Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 74

Thread: GNOME 4.0, GNOME OS Coming In 2014 & Other Crazy Plans

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by dalingrin View Post
    Really wish some developers would rally around Qt 5 and make an alternative to KDE. I'm tired of Gnome 3 and I dislike all the other GTK attempts to go back in time like Mate.
    Despite the rocky start I think KDE and Unity are the best bets moving forward. However, now that Qt is LGPL(has been for a long time) and has an open governance model, I really would like to see a desktop environment take it seriously other than KDE.

    I really agree with you!

    Theres http://razor-qt.org/ but its developement sems to go slowly...
    And its a pre-Qt5 and pre-Qml.

    QML for desktop widgets and other stuff would be nice, and not that hard to implement (KDE4 has to made the whole Plasma desktop think for the widgets).

    I hope Razor-Qt would pick-up Qt5 new features and make it a good desktop.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dalingrin View Post
    Really wish some developers would rally around Qt 5 and make an alternative to KDE. I'm tired of Gnome 3 and I dislike all the other GTK attempts to go back in time like Mate.
    Despite the rocky start I think KDE and Unity are the best bets moving forward. However, now that Qt is LGPL(has been for a long time) and has an open governance model, I really would like to see a desktop environment take it seriously other than KDE.
    Well, there's Razor-qt...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    8

    Default

    The "bad things" for GNOME they pointed out was their focus on the traditional desktop [...]

    Seems that some people never learn for their past mistakes...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Why does everyone always want to create their own OS? GnomeOS, FirefoxOS, ChromeOS, etc. One of the chief complaints from most projects is lack of developers, but somehow a desktop specific OS will somehow make things better? Doesn't that require more developers and fragment existing developers? What does a custom OS buy you other than more stuff to support directly and less chance to share the load?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    827

    Default

    Gnome developers have delusions of grandeur, big time.

    I suspect GnomeOS will fall flat on it's face. I also suspect it will just be Fedora Re-branded with some modest changes. If i am correct on the latter, it is unlikely they will pull (and sustain) much of an audience/user-base from other well-established linux distributions, such as Ubuntu/debian, Archlinux, gentoo, etc. I think there are a lot of linux users whom have picked their distro based on the specific tools that they provide (package management as one example). What real advantages is GnomeOS going to provide _over_ the current linux distributions these users are already happy with? My feeling is that they are going to have to provide some VERY VERY compelling features to gain any traction, at all.

    Gnome on mobile isn't too likely to be widely adopted, either. it's essentially the same story; what compelling features are they going to be able to provide over iOS or Android? (if they can even 'match' those platforms, which i think is unlikely)... One could argue that it is an open platform and a 'real' linux distribution unlike android, but at the end of the day - does the average consumer even care about that? (probably not, although most people in this forum would). At the point where we have mobile devices that can run XYZ linux distro (with proper support), people will just want to run whatever distro they like on their tablet. Hell, they might even use Gnome with GS or with another shell (or not at all).

    I do however really like that they are planning an SDK, that seems like a good idea if you actually want people to target your platform.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    58

    Default

    focus on the traditional desktop
    They practically dropped support for non-touch devices when they released gnome shell. Thanks to canonical for providing a fallback mode that is almost as good as gnome 2.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dstaubsauger View Post
    They practically dropped support for non-touch devices when they released gnome shell.
    Can you name one item that is not accessible by mouse or keyboard but only by finger?

    Thanks to canonical for providing a fallback mode that is almost as good as gnome 2.
    The fallback mode is provided by Gnome as well, not by Canonical.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    394

    Default

    I wonder Whom they meant with fragmentation / freeloaders ?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 0xCAFE View Post
    Can you name one item that is not accessible by mouse or keyboard but only by finger?
    I think being able to quickly launch an application by simply typing the first few letters of its name is too desktop-unfriendly for some people.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ov1d1u View Post
    The "bad things" for GNOME they pointed out was their focus on the traditional desktop [...]

    Seems that some people never learn for their past mistakes...
    This. What brought gnome 1 and 2 their success, traditional desktop, is now "bad" - and what alienated most gnome users, cell phone UI, is the "new target for 4.0".


    Whatever they're smoking, I want some.

Posting Permissions

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