broken half-complete driver for the xbox360 controller (no battery status, no headset support, incorrect player/seat identification code, several race conditions, and a tendency to not work if unplugged and plugged back in every other kernel release), despite that being the most common PC gaming peripheral in existence right now. It certainly doesn't only work with like 1/3rd of the printers actually being manufactured today, or only a fraction of the wireless cards, and it definitely doesn't take months or years to get out of the box driver support for "new" GPU hardware.</abundantly-obvious-sarcasm>

Make sure you run your scans every day, you just have to put up with the system slowdowns while it is running. Do not forget to reformat drive c: once a year and reinstall everything because it has slowed down so much.

You must have visited an awful lot of farm porn sites if that's the experience you had on Windows. All those SEXY_SHEEP.EXE downloads really can wreck havoc on your OS, you know. It's a good thing Linux only has a 1% desktop market share at best, otherwise I'm sure the Intertubes would be filled with MAN_ON_GIRL_ON_GIRL_ON_GOAT.SH files and you'd be bitching about how Linux doesn't have a virus scanner to protect you from your own raging idiocy.

(Really. A very sizable chunk of the virus removals/repairs I've had to do while working help desk at my first job really did come in via "unforgivable porn" based attack vectors. All of the rest came in via warez. The moral of this story is to not want to anally probe furry mammals and also to not be a jackass who illegally acquires software and movies.)

The "scary" (and due to bigotry, unbelievable) part of all this for the Linux fanatics is that the modern Windows incarnation is _more_ secure than Linux. Linux is still trying to coast by on the 1970's pre-Internet UNIX security models, while Windows -- having to actually deal with real people who do stupid shit -- has evolved and improved and innovated and actually put some freaking effort into security. The Linux folks just think "lolol Win 3.1 sux" and then run non-sandboxed browsers, and use root passwords for security prompts, and don't tag untrusted downloaded content to warn users before opening it, and allow any app on the desktop to inspect or modify the window contents of any other app on the desktop including those belonging to root, and think that not starting services on initial install is as good as having a user-focused private firewall, and assume that users only want apps out of the distro's central repo so there's no reason to offer secure verification of downloaded apps, and etc. etc. etc. Linux security is mickey mouse compared to modern Windows. The only reason you don't see a ton of desktop viruses on Linux is because your idiot cousin/sibling/parent/friend/coworker who downloads pirated (and virused) games doesn't (and never will) use Linux (because there's no games, pirated+virused or otherwise).

[Kreed]

Good luck with the viruses and spyware. Good luck paying through the nose for everything. Too bad if your motherboard dies and you get a new one, because MS will want you to buy a new license. Then it will take days of mucking about looking for serial numbers for all your programs that you have paid for. Too bad if you have any old peripherals, they will not work anymore. Make sure you run your scans every day, you just have to put up with the system slowdowns while it is running. Do not forget to reformat drive c: once a year and reinstall everything because it has slowed down so much.

I've had Windows 7 installed since it first came out. I have an Administrator user as well as a normal user account (with no Administrative access) set up. For everyday work, I log in using the normal user account. When I need to install something or change something, I log in using the Administrative account. With this approach, I have not had any problems with viruses or spyware in the time that I've had it installed.

Performance wise, it's as fast as it was since the day I installed it. Shutdown is usually only slow when it has an update to install. Unlike previous versions of Windows, I have not had to re-install the OS ever.

Windows isn't as bad as what many Linux users claim. I am no fan of MS Windows and I also have Debian Linux installed on one of my other hard drives. The Windows 7 UI may not be perfect, but it works! I prefer it over Gnome 3 (Gnome Shell) and KDE 4. KDE 4 is just too bloated and buggy for my liking. I am sure there is an ideal hardware set up where it works perfectly, probably the same hardware that the KDE Devs use. As for Gnome 3, I think I am too used to my ways to use Gnome Shell proficiently. I can possibly get by with Gnome 3 Fallback Mode if I can somehow get the Side-by-side tiling (Aero Snap) feature in Mutter to work in it.

[grege]

Who are you kidding?

Windows 7 is vastly superior to Gnome 3 and I'm seriously considering moving to it in the next two months.

Good luck with the viruses and spyware. Good luck paying through the nose for everything. Too bad if your motherboard dies and you get a new one, because MS will want you to buy a new license. Then it will take days of mucking about looking for serial numbers for all your programs that you have paid for. Too bad if you have any old peripherals, they will not work anymore. Make sure you run your scans every day, you just have to put up with the system slowdowns while it is running. Do not forget to reformat drive c: once a year and reinstall everything because it has slowed down so much.

