A Fork Of GNOME 2: The Mate Desktop

[Nevertime]

My post was an exaggeration aimed at someone threatening to switch to Windows 7, when they have never really left it.

This thread is about Gnome 3. If you want to talk off topic about how great Windows is then this is the wrong place. Phoronix is about Linux and other nix variants. So are the discussions. I have not used Windows in the last 10 years and I do not care even a little bit.

I do not make posts on Windows forums.

I actually like Gnome3. I love the extension system and I cannot wait for the whole thing to mature. There is no need for a fork. How many people use the forked KDE 3?

A gnome 2 port seems premature considering you still have fallback mode and most of the issues people have gnome 3 could end up being fixed before that goes away.

It does seem strange to see windows as the solution to disagreeing with the direction of gnome 3 as its linux that allows choices when it comes to gui.

I would like to point out the advantage with linux repository?s as a good way of getting access to safe software especially for beginners would might otherwise download crap. This is a solution that deals with the problem of 'people doing dumb things' issue better than windows ever has.

Just navigating the tick boxes to avoid a wall of toolbars can be a pain in windows when installing.

[grege]

Very true

Just navigating the tick boxes to avoid a wall of toolbars can be a pain in windows when installing.

I could not agree more.

I really hate the sites that you go to to get Windows freeware only to be presented with flashing download links for everything but what you are after. I occasionally get asked to recommend a program to do some task in Windows and the people (unsophisticated computer users) come back and say they could not get it from the link I gave them. I then download it from Linux and send it to them. And this behaviour is getting worse. Trickery is becoming the norm. Most of my friends are also sick of the advice "don't bother just get Mint".

Back on topic I am running Gnome3 Fallback on my under powered machine and there is really not much I miss from Gnome 2. It does what a desktop environment should do. Once you learn the added step of holding down the alt key when you click on the toolbar then it is just Gnome 2 with very few limitations that matter. I have never been one for spinning cubes.

[Kakao]

My post was an exaggeration aimed at someone threatening to switch to Windows 7, when they have never really left it.

Your reaction to my post was childish/bigotry. Yes I left Windows since Fedora 1. Before that I was playing with RedHat as an alternate boot. My desktop and my notebook are Fedora. My tiny netbook, where the tablet UI actually makes some sense, is Ubuntu. My headless servers are Centos managed through terminals and emacs. And yes I have Windows 7 and XP VMs in the desktop for some casual old game gaming. At my work place I have both Fedora and Win 7 machines and until recently with the advent of this Gnome Shell "I love tablets" nonsense I preferred Fedora. If you think that it only takes discovering the undiscoverable Alt key Shut Down to make it the same as Gnome 2 then you really never used the machine for any kind of real work.

It does seem strange to see windows as the solution to disagreeing with the direction of gnome 3 as its linux that allows choices when it comes to gui.

Unfortunately now Windows 7 is clearly the best UI choice among the Linux choices (I have the choice to change don't I?). I really liked lxde but their target audience is the "I prefer it light" people and for my desktops I want it feature full.

There is a reason why Windows 7 and OSX maintain the old Win95 desktop concept. It is because it is a solid usability engineering decision in instead of a freaking faggot decision to try to impress potential boyfriends.

[grege]

Just use fallback mode

If you think that it only takes discovering the undiscoverable Alt key Shut Down to make it the same as Gnome 2 then you really never used the machine for any kind of real work.

Real work is done in applications that you run on a desktop. The desktop is merely the vehicle to run the applications.

And I did not suggest that any such thing as you infer. For a start the alt key tip I referred to is for fallback mode so you can add applets to the toolbar - it does not work like that in Gnome Shell. Fallback mode is Gnome 2 with slight restrictions on applet and icon placement on the toolbars. 15 minutes of setup and Fallback Mode is functionally the same as Gnome 2, it is just a bit harder to get there. You can set forced fallback mode and ignore the Shell forever.

