GNOME 2.19.2 has been released. “This is our second development release on our road towards GNOME 2.20.0, which will be released in September 2007. New features are still arriving, so your mission is simple: go download it. Go compile it. Go test it. And go hack on it, document it, translate it, fix it.”
When o when will devs look at next milestone GNOME 3.0
I use GNOME on daily basis but it still 3.0 would be great. Or at least more speed optimization.
I was wondering the same thing. Development of Gnome is going too slow, each release only has some minor changes, not to mention Metacity and Nautilus that are basicaly the same for last 2 or 3 years. I don’t like KDE (too glossy, even after changing icons, most software for KDE has glossy icons anyway), but looking at the development going on there I really wonder what’s up with Gnome? Is there ever going to be some real step forward, meaning it’ll include big new/cool features and finally more options to everything (meaning: not making me the feel Gnome is made for dumb secretaries)?
Just my 5 cents.
Edited 2007-05-17 15:29
Not sure if I’m a dumb secretary.
But as a developper and system administrator who use/tried Windows, Mac OS since OS8, Xfce, KDE and Gnome (since 1.2). I feel far more productive and confortable in OSX or gnome(main desktop). Simplicity gives me a fast and clear navigation for my need. Both give all the option necessary to make it feel like I want.
Maybe there’s such dumb secretary or maybe there’s different solution for different people. You know, there’s choices.
metacity has reached the feature-complete status for the intended design (and audience): a minimalistic, themable window manager that doesn’t do anything more than what its name implies. having said that, the theming engine has been revamped and it has support for native compositing (even though it’s a bit broken). you want bling? please, go and play with compiz.
nautilus has had changes in the last two years – the search folders, for instance; what’s changing now it’s the underlying VFS library (gnome-vfs) which is now being completely rewritten (gvfs) and moved even lower in the stack so that gtk+ can use it natively.
so: the applications have reached maturity (bugs notwithstanding) and the platform is now getting attention for the next changes. being the platform, and as the developers community doesn’t want another 1.x/2.x-like transition, it requires more time to do it. it’s happening nonetheless, and it’s the important thing.
http://live.gnome.org/ThreePointZero
Go look at planet gnome, alot of work is being done under the hood, gnomeVFS is looking to be dropped and login speed, nautilus speed is being worked on.
I think people only want GNOME 3.0 because of KDE4, lets not get carried away with the hype.
You are so right. All the time I read someone asking for GNOME 3.0, it seems it is only for the new major number. Hardly anyone gives a reason why he wants GNOME to go for 3.0. And even if a reason is given, the feature can easily be done in the 2.x series. (like speed optimizations mentioned above)
sure, they could/can do that. Yet, it feels like gnome is indeed progressing very slowly (though I don’t use it, so I don’t have intimate knowledge).
And indeed, the latest gnome still isn’t far better than KDE 3.5.x, while the latter saw it’s last major release more than 1.5 years ago.
So if KDE 4 comes out, I wonder what Gnome has against it?!?
Wel Gnome isn’t competing with KDE, it’s simply giving everybody an alternative desktop experience. I’m a Gnome user, and I’m eager to try KDE4, but in the end I’ll choose the one that best suits my needs.
Currently I need simplicity and Gnome gives it to me both functionally and aesthetically. Maybe I’ll change with KDE4. I don’t know yet before I try.
But one thing I’m sure I feel – Gnome devs are not battling KDE and vice versa, they’re showing us the power of true choice.
True, it’s no battle in the sense of kill or be killed – but they are of course competing. Both desktops aspire to be THE linux desktop, after all. Of course I’m pretty sure most would prefer to take marketshare off of Microsoft, and they do.
But KDE4 has a new generation toolkit QT 4. Therefore it’s quite natural to call it a major release. For Gnome 3 to arrive, gtk must get a revamp.
I think the issue at play isn’t necessarily the need for GNOME 3.0 but more correctly a better focus on fixing bugs, reducing bloat and actually bringing features which end users want. For me, gstreamer needs a major overhaul; its mp3mux is completely and utterly broken – its so bad I’ve actually thrown in the towel and now using Grip + cdparanoia + lame’s own id3v2 tagging. If it isn’t the mp4 tagging corrupting files, its the mp3 tagging in gstreamer which corrupts information such as bitrate.
For me, all I see is ‘release, release, release’ without any justification – what are we going to deliver in this release; what user visible enhancements do we need to add to improve the over all user experience; there needs to be someone in charge of GNOME who make decisions and direct the project in a direction which sets down the projects focus for each release – “this is where we are, this is where we should be in 6months time” and set down a schedule.
Edited 2007-05-18 02:26
Lots of fixes and tweaks – keep it rocking! 2.0 was a big jump in the right direction, not stepping along down the same path—-step on gnome foot, step on….
more options? have you had your gconf-editor lately?
Edited 2007-05-17 15:31
gconf? Are you using regedit to set stuff in Windows?
IMO Gconf-editor is perfect for those fifty-million tweaker settings that just turn a GUI config into a complete cluster-fluck. I originally hated the idea. Now that I see the simple, clean GUI preferences compared to old gnome/sawfish I think it is a perfectly implemented tool that provides more info about the selections and more flexibility in settings without just being a crapload of sliders, and radio buttons, and check boxes, and tabs and so forth.