OR you could just get the desktop that Windows 7 resembles, it is called KDE. And KDE did it first.

Every distro has it as an option. But you know that.

[Kakao]

yep, couldn't agree more. I still run gnome2 & openbox at home, but I've been running my work desktop machine with gnome 3 in fallback mode (with openbox as window manager) for about 2 months now. The Gnome Shell is ghastly. Fallback mode is almost OK.

If the panel was fixed (mostly get rid of the stupid hard-coded 3 regions and let me put launchers where *I* want them and stopped wasting precious panel space reminding me what my name is), i'd be reasonably happy switching to Gnome 3 Fallback at home. Also, I want my applets. And I want the clock on the far right of the top menu, not in the middle of the screen. and i want the systray on the far right of the bottom panel, right next to my desktop pager.

I have to say I was pleasantly surprised to see that the "Always Group Windows" option was still available in the task bar....the other panels i've tried (incl. xfce, lxpanel) don't have that feature, so they're useless to me.

Given what Gnome devs have said on the subject, though, I suspect that someone will have to fork the fallback mode. Gnome seems to want it to die off.




I guess theming is important if you care about that kind of thing. I don't very much. I just want a convenient way of launching common apps and displaying various status applets about my system. I don't care much what it looks like as long as it isn't garish, doesn't have distracting animations, and doesn't get in my way.



Fallback mode kind of does that in an almost-but-not-quite adequate way. At least with openbox as the window manager (haven't tried mutter. have no intention of ever doing so).



I can't stand seeing my name as a menu (really, i know my name. I've known it for over 40 years. I don't need reminding and my ego can stand a few minutes of not seeing it in writing). it took me almost a day to even figure out that it was a menu and that's where they were hiding the logout and settings options.

And WTF are those Busy / Available menu options? What do they actually *DO*? What programs do they interact with?

I presume they're for some instant-chat type thing, but my instant reaction was that it's some kind of Big Brother spyware reporting my activities to someone, somewhere. Why the hell is some application so privileged that it gets to occupy my menus when I don't even use any chat programs. And even if i did use software like that I wouldn't want it integrated into my desktop (that just creeps me out), I'd want it as a completely isolated app that i could start up and quit when *I* wanted.

+1 on all your points and I have a bunch of points of my own all leading to a situation of desperation with the Gnome state today. I have been a Fedora user since F1 and after insisting on Gnome 3 for many weeks I feel like now it is end the off the road. Windows 7 is vastly superior to Gnome 3 and I'm seriously considering moving to it in the next two months. A really sad end to someone who made a big bet on the FOSS desktop for so many years. Call me back when and if Gnome devs stop playing "who has the coolest tablet UI" (theirs is among the worst) and go back to playing "mine is more usable".

[v8envy]

I was running Arch Linux until the switch to gnome3 and gnome shell. Now granted, Arch is a bleeding edge distribution which means I was upgraded to gnome3 and Gnome Shell *long* > LONG < -=> LONG <=- before either was ready to be pronounced an alpha candidate, but the several days I tried to give gnome3 a fair shot did not cause a favorable impression. Massive loss of functionality in just about every area I tried to use (don't like it? feel free to spend the next few months writing what you like yourself!), small single touch screen optimized UI thrust at me at every turn and bugs galore do not for a happy user make. Oh, on top of everything the only available theme at the time was absolutely hideous and not well integrated with gnome2 controls still used by many apps.

However, that experience has taught me a gnome2 fork/distribution is simply not viable. Sooner or later software with gnome dependencies will move on, and they will only test/target the gnome3 APIs. Any such fork might as well simply be Ubuntu 10.04 with some modern userland component PPAs (like what I'm running).

It appears that themes and additional functionality have been added on top and to the side of gnome shell and gnome3 since then. Apparently it's possible to use both in daily activities without being filled with rage. I haven't tried, I figure in another year or two it'll be to the point I'll be able to use it. I'm more than fine using a 1.5 year old Ubuntu LTR until then. I'm stuck on a pre- big kernel lock removal kernel as a ClearCase dependency anyway.

