Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 96

Thread: GNOME 3.0 Laptop Change Frustrates Some Users

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    174

    Default

    This is not good. If it is not fixed, ill have to ignore gnome 3.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dekomote View Post
    Again dude, I am not trolling. I have worked on every DE on linux and I feel gnome to be best suited for me. I was just stating my opinion.
    Actually, you were saying KDE4 is a big fail, just because you like Gnome better. If that's not trolling, what is?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    O'Fallon, MO
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Why on earth do developers continue REMOVING choices for no reason other than "we think people should do things our way"??? I understand not implimenting a feature that they don't care about, or getting rid of a feature that is hard to maintain. But simply removing the user interface for a feature that remains behind the scenes is insane.

    Anyone who tries to argue that having an extra menu option or checkbox for a preference is somehow detrimental to a user's experience is completely out of touch with how users operate...

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    726

    Default they dont remove that

    They donīt remove that functionality like you said, they just dont make a new gui thing for it. Its not in gnome3.0 so they canīt remove it.

    gnome3.0 is maybe a somewhat misleading name. It could nearly be called gnome-next-gen 1.0. Ok they use for the beginning some same dependencies but thats all.

    So and the discussion about that this configuration thing is why gnome suck at all and kde is super is somewhat stupid. Even if you thing the gconf stuff sucks, that can not be the benchmark if gnome3.0 is good or not. Or do you all day sit there and configure your gui?

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    I know no less than three people who put Windows on their MacBook just to get rid of this behavior.

    At least one of those people may be happier with GNOME than OS X though, since his particular use case was attaching the laptop to his TV and playing Hulu, which OS X made impossible with the lid closed but Windows allowed.

    Still, I have cases where I close the lid just to get the display to turn off immediately or to move around the apartment, and I don't want my network connections broken. Especially my SSH connections.

    I've been incredibly displeased with GNOME 3 in general, though. I've been wanting to start a fork of the GNOME 3 - gnome-shell code to basically continue the GNOME 2 UI, but clean up some of the rough spots. And make a strict "fix bugs in your code before adding new features" policy. I don't even care if that cuts down the number of developers; I'd rather have 5 guys who are fixing bugs than 50 guys who are adding them.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    I've been incredibly displeased with GNOME 3 in general, though. I've been wanting to start a fork of the GNOME 3 - gnome-shell code to basically continue the GNOME 2 UI, but clean up some of the rough spots. And make a strict "fix bugs in your code before adding new features" policy.
    You know gnome-panel is in gnome 3.0 still there. And there is just released a gnome 2.30 version what is a fresh gnome 2.x verion : http://library.gnome.org/misc/releas.../index.html.en

    The soup isnt that hot when you eating it as it got cooked (german saying ^^)

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    989

    Default

    I have a ThinkPad X61T which suspends to RAM just fine, and I do hook it up to external display from time to time (when using it from my desk). I rarely want to close the laptop lid without suspending to RAM, unless I have an external monitor. I agree with the point of the argument: we need a setting for this. Ideally in a GUI, not in the CLI.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Sixpack View Post
    Which is exactly why Gnome fucking sucks. It's 2011 and you're talking about having to run a bash script and hope for someone making a program. So you're right - the entire concept is stupid, but it's the GNOME way.
    Don't get too carried away - as the guy you're replying to said, that's a worst case scenario. In reality, there *will* be a dconf setting to change the behaviour - that was stated in the first comment on the linked article.

    And realistically, the UI people are certain to change their decision on this. Again from the linked article, it's clear they've been assuming the option was there as a workaround for flaky suspend behaviour. And the replies have made it *very* clear that that's not the case, and that people have genuine reasons for wanting that option. It'll change.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    O'Fallon, MO
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    I've been incredibly displeased with GNOME 3 in general, though. I've been wanting to start a fork of the GNOME 3 - gnome-shell code to basically continue the GNOME 2 UI, but clean up some of the rough spots. And make a strict "fix bugs in your code before adding new features" policy. I don't even care if that cuts down the number of developers; I'd rather have 5 guys who are fixing bugs than 50 guys who are adding them.
    I'm the lead developer of the Nexradix GNU/Linux distro (an Ubuntu derivative), and feel the same way. I have sworn not to add Gnome-Shell or Unity (that Ubuntu is using) as the default interface for Nexradix. Which means I'll need to maintain quite a few Gnome2 packages once they drop out of Gnome3 down the line (gnome-panel probably being the first one eventually).

    If you or anyone else would like to collaborate on that endeavor, send me a PM. My company may end up hosting some kind of Gnome2 fork when it's all said and done, if for no other reason than to keep the interface in Nexradix consistent.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    98

    Default

    GNOME is all about removing freedom of choice from the users. That's why I'm forced to use KDE, even if it's not exactly great.

    I'd actually like a desktop environment in the middle ground between the two - i.e. one that doesn't tell me that I don't need "cancel" buttons, but that doesn't need every window that opens to be resized and pruned from toolbars before getting usable.

    E17 is cool, but it's missing some pieces.

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
  •