digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

GNOME 3.0 officially announced... and explained

arstechnica.com — The developers of the open-source GNOME desktop environment have announced their plans for version 3.0. This milestone will be reached through the current strategy of incremental development.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • amrhassan, on 07/14/2008, -4/+39he didn't even mention the tabs!!
    • RadonPL, on 07/15/2008, -6/+1Sorry, you'll have to wait till 2010 for Gnome 3.0.

      If you want tabs right now, smarten up and use Dolphin or Konqueror in KDE4.
      • rpgmaker, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Until now I've been a gnome guy most of my FLOSS life but I have to say this, one of the main reasons I'm going to seriously try KDE4 when it gets stable enough is Dolphin, is just a beautiful file manager. Kudos to the KDE devs on that, the separation of Web browser and file manager was seriously due.
    • MrSarcasm, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2that mother efer!
    • mohtasham, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2that tab thing was a joke. Tabs are very useful for file managers. I heard nautilus developers are working on adding tab feature to it.
  • SteveMax, on 07/14/2008, -3/+15From the article, Gnome 3.0 will be just Gnome 2.30 with GTK going through a (much needed) complete overhaul. Of course this is a valid plan of action, but it doesn't do much about the "decay" mentioned in the article.
    Can anyone explain this better? Will the GTK improvements alone make Gnome more improveable (sp?), or will there be a need to rewrite some parts of the DE completely to bring it up to speed with more current technologies? Also, how does this fit with the call for a Qt-based Gnome ( http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=3413801 )?
    • Irco, on 07/15/2008, -1/+9The thing is ...the 'decay' that the article refers to is just the fact tha GTK+ was an outdated framework that would not allow Gnome to actually compete with modern desktop environments or third party developers to keep up with new trends, and the fact that the gnome developers were always strict and minimalistic when it came to features, it lead to the dead end they found themselves in and the reason why they are jumping to gnome 3, which is gonna be the same old gnome with the new gtk....now...is it gonna be a revolutionary change to gnome users when 3.0 comes out?...my guess is no, nobody will notice it. Except for perhaps performance changes, it will be the same, and if they achieve that it will be a total _win_ although I really doubt it, you can try and keep interfaces and change all the guts of a system, but if you do major re engineering(like they are planning on) you have to compromise some aspects and I think it could lead to a more or less buggy release which might look just like the old gnome ....KDE developers decided to make two BIG jumps in one release cycle..and it's been really hard for them.
    • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -0/+6Ok, those Qt/Gnome comments are kinda taken out of context.

      Firstly, Mark Shuttleworth has very minimal impact on the direction of Gnome development.
      Secondly, what he said was along the lines of, "I guess that would be possible", not "I think that's a good idea".

      And it's not a good idea. GTK and GLib are the FOUNDATION of the entire Gnome platform. There is pretty much no way to remove them without having to completely rewrite the entire platform and every single application. It's not just a simple porting to a different API - the GObject object model (which is part of GLib) is such a deeply-rooted part of every single GTK application, that removing it would be almost like changing programming languages. And there really wouldn't be any significant benefits to doing so. It's kinda like asking the Linux kernel to switch to using Objective-C or something. Basically there is just no way that is ever ever going to happen.

      The GTK improvements won't really be user-visible, it is mostly just API changes that only developers will notice.
  • brettalton, on 07/14/2008, -7/+23Just please don't make it as messy as the transition to KDE 4.0. Just as KDE 4.1 should have been 4.0, GNOME 2.30 should not be 3.0 unless its ready and stable. Make it 2.32 or 2.34 if you have to, just don't rush it.
    • geoken, on 07/14/2008, -1/+12The difference here is that KDE is still concurrently supporting 3.5.x. There never was a transition because both are currently co-existing.
    • jimminy, on 07/15/2008, -0/+16KDE4 is a complete rewrite. Version 4.0 was released because the API was frozen, making it possible for application developers to actually make and release KDE4 apps. AFAIK 4.0 was never even intended for general desktop usage.
      • Protoss, on 07/15/2008, -2/+12If it wasn't meant for general usage it shouldn't have been advertised as 4.0. They should have labeled it a Developers Preview or something and just released 4.0 when everything was ready.
      • porl, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4they didn't advertise it in the traditional sense. the only way you would be using it is either by using a 'bleeding edge' distro, or downloading and compiling it yourself. neither of these will be done by the general public.
    • Technohamster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+10I think most of the problem is how the distros handled it. openSUSE did things right by offering both 3.5.x and 4.0.x on the install disk. Fedora and Kubuntu screwed things up (no offense).
      • nmnnotmyname, on 07/15/2008, -0/+7I actually agree, but Kubuntu isn't really a good KDE distro. Other distros that are KDE centric are more completed.
      • iofthestorm, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3What is a good KDE distro then? I installed Kubuntu on my laptop as it seemed to be pretty easy to install, much easier than Slackware.
      • Giga, on 07/15/2008, -1/+10Dude, pretty much anything is easier than Slackware.
      • Technohamster, on 07/15/2008, -0/+7openSUSE, Mandriva and PCLinuxOS favor KDE. I think openSUSE 11 totally rocks anyways.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5OpenSuSE 11 is definitally the best KDE4 setup i've used. Gentoo didn't do it for me and Kubuntu also seemed lacking. PCLinuxOS I've seen and looks good. Mandriva is usually good about these things but i haven't tried KDE4 on it because it's been a while since i've used it.
      • GrantTLC, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2For good KDE distros I would suggest looking at Mandriva (my current), MEPIS or OpenSUSE, in approximate order. PCLOS looked good too but I personally couldn't get that to work. Kubuntu sucks by comparison to all of these.
  • nmnnotmyname, on 07/15/2008, -4/+7They already mentioned there would be no major changes between GNOME 2 and 3 a long time ago.