[grege]

@rafirafi

Fallback is only degraded in the sense that it lacks the wonders of Gnome-Shell. Yes, the extension system does not function, but Fallback certainly works as well as Gnome 2 for most people. And it goes forward with Gnome 3 - unlike Gnome 2. Extensions are snippets of Javascript that extend or modify the Gnome Shell. One extension that I like makes shutdown the default exit behaviour, so you do not have to hold down alt to shutdown. Another provides a weather app that can be extended as far as you want. You can have a bottom toolbar, a task switcher, quick launch icons, an Applications menu - the list goes on and on and grows daily. You can make Gnome Shell very un-Gnome Shell like yet it is still Gnome 3.

I run Gnome 3 on an AMD E350 Mini-ITX and use the open source drivers. I run LMDE with Gnome 3 from Debian Experimental. Gnome Shell is usable and I have dabbled in extensions, modifying the works of other to suit my own wants. But as this machine is a little under powered Gnome Fallback works much more smoothly. On my quad core desktop with Nvidia graphics Gnome Shell is as smooth as silk and fully functional. By playing with extensions Gnome Shell can be made to look and act like Gnome 2 anyway. Gnome Shell Frippery and FPMurhpy provide all the extensions needed to modify the standard Gnome 3 experience. The extension system can do wondrous things, things that Gnome 2 can only dream of. And it has just started, who knows what people will come up with now the tools are in place.

My little home made shoebox only draws 26w for most of the time and I use it for most of my computing needs. When FGLRX finally works properly with the E350 and Gnome Shell I will go back to Gnome 3 proper. I hope that 11.9 will work when released, if not 11.10 will. It will also be good when Gnome 3.2 is added to Debian - improvement on every front.

ps

Before anyone pipes up I know I can always use Fedora. But I won't as I will always stay in the Debian ecosystem - Debian, Ubuntu, Mint and Aptosid.

[rafirafi]

Gnome Fallback already exists

You're optimist, fallback mode is a degraded mode by design and gnome devs said they will not accept "extensions" implementing gnome2 like funcitonnalities (Or I misunderstood ? )

I like gnome-shell but when I need to work seriously I always go to fallback interface and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Now that gnome-shell is getting better(not buggy as when it was release) perhaps gnome people can feel reassure and improve gnome-fallback. Why would they want to get rid of their regular users?

I thought gnome was for "all people" so they have to give a little love to fallback mode to be consistent or "people" will begin crazy project like Mate Desktop.

[grege]

Gnome Fallback already exists

As others have mentioned a non-fork already exists.

It has a control panel already - the Gnome 3 one. Get Tweak and set desktop to be controlled by Nautilus. Learn the magic keystroke - hold down alt when right click on toolbar and you have access to the Gnome 2 applets. Remove center clock and add a new one to the right.

You can even move main toolbar to bottom and add a task switcher and you have a Mint like setup.

There are a few limitations on placing applets on toolbar - it works more like Xfce in the way the icons are positioned.

Other than that it is Gnome 2.x by any other name.

Fork done, time to move on.

[movieman]

Adding features is important.

But Gnome 3 is all about _taking away_ features. It's a crappy tablet UI that Gnome want to push onto desktop users even though it's a lousy desktop interface.

Especially considering that GNOME 2 was missing a gigantic freaking swath of necessary features to make it actually bearable to use for anyone who wasn't weened on a terminal.

Gnome 2 is basically the same GUI everyone has been using since Windows 95. So I take it XP wasn't 'actually bearable to use for anyone who wasn't weened on a terminal'?

Compared to an OS like Windows 7, GNOME 2 is utter crap.

What exactly does Windows 7 give me that makes it more usable and productive than XP? I avoid Windows wherever possible, but I haven't seen a single thing I can point to as a reason for switching from XP. If anything it's worse, because I have a much larger taskbar sucking up more pixels solely in order to display larger icons.

[bwat47]

I find it funny how alot of people here are bashing this Gnome fork. Saying you should work on this or work on that, blah blah blah,
When I doubt most or any of you are even Gtk or Qt developers. I spent 8 years writing code for Gnome and the last 4 writing code
for Qt/Kde. And I have been a kde-look, gnome-look, ....... Editor for many years.

http://kde-look.org/usermanager/search.php?username=comtux

The Mate Desktop developers are working on something they feel is worth while. And there doing it for free.

So your not allowed to have an opinion on how you feel would be a better use of there time.

I'm allowed to have an opinion on whatever I wish to. I feel time would better be served working with currently maintained code, and the same goal that mate is reaching for could be achieved with less maintenance headaches.