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

 

 

 

Bonkers Gnome

Graphical Environments, Managers, Multimedia & Desktop questions.
Message
Author
trinidad
Posts: 289
Joined: 2016-08-04 14:58
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#21 Post by trinidad »

Would any Gnome users or DDs care to join the discussion?
The first actual Linux DE I ever used was Suse with KDE, which at the time (circa 1999) was impressive but not what KDE is today. I was an electrical/engineer at the time working mostly on IBM workstation/mainframe software, and more and more being forced to work with, actually transitioning to, MS office and MS word for documentation purposes which was an absolute pain. I can only applaud Linux DE developers for being able to continue to swim on against the tide of the MS oligarchy in business.

That said there are several reasons why I use gnome, but not one of them has anything to do with the DE appearance. The foremost reason is because I prefer Debian stable and have had the best experience with it as far as bugs and software compatibility. I have found it to be the least problematic, and filled with the most reliably functional software, and in all honesty I really don't particularly care about the appearance, as in general I am using a dozen applications at once and once started I never notice or need the base DE anyway. I just want it to work reliably and Debian stable with gnome does accomplish that impressively, and it is aimed at an inevitable future forced upon Linux in general by the RHEL/MS agreements. Wayland has already come to WSL with its modified weston and MS is dedicated to cross platform compatibility more and more though the concessions always seem to land on the Linux DE side due to MS's hardware exclusivity agreements. So yes, I do prefer gnome because it is the default DE for Debian stable, and allows for the most software compatibility, and runs wayland.

I install Linux software for new users coming from bad Windows experiences pretty regularly and I always install Linux Lite as their first experience with Linux. It is an XFCE rendering with some intuitive simple add on applications that they find easy to grasp, and one of the most new user friendly communities in Linux, and a dedicated and available developer. Know it or not most Windows users find XFCE the simplest Linux DE to pick up on. Why not, given that their previous experience other than typing letters in MSWord was all with mouse driven menus, the very opposite of my own first experiences.

I use gnome because it is the default DE for Debian stable, and thus has the most already configured available software, and is the least problematic DE and most compatible DE for stable. If another DE becomes the default for Debian stable I will use that one. I don't hate or love DEs, but I really love stability. I hate repairing my own systems because all I do most days is repair other people's systems. A couple hundred MB of RAM doesn't mean much to 8G or more of onboard RAM, a four core or more CPU, and a 1T drive. ANY DE running under 1G RAM is not bloated. The capabilities of today's modern Linux software and applications has overwhelmingly accomplished just the opposite of bloat. If you're old enough remember what you used to be able to do on computer GUIs compared to what you can do now my point about bloat becomes obvious.

TC
You can't believe your eyes if your imagination is out of focus.

User avatar
craigevil
Posts: 5391
Joined: 2006-09-17 03:17
Location: heaven
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#22 Post by craigevil »

MATE on my Raspberry Pi400

Code: Select all

free
               total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:            3794         715        1037         144        2041        2789
Swap:           3171           8        3163
Total:          6966         723        4201
inxi output, note the Uptime: 10h 33m. Ram usage is roughly 200MB less at boot.

