Now Playing Tracks

I remember a while ago a time that the gnome-screensaver package was amazing. A hundred screensavers that could be tweaked and brighten up any dreary desktop screen. The gnome-screensaver package was amazing!

But no more… GNOME removed all the controls from the screensaver. No controls means no ability to select screensavers, no ability to tweak the settings of the screensaver, no ability to control the screensaver. In fact, since Ubuntu 11.10, all it does now is make the screen go blank…

How sad it must be to have been a most amazing screensaver and to have fallen like this.

The Core of Development

In my earlier post Antidevelopment, I defined the word I coined in that article as “any change made to the user experience that is not beneficial and serves only to limit or restrict what the user wants to do, especially in the field of customization.”

I have been quite vocal about Ubuntu and GNOME3 spiraling into antidevelopment. Yet, as I am often criticized, it is not fair to say that no development at all is going on! Ubuntu continues developing their desktop Unity, and GNOME3 continues developing whatever that is (that most distros, including Debian, are rapidly abandoning for something else)

So when does development actually translate to antidevelopment?

Simply put, when the development ignores the core values that its users, testers, and developers have been asking for.

So many things that have been broken on the Ubuntu and GNOME3 desktop for so long, and yet no one revisits these problems to fix them. I continually ask Canonical and GNOME to revisit these problems and fix them, but there is no response, or a completely negative response indicating they are still completely detached from their user base. Slightly usable does not mean it’s good; if it’s not 100% then it should be fixed!

The only ones who seem to care the users who write countless patches, extensions, and unsupported programs to fix little irritations here and there.

Simply the fact that Ubuntu Tweak, the GNOME Tweak Tool, and MyUnity programs exist and are downloaded so heavily shows that the users do want the ability to tweak. But these are poor substitutes for tweaking a desktop. In many cases (like with mouse cursors) those programs are not able to makes changes system-wide, even though advanced tweaking of system properties shows that no breakage occurs when something is applied system-wide. There simply is no substitute for a developer who uses common sense, and listens to its user base.

In complete defiance of anyone who actually liked having a screensaver, GNOME completely destroyed the gnome-screensaver. No screensavers, no controls, just a blank screen. Blank screen, blank mind, all is GNOME - I think I’m going to coin that phrase.

Is This Development?

So many things are broken with current and future Unity and GNOME versions that it begs the question, “what has been developed?”

On GNOME’s side, the latest line of programs being axed to their core is Nautilus. First they destroyed menus by removing categories, and hiding Shutdown/Restart. Then they began axing menus and customization in a wide arc of programs. In the grand GNOME tradition of menu destruction, there are no text menus in Nautilus 3.6, just iconified buttons that somehow manage to do less than their text counterparts did in 3.4 and earlier versions.

The changes made to Nautilus 3.6 were so radical that Canonical decided to freeze Nautilus packages at 3.4 or even seek a new file browser, and Mint developers called it “a catastrophe”. It takes amazing amounts of antidevelopment to make something that no one wants to use!

Nautilus was a beautiful program that for several years grew almost organically from the desires and needs of its users. I feel sorry for Nautilus, and will mourn its passing.

An Interesting View of Development

At this time I would like to expound upon what development is. To do this, I am going to establish ground rules.

  1. Every successful desktop environment innovates for itself.
  2. Every successful desktop environment listens to its users, and makes solutions tailored to what its users want.
  3. Innovation usually starts at a core and expands outward from that core. 

This is what I feel primarily makes up successful development.

Despite the fact that #3 is listed last, it is possibly the most important because that is where GNOME and Unity have failed.

Innovation starts at a core. A weak core makes for a weak overall desktop environment. What kind of core have GNOME and Unity established for themselves?

GNOME’s core can be summed up this way: Make everything idiotically simple, and remove options and menus. Systematically they have removed menus, customization options, and preferences from numerous programs, despite outrage from both users and software companies.

Unity has a different core. Integration seems to be the common thread. When Unity was first premiered, it was designed to integrate user and programs in a new way. The Ubuntu Software Center was designed to integrate users and programs. Dash was designed to integrate users with their music, pictures, and programs. The Me menu was designed to integrate users with social networks. Ubuntu One was designed to integrate users with the cloud.

12.04 saw the integration of users with television with the release of Ubuntu TV.

In 12.10 sees the release of Unity 6.0 which has the Dash being designed to integrate users even more with their news (BBC, CNN, Yahoo, Google News, Yandex News, Google Reader, Reddit, NewsBlur), their mail (GMail, Yahoo! Mail, QQ Mail, Windows Live Mail, Mail RU), their social networks (Facebook, Twitter, Google+, VK.com, LinkedIn, Tumblr), their games (Cut the Rope, Angry Birds, Lord of Ultima, Command and Conquer: Tiberium Alliances), their office apps (Google Docs, and Google Calendar), their music (last.fm, libre.fm, Pandora, Grooveshark, Hulu, Rdio, YouTube, Ubuntu One Music), and more!

As you can see, GNOME and Unity have radically different cores. So you’re probably wondering why I bash them with equal intensity.

I realized why when I read the Linux Mint blog article. When discussing the core of its Cinnamon environment, it said: “The file manager isn’t just a file browser, it defines how the user interacts with filesystems, documents, and the visible desktop. It’s a core part of any desktop and it’s important it properly integrates with it… KDE built Dolphin as a central piece of KDE. Xfce and LXDE rely on Thunar and PCManFM… it’s probably only a matter of time before Unity gets its own file manager (patching/freezing Nautilus was the right decision but it’s only a good decision if it’s a temporary one, long term they’ll need to make their own file manager if they don’t want to chose between breaking Unity or Shell.”

Now, I realize why I bash Unity and GNOME equally. Both seem to have forgotten that the central core of an operating system, the one integral program that should not be forgotten, is the file browser.

Users don’t necessarily need to be integrated with the web, or have an interface so simple it borders on the idiotic. They need to be integrated with their files. That should be the core.