    I think it sucks - If they could just give it enough time, they could improve a lot of horrible horrible things about GNOME (Think GtkFileDialog, that thing i'm absolutely obsessed with hating :P)
    • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9'Major changes' means that they won't be completely ripping out the platform libraries and starting from scratch, or changing to a completely different desktop metaphor, for example. Fixing problems in GtkFileDialog is certainly within scope of what could potentially be changed in the next few years. :)
  • kroni, on 07/15/2008, -12/+1dtich GTK... the whole project is a mess
    • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -0/+8I agree, but why stop there? Ditch X11, and the C programming language while you're at it!

      >.<
  • PATSCRU, on 07/15/2008, -4/+27It has been gnome for some time now that they would announce this.
  • charlie763, on 07/15/2008, -19/+010th post!
  • molom, on 07/15/2008, -2/+7I wanted something interesting like the big changes KDE did with 4.0, Gnome 3.0 won't be exciting?

    'avoids significant user-visible changes or disruption to basic desktop usability'
    Wahhhhhhhhh (Crying)
    • Protoss, on 07/15/2008, -0/+11GNOME is obsessed with not changing much of anything, and sometimes that's good, sometimes it's not. I'd like to see some changes, to bring GNOME up to speed with the major features of KDE4.
    • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Gnome will have big changes, but the difference is that unlike in KDE 4, all the changes won't arrive in one huge release. It will be incremental improvements rather than sudden big changes. See my comment below.
  • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -0/+13A lot of people have comments along the lines of "oh, why won't they have massive changes/improvements that KDE 4 did?"

    The simple fact is that massive change takes a massive amount of time to implement. Suppose you have some huge feature "Feature X" which is really cool but will take 5 years to implement, test, stabilise, etc. Which of the following sounds like a smarter development strategy:

    Strategy A
    Release 3.0 in 2013 with Feature X

    Strategy B
    Release 3.0 in 2010
    Release 3.Y in 2013 with Feature X

    Obviously Strategy B is smarter, since Feature X still takes exactly the same amount of time to develop, but it won't delay all the OTHER features that are coming in 3.0. And if you think that Strategy A is better, why wait for Feature X which will be ready in 2013, when there is the really awesome Feature Z which will be done by 2015? And Feature Q which will be done in 2020? If you keep delaying your release because _eventually_ a really cool feature will be ready, you will end up just never ever end up releasing.

    The difference between these two strategies is that with Strategy A, all the changes will come at once, so it seems like there are lots more changes than with Strategy B. In the end it is actually the same for the end user.
    • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -1/+6Of course there is also

      Strategy C
      Release 3.0 in 2010 with Feature X completely broken and unstable

      I don't think I need to argue that's a bad idea.
      • Culyt, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Actually that is a good idea, you just need to ensure feature X is disabled by default.

        If there is something broken in it then someone will be more likely to fix it, also if its in there then developers can work on it easier rather than trying to find the patch to apply to add the prototype feature X.