To make Gnome Shell function in a similar manner to Gnome 2 you need several extensions - one to make a bottom toolbar with a task switcher and virtual desktop pager, one to move the clock, one to add a weather applet, another to activate an Applications menu and one to make add quick launch icons to the top toolbar. You also need to set Nautilus to control the desktop. All of this is doable if you spend some time in Gnome 3 and look for solutions to problems. Even after all that it is still Gnome 3 not Gnome 2. All of these extensions have been written are are available from GitHub or from FPMurphy or in the Fedora repositories. Other extensions of use are one to move the hot corner and one to make shutdown the default. Extensions make Gnome 3 infinitely configurable. Going down this path is a lot more complicated than just using fallback mode, but it is also very satisfying to bend the desktop to your own vision. And extensions are just simple Javascript text files in the ~/.local/gnome-shell/extensions folder, you do not need to be much of a programmer to edit them to do simple thing like change colors or re-position them.

When Unity came out I revolted and switched to LMDE with Gnome 2 and then Xfce 4.8. I then installed KDE 4.6 and tried that and it runs fine on my low specced machine. I then reverted to Gnome but realized that Gnome Shell will filter down to Debian Testing soon enough. What to do? Getting angry and calling for forks was not going to get me anywhere. My answer was to embrace Gnome 3 and modify it to suit me. I found Xfce OK for a simple desktop and I use it on my notebook, but wanted more for my desktops. For a start I need Samba shares for media streaming. It can be done in Xfce by adding bits from KDE (dolphin and knetwork sharing), the same solution I now use for Gnome 3 as it does not yet handle Samba at all well. I use Gnome 3.01, but eagerly await 3.2. Gnome Shell is a work in progress and it is exciting to go along for the ride.

If you really want to continue to use Gnome 2 then Gnome 3 Fallback Mode is Gnome 2, it just needs a little tweaking and it is just sitting there waiting to be selected.

[drag]

Like I mentioned in another thread there is some things you cannot do in Gnome 3 that you could do in Gnome 2, but there is a shitload of things you can do in Gnome 3 that you never will be able to do in Gnome 2.

The composited window manager, desktop scenegraph engine, fully scripted environment (using a real, widely used language will built in debugging/development capabilities), extensions, and such things means that Gnome-shell is far more capable system.

It's just a matter of time before desktops like XFCE start trying to do the same things. They are going to seem hopelessly obsolete in a year or two.

[Nevertime]

freaking faggot decision to try to impress potential boyfriends.

And you have the nerve to accuse other people of bigotry.

[crazycheese]

Unfortunately now Windows 7 is clearly the best UI choice among the Linux choices (I have the choice to change don't I?). I really liked lxde but their target audience is the "I prefer it light" people and for my desktops I want it feature full.

There is a reason why Windows 7 and OSX maintain the old Win95 desktop concept. It is because it is a solid usability engineering decision in instead of a freaking faggot decision to try to impress potential boyfriends.

W7 does not maintain "old Win95 desktop concept", it tries hard to break it. How is windows desktop "solid usability engineering decision"? It is just a start button that contradicts to desktop links (which originate from win3x); and that again contradicts to filemanager. That is not part of internet but makes internet stay separate behind browser app. This is garbage UI.

OSX has zero of "old Win95 desktop concept". I think gnome is the best version of OSX interface. Apple should throw away their UI and just take gnome instead.

The reason is windows desktop is same is that they collect money instead of applying it. Why bother changing when everyone is hooked up and paying? They can sqeek all they want, but windows UI is only good for launching 10-20 binary applications. An interface through the garbage piles.

You can break any stereotype in GPL and have your way. This is the reason for many WMs and DEs under opensource OS?es. They are different in approaches, toolkits and requirements.
Name me any WMs for windows that ain?t dead or deadend? I know only one - emerge desktop. But aha, "emerge desktop" seriously sounds like gentoo guy trying to pull his desktop in.

If you want feature full, you are served with KDE4 more than you can eat.

[crazycheese]

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

[devius]

There is a reason why Windows 7 (...)* maintain the old Win95 desktop concept. It is because it is a solid usability engineering decision

That explains why even MS is throwing that "solid engineering decision" down the drain with Win8...

Notes:
* Removed this part because it doesn't make any sense