They chose style over substance, and it’s not making the distro better. How could it? This has been obvious for several releases now, everyone knows it, it’s no secret. Why do some people still use it even if it doesn’t serve them well? For the same reason others stick with Windows: “Better the devil you know…”
Explorers are not the rule, they’re the exception among humans.
llewton’s answer to the question, “Why are people content running a substandard system, instead of actually finding an OS that fills their every need?”

Debian Shifts Focus… to XFCE?

It’s no secret that I hate GNOME. What might surprise you is that I love the idea behind the GNOME3 desktop; it’s just the implementation that frustrates me. GNOME has managed to dumb down so much of their desktop and pen the user with so many frustrating limits that I would rather use a different environment than be aggravated with GNOME.

I could never get into Debian, because every ISO image people insisted were amazing, that I just had to try, ran GNOME3. This was perhaps the most limiting factor to my trying and liking Debian.

Imagine my shock when I read that GNOME is no longer the default desktop of Debian!? Now the default desktop is XFCE! They aren’t even using GDM as the default log-in manager anymore, swapping that out for LightDM.

Considering the fact that GNOME3 has practically been Debian’s flagship desktop since the beginning of GNOME3, I find it amazing that Debian has done this. The reasons for doing this are “complex and subjective” but it appears that Debian was looking for a desktop environment that would fit on a CD, something which GNOME cannot do.

I think they made a good choice. Now they have XFCE, which is a desktop environment designed for productivity, which loads and executes applications fast, while conserving system resources (a bunch of qualifiers I could never say about GNOME).

Perhaps I should try Debian again.

The Panthera Problem

(#debian-gnome @ irc.oftc.net)

So this is what GNOME developers worry about!

Apparently there’s a rogue developer named “panthera” who is hated by some of his fellow developers. He destabilizes Debian GNOME just before package freeze dates. There are technical issues with his code. He shuts down repositories just to annoy people. And he refuses to work with anyone. And despite being told about his deficiencies, he hasn’t improved; it’s actually gotten worse.

So, why hasn’t this apparent GNOME problem been fixed? The answer is included in the chat I copied.

GNOME is social club, so all the problems are argued on a social basis. There is no formal process for kicking out a rogue developer who causes problems felt by both developers and users.

However, this is not what disturbs me the most.

I stopped using GNOME a while ago. I was researching GNOME for a technical write-up, and I was trying to determine if GNOME had (like other Linux distros) an official help and support chatroom. It turns out there is. According to GNOME website this is the “Official Debian GNOME channel”

This is official? I recorded this disturbing chat in the OFFICIAL channel. This is an open channel, where users meet developers to ask questions and get support for GNOME.

Apparently, with GNOME being a social club and all, and there being no formal process for developers to complain or air their differences about each other, conversations like this take place regardless of whether there are users watching or needing help.

Anonymous

Anonymous asked:

From your experience, what have been the best Linux distros?

This is a very personal question, since Linux comes in so many environments, and I’ve tried only a fraction of them.

The best Linux distro for any user is the one that offers what the user is looking for… and perhaps more.

While I was thinking about this question, I made a checklist of the things I look for in distro. I think that the best Linux distros should…

  1. offer the vaunted security and stability that Linux is known for
  2. work right out of the install without needing to be tweaked
  3. but allow the user the most options to design and tweak their desktop, should they desire to do so.
  4. have excellent documentation
  5. provide help and support in multiple ways (real-time chat support, help desk forum, bug reporting, etc.)

Currently those 5 things are what i look for in a Linux distro.

GNOME3 and GNOME-Shell fails horribly on my checklist because of having limited options for tweaking, limited and out-of-date documentation, and terrible support. While most distros provide for live support through installing xchat (which provides the option to place the user into the distro’s support channel automatically), GNOME does not. This is apparently not even an option when using xchat-gnome (the GNOME Xchat client). I’m not even sure if they have a support channel! (Revision 7/4/12 - I realized that GNOME does have an IRC option, though it’s not easy to find. A Google search for “GNOME chat” doesn’t even help a user find the IRC channel on the first page of search results. I logged into the official and unofficial GNOME chatrooms and sat around idling. A lot of users logged in and expressed frustration with GNOME3 in the form of questions, but despite the 226+ users in the unofficial rooms, and the 64 users in the official chatroom, there wasn’t any help being offered. Questions were left completely unanswered.)

Ubuntu’s Unity fails my checklist because it is continuing to limit customization options, and has poor support. While Ubuntu does offer support through both Launchpad and IRC, the IRC channel is where I’ve seen some of the worst advice being offered users. Some of the most common pieces of advice on #ubuntu is to reformat the computer, or switch from using Ubuntu to using another distro. Although #ubuntu is a unofficial chatroom, this level of incompetence being displayed in a “help” chatroom makes me rank them as having poor support.

Many other GNOME3-based desktops (with the exception of Mint) are usually unofficial ports or hacks, and because of not being connected to official repositories, additionally suffer from being unable to upgrade.

I haven’t tried enough distros to make a claim for which one is the absolute best. My current pick from what I have used would be Kubuntu (KDE4). KDE is amazing! For those people who don’t particularly want to tweak their desktop, KDE works right out of the install with no tweaking needed. But everything is tweakable and changeable on KDE with minimal fuss!

Runners up on my list would be Xubuntu, and Mint (both MATE and Cinnamon).

Mint Cinnamon, by the way, is based on GNOME3. While they started with MGSE (Mint Gnome Shell Extensions) and were extension designers at the beginning, the reason they forked was because GNOME devs wouldn’t work with them. Mint is community-driven and Cinnamon is developed the same way Mint is. Mint realized that users want to customize and they’ve left many features adjustable. The theme changes from version to version are described in the release notes. Mint aims to make it as easy as possible for artists to update their themes and create new themes! They have an easily accessed theme repository and encourage developers and artists to join them on IRC at irc.spotchat.org #linuxmint-dev where we’re happy to help and chat about applets, themes, or cinnamon itself.