        ☢
      • cornflakepirate, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3You're right. But from a user's perspective, "disabled by default" is effectively the same as "not even there", which would make it the same as Strategy B. The point I'm making is that either:

        * you don't get the feature, or
        * the release gets delayed, or
        * the feature is unstable

        so anybody complaining about lack of spiffy new features should be prepared for either delays or instabilities. Personally I would prefer my releases to be on-time and stable, and that's also what the Gnome release teams prefers. :)
  • sloppychris, on 07/15/2008, -1/+34Gnome is such a great compliment to KDE. KDE focuses on developing new ideas plus allowing control, and Gnome is centered on stability and simplicity. They fulfill their intentions perfectly. I love the having the option between them.
    • halfabean, on 07/15/2008, -0/+8im with you. i dont see why people feel the need to trash one or the other. having options is fantastic.
      • RUGERSP101, on 07/15/2008, -9/+0I agree, if you are a flaming homosexual you should be free to use KDE.
    • Drazzard, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2@sloppychris: that could be the most truthful/important comment i've seen on ths page.
  • rlbond86, on 07/15/2008, -12/+6Maybe it won't suck now. Right now it's KDE for me.
  • JamJosh, on 07/15/2008, -7/+4Don't forget to mention Rocket Fuel Malt Liquor 2.0. Now the drink that takes the parties to the next level has itself been taken to the next level. Now you can get even more crezappy!! you crazy dilznoofus with ROCKET FUEL MALT LIQUOR...DAMN!!!!!
  • GrantTLC, on 07/15/2008, -5/+2Reading the article, I think it's funny how Gnome users all got disgruntled with Gnome RIGHT about the time KDE users were all fired up with the massive level of innovation promised in KDE 4.

    Jealous much? ;)
    • moduc, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3I am not sure why people like KDE 4 so much. I installed it, but switch back to 3.5 because it lacks so much stuffs. The graphics looks nice, but lacking features doesn't cut it for me. The missing features are so important that maybe command line people like KDE4, but then what's the point of KDE4? It would be interesting to hear from people who actually use KDE4 and KDE3.5 share their point of view? Anyone? BTW, I use OpenSuse 11.
    • MeneerR, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Nobody is jealous on KDE4 .. but gnome people do like to see progress, and there are things that can't easily be fixed, without re-thinking some infrastructure.

      Also, the desktop metaphor has been evolving and really needs some new metaphors and guidelines. Or we -will- end up with tab-pages in a calculator that minimizes itself to the notification area ..
  • Vadi0, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3"Incrementalism is among GNOME's defining values and is one of the major factors that has contributed to GNOME's popularity with commercial Linux distributors. GNOME's developers concluded that a radical departure from conventional desktop idioms was ultimately not in the best interest of end users."

    ... and that's why Gnome is Ubuntu's default and mine too. (but hey, I keep some KDE programs about too. Yay cooperation)
  • jabz, on 07/15/2008, -0/+10"Unlike KDE 4.0, which produced impressive innovation and accelerated development at the cost of user trust and overall desktop stability, the GNOME 3.0 plan is less ambitious, largely builds on the GNOME desktop environment's current strategy, and avoids significant user-visible changes or disruption to basic desktop usability."

    Sounds good to me.
    • ufee, on 07/15/2008, -2/+3Me too. I personally hate KDE 4. Everything about it.
    • greywolfexcel, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Err, how is this different from the current development plan with a slight change in direction (and not method of travel)?
  • MrViklund, on 07/15/2008, -11/+5Sorry but KDE > Gnome
  • manstein01, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Interesting strategy. I look forward to seeing what the Gnome team comes up with.

    Gnome's ease of use cannot be argued with, but I love the KDE control center. It took me six months to learn all the options! Guess that's the beauty of Linux, you can choose what you like. And somewhere, a Microsoft fan's head just exploded.
  • Stupidumb, on 07/15/2008, -3/+3This is the best Linux yet!
  • davidkeithjones, on 07/15/2008, -12/+1zzzzzzzzz.........zzzzzzz........zzzzzzzzz........Linux people get so excited about little things, it makes me sad.

    Don't worry, one day you will be just like Windows!
  • starkes, on 07/15/2008, -6/+1nice!

    seriously, nobody wants kde anymore it seems.
    seems like they thought of some cool ideas and decided we'd like them, but gnome has the flow.
  • dragoninsane, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2Whats in the Name-game,improve functionality,usability,aesthetics,look n feel,fix bugs and crashes.well there are plenty features to improve rather than focusing on Version Names.also there are plenty of hardware and software improvements needed from ground start.
  • whitenerdy92, on 07/15/2008, -3/+2Meh. I dont get excited until i see some screenshots.
  • dtfinch, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5I'll get excited when I can scroll a page of text in gedit faster than 3fps.
    • skyshock1, on 07/15/2008, -0/+6Use vi.
    • Technohamster, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1Use emacs.
    • Lazaryn, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1That's a problem with your display driver, not Gnome. Google for solutions.
      • dtfinch, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2Text rendering is the only thing that's slow.
  • CoMpUtErITGuY, on 07/15/2008, -5/+1OMG!!!!!!! Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • skyshock1, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3I'm VERY much looking forward to the GTK Webkit port. It's going to be a much welcomed respite from that abhorrent Gecko engine the Mozilla team seems hell bent on using.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.