Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 76

Thread: Ubuntu 11.04 Desktop To Get Rid Of GNOME's Shell

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragas View Post
    Why the hell would you do that?! Kubuntu is packaged even worse than Ubuntu.
    For KDE at least use SUSE
    Why the hell would you do that?! Suse is packaged even worse than Jurix.
    For KDE at least use $DISTRO_THAT_INCLUDES_OLDER_VERSION_OF_KDE_AND_SMA LLER_COMMUNITY_USING_BASE_PACKAGES

    Thanks for the suggestion though. I'm downloading openSUSE now to see how it has changed since I last used it; the current version apparently has you liking it a lot.

    Your disparaging remarks about the Kubuntu packaging may have been true with some previous version, but I think you might like the current one if you give it a chance.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KAMiKAZOW View Post
    And why would .deb be better than RPM?
    Why is apt better than zypper?
    Why should openSUSE become yet another immature Debian Unstable snapshot distro?
    Debian doesn't use rpm, so deb>rpm. Point.

    Debian is the only distribution that's been consistently there and high quality for the 16+ years I've been using Linux. The rest went from worst to acceptable, then back to worst, then acceptable for those that are still around. I've done the Red Hat/Mandriva/Suse dance enough, and always come back to Debian or one of those "immature Debian Unstable snapshot distro", which are still in a far better shape, in great part thanks to Debian. I keep reading their forums from time to time, and the latter are still not there. Last year I went and checked what problems people had with Open Suse and Wacom tablets, since I'm interested in the "competition", and the howtos were so retarded I laughed to no end.

    If Debian development wasn't so autistic, I wouldn't even have tried spin-offs, but at least for Ubuntu they did great in trying to fixing that thorn in Debian's side.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    33

    Default

    And just got annouced that it's definite.
    http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...buntu-1104.ars

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KAMiKAZOW View Post
    After reading http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2010/10/17...admits-it.html I'm convinced that this move is solely because Canonical own full copyrights to Unity and can license it to OEMs in order to allow them to create proprietary variants (eg. unchangeable branding, forced ads, or so).

    I doubt that Canonical on its own can produce a better shell than the entire GNOME community.

    Glad i switched to Archlinux/KDE last year. Canonical/Ubuntu creeps me out.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Radoboj, Croatia
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreeBooteR69 View Post
    Glad i switched to Archlinux/KDE last year. Canonical/Ubuntu creeps me out.
    I did the same this summer for same reason.

    I was actually considering SuSe (because of good KDE support), but last time I used it, it had very slow package manager. Given the fact that last year I tried Fedora, and its yum was very slow on my machine, I concluded that it must be something wrong with the RPM format, as I haven't seen any fast RPM package manager so far (I tried Fedora, SuSe and Mandriva). Debian APT is quite faster, but it's still very slow compared to Arch's pacman.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,091

    Default

    Guys, the performance problems of Unity where due to using Mutter which will no longer be used and they did the first Unity with a small team in just 6 months and it is pretty good for that. Now they have a huge team working on just improving Unity to make it shine really bright. They even hired smspillaz, the well known Compiz developer and will use the Compiz rewrite (0.9 and later) for Unity.

    Hate him if you want, but they know what they're doing as they had to think about Gnome-panel vs. Gnome-shell vs. Unity for a long time now.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Ubuntu is full of stupid decisions lately, starting with this multitouch effort and now this. For me its easy, just change distro. Hopefully there will be an Ubuntu fork that uses the default gnome desktop.

    But what about simple users who do not know or care about all that ? Only lately some people started to know Linux and Gnome, and getting used to this desktop and now its about to change again.

    I hope they won't go through with this effort, its pure stupidity

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    125

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by iznogood View Post
    Hopefully there will be an Ubuntu fork that uses the default gnome desktop.
    It's called Debian ;-)

  9. #29

    Default

    People, Unity desktop edition won't be like UNE's Unity. It will use Compiz and other elements.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    980

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post
    Guys, the performance problems of Unity where due to using Mutter which will no longer be used and they did the first Unity with a small team in just 6 months and it is pretty good for that. Now they have a huge team working on just improving Unity to make it shine really bright. They even hired smspillaz, the well known Compiz developer and will use the Compiz rewrite (0.9 and later) for Unity.

    Hate him if you want, but they know what they're doing as they had to think about Gnome-panel vs. Gnome-shell vs. Unity for a long time now.
    I agree that the performance of mutter in its current state is abysmal compared to compiz, this is a well known fact. So no sane distro is shipping gnome-shell/mutter as default because it's simply not ready yet. Only Canonical decided to ship unity/mutter with their netbook edition, despite mutter's well known problems. So they should take the responsibility for it and not resort to KDE/Kwin tactics of blaming upstream for their own cock-ups. In the light of this unity/mutter disaster I'm not sure how exactly you can come to the conclusion that they (canonical) know what they are doing.

    Anyway cheerios to the compiz devs, as right know they seem to be the only ones that can actually make a compositing manager with good performance.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •