Recommended Posts

Eh they all "borrow" ideas from other operating systems, nothing new there.

There's a difference between "borrowing" ideas and give your own spin to it and just ripping things off. As far as I know the Dashboard close button from Mac OS X is still in GNOME 3 as well.

Screenshots from the Fedora-based live CD (from gnome3.org):

Is it just me or does GNOME 3 look extremely bulky? All interface elements seem to waste lot of screen estate. :/ I mean, by default Safari's window chrome occupies almost half the space with tab bar enabled... :blink:

screenshot20110407at015.png

Terminal

screenshot20110407at020.png

Has GNOME 3 been designed with the visually impaired in mind or something? Seeing this I get that Ubuntu went its own route.

First impressions:

Ugly default theme. No way to change it or the UI font via the GUI.

The new UI paradigm is... confusing. I get what they are going for, but will Joe User? Unlikely

Incomplete. This feels like KDE 4.0, only worse.

Unstable - I had Epiphany crash on me twice while trying to edit this post.

On the positive side I get the full Shell experience on Intel graphics; the Intel wi-fi adapter worked ootb.

Overall not very impressed.

I love the theme. I don't know why others don't like it, it's gorgeous.

GNOME is FOR the Joe User. That's their target audience. Of course they'll get it. It's been simplified a ton, and it really is way easier to use. Every part of the interface has been made simplier and easier. It's really intuitive. I think you, like most others, are confusing different with hard. I've used it for about a week now, and it's simply super-easy to use. Window management is fantastic. You simply move the mouse to the top left and you get OS X's expose, and this is -the- best way to do window management. Period. You also get that dash/dock, which again is mostly like the OS X dock, and it's really simple to use. You simply click on an icon and you get your program. This works for launching and for focusing already opened applications. In previous GNOME versions launching an application from the menu would often re-launch the same application twice, and this was entirely redundant. Now it's done properly.

It has the feel of OS X-style polish and simplicity, and it's definitely the correct way of going about the Desktop Environment. I honestly have no idea how you can call the new UI paradigm confusing when it's so similar to what OS X is doing. Does everyone go around call OS X's UI paradigm confusing too? Last I checked OS X is touted as having a superior DE due to its simplicity and excellent window management with the dock and Expose.

Not being able to change the themes by default may be a slight issue to some, but then if you look at Windows and OS X you can't change the themes there either. There's a simple tool you can install that's part of GNOME 3(but not installed by default I believe) that lets you change the theme and mess around with a bunch of other options. Here's the link: http://www.webupd8.org/2011/04/introducing-gnome-tweak-tool-gui-to.html

Incomplete? What's incomplete about it? It has more or less everything GNOME 2 had, except for some of the options and features that have been purposefully removed from the GUI. Again, look at OS X. It's not known for being super-customizable from the GUI either. Many of the options are however still in place, just that officially there's no GUI for it any more. It's up to you to go around the gconf-editor and all that.

And KDE4.0? You have no idea what KDE4.0 launch was like. That or you simply forgot entirely. KDE4.0 was so feature incomplete at launch, and the entire DE crashed EVERY SINGLE TIME I did the most basic navigation around it. I could not run KDE4.0 for more than literally 2-3 minutes without having it crash on me. It could not be done. GNOME3.0 on the other hand I've been running with few hitches for several days now. I can use it for... well for everything. I have mutter crash on me every about 30 minutes to an hour(of course it restarts in a few seconds and everything resumes perfectly like nothing happened), but do keep in mind that this could be a bug in the driver as well, and it could also be the fact that I'm running an incomplete GNOME3 from an unstable PPA. Not even all the packages from it have been updated to the final 3.0. It runs like a charm though. You should find KDE 4.0 yourself in some past distro release and run that for a bit. You literally have no idea how bad 4.0 was, because comparing GNOME3 to KDE4.0 is night and day, and of course a ton of features were missing at launch. GNOME 3 is, I'll emphasize again, feature-complete. It's like Windows 7 or OS X Snow Leopard right now. Yes there are newer version incoming with more features, however they are feature-complete and ideal for every-day computing of any sort. Same with GNOME 3.

Well I just had a while messing with the Fedora one, my experience lasted about 3 minutes before I rebooted into 10.10 in disgust

What a heap of ***

Application icons wouldn't even display properly - most of them were all white with unreadable text until they reached the bottom of the screen where they became normal icons again.

Wi-Fi worked - thats about the only good thing I have to say about it in its present state.

If they said this was Alpha, then ok, I would be like, "Yea its coming along"... but final ? WTF

It's obvious the Fedora team have not packaged it properly yet. It takes time. It was just release, and it's possible their GNOME3 iso hasn't been merged with the latest packages. This happens very often to any new DE version, and it has nothing to do with GNOME3 itself. It runs almost flawlessly here for example. It's up to the distro teams to compile and set it up properly. This will, I'll stress again, take a bit of time. The missing icons as an example are so obviously due to improper packaging. You're judging the wrong set of people for the mistakes here.