Mint may be GNOME3-based, but it is not GNOME3. This is why I give it a different rating than other GNOME3 based distros.

How to Fix Unity…

I just want to make it clear that the chat conversation I recorded in this Tumblr post happened in the official #ubuntu chatroom on FreeNode.

Since the mods seem to think that the best way to fix Unity is to use something else, I bring you this post…

This is how to fix Unity!

sudo apt-get remove adium-theme-ubuntu apg appmenu-gtk appmenu-gtk3 appmenu-qt at-spi2-core bamfdaemon banshee banshee-extension-soundmenu banshee-extension-ubuntuonemusicstore baobab binfmt-support bluez-gstreamer branding-ubuntu brasero brasero-cdrkit brasero-common checkbox checkbox-gtk cli-common compiz compiz-core compiz-gnome compiz-plugins-default compiz-plugins-main-default compizconfig-backend-gconf deja-dup duplicity dvd+rw-tools empathy empathy-common eog evolution-data-server evolution-data-server-common example-content gbrainy gedit gedit-common geoclue geoclue-ubuntu-geoip ginn gir1.2-atspi-2.0 gir1.2-gnomebluetooth-1.0 gir1.2-gtksource-3.0 gir1.2-indicate-0.6 gir1.2-peas-1.0 gir1.2-totem-1.0 gir1.2-totem-plparser-1.0 gir1.2-wnck-3.0 gnome-bluetooth gnome-control-center gnome-control-center-data gnome-desktop3-data gnome-disk-utility gnome-font-viewer gnome-icon-theme-symbolic gnome-media gnome-nettool gnome-online-accounts gnome-orca gnome-power-manager gnome-screensaver gnome-screenshot gnome-search-tool gnome-session gnome-session-bin gnome-session-canberra gnome-session-common gnome-settings-daemon gnome-system-log gnome-system-monitor gnome-terminal gnome-terminal-data gnome-user-share gnome-utils-common growisofs gstreamer0.10-gconf gvfs-backends gwibber gwibber-service gwibber-service-facebook gwibber-service-identica gwibber-service-twitter hwdata ibus-gtk3 indicator-appmenu indicator-datetime indicator-power indicator-session intel-gpu-tools libappindicator0.1-cil libarchive1 libatk-adaptor libatspi2.0-0 libaudio2 libbamf0 libbamf3-0 libboost-serialization1.46.1 libbrasero-media3-1 libcamel-1.2-29 libcanberra-pulse libcdio-cdda0 libcdio-paranoia0 libcdio10 libcompizconfig0 libdbus-glib1.0-cil libdbus1.0-cil libdbusmenu-qt2 libdconf-dbus-1-0 libdconf-qt0 libdconf0 libdecoration0 libebackend-1.2-1 libebook1.2-12 libecal1.2-10 libedata-book-1.2-11 libedata-cal-1.2-13 libedataserver1.2-15 libedataserverui-3.0-1 libexempi3 libfolks-telepathy25 libfolks25 libgail-3-common libgail-common libgconf2.0-cil libgdata-common libgdata1.7-cil libgdata13 libgdiplus libgdu-gtk0 libgeoclue0 libgexiv2-0 libgif4 libgkeyfile1.0-cil libglew1.5 libglewmx1.5 libglib2.0-bin libglib2.0-cil libglib2.0-data libgmime-2.4-2 libgmime2.4-cil libgnome-control-center1 libgnome-desktop-3-2 libgnome-media-profiles-3.0-0 libgnome-menu2 libgnome2-common libgnomekbd-common libgnomekbd7 libgoa-1.0-0 libgpgme11 libgpod-common libgpod4 libgtk-sharp-beans-cil libgtk2.0-cil libgtkmm-3.0-1 libgtksourceview-3.0-0 libgtksourceview-3.0-common libgtkspell3-0 libgudev1.0-cil libgweather-3-0 libgweather-common libgwibber-gtk2 libgwibber2 libhyphen0 libidl0 liblaunchpad-integration1.0-cil liblircclient0 liblouis-data liblouis2 libmetacity-private0 libmhash2 libmission-control-plugins0 libmono-addins-gui0.2-cil libmono-addins0.2-cil libmono-cairo4.0-cil libmono-corlib4.0-cil libmono-csharp4.0-cil libmono-i18n-west4.0-cil libmono-i18n4.0-cil libmono-posix4.0-cil libmono-security4.0-cil libmono-sharpzip4.84-cil libmono-system-configuration4.0-cil libmono-system-core4.0-cil libmono-system-drawing4.0-cil libmono-system-security4.0-cil libmono-system-xml4.0-cil libmono-system4.0-cil libmono-zeroconf1.0-cil libmtp-common libmtp-runtime libmtp9 libmysqlclient16 libmythes-1.2-0 libneon27-gnutls libnotify0.4-cil libnux-1.0-0 libnux-1.0-common liboauth0 liborbit2 liboverlay-scrollbar-0.2-0 liboverlay-scrollbar3-0.2-0 libpeas-1.0-0 libpeas-common libprotobuf7 libprotoc7 libpth20 libqt4-dbus libqt4-declarative libqt4-network libqt4-opengl libqt4-script libqt4-sql libqt4-sql-mysql libqt4-svg libqt4-xml libqt4-xmlpatterns libqtbamf1 libqtcore4 libqtdee2 libqtgconf1 libqtgui4 libquvi0 libraptor2-0 librasqal3 librdf0 libreoffice-base-core libreoffice-calc libreoffice-common libreoffice-core libreoffice-draw libreoffice-emailmerge libreoffice-gnome libreoffice-gtk libreoffice-help-en-us libreoffice-impress libreoffice-math libreoffice-style-human libreoffice-writer librest-0.7-0 librsync1 libsdl1.2debian libsdl1.2debian-pulseaudio libstlport4.6ldbl libsyncdaemon-1.0-1 libtaglib2.0-cil libtelepathy-farsight0 libtelepathy-logger2 libtextcat-data libtextcat0 libtotem-plparser17 libtotem0 libubuntuone-1.0-1 libubuntuone1.0-cil libunique-3.0-0 libunity-2d-private0 libunity-core-4.0-4 libunity-misc4 libwmf0.2-7-gtk libwnck-3-0 libwnck-3-common libyajl1 libzeitgeist-1.0-1 light-themes media-player-info metacity metacity-common mono-4.0-gac mono-gac mono-runtime mousetweaks mysql-common nautilus nautilus-sendto nautilus-sendto-empathy nautilus-share notify-osd notify-osd-icons nux-tools obexd-client overlay-scrollbar plymouth-theme-ubuntu-logo protobuf-compiler pulseaudio-module-bluetooth pulseaudio-module-gconf python-brlapi python-configglue python-dateutil python-egenix-mxdatetime python-egenix-mxtools python-farsight python-indicate python-libproxy python-louis python-papyon python-protobuf python-pyatspi2 python-pyinotify python-speechd python-support python-telepathy python-twisted-names python-ubuntuone-client python-ubuntuone-control-panel python-ubuntuone-storageprotocol python-uno python-wnck qdbus qt-at-spi seahorse shotwell sni-qt ssh-askpass-gnome telepathy-butterfly telepathy-gabble telepathy-haze telepathy-idle telepathy-indicator telepathy-logger telepathy-mission-control-5 telepathy-salut thunderbird-gnome-support tomboy totem totem-common totem-mozilla totem-plugins ubuntu-artwork ubuntu-desktop ubuntu-docs ubuntu-mono ubuntu-sounds ubuntu-system-service ubuntu-wallpapers ubuntuone-client ubuntuone-client-gnome ubuntuone-control-panel ubuntuone-control-panel-gtk ubuntuone-couch ubuntuone-installer unity unity-2d unity-2d-launcher unity-2d-panel unity-2d-places unity-2d-spread unity-asset-pool unity-common unity-lens-applications unity-lens-files unity-lens-music unity-scope-musicstores unity-services uno-libs3 ure vino whois wodim xdiagnose xfonts-mathml zeitgeist zeitgeist-datahub zeitgeist-extension-fts

