Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1188 mails)

[Roger Luedecke <roger.luedecke@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 23:39 -1000, kanenas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: 
> On Friday 13 January 2012 11:32:58 am Roger Luedecke wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 16:14 -0500, Robert Schweikert wrote:
> > > On 01/13/2012 03:54 PM, Roger Luedecke wrote:
> > > >  From my understanding GTK3 is fine. The hated thing in Gnome 3 is the
> > > > GnomeSHell.GTK 2 and 3 are compatible from what I understand. So, why
> > > > aren't we simply maintaining or porting the old desktop stuff instead
> > > > of using GNomeShell, as opposed to forks like MATE and Cinnamon?
> > >
> > > Different teams I suppose. The GNOME team wants to follow what upstream
> > > is doing and they do probably not have the bandwidth or the desire to
> > > maintain a "semi fork" with he GNOME 2 look. Plus there's always the
> > > fallback mode, so they say.
> > >
> > > Therefore whatever effort is undertaken to hold on to GNOME2 things will
> > > have to be outside the GNOME project and lead by a different team.
> > >
> > > My personal opinion is that there will not be a sufficient number of
> > > developers to form a viable upstream community, similar to the KDE3
> > > fork. This make maintenance within the openSUSE project extremely
> > > difficult.
> > >
> > > I switched to XFCE quite a while ago, before GNOME 3 was the default
> > > GNOME implementation and have been quite happy with it. XFCE upstream
> > > community is reasonably active and maintenance in the openSUSE project
> > > is in good shape.
> > >
> > > My $0.02
> > > Robert
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Robert Schweikert                           MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
> > > SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center                   LINUX
> > > Tech Lead
> > > rjschwei@xxxxxxxx
> > > rschweik@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > 781-464-8147
> >
> > Honestly, besides that I'm very much not fond of Gnome Shell there are
> > other concerns. For example, the insistence of needing 3D acceleration
> > will be bad for business desktop users who haven't needed such a thing,
> > and thus require massive upgrades to make Gnome work properly. Plus,
> > lets face it... even Grandma can use Gnome 2. The new paradigm isn't an
> > improvement in usability as anticipated. This concerns me further with
> > Enterprise users... demo this shit, and see how quickly Windows gets the
> > upper hand in Enterprise environments. As far as that goes, if we can
> > accept the issues of hardware acceleration then I would say Cinnamon
> > essentially has the right idea. Reinventing the wheel keeps things from
> > rolling. I also take issue with abandoning Compiz which is likely the
> > best compositing thingamajig on the market. Would it be that hard to
> > port the old style panels and such to GTK3?
>
> you are missing the point: kde4 and gnome3 are ms conspiracies....
> d.
Sometimes I wonder, lol. KDE4 is a good design... since its modular, it
doesn't remove control and insane configurability from the user... not
to mention it WILL run without compositing.

Gnome 3 on the other hand just pisses me off. And all the squawk about
it being a new paradigm is bullshit since you can replicate EVERYTHING
it does in concept simply by using screen edges with compiz, docky, and
the special Main Menu Novell put together for SuSE also has a nice big,
potentially full screen app launcher.

Quite frankly, its time for a revolt! Gnome users need to flat out
boycott Gnome 3 and support MATE, or at least Cinnamon.

In 12.1 KDE 4.7 was so damn glitchy and sluggish I finally just rolled
back to Gnome on 11.4. Honestly... now that I'm actually getting
acquainted with it, I'm falling in love with it and can't imagine why
such a well polished thing is going to be utterly f*&^$d off. Gnome was
about as close as we have gotten to the holy grail of desktop Linux, and
now its being twisted into some awkward, ugly, inversatile, monolithic
monstrosity.

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx