Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu's Unity Desktop Comes To Fedora 17

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

  • bwat47
    replied
    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
    ok only ppa like 3rd party stuff, go ahead nobody can forbit some random people to build such crap and release it for any linux...

    When I read the headline I just thought, are they stupid, want redhat really support that? I tried a bit to switch to fedora and waiting till a bug I have will get fixed ( I filled a report ) then I would maybe migrate to it from ubuntu, not only because of unity it was only the last thing that gave me enough. I love gnome-shell, I dont get this gnome-fork, I find it retarded, and with this thing it stays the way I said it, its a ubuntu only project and canonical could not even make upstart a sucess (nobody wants now to migrate to it, all go for the better systemd).

    The point that mostly pissed me of most about unity is not the existence, it would not eben be that it was made the default in a kind of beta state, but to give at the beginning no support for gnome-shell and then they kept even packages in very old versions (nautilus totem...) because they were not able to port their "better" thing in time.

    so some of you shure will not agree with my feelings about unity, thats ok, I just dont see some big mistakes gnome devs did that would justify such kind of fork, but ok... like I said -> I <- dont agree to it, because of that (and other stuff, as example because redhat does more for free software more upstream commits...) I try to migrate to fedora, even I dont like redhat dir-structure and rpm format... most of the time you dont mess much with that stuff today anyway.

    so I am happy that redhat gives still a shit about that "thing".

    Sadly redhat fixes my bug not/very slow. I postet it several weeks ago and I got not even a reaction:

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798844

    not very happy about that reaction times... its nearly a month old my additional info and other people have that bug, and its nearly a half year old this bug... so very poor bug managment. hope that changes soon.

    1. Unity isn't a fork, its just an all new shell running on top of gnome 3.

    2. canonical created unity because they wanted full control over the direction of ubuntu's interface. Ubuntu tried to contribute ayatana stuff like indicators and notify-osd to upstream in the beginning, before unity and gnome-shell and unity were in development, but gnome wouldn't accept them. Canonical and gnome just had different visions for how the shell should work, so they went their own ways.
    Last edited by bwat47; 19 July 2012, 10:46 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • baffledmollusc
    replied
    Originally posted by RoboJ1M View Post
    A level headed Unity discussion?
    I came to watch the bun fight, where are all the Unity haters??
    Maybe all the rage exploded their heads.
    Me too. I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!

    Leave a comment:


  • blackiwid
    replied
    ok only ppa like 3rd party stuff, go ahead nobody can forbit some random people to build such crap and release it for any linux...

    When I read the headline I just thought, are they stupid, want redhat really support that? I tried a bit to switch to fedora and waiting till a bug I have will get fixed ( I filled a report ) then I would maybe migrate to it from ubuntu, not only because of unity it was only the last thing that gave me enough. I love gnome-shell, I dont get this gnome-fork, I find it retarded, and with this thing it stays the way I said it, its a ubuntu only project and canonical could not even make upstart a sucess (nobody wants now to migrate to it, all go for the better systemd).

    The point that mostly pissed me of most about unity is not the existence, it would not eben be that it was made the default in a kind of beta state, but to give at the beginning no support for gnome-shell and then they kept even packages in very old versions (nautilus totem...) because they were not able to port their "better" thing in time.

    so some of you shure will not agree with my feelings about unity, thats ok, I just dont see some big mistakes gnome devs did that would justify such kind of fork, but ok... like I said -> I <- dont agree to it, because of that (and other stuff, as example because redhat does more for free software more upstream commits...) I try to migrate to fedora, even I dont like redhat dir-structure and rpm format... most of the time you dont mess much with that stuff today anyway.

    so I am happy that redhat gives still a shit about that "thing".

    Sadly redhat fixes my bug not/very slow. I postet it several weeks ago and I got not even a reaction:

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798844

    not very happy about that reaction times... its nearly a month old my additional info and other people have that bug, and its nearly a half year old this bug... so very poor bug managment. hope that changes soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • GreatEmerald
    replied
    Originally posted by RoboJ1M View Post
    A level headed Unity discussion?
    I came to watch the bun fight, where are all the Unity haters??
    Maybe all the rage exploded their heads.
    We're here, lurking in the shadows.

    Well, actually, I think most of us didn't even bother looking over the article as it's really kind of irrelevant.

    Leave a comment:


  • bwat47
    replied
    Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
    ORLY? What do you not like about gnome3 that unity does better?
    Unity does a few things better:

    The dash's search seems more powerful, due to lenses. For example I love being able to open the music lense, type an album name and hit enter and automatically starts playing the whole album in rhythmbox I've been finding the music and video lenses very useful.

    More efficient use of vertical screenspace

    The launcher has features that gnome-shell doesn't have, like integrated progressbars, and better quicklist support.

    Super key + number shortcuts for launching apps. Unity is far more efficient for launching multiple apps in quick succession than gnome-shell is.. In gnome-shell unless you install a seperate launcher, you have to keep opening the overlay, in unity if I want to quickly launch my 3 favorite apps its just meta + 1-2-3 BAM!

    Messaging integration that isn't specific to empathy, pidgin has indicator support out of the box, on par with unity's empathy integration. In gnome-shell there's extensions for pidgin integration but they make my shell crash and seem buggy .

    Also, while gnome-shell's slick empathy integration and notifications are nice, as a whole I find unity and notify-osd's notifications to be superior. In gnome I often "miss" notifications if I wasn't at my computer at the time, in unity the messaging indicator turns blue and stays blue until I've checked the notification, and notify-osd is a little bit less intrusive IMO.

    Gnome-shell does certain things better of course, but I think unity is maturing into a great desktop and I now prefer it to gnome-shell. It all comes down to personal taste, both unity and gnome-shell are nice desktops.
    Last edited by bwat47; 19 July 2012, 03:51 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MonkeyPaw
    replied
    Originally posted by ninez View Post
    Ah, i see. I had thought global menus just happened to disabled - as i've seen Ubuntu users with global menu disabled / a guide on some ubuntu site on how to disable it.
    Better yet, remove autohide and you get a more OSX-like experience instead:

    http://www.webupd8.org/2012/07/disab...behaviour.html


    As for odd things in operating systems, why do some make it so hard to figure out how to reboot or shut down? Windows 8 buried it, and for the life of me I never even found it on Fedora when using a live CD. I just held the power button down.

    Leave a comment:


  • chenxiaolong
    replied
    Originally posted by Kasumi_Ninja View Post
    This doesn't work in the KDE version of Fedora, I get lots of unmet depencies.
    Could you post the entire output of yum when doing that?

    Leave a comment:


  • Kasumi_Ninja
    replied
    Originally posted by chenxiaolong View Post
    You will need to run "yum update". Note: This will replace some system packages. That should pull in gnome-session-ubuntu, which contains the Ubuntu session.
    This doesn't work in the KDE version of Fedora, I get lots of unmet depencies.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hamish Wilson
    replied
    Originally posted by fuzz View Post
    I like Gnome 3 more than I like Unity or KDE. XFCE is pretty cool though and is my 2nd favorite.

    Woo-hoo, personal tastes! Because we forget linux is about choices.
    Yes, indeed.

    Leave a comment:


  • chenxiaolong
    replied
    Originally posted by Kasumi_Ninja View Post
    I tried installing unity with 'yum install unity' this didn't work. I can't select it in gdm. Anyone knows how to install it?
    You will need to run "yum update". Note: This will replace some system packages. That should pull in gnome-session-ubuntu, which contains the Ubuntu session.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X