AND…

sudo apt-get install xfce4-session

In the words of one of the moderators in the #ubuntu chatroom… “it’s a simple solution.”

Linux Mint 13 Maya Cinnamon Review

Very quick boot! Using a USB pendrive, the boot time was maybe 30 seconds to boot the entire desktop. Unlike other live-boot distros, this one did not present me with a menu to choose between previewing and installing. It simply boots into the Live Preview, and there are options from there to begin installing if you wish.

I thought this was a very good way to begin my Mint experience. On Ubuntu the live-boot always boots to an option screen where you select whether to Preview or Install. But booting directly into Live Mode instead of an option screen cuts about 20-30 seconds off the initial boot time. Nice job Mint!

To begin with, I researched Cinnamon on the Linux mint website. It says the following regarding Cinnamon: “Cinnamon was born for the same reasons as MATE. Gnome 2 was one of the core components of Linux Mint, and Gnome 3 lacked the features and design of a suitable alternative. Linux Mint started by developing the extra features it needed on top of Gnome 3 and eventually started to develop its own environment called Cinnamon.”

I can completely understand why GNOME3 was unsuitable as a replacement (and if you don’t understand what I’m referring to, read some of the earlier posts I’ve made in this blog)… but I digress… my apologies. This is not time to bash GNOME3; it’s time to review Cinnamon.

What I took from that explanation on the Mint website is this. Cinnamon is NOT GNOME3. It’s an entirely different environment, similar to GNOME3, but being developed along different lines. So, while GNOME3 spirals off into antidevelopment, Linux Mint is developing Cinnamon to be user-friendly, theme-friendly, and customizable (all features which rank very high with me).

How customizable is it? Well, admittedly, it took me about 2 minutes to figure out how to customize the bottom toolbar (but that’s very quick considering I did not read or view any tutorials in advance). Right-clicking on the bottom toolbar does nothing (this is not MATE). Rather there’s a little arrow in the tollbar that looks like ^. Once you click on the ^ a menu pops up that allows you to access the Panel Edit mode so you can drag things around on the panel and add/remove applets.

You can also click on the main menu and find “Cinnamon Settings”. From there you can customize extensively! If you want a desktop similar in form to GNOME2, you can place two dock-bars on the screen, or move the current menubar around the screen. Mint ships with 20 beautiful themes that can be exchanged, and the Mint Theme Selector has a link inside it so you can download more themes and apply them immediately.

Cinnamon Settings also has a link so you can add extensions to your desktop and customize further. I was initially impressed that the installed extension list on Cinnamon was EMPTY! Unlike GNOME3, where everything you want to customize must be customized with an extension, Cinnamon comes preloaded and predesigned with all the tweaks as defaults… so there are very few things needed to extend further to make the desktop a pleasant user experience.

I am not disappointed by this distro in any way! Themes, check! Extensions, check! User-friendly, check! Customize, check! Mint 13 Maya Cinnamon is deserving of the highest rating I’ve ever given a Linux distro. 10 / 10!! Way to go Linux Mint!!

Antidevelopment

When I asked several people why they liked GNOME3 or GNOME-Shell, the most common answer was “the extensions system that allows you to customize your desktop.” GNOME3 simply wouldn’t be popular without the extensions system that allows developers to write and publish desktop extensions.

Customization is at the heart of every Linux desktop. A long time ago, when GNOME2.0 was the standard, customization was openly allowed on Linux systems, and everyone used that freedom in different ways. Everyone tweaked their desktop differently, and made it feel like $HOME in different ways.