Code: Select all

inxi -Ffxxxz
System:    Kernel: 5.10.63-v8+ aarch64 bits: 64 compiler: N/A Desktop: MATE 1.24.1 info: mate-panel, plank wm: marco 1.24.1 
           vt: 7 dm: LightDM 1.26.0 Distro: Raspberry Pi OS base: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid 
Machine:   Type: ARM Device System: Raspberry Pi 400 Rev 1.0 details: BCM2835 rev: c03130 serial: <filter> 
CPU:       Info: Quad Core model: N/A variant: cortex-a72 bits: 64 type: MCP arch: ARMv8 rev: 3 bogomips: 432 
           Speed: 2200 MHz max: 2200 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 2200 2: 2200 3: 2200 4: 2200 
           Features: asimd cpuid crc32 evtstrm fp 
Graphics:  Device-1: bcm2711-hdmi0 driver: vc4_hdmi v: N/A bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:fef00700 class-ID: hdmi 
           Device-2: bcm2711-hdmi1 driver: vc4_hdmi v: N/A bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:fef05700 class-ID: hdmi 
           Device-3: bcm2711-vc5 driver: vc4_drm v: N/A bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:gpu class-ID: gpu 
           Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.11 compositor: marco v: 1.24.1 driver: loaded: modesetting unloaded: fbdev 
           resolution: 1920x1080~60Hz s-dpi: 96 
           OpenGL: renderer: V3D 4.2 v: 2.1 Mesa 21.2.1 direct render: Yes 
Audio:     Device-1: bcm2711-hdmi0 driver: vc4_hdmi bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:fef00700 class-ID: hdmi 
           Device-2: bcm2711-hdmi1 driver: vc4_hdmi bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:fef05700 class-ID: hdmi 
           Device-3: bcm2835-audio driver: bcm2835_audio bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:bcm2835_audio class-ID: bcm2835_audio 
           Device-4: Logitech Logitech USB Headset type: USB driver: hid-generic,snd-usb-audio,usbhid bus-ID: 1-1.2.2:6 
           chip-ID: 046d:0a8f class-ID: 0300 
           Sound Server-1: ALSA v: k5.10.63-v8+ running: yes 
           Sound Server-2: PulseAudio v: 15.0 running: yes 
Network:   Device-1: bcm2835-mmc driver: mmc_bcm2835 v: N/A port: N/A bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:fe300000 class-ID: mmcnr 
           IF: wlan0 state: up mac: <filter> 
           Device-2: bcm2711-genet-v5 driver: bcmgenet v: N/A port: N/A bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: brcm:fd580000 class-ID: ethernet 
           IF: eth0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
           IF-ID-1: proton0 state: unknown speed: 10 Mbps duplex: full mac: N/A 
Bluetooth: Device-1: pl011 driver: uart_pl011 bus-ID: N/A chip-ID: arm:fe201000 class-ID: serial 
           Report: hciconfig ID: hci0 rfk-id: 1 state: up address: <filter> bt-v: 3.0 lmp-v: 5.0 sub-v: 6606 hci-v: 5.0 
           rev: 36 
Drives:    Local Storage: total: 936.93 GiB used: 217.31 GiB (23.2%) 
           ID-1: /dev/mmcblk0 model: SD256 size: 238.3 GiB type: SSD serial: <filter> scheme: MBR 
           ID-2: /dev/sda type: USB vendor: SanDisk model: USB 3.2Gen1 size: 232.88 GiB type: N/A serial: <filter> rev: 1.00 
           scheme: MBR 
           ID-3: /dev/sdb type: USB vendor: Samsung model: PSSD T7 size: 465.76 GiB type: SSD serial: <filter> scheme: MBR 
Partition: ID-1: / size: 458.2 GiB used: 58.45 GiB (12.8%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sdb2 
           ID-2: /boot size: 252 MiB used: 48.1 MiB (19.1%) fs: vfat dev: /dev/sdb1 
Swap:      ID-1: swap-1 type: file size: 100 MiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) priority: -2 file: /var/swap 
           ID-2: swap-2 type: zram size: 3 GiB used: 9.8 MiB (0.3%) priority: 100 dev: /dev/zram0 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 45.8 C mobo: N/A 
           Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A 
Info:      Processes: 233 Uptime: 10h 33m Memory: 3.78 GiB used: 1.48 GiB (39.3%) gpu: 76 MiB Init: systemd v: 247 runlevel: 5 
           target: graphical.target Compilers: gcc: 10.3.0 alt: 10 Packages: 2735 apt: 2727 flatpak: 8 Shell: Bash v: 5.1.8 
           running-in: guake inxi: 3.3.06 
Raspberry PI 400 Distro: Raspberry Pi OS Base: Debian Sid Kernel: 5.15.69-v8+ aarch64 DE: MATE Ram 4GB
Debian - "If you can't apt install something, it isn't useful or doesn't exist"
My Giant Sources.list

User avatar
oswaldkelso
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1485
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#23 Post by oswaldkelso »

trinidad

Thanks for replying. But Windows, RHEL, Wayland and WSL are not good enough reasons for me to use Gnome. In fact It's the very opposite. The more they embed and enforce a monoculture the more I move away. I can see in a few years I'll be living in a terminal surfing gemini posts.
"That said there are several reasons why I use gnome, but not one of them has anything to do with the DE appearance."
My critique was not about it's appearance. Gnome looks quite nice and clean to me.
" I use gnome because it is the default DE for Debian stable, and thus has the most already configured available software, and is the least problematic DE and most compatible DE for stable."
You raise a good point about it being the default. But that's an issue for many. IMHO Xfce should be the default as it's the nearest thing to a traditional DE we have. It's also the best when it comes to lower end hardware. As for problematic and compatible I wonder how many new users have given up on Gnu/Linux after being presented with a bloated Gnome DE with it's high hardware requirements with it's poorly designed inefficient interface.

