The title says it all. Like when Kde4 came along and “everyone hated it”. Then there was Trinity. A fork of Kde 3 that I hope succeeds.
Now a similar situation exists with Gnome 3. I’d like to see a successful Gnome 2 fork as well to perpetuate that DE.
It isn’t true that I don’t like the new versions and that isn’t my point, but a lot of people did like the old versions. I agree with them. I think they were good programs themselves and think they are worth continuing as their own respective forks.
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 23:06:03 +0000, Scott Swinyard wrote:
> The title says it all. Like when Kde4 came along and “everyone hated
> it”. Then there was Trinity. A fork of Kde 3 that I hope succeeds.
>
> Now a similar situation exists with Gnome 3. I’d like to see a
> successful Gnome 2 fork as well to perpetuate that DE.
>
> It isn’t true that I don’t like the new versions and that isn’t my
> point, but a lot of people did like the old versions. I agree with them.
> I think they were good programs themselves and think they are worth
> continuing as their own respective forks.
>
> What do you think?
GNOME3 has a fallback option to run an environment that looks like GNOME2
(I recall seeing it on an underpowered system), so it seems that the easy
way to get a GNOME2-like environment is to use that if you don’t want the
full GNOME3 experience.
I agree with that. When I first tried XFCE, it reminded me of the first version of gnome that I used (probably gnome 1).
Since XFCE uses a number of gnome applications, it will either have to fork them, or find a way of using them with the XFCE desktop. Either way, it should be a reasonable choice for those who prefer gnome 2.
From what I’ve seen the fallback mode is nothing like Gnome 2. It has almost none of the functionality. I’ve only tested the live CD, so I might be missing something, but I don’t like what I see.
Gnome 2 is a pretty good interface, and I am sure that some group will folk it and keep it active. But on another note Gnome 3 is quite good and the Fallback is pretty close its not perfect but its very close to what the Ubuntu project call Ubuntu classic( Sorry said the Ubuntu word ) This interface is under development and will only improve. I have heard that there is ways to give the interface some of the features that Gnome 2 had, I believe it was the Linux Action Show one of the recent shows, they said they were going to put the info into the show notes. I hope that helps.
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 03:36:03 +0000, chief sealth wrote:
> hendersj;2357459 Wrote:
>> GNOME3 has a fallback option to run an environment that looks like
>> GNOME2 (I recall seeing it on an underpowered system), so it seems that
>> the easy way to get a GNOME2-like environment is to use that if you
>> don’t want the full GNOME3 experience.
>
> From what I’ve seen the fallback mode is nothing like Gnome 2. It has
> almost none of the functionality. I’ve only tested the live CD, so I
> might be missing something, but I don’t like what I see.
I didn’t look that deeply into it, but I noticed that my panels and
desktop looked like GNOME2 - but there probably were some differences I
didn’t see.
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 01:36:04 +0000, nrickert wrote:
> Since XFCE uses a number of gnome applications, it will either have to
> fork them, or find a way of using them with the XFCE desktop. Either
> way, it should be a reasonable choice for those who prefer gnome 2.
Well, no, as long as the necessary libraries are available, those apps
should continue to work.
An empty desktop and panel that can only be customized by adding additional packages.
The worst thing about it is if I want to use the full Gnome 3 I’ll have to upgrade my hardware! Sound familiar? I have a GeForce 8400 GS GPU, which seems common enough but Gnome 3 just doesn’t support it.
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:06:03 +0000, chief sealth wrote:
> hendersj;2357506 Wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 03:36:03 +0000, chief sealth wrote:
>>
>> > hendersj;2357459 Wrote:
>> >> GNOME3 has a fallback option to run an environment that looks like
>> >> GNOME2 (I recall seeing it on an underpowered system), so it seems
>> that
>> >> the easy way to get a GNOME2-like environment is to use that if you
>> >> don’t want the full GNOME3 experience.
>> >
>> > From what I’ve seen the fallback mode is nothing like Gnome 2. It
>> has
>> > almost none of the functionality. I’ve only tested the live CD, so I
>> > might be missing something, but I don’t like what I see.
>>
>> I didn’t look that deeply into it, but I noticed that my panels and
>> desktop looked like GNOME2 - but there probably were some differences I
>> didn’t see.
>
> An empty desktop and panel that can only be customized by adding
> additional packages.
I didn’t observe an empty desktop and panel, but I upgraded from 11.2 and
my 11.2 desktop is what I saw.
As I said, I’ve only tested the live CD, so I’m starting from a blank slate. From what I’ve seen and read on these forums, adding launchers or applets to the panel isn’t possible from the initial install of g3.