But recently there have been changes in two major Linux desktops that seek to limit customization and development. I’m going to call it what it is… if it seeks to limit development, it’s antidevelopment!

Antidevelopment is any change made to the user experience that is not beneficial and serves only to limit or restrict what the user wants to do, especially in the field of customization.

I read an interesting post the other day from deviantART user half-left. He recently had a falling out with GNOME3 because of the same antidevelopment I’ve seen in GNOME3 and Ubuntu Unity.

half-left journaled it this way: “Apparently, GNOME upstream thinks their users don’t customize their desktop… because they are so detached from their user base.”

I would extend this to include both GNOME and Ubuntu Unity. GNOME3 and Ubuntu Unity seems to be completely detached from their user base. Why are they so detached from their users?

The GNOME team has made such puzzling changes in the past year that it is clear that they aren’t connected in any way, shape, or form to their users.

Mouse cursors? - You can’t change them and expect the change to stick. When I filed a bug about the problem with mouse cursors, I was told “Don’t change the mouse cursor. DMZ-White is good enough for every user. Problem solved.” That’s the solution! Don’t change anything; just stick with default… and there’s no problem.

Changing the mouse cursor can be more important than just the desire to tweak a new theme. What about users who have trouble seeing the DMZ-White cursor and need to change to a larger cursor? This could be considered a bug in Accessibility. Because mouse cursor changes have been ignored and largely removed by GNOME3 and Unity for the last 2 years, I claim that this is antidevelopment!

Screensaver? - What screensaver? Oh, the GNOME screensaver? There is no screensaver, anymore. For many years the GNOME screensaver was frustrating because it had no user controls to set screensaver properties. Now… all it does is blank the screen. There are no controls or screensavers left in the screensaver package! GNOME has apparently decided that its users don’t like using screensavers so they took all the controls out! This is antidevelopment!

Themes? - What themes? There are 5 themes provided in Ubuntu, and only 1 theme provided in GNOME. Only recently did Unity add the ability to change between the 5 themes that came installed on it. But no ways have been provided in either Unity or GNOME to import user themes. This is antidevelopment!

Extensions? - Ubuntu Unity does not support extensions at all, period!

GNOME3 maintains the veneer of supporting extensions, but once you start digging you realize the truth… GNOME3 extensions are barely supported at present. Many extensions only work with older versions of GNOME3. My favorite piece of evidence that GNOME isn’t supporting extensions is this: There is a website which explains how a user can make and submit an extension to GNOME, but it’s completely out of date! It explains how to make extensions for GNOME 3.0 and there’s a link to how to update the extension to 3.2… but, we aren’t using 3.2 any more! GNOME is at 3.4! And there is no documentation at present on how to update extensions to be compatible with the current version. Which means, every time GNOME updates, ALL the extensions break! This is antidevelopment!

One user explained the frustration this way to me on IRC: “I get the feeling that the so called gnome-developers do things in ‘their perspective’ rather than the ‘Gnome users’. The most important problem I see is that many of the other “modern” desktop environments are forks of GNOME…”

Another themer said: “…they even want to delete the applications categories selection. Pretty soon there will be nothing left in GNOME3 to theme.”

When you are too stuck up to listen to your users who are asking for the ability to customize their desktops, and you are actively developing the desktop in ways to limit the user experience… you are stuck in antidevelopment.

When it comes to changing themes and cursors… you can do more with Microsoft Windows than you can with GNOME3.

Microsoft listens to its users. Sometimes changes don’t come for years, but at least they listen. The same can’t be said for Ubuntu or GNOME3 though. They are currently stuck in antidevelopment.

Ubuntu-GS Remix 12.04 Review

In my quest for an operating system I can tolerate, I turned my attention back to GNOME Shell. There has to be an Ubuntu OS that uses GNOME3, and that works correctly!

To begin, let me explain all the issues I’ve had running GNOME3 in Ubuntu. When I first booted 12.04, I remembered learning that GNOME3.4 had just been released, however the package included in the Ubuntu repositories was considered incomplete and unsafe/unstable. It was included in the repositories because it was the latest GNOME3 image available before the 12.04 LTS package freeze.