I just don't understand why anyone would want to use such a poorly designed interface. Especially one that is so bloated. An interface that many try and fix by adding more software! I just don't get it.

https://gitlab.gnome.org/groups/GNOME/-/issues Now I know Gnomes a big project but 29k is a lot of issues. Maybe it's to big. The Unix philosophy "Do One Thing And Do It Well." springs to my mind
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
My oldest used PC: 1999 imac 333Mhz 256MB PPC abandoned by Debian

User avatar
golinux
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2010-12-09 00:56
Location: not a 'buntard!
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#24 Post by golinux »

Perhaps some historical context would be useful. This gem from nearly a decade ago puts all the pieces together quite nicely:
GNOME (et al): Rotting In Threes
May the FORK be with you!

trinidad
Posts: 289
Joined: 2016-08-04 14:58
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#25 Post by trinidad »

I wonder how many new users have given up on Gnu/Linux after being presented with a bloated Gnome DE with it's high hardware requirements
I'm sure there are many, but rescuing 20 year old Windows/OEM hardware with 5% of the computing power of a modern cell phone is hardly the goal, and should not be the goal of a modern Linux system. As I mentioned, I often do such old computer rescue for users with financial limitations, but this is no path to the future, more of a mix of hobbyist interest and compassionate motivations in my case. In the modern hardware world, Linux, any Linux, can hardly be characterized as bloated. Comments about bloat are just an Internet meme to me. The problem facing us all has always been the same: MS agreements and partnerships with OEM hardware manufacturers. The actual dent we have made is in servers, networking, and network security, things which do not necessarily directly fall into a consumer category, but rather more like an implementing infrastructure kind of category that a consumer rents rather than owns. DEs are just not particularly important in that category.

All of that said, it would be very nice to have a centralized archive of old kernels, OS's and DEs to draw upon to operate old hardware, but again that is from a hobbyist's point of view, kind of like what is attempted with Gopher.

Regards
TC
You can't believe your eyes if your imagination is out of focus.

User avatar
oswaldkelso
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1485
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#26 Post by oswaldkelso »

^
Sorry I don't buy the it's designed for newer hardware argument. Gnome and other De's are primarily as aimed at office workers be they at home or in the companies office. If you happen to take a look in many offices you'll see many old machines because of what they do. Word processing, spreadsheets, email, browsing and calendar applications are the bread and butter of most office machines. Many still running Windows 7. As far as I can tell no one has stated that keeping old hardware alive is the goal of Gnu/Linux. That fact it can be done is more a reflection on the floss nature of the software and the Unix philosophy. Certainly nothing to do with Gnome.

As for networking you're correct it has absolutely bog all to to with a DE, Gnome included. I access my next-cloud and freedombox from all my devices old and new just dandy.

What is bonkers is putting loads of energy in to creating a Desktop that does most things slower and more inefficiently than what Gnu/Linux has already. No standing on the shoulders of giants for Gnome. Watching people that have used nothing but Windows and MacOS or desktops that were derived from them for the last 30 years will not teach you much about how to improve your Desktop.

https://developer.gnome.org/hig/index.html Make it Simple = fail. Reduce User Effort = fail. Be Considerate = partial fail. In short they fell at the first hurdle. Making it the default in Debian and inflicting it on unsuspecting users is a travesty. It reminds me of the old chopper bicycles. Looked pretty cool but you wouldn't want to ride it more than a mile.
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
My oldest used PC: 1999 imac 333Mhz 256MB PPC abandoned by Debian

User avatar
Onsemeliot
Posts: 333
Joined: 2010-12-15 14:43
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#27 Post by Onsemeliot »

I have chosen to use GNOME 3 when Debian made it the default. At first it was strange and I didn't really like it. But it took me only maybe some days to get used to it. Back then it was still slow and it had less features compared to GNOME 2. But I instantly loved the sparse interface which only ever shows me the features that can be used in this context. I also love the padding and minimalistic design. I also am very fond of how quickly I can access the functions I frequently need by using simple keyboard commands. (I usually customise it to even autohide all panels.) I am annoyed by any desktop icons and love just seeing only the background image when I boot up my system. This feels like a sober focused start. Just pressing the super button gives me access to everything I usually want (if I'm not only wanting to switch between application windows anyway which I can easily do without using the mouse).
GNOME 3 ran pretty well on my weak old Acer Extensa 5220 with only 2 GB of RAM. Later it became more heavy and it wasn't even really practical to use on a laptop with only 4GB of RAM any more. But then they improved performance and added many features I missed. A typical example is how easy it now is to rename several files at once in Nautilus. GNOME 3 I don't want to customise very much because it already pleases my eye out of the box without showing me stuff I most of the time don't want to see. I often use "F11" to make single application windows full screen to even get rid of the most of the time useless top window frame. Of course I need to know in which application I am in but most of the time I am very aware of that and it is great to have all the space I can have for the application at hand. And since "Alt+Tab" is such an easy command I can neatly switch between my applications without ever touching the mouse. There is just no need for any permanent header bars or menus. If anything: For my taste GNOME 3 could even be more radical with hiding UI elements out of the box. (Surely then it would need some good optional UI introduction when first starting the system.)

