Ubuntu moves away from GNOME


Recommended Posts

.Neo

I don't see why Ubuntu doesn't move to KDE. 4.5.2 is pretty sweet. It would be a heck of a lot easier than writing your own interface.

I can understand a company wants to set itself aside from others and has its own wishes and demands that isn't provided for by others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Subject Delta

Yeah, I agree early versions were flaky. 4.5.2 is really smooth. It's the first version that makes me want to use KDE in a long time.

I meant the Kubuntu distro in general, sorry, not KDE. I haven't tried the 10.10 final, but the betas where a bit flaky on my rig. Does 10.10 come with 4.5.x by default?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syanide

Yeah it's 4.5.something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Subject Delta

Yeah it's 4.5.something.

Thanks. Will have to have another pop next time I am bored (Y)

Link to post
Share on other sites
ViperAFK

Every time I have tried any kde distro its been incredibly buggy for me, then I hear [x] version of kde was really buggy, but its fine now! then I try it again and the cycle repeats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Farstrider

I thought I would add something to this subject because the title of the thread is misleading! Just to clarify:

GNOME:

"Unity is a shell for GNOME ? it may not be GNOME-Shell but it is a shell for GNOME."

GNOME-Shell uses Mutter as a WM (it will use compiz later), and notably, "Desktop Unity" will use Compiz rather than Mutter for compositing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syanide

I installed Unity on my desktop, since it's like a 1.5 MB download if you're running desktop edition, and what I can say is that it definitely reminds me of Gnome Shell. Just made for smaller screens, and you can notice they have touch in mind for future releases, especially the way the dock behaves. Mutter is buggy and feels slow, plus the window management issues imposed by small screen optimization are annoying. Luckily, they'll be using Compiz. Other than that, I don't know... It's okay. But I guess the desktop Unity is where it's at, and I can't wait to try that out.

Also, standard Gnome and Gnome Shell will be one click away, so it doesn't really worry me in case I end up disliking it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

Also, standard Gnome and Gnome Shell will be one click away, so it doesn't really worry me in case I end up disliking it.

I think a lot of people forget that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
PGHammer

Ubuntu moves away from GNOME

Ubuntu 11.04 to have Unity interface instead of GNOME Shell

The big news at the Ubuntu Developer Summit? Moving to Unity as the default interface for Ubuntu Desktop with Natty Narwhal (11.04), rather than GNOME Shell.

Earlier this year, Canonical representatives had to deny that they were forking GNOME with the work on the Unity interface. (Quick disclaimer, I'm a GNOME Member and help out with GNOME PR.) Unity is a Canonical-sponsored project that was initially delivered for the Ubuntu Netbook Remix. GNOME Shell is the interface being developed for GNOME 3.0, which was delayed to spring 2011.

Apparently, Canonical were being asked the wrong question. During the opening keynote, Mark Shuttleworth has announced that Canonical is committing to making Unity the default desktop experience "for users that have the appropriate software and hardware." Unity requires compositing to work properly, which means users need functioning 3D support to use the interface.

Unity will require quite a bit of work between now and April, 2011 to get Unity into shape as the default desktop. While the Ubuntu desktop 10.10 received glowing reviews, the netbook release much less so. Canonial partner and system integrator System 76 chose to stick with the 10.04 LTS release on its netbook line, saying the interface was "slow and in many ways confusing to use."

What happens with GNOME at this point? Shuttleworth says that Unity is "a shell for GNOME, even if it isn't GNOME shell." He added that he thinks it's good to have "competition" between GNOME Shell and Unity, and referenced Monty Python's Life of Brian as an example of factionalism in a community. Shuttleworth says "we're all in this together," even if there's differences of opinion.

It will be interesting to see how the larger community reacts to this. I'll be covering this more extensively throughout the week, so stay tuned.

Source: networkworld.com

That would largely put Unity's hardware requirements on par with KDE (which pretty much requires at least OpenGL support in hardware for any sort of decent performance starting with 4.4, not 4.5, as some have said). Also, it does not mean that GNOME Shell is going away - it merely means that it may not be the default (Unity is the default for Ubuntu Netbook Remix starting with Maverick Meerkat, and an option for Lucid Lynx). Further, Canonical *will* offer Unity to other distributions, as opposed to keeping it in-house.

I've been more of a fan of KDE, as opposed to GNOME, and I have taken peeks at GNOME Shell (but not Unity). I am curious as to how Unity performs as a desktop shell on desktop hardware, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Syanide

I am curious as to how Unity performs as a desktop shell on desktop hardware, though.