I looked on ubuntuupdates.org and it said there were extra repositories (ppa:ricotz/testing and ppa:gnome3-team/gnome3) you could add to get the latest GNOME3 images. I added those and proceeded to log in and try to customize my GNOME3 experience.
My first issue with GNOME3.4 was that none of the extensions I had grown accustomed to using worked! I could install them, and they showed up as being installed… but the modifications they were supposed to make never appeared! I tried restarting the shell and the computer many times, but with no luck. I later discovered that this was not a problem unique to me. Many people had the same problem, but no one seemed to be able to provide a satisfactory answer as to why GNOME3.4 on Ubuntu isn’t 100% stable. Some people claimed that having Compiz on the system conflicted with Mutter. Some claimed that Unity modifications made GNOME3 unstable.
Whatever the reason, the fact was that my unfortunate first preview of GNOME3 was of it crashing.
Last night, however, I turned my attention back to GNOME3. I downloaded a new distro called Ubuntu-GS Remix. As it says, it’s a remix distro. The designers of this distro started with Ubuntu 12.04 and proceeded to remove everything Unity from Ubuntu, leaving only GNOME Shell behind.
My hope was that this would finally give me a good taste of GNOME3.4!
I tested it first from a USB-key. I booted into Live Mode and began installing it to the hard drive from there. While it was installing, I had the initial worry that extensions were going to have problems. So (while installing in Live Mode) I opened Firefox and went to extensions.gnome.org
I checked the first page of extensions, installing them to the Live Preview to see if they would work correctly. They did! All of them worked!!
So, finally finished installing…
My impressions on Ubuntu-GS?
It’s amazing how few programs show up in the Applications menu! I hadn’t realized before how many programs are Unity dependant, or install Unity elements as dependants. All of those are gone. The main Applications menu seems a little empty.
The Overlay Scrollbars are also gone. This was a Unity invention, and they aren’t included with standard GNOME3 distros, and they aren’t included with Ubuntu-GS. It’s nice! I didn’t realize how much I had missed the old scrollbars.
For those of you who hadn’t realized it, GNOME3 doesn’t use indicators either. Indicators are a Unity thing. There is a notification bar on the bottom of the GNOME3 window that can share some information, but there are no indicators in GNOME3.
Also not included in this remix are the Unity-inspired globalmenu that every program had to conform to. I really didn’t like globalmenu in the first place. I found it annoying. All globalmenu did was eliminate the menubar in every program and hide it all in the top window bar.
I had expected the gnome-tweak-tool to be installed by default on this remix, but it wasn’t. I found this odd, since to tweak GNOME3 settings, you need the gnome-tweak-tool. In the case of enabling/disabling GNOME3 extensions this is especially apparent since there is no native GNOME3 interface to tweak extensions or install themes.
gnome-tweak-tool was however in the repository that Ubuntu-GS uses. I installed it. It appeared to be an older version of the gnome-tweak-tool (the version we used to use in GNOME3.1-3.2 that had a theme selector but didn’t have the button to install themes). I thought this was odd but I went with it.
The gnome-tweak-tool worked fine until I started installing extensions from extensions.gnome.org. Then, for some reason, it wouldn’t open (couldn’t figure out why)! I tried opening it from the Terminal. Apport opened instead, and after analyzing the crash, it clearly said in the report, “You are using packages that are out-of-date. It is reccomended that you update before submitting an bug report”.
I knew that gnome-tweak-tool was out-of-date but there was no up-to-date version in the Ubuntu-GS repository. I downloaded the .deb package of the gnome-tweak-tool from the Ricotz repository. I didn’t want to enable the entire repository on chance that it might break Ubuntu-GS, but I needed a working copy of the gnome-tweak-tool and the Ricotz repository has the only current version. After I updated the gnome-tweak-tool, it worked fine!
All the extensions that I installed online work fine, and so do the extensions I added from the gnome3team PPA. The extensions that I installed from extensions.gnome.org worked perfectly without my needing to restart the shell. Oddly though, the extensions from the gnome3team PPA did not work or even show up in the gnome-tweak-tool menus until I had restarted the shell (then showed up and they worked perfectly).
Are there downsides to using Ubuntu-GS? There is perhaps one negative… but I knew about it in advance from reading the release notes on the Ubuntu-GS site.
This is an unofficial remix. Despite the fact that it makes GNOME3.4 absolutely shine, this is a negative. What this means that upgrading to a newer distribution release is impossible without doing a full install. This can’t be fixed as long as this remix is unofficial, because the distribution upgrade process requires having installed one of the desktop metapackages from the official Ubuntu repositories.
So, this means that theoretically I should be okay using Ubuntu-GS until the next LTS comes out (14.04), but considering how the GNOME3 repositories get continuous updates some programs might get a little weird by 12.10. But in order to fix it, you’ll have to wait for the next Ubuntu-GS remix to be released and reformat to update.
Everything Unity is gone. Everything GNOME3 is here…
It feels good! My rating of Ubuntu-GS is 8 out of 10.

Pinguy 12.04 Beta Review

Saw this on webupd8 the other day. Pinguy OS 12.04 beta, based on Ubuntu 12.04, is now available for download.

Unlike the previous 11.10 release which never reached a stable state (because Pinguy didn’t consider GNOME Shell 3.2 stable), Pinguy OS 12.04 will have a stable release.

The latest Pinguy OS 12.04 LTS beta uses GNOME Shell 3.4.1 as the default desktop environment with quite a few extensions installed by default, such as: Weather Indicator, Cardapio Menu, Classic Systray, Native Window Placement, Workspace Indicator, GPaste, User Theme, System Monitor, Media Player Indicator, and many more.
Like in the previous release, Pinguy OS 12.04 beta uses Cardapio, a cool, highly customizable application menu as the default menu, replacing the GNOME Shell Activities Overview. You can, however, disable Cardapio and re-enable the Activities Overview and Dash, by using GNOME Tweak Tool which is installed by default.

So I installed it to a USB drive and tested it.
My impressions?

When I first loaded Pinguy up, my immediate thought was that the desktop was cluttered. Many Linux distros take great care to not overly clutter the desktop with icons and toolbars, but apparently that’s not the case with Pinguy. Now, most Live-CD’s place an icon on the desktop to “Install the OS”, so I’ll discount that one being there. But in addition to that one icon, there was also an icon for Examples, Language Support and Additional Drivers. These icons on most distros don’t appear on the desktop, but are usually tucked away in some menu somewhere in case you need them. With the desktop already packed with TWO Docky bars, the extra icons on the Desktop make it seem very cluttered.

Pinguy comes loaded with a bunch of extensions which can be enabled or disabled using the gnome-tweak-tool. Most of them seem to work, but there are a few that will not enable due to unmet shell dependencies.

While the Hot Corner was disabled, I discovered it is still possible to access the GNOME3 Dash by hitting the Super-key. Then all the open windows are spread, and you can access the GNOME3 Dash menu from there.

I think it’s interesting that Pinguy decided to use GNOME Shell 3.4 to develop their desktop on, as they’ve taken great steps to make it look as un-GNOME3 as possible. From disabling the Topleft Hot Corner, to using Cardapio in place of the Dash, to using a double Docky setup in place of the GNOME3 dock, this distro has the feel of GNOME3 without some of the immediately obvious benefits of GNOME3. I suppose the reasoning was that is would be more stable based on GNOME3 than on Unity.