For weak systems with less than 8GB of RAM I gladly use LXDE which is somewhat limited but shares the sparse interface (when I select a flat design) which GNOME 3 which I indeed like very much. I quite like Xfce but I never chose to use it as my daily driver because I actually prefer the interaction I can use on GNOME 3. I suspect I could get used to Xfce again but it feels like I would go backwards since it (by default) is more dependant on mouse interaction. For some reason I can't really like MATE even if it shouldn't be much different from Xfce. I suspect I could get used to it as well. But as with Xfce it feels backwards to me.

Plasma has come a long way and I applause its performance gains. But I was never fond of packed option menus. Between LXDE and LXQt I prefer the former for its better capability to deal with small screens (like an Asus EeePC with only 1024x600 pixel resolution) and its lower footprint. I never actually tested any of the other Desktops. But from what I have seen they seem to feel like variations/combinations of the already mentioned desktops.

Here you have it: I actually do prefer GNOME 3 on somewhat recent systems but I never had issues with it even if we in our organisation are getting cheap used computers for all co-workers. But surely on every system with less than 8 GB of RAM I wouldn't recommend using GNOME 3. But such devices my colleagues don't want to use for other reasons in the first place since for example they can't work with horrible heavy web pages like Facebook on those.

steve_v
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1396
Joined: 2012-10-06 05:31
Location: /dev/chair
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 173 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#28 Post by steve_v »

golinux wrote: 2021-09-19 18:50This gem from nearly a decade ago puts all the pieces together quite nicely
That blog, while rather rant-y, is right on point. It's sad too, because GNOME used to be awesome, before all the madness.
IIRC even Linus posted a good rant about GNOME3 at one point, and he's not usually one for commentary on DE choice beyond "get out of my way so I can hack on the kernel".

Onsemeliot wrote: 2021-09-25 08:13I instantly loved the sparse interface which only ever shows me the features that can be used in this context. I also love the padding and minimalistic design. I also am very fond of how quickly I can access the functions I frequently need by using simple keyboard commands. (I usually customise it to even autohide all panels.) I am annoyed by any desktop icons and love just seeing only the background image when I boot up my system. This feels like a sober focused start. Just pressing the super button gives me access to everything I usually want
While minimalism isn't my thing personally, I can certainly understand the appeal... My problems with the UX decisions in GNOME 3+ aren't because it's minimalistic by default, they're because it's minimalistic or GTFO.
With XFCE, LXDE, MATE, Cinnamon, or Plasma, one can set up the desktop to be as minimal or not as you please. If you want desktop icons, have desktop icons. If you don't, don't. The same goes for panels, buttons in window headers, keyboard shortcuts, status icons, and a whole slew of other features.

TBF I don't interact with the traditional panel, launcher, or desktop icons in my plasma desktop much either - I do pretty much everything with keyboard shortcuts and krunner (krunner is awesome BTW).
But the other things are there if I want them, I can disable them or reconfigure them, I can change their appearance, behaviour and position. In short, it's my desktop to set up as I see fit. As it should be.

On the other hand, the GNOME devs have openly stated that they don't want users to be able to change the UI. At all. They know best, and it's the GNOME way or go away.
The top panel is somehow sacred, themes are evil, and features get removed without warning because they don't fit the "GNOME experience" or don't fit with the "brand image".
Even GTK itself, once the most popular general-purpose UI toolkit on GNU/Linux, is now the GNOME Toolkit. No thought at all seems to be being given to not breaking non-GNOME apps that use it, or to making it at all functional outside a GNOME desktop. Things that are horribly broken, constantly complained about, and borderline unusable outside the GNOME workflow paradigm (I'm looking at the GTK3 file-picker in particular) just don't get fixed. Because the GNOME way, and screw anyone else.

I don't know where this brain-damaged attitude came from, but IMO it's outright antithetical to the open, collaborative FOSS spirit I've become accustomed to over the last ~20 years. It separates the users and the developers in a way that feels more like a committee-designed commercial product than a community-driven free software project, and that alone is enough to keep me from using, supporting or promoting it.
It's also a complete about-face from the early (open, flexible, hackable) days of GNOME, so much so it might as well be a completely different project since RedHat & co got hold of it. Where KDE used to be the commercially-tainted (i.e. Trolltech) child that doesn't play well with others or look right with non-KDE apps, now the roles are completely reversed.


TLDR? Minimalism is fine, enforced minimalism and restrictions that completely disregard the wishes of the community (and often application developers too) is not. It's the opposite of fine in fact. So is constantly breaking third-party apps and themes.