Currently, not so well, mostly due to Mutter. I think that sometime this week they'll introduce a PPA for Compiz based Unity for Maverick users (Natty users can already add it), and I'm looking forward to testing it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ViperAFK

Yeah I am not even trying it until mutter is gone. Its sooo slow. the one thing it does better then compiz though is vsync actually freakin works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
PGHammer

Yeah I am not even trying it until mutter is gone. Its sooo slow. the one thing it does better then compiz though is vsync actually freakin works.

You can use mutter with GNOME-Shell (AKA GNOME 3) - in fact, openSuSE 11.4 RC1 has mutter as an option. I don't see why you can't use compiz with Unity (as you can with GNOME-Shell/GNOME today, or even with KDE).

What's the difference between mutter and compiz, from an implementation standpoint? If mutter is DE-neutral (as compiz is known to be), then there is no reason other than the underpinnings for mutter to be significantly slower than compiz, given DRI/DRI2. (One thing that is certain is that compiz performance is absolutely awful if there is no DRI/DRI2 support; either via hardware or software (which is why the software rasterization support in Mesa 7.9, and the vastly improved r600c driver with X.org 1.9/Mesa 7.10 are as important as they are.)

GNOME-Shell does, in fact, require at least DRI (either in software or, better yet, in hardware), and that is without compiz or mutter - otherwise, performance will flat-out blow chunks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
iamawesomewicked

It's only a matter of time before Wayland takes over as the default interface.

Link to post
Share on other sites
yowanvista

It that because GNOME3 was delayed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
AJerman

It's only a matter of time before Wayland takes over as the default interface.

As I understand it Wayland works in conjunction with Unity. Removing X from the equation, but it's still not the UI itself.

It that because GNOME3 was delayed?

No, because GNOME3 will be out by the time 11.04 is out. They've been planning this switch for a while. I'm not sure what I think about it just yet as I'm a pretty big GNOME fan, but it looks like they are doing a pretty good job so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solid Knight

How can they move away from Gnome by using something that depends on Gnome?

Link to post
Share on other sites
OuchOfDeath

How can they move away from Gnome by using something that depends on Gnome?

Because they wrote their own Desktop Environment. Just because it uses GNOME libraries does not mean it's "GNOME".

XFCE also uses the same GTK+ toolkit, as well as some GNOME libraries, however it's not GNOME. It's its own Desktop Environment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
08993

Because they wrote their own Desktop Environment. Just because it uses GNOME libraries does not mean it's "GNOME".

XFCE also uses the same GTK+ toolkit, as well as some GNOME libraries, however it's not GNOME. It's its own Desktop Environment.

Still used nautilus and gconf, gedit, gnome-terminal and seahorse and all of the other gnome crap - it's still gnome. Isn't that what Canonical do, 90% somebody else's codebase and 10% Canonical and then take all of the glory?

Link to post
Share on other sites
OuchOfDeath

Still used nautilus and gconf, gedit, gnome-terminal and seahorse and all of the other gnome crap - it's still gnome.

It's supposed to use... what else? Obviously it'll be using the standard GNOME applications, however its still a separate DE.

Link to post
Share on other sites
08993

It's supposed to use... what else? Obviously it'll be using the standard GNOME applications, however its still a separate DE.

What? A DE is a collaboration of apps, how can it be a seperate DE?

Link to post
Share on other sites
AJerman

Still used nautilus and gconf, gedit, gnome-terminal and seahorse and all of the other gnome crap - it's still gnome. Isn't that what Canonical do, 90% somebody else's codebase and 10% Canonical and then take all of the glory?

Welcome to Linux. It's not about taking someone else's work and taking the glory. That's a very closed source attitude. It's about blending together all of the best elements to make the best possible package, and adding whatever polish you want on it. We work together to continually build a better product.

Link to post
Share on other sites
08993

Welcome to Linux. It's not about taking someone else's work and taking the glory. That's a very closed source attitude. It's about blending together all of the best elements to make the best possible package, and adding whatever polish you want on it. We work together to continually build a better product.

And charge corps to support it, you forgot that bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
cork1958

I'm not really sure about this. We'll see how it goes. I am not a fan of Gnome, but I think much of Ubuntu's popularity comes from using Gnome. Besides, I don't see them finishing it by April. And what of Mint?

Yeah,

What of Mint?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The_Observer

i would use linux full time if it wasnt for steam/bc2 and ps/dw

Link to post
Share on other sites
AJerman

And charge corps to support it, you forgot that bit.

I don't really see what you're getting at. When you need corporate level support, you pay for corporate level support. Linux is free, open source software, it's not magic, the organizations and people involved do still have to make money some how, and providing support is a very good way.

You never HAVE to pay for support though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.