I encountered one serious issue though. When I went to take a screenshot of the OS, I discovered that the OS doesn’t respond to a press of the PrintScreen button. So I went hunting for a screenshot program. One program, called Shutter, comes installed with Pinguy. However, every time I went to make a screenshot, CPU and RAM usage climbed to the point where the system froze and I had to hard-shutdown by holding down the Power button.
Final impressions?
I really like GNOME3. PinGuy was nice, but it took away some of the best features of GNOME3 that I liked. In the end, I can’t help but think of PinGuy as another GNOME3 spinoff.
It seems stable enough to use and enjoy as a desktop solution.
For that reason, I’ll give Pinguy 12.04 a rating of 7 out of 10.

Hybryde Evolution 12.04 Review

Here’s an interesting distro! Hybryde Evolution v1, based on Ubuntu 12.04, comes with nine different desktop environments by default. These include KDE, GNOME 3, GNOME Classic, Unity, Elightenment 17, LXDE, XFCE, Openbox, and FVWM. The system smartly and fluidly transfers over open windows and applications to the new Desktop.

Hybryde is an Ubuntu-based live boot DVD which, according to the Google-translated project home page (which is in French), “is a tool to discover and use a multitude of desktop environments and without disconnection.”

The boot process boots you into the Hy-menu system dashboard. A small dock gives you a terminal, home folder, and the Hybryde menu that expands when clicked. From here you can select one of nine different desktop environments: KDE, GNOME3 Fallback, Gnome3 Shell, Unity, Enlightenment 17, OpenBox, FVWM, XFCE, and LXDE
…as well as a full menu of Linux applications. You also can continue to work in the Hybryde dashboard environment.

The Hy-menu also has four options for window managers:
Metacity, the default for Gnome3 Fallback
Mutter, the default for Gnome3
Compiz, compositing window manager for X, and the default for Hybryde (although I noticed a slight speed increase when I ran Hybryde in Mutter instead of Compiz)
and Kwin, the window manager for KDE

From the Hybryde desktop environment you will also find the full suite of Linux applications, and you can run any of these from the Hybryde desktop, or switch desktop flavors and run them in another desktop! The choices are virtually endless…

First impressions of Hybryde. It sounds like a distro put together by a team who have commitment issues. They couldn’t commit to a single desktop, so they committed to them all! As it turns out, this first impression wasn’t that far off.

The basic .iso image is HUGE compared to other distros, but this would largely be because it has so many desktop versions (with all their ancillary programs) on it. Other distros with a single fixed desktop idea can usually fit on a CD; Hybryde takes either a DVD or USB flashdrive with it’s 1.6GB image.

I experimented with Hybryde for about 2 hours.
The startup screen for Hybryde is very pretty! The Hybryde logo rotates in place, and the Hybryde desktop loads shortly thereafter.
My only critique on the startup screen is this: The rotating logo is the only moving element on the startup screen. There are no loading bars (like in Ubuntu), or dotted lines (like with XFCE). So when the logo stopped rotating and just sat there, I was momentarily scared that it was frozen. It would be nice to see a loading bar on this screen, or just keep the logo rotating while the distro is loading.

First major issue was language. The French developers of Hybryde likely didn’t think this was an issue, but the distro only comes in French. It took me about 5 minutes to figure out enough French to find System Settings, and another 5 minutes to figure out where the Language Selector was… all while I am in an unfamiliar distro! Finally got the language and locale switched over to English (US).

From there, my experience with this distro notably improved.
Distrowatch describes Hybryde’s most fascinating element this way: “All open applications are carried to any of the available desktops. The system offers an interesting way to work fluidly in a multi-desktop environment.”
I decided to test this. I opened a couple applications (gedit, gnome-terminal, and ksudoku) on the Hybryde Desktop. Then I transistioned to GNOME 3. The desktop blinked and suddenly I was in a new desktop! There’s a small back-arrow icon located on the right-edge of the screen that you can use to go back to the Hybryde Desktop at any time. All the applications I had opened stayed open, though ksudoku had a few issues at first.
I clicked back and tried other desktops. Not needing to log out to do this made the experience very nice.
My only critique on the multi-desktop environment is this: You must go back to the Hybryde Desktop every time if you want to switch to another desktop flavor. It would be nice if the Hybryde menu could be accessed from any environment, allowing you to switch flavors without having to return to the Hybryde environment first.
Most applications work great when launched from a specific flavor desktop, but there are occasionally issues with application crashing when you switch flavors. LibreOffice was by far the most cantankerous program. It did not like being switched between flavors, but leave it one flavor (any flavor) and it was fine!
Just about all the programs get a little obnoxious if you switch environments multiple times while they are open, but it was very rare that they would crash.
Shutdown is fast; 5 seconds or less, and the computer is off

Hybryde is a neat distro. Switching between desktops quickly and with minimal fuss allows the user to experiment with desktop flavors and find the one that’s right for them. But I don’t see this becoming my main Linux distribution, nor do I think it will capture too many other hearts and minds. It’s great for experimenting but not keeping!

Back to the Shell… Again

At the outset, I feel I should explain the title. I am using GNOME-Shell 3.4 again, having shucked Unity in favor of it.

But… but… you say. Didn’t you say that Unity was amazing? I did. And I don’t think I’m going to go back on anything I said in my previous posts. Remember, I won’t use a UI if I don’t like it. And I chose to use Unity for the past several weeks, and that means I liked it.

Ubuntu 12.04 has been described as the best release of Ubuntu yet, and I don’t fault that. Most of the hurrah’s Ubuntu has gotten on this release are for the improvements to Unity, the addition of HUD, and the many other minor fixes and tweaks along the way.

It’s been 2 years since the fall of GNOME 2. GNOME 2 had lots of minor bugs, but instead of fixing them, GNOME developers decided to scrap the whole project and move into GNOME 3 (a project which had been developed for 6-7 years and which had it’s own unique bugs).

For whatever reason, Ubuntu decided to not run with popular opinion, and quickly cobbled together it’s own GUI, which they called Unity. Unlike GNOME3 which had almost half a decade of slow developments under it’s belt at that point, Unity was kind of a flash project. It had bugs, some of them serious. And it would take entire distribution cycles for some of those bugs to be removed or even addressed.