Onsemeliot wrote: 2021-09-25 08:13I actually do prefer GNOME 3 on somewhat recent systems but I never had issues with it even if we in our organisation are getting cheap used computers for all co-workers. But surely on every system with less than 8 GB of RAM I wouldn't recommend using GNOME 3. But such devices my colleagues don't want to use for other reasons in the first place since for example they can't work with horrible heavy web pages like Facebook on those.
Tangent: I installed GNU/Linux (Slackware) on my old 486 (DX4@100Mhz, 32MB RAM, 2.1GB HDD) recently... A full (and true colour to boot, on a 1MB GPU) DE with GNOME 1.2.
It's nice. It's pretty snappy, all things considered, and it's configurable enough that I can just turn off features the system can't really handle. Performance is actually better than KDE, because KDE 1.1 had a bunch of cruft you couldn't disable.
Again, what a role-reversal. Nowadays GNOME has fewer features, less configurability, and steeper system requirements.

* Note I can't really speak to system requirements of KDE5/Plasma on Debian, as I don't have any Debian desktops any more. I can however say that it's lighter than GNOME 3 on Gentoo, at least with my USE flags... And it still works fine without OpenGL acceleration too - none of that "Oh no, something went wrong" bollocks.
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action. Four times is Official GNOME Policy.

User avatar
Onsemeliot
Posts: 333
Joined: 2010-12-15 14:43
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#29 Post by Onsemeliot »

steve_v wrote: 2021-09-25 10:23 My problems with the UX decisions in GNOME 3+ aren't because it's minimalistic by default, they're because it's minimalistic or GTFO.
You argue as if you would be forced to use it. I use it because I like the default and the few things I can alter are satisfying and not much work. Of course I could get close to what I would like with Xfce for example. But I see no good reason to put in the work when I can have what I like with GNOME 3 out of the box.

I can't really comment on development since I am in no way qualified and just don't know enough about it. But from a purely rational standpoint I can comment on the points you raise: It might very well be impossible for other projects to use what the GNOME 3 team is doing. But since all is free software I see no sensible base to demand that developers of certain teams need to cater to the needs of other projects. All people are allowed to pursue their vision without depending on others' approval as long as they respect the license terms. Of course it is nice to cooperate but if their visions are very different this might not be practical after all.

And from a designers standpoint I can understand why the GNOME team is exceptionally strict. The vision they have would be impossible to achieve if they allowed theming. And since they aren't interested in enabling such personalisation they just don't develop the tools to do so. We have the luxury of having a lot of desktop environments. Even if you really dislike GNOME 3 you shouldn't have any problems using an other desktop environment.

On the other hand it is surprising to me too how many distros chose to use GNOME 3 (and how wide systemd got adopted) as the default. I don't know much about what is happening behind the curtains but if so many very well versed people are willing to engage in such huge undertakings and a departure from what they are used to I can only assume there are relevant advantages to do so (other than just big pay checks). Obviously not all people agree and it caused splits in the community but if everything was as bad as the picture you paint I can't imagine how this big shift would be possible. As far as I know the free software world isn't a huge monolithic structure where only very few people can decide and the rest of the community has no other option than to follow suit.

User avatar
oswaldkelso
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1485
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#30 Post by oswaldkelso »

Onsemeliot wrote: 2021-09-25 17:46
You argue as if you would be forced to use it. I use it because I like the default and the few things I can alter are satisfying and not much work. Of course I could get close to what I would like with Xfce for example. But I see no good reason to put in the work when I can have what I like with GNOME 3 out of the box.
I know people that walk 20 minutes to the shop because they can't be arsed to waste 1 minute taking the bicycle out the garage and doing it in 5. That's fine, they may have time on their hands but it doesn't mean it makes sense when you're going to the shop 30 times a day.
I can't really comment on development since I am in no way qualified and just don't know enough about it. But from a purely rational standpoint I can comment on the points you raise: It might very well be impossible for other projects to use what the GNOME 3 team is doing. But since all is free software I see no sensible base to demand that developers of certain teams need to cater to the needs of other projects. All people are allowed to pursue their vision without depending on others' approval as long as they respect the license terms. Of course it is nice to cooperate but if their visions are very different this might not be practical after all.