Yes. When I’m making config changes that ‘the average user’ wouldn’t likely want to change (Like for example advanced networking stuff), I edit the registry directly.
Gconf-editor should be used in the same way.
[q]markob: gconf? Are you using regedit to set stuff in Windows?[q]
Ahh, so you never used the gconf-editor. Interesting, anything more you want to share?
You are either missing the point or you just want to reply with anything. Gconf is not a way to change things. Yes, I AM using it, but that’s not my point. My point is: the amount of settings you can set in Gnome via UI is way too low. People don’t want to mess with gconf to set things up. Is this how you’d sell for example a TV to people: well, you can change channels on the remote, but you have to open it and use a screwdriver to set brightness and contrast? You need to realise that if Gnome/Linux is to be used by more and more people, people need to lose the geeky way of thinking about things, if you produce a product, it doesn’t matter if you think it’s OK, it’s what customers think. Not everyone can compile a kernel, edit some .whatever file from terminal and use gconf to search and set things. Remember the MOM test, a VERY important part of every consumer product development.
Edited 2007-05-18 07:18
I was looking through the documentation for 2.19, but I did not see anything about the version of mono that they are using. I first used mono on Suse 10, and it was pretty slow. I don’t care much for mono, but I wanted to know if there have been speed improvements over the past year or so.
I’m a Gnome user, and I’m very happy with it. But for the last couple of releases, it’s seemed like nothing much has happened. Bugs have been fixed and the odd application received a new feature here and there, but there’s been nothing to make people sit up and go “wow, that’s fantastic”.
It seems to me that the Gnome developers have lost their way somewhat. They’ve got stuck in maintenance mode. The number of people asking about Gnome 3 is evidence enough of that.
They need the project leaders to come out and say, “for this release, our focus is on X”, where X is (say) fixing the bugs in Tracker and integrating it wherever it’s sensible to do so (eg. the media library in Rhythmbox). Or ensuring that every Gnome application exports a DBus interface to allow for Apple-style (and KDE-style) desktop scripting. Or memory reduction or performance improvements or using Cairo to make the whole thing look beautiful. Or making sure that every application supports Evince-style (or Epiphany-style) toolbar editing. Or…
Hopefully the fact that KDE4 looks like stepping heavily on Gnome’s toes (even the most belligerent KDE fan would have to admit that Dolphin bears more than a passing resemblance to Nautilus) will give the Gnome developers the kick up the arse they need to get the desktop moving forward again rather than treading water like they are at the moment. Otherwise Gnome risks being permanently stuck in 2005, which would be a great shame…
I think it only appears that Gnome has lost its way. There is actually a lot of activity by Gnome developers under the surface. Many of these projects are developed by Gnome developers with Gnome in mind but not only for Gnome, so you would not necessarily tie the projects to Gnome at first glance. If you read Planet Gnome and Planet Freedesktop, you will get a much better sense of the flurry of activity going on within the Gnome world. It’s actually very exciting.
Gnome specific projects in the works (if they’re ready for 2.20, they’ll go in; otherwise, they will wait): new vfs layer; more and more core technologies and applications are changing their IPC layer from Bonobo/Orbit to the relatively new DBus; more and more GTK+ functions are moving to the relatively new drawing layer– Cairo; deprecation of libgnome{ui} with cleaner APIs moving to GTK+; replacement panels beind developed in the form of Gimmie and Big Board; new canvas widget (based on Cairo) being developed– which might form the basis for a radically new GTK+; Gnome mobile initiative; and probably more stuff I’m forgetting.
Other new areas being developed for Gnome (including Gnome mobile) as well as other desktops: Conduit (synchronization framework), Telepathy (IP, VOIP, IM framework), Empathy (higher level widgets based on Telepathy and Nokia’s Mission Control), GStreamer (multimedia framework), HAL (hardware detection framework), and PowerManager (power management framework). Some of this has been included in Gnome over the last two years.
Also, a lot of the more radical experimentation by Gnome developers is occurring outside the usual Gnome framework, often in the embedded context: OLPC/Sugar (new UI design for children’s computers), Maemo/Hildon (internet tablet UI), Clutter (new GL based UI toolkit), Pigment (new GL based UI toolkit), and LowFat (new desktop paradigm based on GL architecture).
It’s good stuff. Check it out.
Wow! All that happening!
Yet when I start Gnome it looks the same for last 7 years.
And featurewise it’s on par with Windows 3.1.
Last time I checked I couldn’t even customize the tool bar in Nautilus.
Surely I’m not the only one wanting to add a delete button to the toolbar?! Or change the font for desktop and menus?
Where are the features? Functionality?
It’s 2007 yet PCTools shell on Win 3.1 in 1994 had more functionality than Gnome.
But for the last couple of releases, it’s seemed like nothing much has happened. Bugs have been fixed and the odd application received a new feature here and there, but there’s been nothing to make people sit up and go “wow, that’s fantastic”.