And, looking back at the events which led to Linux User Interface Battle (Unity vs GNOME3 Shell), I find it almost ironic the bugs that have been tolerated on both sides all this time, because other problems are considered bigger.

And it’s still ironic what both of those UI’s CAN’T do correctly.

For example, both GNOME 3 and Unity have issues with mouse cursors. In case you hadn’t realized it yet, there are only 5 cursor themes installed on Unity (and only one of them works 100%).

So let’s say you download a mouse cursor theme and install it to the correct location on your drive. Remember GNOME 2 where you could bring up Appearance properties and change the pointer and preview it immediately? That is history… Now, in order to change your cursor theme you have to be a Linux wizard! First, to change your mouse cursor theme, you have to install gnome-tweak-tool and change the theme there. But that doesn’t work completely (it might only change the cursor for 40% of the programs you use, or for none at all). So then, you have to open the Terminal and type “sudo update-alternative —config x-cursor-theme” and select the x-cursor-theme you just opted to use in gnome-tweak-tool again to make it a systemwide change! But that still doesn’t work completely… Finally, you have to Alt-F2 and type “compiz —replace” and (theoretically) your mouse cursor should change after all that. But usually, one more step is required. You must restart your computer to make the change stick everywhere.

How retarded is that?

Another thing Unity can’t do is themes! You can’t theme Unity AT ALL! It is what it is. The only things you can tweak on Unity are whether the dock hides or not, and the size of the icons in the dock. And since Intellihide was removed as an option recently, hiding the Unity dock sometimes causes more problems than you bargained for (I believe the “My dock disappeared and won’t come back” bug is classified as a low-priority bug; the solution suggested is “Don’t hide it”)

So as long as the white cursor set works, and the dock is visible, everyone is happy. Mouse cursors are not an extremely high priority. Icons and window themes are not an extremely high priority. At least, not in comparison with the hundreds of other bugs that plague Unity and GNOME 3.

But it’s these minor inconveniences that really tweak some people off!

Which leads to my initial statement. I have decided to start using GNOME Shell again. You’re probably wondering why.

Here’s the thing, when you dig into one particular operating system enough, you’ll eventually find all it’s flaws. And I still have some issues with Unity. Ironically, changing the mouse cursors is a problem shared by GNOME-Shell, so I found no immediate resolution there, but when I went to check out GNOME-Shell it captivated me faster than Unity did… so I stayed.

In parting, I will admit there were a few things I truly liked about Unity. And there were some things I didn’t realize could be improved about Unity until I looked at GNOME Shell

The Ubuntu Software Center. I rarely used it since I favor other hardcore solutions like Synaptic. But I did like the graphical whoosh that USC did when you installed a program thru it. The program would fly from your USC to the Dash bar and stick there. It was cool!

HUD was another thing I liked. However, I rarely used HUD. It was much easier on my mind to explore a menu.

12.04 didn’t cause my laptop to overheat. The overheating bug is something that I refer to as a superbug, because it was a bunch of micro problems inside and outside the kernal that caused observable macro problems (HEAT!!). It took Ubuntu about a year and two distribution cycles to solve it.

When I first tested Unity on 12.04 I was impressed by the speed of the Dash menu. It wasn’t laggy like it had been in previous distribution cycles. I’ll touch on this later though.

There was one issue I mentioned in my previous article that I still stick to. It’s hard to multitask on Unity. Multitasking for me is a big deal! On a normal day, I usually have Chromium, Skype, the FatRat download manager, Synaptic, and 2-3 Terminals open all at once. When I have that many programs open, and I’m flipping back and forth between them, Unity can’t keep up! This is where Unity fails horribly and ends up slowing me down! The Unity taskbar shows that a particular program is open. I click on that icon to raise the program, but it will only raise the last used window in that program. What if I want a different window? Click again. It will spread the active windows of that program eventually. Then click on the window you want and it pops to the top. But if you click on a different program and then try clicking back again that window is what will display. Want a different window? Repeat the directions above… see, how Unity complicates multitasking?

So, after updating the repositories with ricotz’s PPA and GNOME3’s PPA and updating gnome-shell to the highest version, I switched to see what things looked like on the other side.

When I checked out GNOME Shell I discovered that as fast as Unity was (mentioned above), the Activities Overview in GNOME 3 was about 20x-50x faster. It found results as I typed individual keys, no matter how many programs I had installed and no matter how fast I typed. Unity always lagged slightly, sometimes by a fraction of a second, sometimes more. There was no lag finding the program I wanted on GNOME 3. Unity gets props for increasing it’s speed, but for me, GNOME 3 gets the vote because it’s still faster!

Despite the fact that the overheating problem (mentioned above) appeared solved, I have noticed that my laptop is running even cooler while using GNOME Shell. Unity deserved some props. Not overheating in the first place is good; but cooler is ALWAYS better, so GNOME 3 wins my vote.

GNOME 3 does themes! You can change how the desktop looks easily by writing up a CSS stylesheet and loading it into theme package. You can select the theme package using the gnome-tweak-tool. Unity I don’t think should even get a vote here because the Unity UI is locked and cannot be themed, except in very minor ways (mentioned above)

GNOME 3 has one issue in common with Unity. Mouse cursors. Neither UI does mice spectacularly. And GNOME 3 has serious complications with “compiz —replace” because GNOME 3 doesn’t use Compiz as a display manager. So both fail in this regard.

Multitasking is amazing on GNOME 3! Push your mouse into the left-hand corner and it spreads all the windows. Use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out of certain windows, or click on a window to select it. There are certain shell extensions which refine the process even better (select windows using Alt+#, native window placement, etc.) Multitasking has never been easier or more efficient. Unity approaches the UI in a different way than GNOME 3 does, so it’s hard to compare them on this area. For me, I’m torn between both… they both have individual facets I like.

Long blog summed up? TL,DR?

I’m using GNOME Shell now. My reasons are my own.

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union