There's a difference between "borrowing" ideas and give your own spin to it and just ripping things off. As far as I know the Dashboard close button from Mac OS X is still in GNOME 3 as well.

Is it just me or does GNOME 3 look extremely bulky? All interface elements seem to waste lot of screen estate. :/ I mean, by default Safari's window chrome occupies almost half the space with tab bar enabled... :blink:

screenshot20110407at015.png

Terminal

screenshot20110407at020.png

Has GNOME 3 been designed with the visually impaired in mind or something?

Ubuntu and most other distros are like this as well. Have you not run Linux before? It's simply the fonts that are too big. I find when I shrink the font size to 9 everything ends up being more or less like on Windows or OS X. EDIT: Yes though it is a valid point. It definitely needs changing.

Ubuntu and most other distros are like this as well. Have you not run Linux before? It's simply the fonts that are too big. I find when I shrink the font size to 9 everything ends up being more or less like on Windows or OS X.

The font size has little to do with the toolbar and title bar size in GNOME 3. Not to mention it now needs four bars to accomplish the same thing as Mac OS X does with two. That's insane.

I have used Linux before, but for some reason GNOME 3 feels extremely bulky. Even by Linux standards.

Try changing the font. I've done it and everything shrinks. The font absolutely does have a lot (everything) to do with the toolbar. Most parts of the UI except for the titlebar will shrink when lowering the font. I do agree that it's too bulky by default though.

There is a lot of empty space around the fonts and toolbar icons. That has nothing to do with the font size, it's a design decision.

GNOME Shell Extensions is a collections of extensions providing additional functionality for GNOME Shell. The first public release was made two days ago but the extensions didn't really work because of a bug in GNOME Shell - which was fixed today.

Alternative tab: use the classic ALT + Tab

Alternative Status Menu: adds a "Power off" menu item visible at all time (and not just when pressing the ALT key) in the status menu.

Dock: shows a dock-style task switcher to the right side of the screen and is visible all the time (unlike the Dash "dock" displayed on the left that's only displayed in the "Activities" view). Right now, the dock looks almost the same as the Dash dock except it's smaller.

Auto Move Windows: you can assign a specific workspace to each application.

Gajim: Integration with Gajim, a Jabber/XMPP instant messaging client.

User Theme: Loads a shell theme from ~/.themes/THEME_NAME/gnome-shell.

Windows Navigator: Allow keyboard selection of windows and workspaces in overlay mode: when you hold the ALT key, a number is assigned to each window (displayed in the top left corner) and you can then press the number to switch to that window:

Xrandr Indicator: Replace the GTK+ based indicator from gnome-settings-daemon with a native one. Lets the user rotate the laptop monitor and open display preferences quickly.

Source

Download

Why most of these aren't included by default is beyond me.

Not my kind of thing.

The "snapping" goes straight against what I want and expect a window to do when I drag it to the boder of the screen, ie. go through the edge and out of the way to the extent I want it to. If I want windows to fully maximize (or maximize vertically side by side) I can do that already without resorting to triggers fired by completely unrelated actions *shrugs*

I guess I'll eventually give it a good try, but I don't see any advantages that justify crippling my workflow. It'll certainly get nowhere near my work laptop.

Why would you drag a window way to the border? I can't think of a possible real-life situation forcing you to do so.

Why would you drag a window way to the border? I can't think of a possible real-life situation forcing you to do so.

Maybe because I'm not interested in the whole window but just part of it. You might say "ok, then resize it", but then it's the window content what's scaled while the decoration, toolbar, etc... remains the same size, so what's the point. Even while I alt+middleclick drag to resize instead of reaching for the boders It'd still be slower than dragging the window around.

Also I only maximize two apps (the browser and the mail client) and never ever had the need to maximize two apps side by side, so I certainly don't want those two things to happen automatically when I'm actually trying to do something else. If I wanted to maximize vertically I could just middle click the maximize button, which is an action whose effect is only that one and there's no way I can accidentally trigger it.

EDIT: Wow, way to take the idea of Aero Snap completely from Windows and not even mention it as inspiration or anything. That's kind of a douche move. I'm not on the "OMG THEY COPIED THIS" train, but it kind of bugs me what a blatant rip that is of a Windows feature without even recognizing Windows for it :/

Yeah, it made me smirk in disgust. Not the fact they copied it (was bound to happen, everyone copies stuff like someone has mentioned) but the fact they went all "omg look what an awesome thing we invented" on this.

I always wonder why window corners are aliased? I believe this is the same in MS Windows.

Window corners look like crap on both Linux and Windows. Mac OS X is the only one of the three that actually has smooth corners that are properly anti-aliased.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Pretty nice tool, thanks
    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!