And from a designers standpoint I can understand why the GNOME team is exceptionally strict. The vision they have would be impossible to achieve if they allowed theming. And since they aren't interested in enabling such personalisation they just don't develop the tools to do so. We have the luxury of having a lot of desktop environments. Even if you really dislike GNOME 3 you shouldn't have any problems using an other desktop environment.
So GTK is the Gnome tool kit and they control it and undermine all floss projects that use it. Sounds rather like what's happened with systemd. Go to the very foundation of the system and control it. Floss by name but not floss by nature.
On the other hand it is surprising to me too how many distros chose to use GNOME 3 (and how wide systemd got adopted) as the default. I don't know much about what is happening behind the curtains but if so many very well versed people are willing to engage in such huge undertakings and a departure from what they are used to I can only assume there are relevant advantages to do so (other than just big pay checks). Obviously not all people agree and it caused splits in the community but if everything was as bad as the picture you paint I can't imagine how this big shift would be possible. As far as I know the free software world isn't a huge monolithic structure where only very few people can decide and the rest of the community has no other option than to follow suit.
As I said before it's a travesty that Gnome is the default desktop in Debian. No one has disagreed with the fact it's heavy and inefficient. IMHO it shouldn't be the default DE in Debian simply because of the resources required to just run it. Why and how it became default needs some serious questions asked.

The big boys with the money and ability to pay developers can create such a volume of work flow that small independent projects like Debian that mostly rely on volunteers simply can't compete. Ring a bell? Floss or not if you don't have the ability to keep up with the rate of change you're done for. Look no further than init diversity. Debian simply didn't have the number of devs to offer support for multiple inits because systemd breaks so many packages up stream. A similar thing is happening with Wayland. Guess who is driving that as well. How long before the only way to run a Gnu/Linux desktop is basically run Red Hat or at least the Red Hat controlled stack?

" freedesktop.org is a "collaboration zone" for standards and specifications where users can freely discuss ideas, and not a formal standards organization"

That's maybe what they say about themselves but it still presents it's self as one. The actual standards are POSIX and LSB. Their claim "We do not ourselves produce a desktopbut we aim to help others to do so." looks pretty shallow if you follow the money.
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
My oldest used PC: 1999 imac 333Mhz 256MB PPC abandoned by Debian

User avatar
Onsemeliot
Posts: 333
Joined: 2010-12-15 14:43
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#31 Post by Onsemeliot »

oswaldkelso wrote: 2021-09-26 14:32 I know people that walk 20 minutes to the shop because they can't be arsed to waste 1 minute taking the bicycle out the garage and doing it in 5.
I don't see how this applies to what I have said. Gnome does what I want. It might be possible to get something similar with an other desktop. But I don't need anything else.
We can argue if it would be better community spirit to use a desktop that plays well with other projects. But from a personal standpoint it doesn't make sense to basically use a tool for something other than it was designed for. It might be possible to cut my food with a spoon but it works better with a knife. Why should I try to use a spoon to cut things if I can just use a knife for that (and a spoon for eating soup when I have any)?
So GTK is the Gnome tool kit and they control it and undermine all floss projects that use it. Sounds rather like what's happened with systemd. Go to the very foundation of the system and control it. Floss by name but not floss by nature.
Forking GTK is perfectly possible. It might develop much slower than the original but that doesn't mean it is not worth doing it. Projects only exist because someone decided to work on it at some point. Surely, a lot of work has been invested but if we don't like where the project goes we are not obligated to stick with it. This is the great thing about free software – even if it at times feels like a huge waste of resources.
No one has disagreed with the fact it's heavy and inefficient.
I have the impression it has been greatly improved in that regard recently.
if you don't have the ability to keep up with the rate of change you're done for. ... The actual standards are POSIX and LSB. Their claim "We do not ourselves produce a desktopbut we aim to help others to do so." looks pretty shallow if you follow the money.
The "others" could very well just mean the GNOME team. It seems to be similar to Android. But still: Replicant exists and my mobile runs it. It obviously isn't the most recent hardware but it works for most functions and if more people get interested development might pick up pace. Also, Devuan does exist – even if it hasn't the man power and public standing Debian has. Debian started small too.
It might be frustrating that people with loads of resources can do much more than others. But free software wasn't meant to address this problem. It just aimed to ensure that we can go our own way – if we want to. If that is slow and hard, is an other story all together.

From what I have red the very streamlined GNOME 3 is practically the opposite of Xfce where many different pieces are pulled together and are developed within very different structures. Which obviously brings a different kind of frustration to people.

But just to be clear here: Even if I personally like the GNOME 3 experience I wouldn't have chosen it as the default either. Especially because Debian aims to be a reliable distribution that works for a wide range of systems. Due to being surprisingly wide spread GNOME 3 might not be as experimental any more as it was in the beginning but it still is somewhat atypical and wouldn't play well with weaker systems. And even I feel the default should be rock solid. Therefore, I would even prefer LXDE over GNOME 3 as the default. But I guess this wouldn't be very attractive to many newcomers either because it isn't very shiny and not the coolest kid on the block.

