Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
hhh wrote:re: visible list of open windows, I require this too. There are 2 extension options, Dock and Panel-Docklet v14...
I hope that helps you. I use panel-docklet as middle-clicking an app's icon closes the app and it has a slew of configurations.
Thank you a lot for this. Panel Docklet looks great and has many features. I definitely have to try it.
Whenever I use Gnome 3, I end opening many instances of the same application just because I forgot that it had already been opened. In Gnome 2, I even set the window list in the panel to show all windows of all workspaces.
I seem to recall that alt+tab scrolled through all apps of all desktops, which i liked. Else i got the same apps open on the same desktop anwyway. And always. I know where they are.
"I am not fine with it, so there is nothing for me to do but stand aside." M.D.
hhh wrote:Power button? You know that the Shift key shows the shutdown option when that menu is open, don't you?
Actually, it is the Alt button on my Wheezy machine. Thanks for pointing this out. I must say, though, that this is the stupidest crap I've seen in my life. How the hell is the target audience for Gnome3, amateurs, supposed to figure this out?
hhh wrote:Power button? You know that the Shift key shows the shutdown option when that menu is open, don't you?
Actually, it is the Alt button on my Wheezy machine. Thanks for pointing this out. I must say, though, that this is the stupidest crap I've seen in my life. How the hell is the target audience for Gnome3, amateurs, supposed to figure this out?
No problem. Right, Alt. I'm out of town and was going from memory, sorry. And although I and hundreds of others agree with your last statement, the devs had their reasoning (the devs have ceded and the Power Off option is visible by default in 3.6 again) and there also is this...
It's just that that doesn't always help, in the slightest.
After reading this link and others, I learned that Gnome 3.6 actually removes useful features from Nautilus. This makes me happy that Wheezy is stuck on Gnome 3.4. A good thing, for the best of the Gnome 3.x series will be available in Debian for more than 3 years.
I've used Xfce since around 1998 or 1999, but I've been experimenting with Gnome 3 lately, and think it's OK. I'm living with the irritating parts for now, and trying to mimick Xfce features in the extensions (e.g., nautilus-actions). We'll see how long it lasts...
UPDATE: In the most recent update of Gnome 3, Wheezy has included the Power Off button in the menu! I loves me some Debian!
There are a few good improvements in gnome 3.6, but I've found 3.6 to be very buggy in every distro I've tried it on. I actually recently installed wheezy *because* it has gnome 3.4, which runs very stable for me. I actually much prefer gnome 3.x to gnome 2, but I feel like lately "stable" releases of gnome have been glorified betas.
I've read in the forums belonging to other Debian-derived distros some warnings of missing features in Nautilus and overall bugginess in Gnome 3.6 too. Don't know how true they are since I've only run any of the Gnome 3.x DEs in Debian Wheezy. But I am pretty happy with Gnome 3.4, much as I once excoriated Gnome developers for abandoning a functioning DE (the 2.x series) which I liked and which met my needs well. I could wish that Gnome 3.4 was just a bit more customizable than it seems to be, but could be I've yet to figure out how to do certain things too. And for me, that's a very minor gripe. It worked (and works) great for me as installed.
I had some huge gripes with the changing desktop background in Gnome 3.6. I also do no like how some programs have multiple menus in different places. It is hard to know if a feature is in the 'little gear' or 'top panel' menu. That being said they are minor complaints. It is overall a much better experience than Gnome 3.4 (which is already ok).
The nail in the coffin for me is that the compositing is so heavy. It has obvious performance issues when I run games and applications with intensive drawing. I have decent framerates using other desktops, even KDE with compositing. I decided it was far too annoying to switch in and out of the gnome desktop to fallback or another light window manager just to play games. I switched my main computer over to KDE 4.8.
vbrummond wrote:I switched my main computer over to KDE 4.8.
Been there, done that, etc...
And in a few months you'll switch again... to be honest the problem is that the three main DEs are crap and all three have enough issues to write a book about.
cynwulf wrote:And in a few months you'll switch again... to be honest the problem is that the three main DEs are crap and all three have enough issues to write a book about.
Too right. It gets to the point of frustration. I ask myself: Which is the lesser of all of the evils that I can install/recommend for Linux beginners?
I can only give my opinion, but I'd choose KDE or Xfce over gnome any day of the week - and I don't say that only because of it's awful bastardisation of a GUI...
KDE however is a big bloated beast with some good apps, but with tons of bells and whistles which most people don't want, know about or need. Yet for all it's bloat and features they couldn't manage simple old fashioned desktop icons (which I don't use, but many if not all KDE 3.x users probably did)...
Xfce and anything gtk2 based has always run like crap on any system I've installed it on - I suppose if you have something really high end you won't notice it, but my system are mediocre at best (but not antiques either). I find gnome-shell and KDE more responsive.
For me I can only get a system running to my liking without the bloat and without all of the gnome, mono and Qt crap, by using simple window managers.
I have only seen gtk3 stuff on other people's screen grabs, so cannot comment on them, but when it comes to icons and themes, I have always preferred gtk2 over qt. KDE's icons never appealed to me.
I don't hate Gnome3, but like many other posters the niggling issues have driven me to try other desktop environments. I just finished a several day trial of KDE and, while I liked using it, it was still unstable compared to Gnome or XFCE. The niggling problems were things like installing programs and not having them appear in the menu (not obscure packages I compiled myself but core KDE applications) and not having configuration changes stick. The most aggravating issue was that, at login, performance would be dreadful until I stopped and restarted kwin. One thing I can say for Gnome3 is that I've found it to be remarkablly stable (particularly for a young project).
I'm currently giving Cinnamon a shot and liking it quite a bit. As it uses mostly Gnome3 components it's an easy install (I think there's six packages total). I could see this as a good place for old and new Linux users - it's quick, more configurable than Gnome3, it doesn't break the traditional metaphors and it still gives you some modern eye candy. Even though I've installed the development release from Sid, it's stable enough to use as a daily driver. I'd really like to see it in backports once Wheezy goes stable.
however "we the debian users community" feel about the DE's our complaints fall on "deef" ears.
As the tide of "hardware enhancements?" edd and flow like the seas
it becomes an endless parade of SNS written by authors who
don't care much about how code intereacts on bare hardware.
A lot is now written for VM's an such or other architectures.
The new chips that are included in the DRM code we run everyday
is staggering.
Then take into account what is being built into the kernel these days.
What will happen if / when Linus retires?
In memory of Ian Ashley Murdock (1973 - 2015) founder of the Debian project.
cynwulf wrote:For me I can only get a system running to my liking without the bloat and without all of the gnome, mono and Qt crap, by using simple window managers.
Quoted for truth.
Q: Why is the Eunux kernel so bloated?
A: It was made in the image of its founder.