Back when I said this [1] [2], a few months ago, I was vilified for doing so. Now, it appears as if more people are realising the truth: GNOMe is ever improving with each release, but nothing radically new or improving is coming. They are perfecting their work, and it shows (I really like GNOME as it is), but where’s the new stuff? Where are innovative new features? New applications? Hardware management front-ends? A panel/applet architecture that does not eat up RAM like a fat kid eats chocolate?
You tell me.
[1] http://osnews.com/story.php/16783/Has-the-Desktop-Linux-Bubble-Burs…
[2] http://osnews.com/story.php/16802/On-Favouritism-Apologies-and-Blac…
I feel quite comfortable the way things are, I get my work done, new features are appearing each release making work even easier. I don’t want them to change the way I work completely from one to another release and give it the magical number 3.0.
Do you have any specific “innovative new features” or “new applications” in mind, or should the GNOME crew just pump out shiny stuff nobody asked for to feed your sense of “wow”? Innovation should happen in response to a specific need, not for the sake of generating “new stuff”. Believe it or not, a slowdown in the number and frequency of disruptive architecture changes is good, not bad. It means GNOME is achieving a modicum of success in its goal of being a usable desktop.
Now, if you have any specific needs or wants, feel free to express them in a constructive way. The last two lines of your rant were close, but you could go a little further. You can donate some time to handle bug reports or even contribute code. Your panel/applet architecture complaint is being worked on, but there’s only one maintainer for the entire module [1].
As far as your last few questions, I defer to an earlier poster who did a far better job than I will summarizing some of the exciting development happening in the GNOME/GTK/Freedesktop.org world. There are TONS of new applications and innovative new features being pumped out by third party developers and projects. GNOME’s job is not to incorporate all these into some mega-distribution; it’s supposed to be a basic productivity framework upon which these third parties can reliably build and innovate.
That appears to be happening at a very rapid, very sustainable, very exciting pace. So what’s your complaint again?
[EDIT] phoebus has apparently already made this point before, eloquently and succinctly: http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=16802&comment_id=195799
[1] http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap/GnomePanel
Edited 2007-05-17 17:58
Do you have any specific “innovative new features” or “new applications” in mind
No! That’s the whole point! I’m not the brilliant application developer, I’m not the programmer, I’m not the brilliant mind who will come up with ‘the next best thing’, that’s not my job, nor am I capable of doing that. How am I supposed to know what the next best thing is?
If GNOME (or any other desktop environment/operating system for that matter) wants to attract new users (obviously from Windows), it will not suffice to be “good enough” or “on par”. You need something *compelling*, something *new*, something that makes users think, “wow, my Windows can’t do that, I’m going to try GNOME!”
*I* certainly don’t know what that “something” is, because if I did know, I certainly wouldn’t be the glorified newsbot here; I’d be working on KDE/GNOME/whatever.
You can donate some time to handle bug reports
I do my time there, don’t worry.
Believe it or not, a slowdown in the number and frequency of disruptive architecture changes is good, not bad. It means GNOME is achieving a modicum of success in its goal of being a usable desktop.
Who says it has to be disruptive? I am just saying GNOME needs something *compelling*. Can you give me 3 (three) killer features in GNOME that will make Windows users go “wow, I want that!”? Because *that* is what GNOME needs in order to grow. Without it, GNOME won’t make that ’10×10′ claim. Not by a long shot.
You see there is that distro called Ubuntu, it’s GNOME based and attracting ALOT of attention, even DELL like it.
Ummm, your post reads like the recent Bill Gates “We’ve sold 40 million copies of Vista” announcement.
Why am I not buying it?
Just how many bugs are there in Gnome that it takes 7 years to debug?
Is one shiny new feature each release too much to ask for?
That’s not how GNOME works. They do time-based, not feature-based, releases.
Whenever I hear people talk about this the first thing that pops to my mind is the Applications/Places/System menu. I don’t think we need so much more speed as we need perceived speed, and that particular menu set is extremely aggravating. I often flip back and forth between Gnome and KDE and I can say with *absolute* certainty that the Gnome menu is perceptibly slower. For some reason it seems like the gnome menu lags at times and occasionally I can watch the icons paint. This never happens to me in KDE.
I think it would be great if there was some way to permanently cache the contents of the menu in memory. I don’t know for sure, but is sure seems that it has to load every time.
Maybe there’s nothing very much new in this release of GNOME(?) but anyway, and for those interested, Phoronix has some GNOME 2.19.2 screenshots here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=719&num=1
Just the work they have done on cairo alone would have justified a major version bump- if the project started with a ‘k’ rather than a ‘g’.
Most of this time I have agreed that there is no reason to change the version number of GNOME. There are tons of nice things that can be done without breaking compatability, which is what the developers are talking about.
I’ve started to think a little bit different though. Shouldn’t the version number be changed once there have been so many existing changes that GNOME is not completely recognizable from its initial 2.0 release?
Eventually we are going to have a new vfs, a new canvas widget, an awesome communication framework, theres a maturing library of gtk extensions that give you customizable toolbars, floating toolbars, etc.
When these changes are in place, even though compatability hasn’t nessisarily been broken, it is a radically different GNOME than it was before and deserving of a 3.0 designation.