User avatar
oswaldkelso
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1485
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#32 Post by oswaldkelso »

Forking GTK is perfectly possible.
It is but what I see happening is projects shifting to QT in droves. GTK2 was great and I would avoid QT as much as possible. Now I'm having to re evaluate what applications I use and though still using GTK in the main I can see the day when I switch.
I have the impression it has been greatly improved in that regard recently.
In my first post I demonstrated what my issues with Gnome were. Very heavy and an inefficient work flow even when using it like they recommend. I tried it on one of my main machines 6 months ago and it was so slow it and had me screaming at the screen! Now I get many people just log in start one or two applications and are done. In this scenario if you hardware is capable enough I can see you wouldn't much care. But it still doesn't change the facts it's heavy and inefficient. It also has a bit of a learning curve to use it as you're meant to and even then as I showed it's still inefficient compared to other interfaces. Lets be clear here it just a GUI. All it has to do is let you start, run and organise the programs you chose to use. If I compare it to something like "notion" it's not simple to use. log in close a frame, super+shift+i and I'm done. When I log out I save the session and I don't even need to do that again. I'd say it has a learning curve similar to learning how to use Gnome properly.
"The "others" could very well just mean the GNOME team......"
Agreed :-) The point about Devuan was that it shouldn't have needed to exist. The corporate interests caused this and it wasn't about improving the Desktop. I suspect it was more to do with taking back control from upstart/s like ubuntu that were making in roads in to their money streams... another thread I think. Hopefully one-day their work it will be back in Debian and those broken bridges will have been repaired but I wont hold my breath.

Re the default DE in Debian you raise some valid points. For me Debian needs to improves the installer options or default to a lighter DE. Perhaps a few questions to ascertain better choices for new users as to the suitability of their hardware and DE choices.
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
My oldest used PC: 1999 imac 333Mhz 256MB PPC abandoned by Debian

steve_v
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1396
Joined: 2012-10-06 05:31
Location: /dev/chair
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 173 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#33 Post by steve_v »

oswaldkelso wrote: 2021-09-26 18:46
Forking GTK is perfectly possible.
It is but what I see happening is projects shifting to QT in droves. GTK2 was great and I would avoid QT as much as possible. Now I'm having to re evaluate what applications I use and though still using GTK in the main I can see the day when I switch.
Forking is indeed possible, but it's also a lot of work... Particularly if the fork needs to maintain compatibility with upstream. Wanna bet how co-operative upstream would be here?
GTK2... GTK2 is fine, but it's also on life-support in a lot of cases.

The ability to do stuff like this:

Code: Select all

$ ls /etc/portage/patches/x11-libs/gtk+\:3/
0001-Add-even-odd-row-css-nodes-for-tree-view.patch  file-chooser__typeahead.patch
appearance__buttons-menus-icons.patch                fixes__atk-bridge-errors.patch
appearance__disable-backdrop.patch                   fixes__labels-wrapping.patch
appearance__file-chooser.patch                       other__default-settings.patch
appearance__message-dialogs.patch                    other__hide-insert-emoji.patch
appearance__print-dialog.patch                       other__mnemonics-delay.patch
appearance__smaller-statusbar.patch                  popovers__color-chooser.patch
csd__clean-headerbar.patch                           popovers__file-chooser-list.patch
csd__disabled-by-default.patch                       popovers__places-sidebar.patch
csd__server-side-shadow.patch                        revert_xft_dpi_stupidity.patch
file-chooser__places-sidebar.patch
relatively easily is one of the reasons I switched to Gentoo on my primary desktop. The list of revert_$idiocy or disable_$dumb_thing patches grows with every GTK release though.
As far as QT goes, I don't think there's as much to worry about as some claim. Odd semi-proprietary licencing notwithstanding, as long as KDE is reliant on it there'll be a usable, maintained FOSS branch.
oswaldkelso wrote: 2021-09-26 18:46 The point about Devuan was that it shouldn't have needed to exist. The corporate interests caused this and it wasn't about improving the Desktop. I suspect it was more to do with taking back control from upstart/s like ubuntu that were making in roads in to their money streams... another thread I think.
Indeed.
That said, for anyone not already aware, GNOME as the default desktop and systemd as the default (or only, as the case may be) init are not altogether unrelated. AFAIK Gentoo is the only major distro that provides GNOME3 without systemd, and getting such to work is not a minor undertaking.
Everyone else just caved in to the whole "If you want GNOME, you must systemd" bit. Debian wanted GNOME for some unfathomable reason, so here we are. Maybe setting it as the default was an init-switch sunk-cost fallacy all along? :P
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action. Four times is Official GNOME Policy.

