gnome should never have existed at all, it's just a waste of developers time.
they should have join XFCE and KDE projects.
GNOME delays 3.0 release
Summary
The release of the next major upgrade of the GNOME desktop, GNOME 3.0, has been pushed back to September 2010.
Topics
The release of the next major upgrade of the GNOME desktop, GNOME 3.0, has been pushed back to September 2010. GNOME 2.30 is still intended for a March 2010 release.
This announcement, made by GNOME foundation director Vincent Untz, reverses previous plans to make the release of GNOME 2.30 the first release of GNOME 3.0.
"Note that this release date for 3.0 doesn't mean that 2.30 will be less stable than usual," said Untz. "On the contrary, this will help us integrate the changes that are ready for 2.30, while leaving the parts that are still rough on the edges outside of GNOME, as used daily by our users, until after 2.30 is out. This will solidify both our 2.30 and 3.0 releases."
For more, read GNOME delays 3.0 release on ZDNet Australia.
Talkback Most Recent of 21 Talkback(s)
-
ljenux-2304376600766755823441610560426510th Nov 2009 -
KDE 4.3 ....
Just plain stinks ... not ready for prime time.
Me, I prefer 3.5.10 ...
linux4u10th Nov 2009 -
kde 4.3. doesn't stink
you are just spoiled by the extremly high standards of kde 3.5.
i am too, and i still use it.
but,
look what gnome can do, or windows desktop can do, and you'll see how good is kde 4.3.ljenux-2304376600766755823441610560426510th Nov 2009 -
You've got to be kidding
I loved KDE back in the days of RedHat 7.0. But, honestly, since about RedHat 7.1 KDE's been about as stable as Charles Manson on crack. I'd rather go with anything but KDE. Hell, I'd even go as far as going with Windows ME over KDE. At least my computer would be more stable.
Necrolin10th Nov 2009 -
Key word: Red Hat
Your problem is not KDE, it is RedHat. Ever since Red Hat gave GNOME a preference over KDE they do a poor job a presetting KDE because they don't care.
Run KDE on for example Mandriva and Suse and you will see the huge difference.
wackoae10th Nov 2009 -
Actually
I really like the look and the tools that come
with KDE so I've tried to use it a few times. I
regularly install it about once a year to year
and a half in the hopes that the situation has
improved. There's a lot of useful features and
tools in that desktop environment, but here's
my latest experience (about 6 months ago):
1) Installed up Kubuntu: -regular random
crashes every 10 minutes +/-. GUI config for
wireless networking not working requiring
manually editing config files for networking.
2) Installed Fedora KDE version. Worked rather
well, but had random crashes every 45 minutes.
Package manager borked and would regularly
freeze up partway through searches/installs.
3) Loaded up Mandriva Live CD: -crashed within
1 minute.... gave up.
On the other hand Gnome has been working fine,
without crashes, since the year 2000. The only
complaint I have against Gnome is that it's
starting to look rather old.Necrolin10th Nov 2009 -
Need to try a KDE centric Distro
I think Fedora and Kubuntu are not considered
KDE showcases. I think people just bash KDE for
stability like they bash RPM for dependency
hell. Old news from years ago that just Freedom Crusaders repeated for years. Now that KDE has
a LGPL I would have thought these items would
drop. Sure 4.0 a BETA had stability and
features issues but 4.2 and 4.3 have been
stable.
The nice thing is that Linux = choice and if
your personal choice is GNOME more power to
you.
Personally I choice KDE and I prefer Arch Linux
or OpenSUSE.
mtelesha13th Nov 2009 -
Looking at the fact....
....that most "normal" people seem to be using Ubuntu and Fedora I'd say I disagree. If anything they are probably pretty equal.
I'm a bit concerned about this Gnome 3.0 move. While it looks neat it doesn't seem to have concern for what I think would be the better things to work on. I'm almost afraid its change for the sake of change. I'm really not a fan of KDE. I'm one of those in the crowd that thinks its butt ugly. But if Gnome screws this up I guess thats where I'll be headed first until I try out some of the other DE's.
storm14k10th Nov 2009 -
Actually, normal people use pre-installed Linux
Regular people don't install Linux. They just buy it pre-installed.
Ubuntu is not even the top Linux distro today. It is still Red Hat, followed by Suse and Mandriva ... then Ubuntu. Fedora is not even in the radar (not to mention it is one of the WORST free distros out there).
Ubuntu is the talk of the town, but is not on top on the usage list. Fedora is a well known name ... but people who know better, stay the hell away from it.
wackoae10th Nov 2009 -
Where do you get these numbers?
Um where do you get your numbers from? I would be
SHOCKED that Mandriva has more users then Ubuntu!
I use Mandriva on my family living room computer
and OpenSUSE on my personal computer (With Arch
Linux from time to time). I would be shocked that
SUSE has half as many users as Ubuntu.mtelesha13th Nov 2009 -
actually, normal people use windows
or osx, according to most pie charts.
I'll admit not using GNOME since 1.x. Kbuntu isn't bad.
zacharias.stankiewicz@...10th Nov 2009 -
Normal People Don't Use Linux
There's nothing good about being normal, but it's silly to pretend that there is such a thing as a Linux user who is normal.
Embrace your inner freak, Linux users. It's a good thing.
tomonroad13th Nov 2009 -
I'm re-thinking Gnome
I started with KDE for reconfigurability, I then moved to Gnome for convenience. But now that I have Karmic and see the crippling changes Gnome is doing, I am re-thinking it.
Before: Configure Login screen to allow remote login
Now: Open a configuration file which actually changed name and configure manually.
Before: Ability to remote login from the GDM
Now: Not any more.
Before: Volume control with mute check box
Now: Right click mute (not intuitive)
And more. It seems that instead of adding functionality they keep removing options from all configuration screens. I would understand putting them under an "advanced" configuration but totally removing them?
rarsa10th Nov 2009 -
For Dummies
Exactly, they bring a whole new meaning to "Gnome for
Dummies". KDE is coming back into its own after pretty
much a total rewrite using modern code.
bigpicture10th Nov 2009 -
GNOME sucks
I recently gave GNOME another try and I'm still dissapointed at the fact that I can still crash it within 10 mins of usage with the same steps I reported in 2004 (ie: 5 years ago).
The arrogant pricks closed the bug reports with "that is not how you are supposed to this" and other "stupid user" remarks instead of actually fixing the bug. Guess what, 5 years later I can still crash GNOME with the same simple steps. And when I say crash, it is the RED screen of death.
On top of that, GNOME still fails miserably at usability (for example, having the Cancel button, a high priority button on the left and away from the mouse is idiotic) and the developers still have the problem of deleting instead of fixing. If one of their tools or feature has problems and is not in their cool list, they just erase it from the next update and people are left wondering what happen to the tool/feature they got used to.wackoae10th Nov 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