User avatar
Onsemeliot
Posts: 333
Joined: 2010-12-15 14:43
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#34 Post by Onsemeliot »

Yesterday I red a little about what newer Xfce releases bring to the table. And there are indeed some nice features I can't have with GNOME 3. The last time I tried Xfce I had problems with the login and therefore didn't really take a closer look into things. I guess I will give it an other try. Maybe with Devuan. I have already downloaded it some time ago but didn't get around installing it somewhere yet.

There are still plenty of well known DEs which use GTK. How are they able to keep up their game if GTK is that bad concerning projects depending on it? Will this only be a serious problem if they want to switch to GTK 4?

mrwc
Posts: 7
Joined: 2021-08-17 19:07

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#35 Post by mrwc »

oswaldkelso wrote: 2021-09-17 20:49 bump:

There must be at least one gnome user that has a rational argument that says my theory is tosh and I've missed something!

Maybe not :-)

If you love Gnome please show me where I'm wrong, because I'm flummoxed .
That'd be me then :D

I think it's terrible "out the box". So not for a novice.

And yes, the extension system is very strange. If ever install a new system, it takes me a good while to get gnome where I want it to be. Changing themes is also annoying. I hope these things improve

But jump through those hoops, and it's super fast and functional. I have the panel at the top, but bottom left hot corner flicks that on and off. Top left shows all active apps. Top right shows the desktop. Bottom right corner for terminal

Dash to dock and gnome tweaks are essential. Mine is like an intelligent dock on the left, you see it when you need it.

Fast , intuitive, just works. I've tried them all, but it's the best. If you still need a minimise button, you haven't played with it enough

User avatar
golinux
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2010-12-09 00:56
Location: not a 'buntard!
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#36 Post by golinux »

steve_v wrote: 2021-09-27 04:16Indeed.AFAIK Gentoo is the only major distro that provides GNOME3 without systemd, and getting such to work is not a minor undertaking.
Running Gnome 3 without systemd on Devuan Beowulf was possible last year. Unknown whether it still is or not:

Gnome 3.30 on Beowulf working in wayland & Xorg
May the FORK be with you!

User avatar
sunrat
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6382
Joined: 2006-08-29 09:12
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Has thanked: 115 times
Been thanked: 456 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#37 Post by sunrat »

Having not tried Gnome for several years, I finally got round to installing it in KVM/QEMU VM. It's worse than I imagined or remembered. Default interface is like what one would expect on a smartphone in 1999 if smartphones existed then. Just silly on my 43" 4K monitor. And it still doesn't have fractional scaling OOTB. :|
Happy to be back in KDE Plasma now! 8)
“ computer users can be divided into 2 categories:
Those who have lost data
...and those who have not lost data YET ”
Remember to BACKUP!

User avatar
sunrat
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6382
Joined: 2006-08-29 09:12
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Has thanked: 115 times
Been thanked: 456 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#38 Post by sunrat »

New video on DistroTube - "The Worst Ubuntu Release In Years (21.10)". Serious issues with Gnome and snaps. The last thing he says summarises it nicely - "Gnome makes my head hurt".

https://yewtu.be/watch?v=QsuI-nLqwhg
“ computer users can be divided into 2 categories:
Those who have lost data
...and those who have not lost data YET ”
Remember to BACKUP!

steve_v
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1396
Joined: 2012-10-06 05:31
Location: /dev/chair
Has thanked: 78 times
Been thanked: 173 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#39 Post by steve_v »

LOL. Pretty much sums it up, AFAIAC.
Image
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action. Four times is Official GNOME Policy.

User avatar
canci
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2497
Joined: 2006-09-24 11:28
Has thanked: 135 times
Been thanked: 134 times

Re: Bonkers Gnome

#40 Post by canci »

I've always thought free -m was a very skewed way of looking at how much RAM a desktop takes since in Linux, memory will just be used to a certain extent when available. Meaning that, if you have 16 GB of RAM, the desktop might use 700-ish MB and if you're just on 1 GB, it might use less than that. Am I wrong there?

Also, Plasma has seen a lot of optimisation since 5.x, so I'm not at all surprised that it might be frugal with RAM. On my 4GB laptop, it performs much snappier than Gnome. IceWM is hard do compare to that, since it's only been maintained for the last 10 years or so. There isn't really any big plumbing put into it AFAIK. But I still think that just a window manager with a few extras is snappier for me.

I've stopped looking at the numbers and just use what feels right for me. Openbox is quite enough for my needs and it feels snappier for me. I will use that new Wayland alternative to Openbox once Wayland is as stable as Xorg.
Image Stable / Asus VivoBook X421DA / AMD Ryzen 7 3700U / Radeon Vega Mobile Gfx (Picasso) / 8 GB RAM / 512GB NVMe

READ THIS:

* How to Post a Thread Here
* Other Tips and Great Resources

Post Reply