Thema: Verfolgt Gnome den richtigen Weg?
Für Red Hat heißt das zur Zeit, Gnome seine gestalterische Freiheit zu belassen.
Na, da kann man gespannt sein was die zahlenden (Desktop-)Kunden von RH über diese "gestalterische Freiheit" denken.
Da bin auch schon sehr gespannt.
Sun fiel vor einigen Jahren einmal mit Looking Glass etwas in Ungnade, kein Unternehmenskunde wollte diese 3D-GUI wirklich benutzen. Vielleicht widerfährt Red Hat genau das Gleiche.
Unternehmenskunden sind mit Gnome2 hochzufrieden. Die ähneln in Ihrer Grundeinstellung Firmen, die noch Windows XP SP3 einsetzen. Prinzipiell lässt sich das im Gnome3-Bereich allerdings mit einem aufgebohrten Fallback-Modus auffangen. Da haben Red Hat (und auch Suse) unter Umständen bald ziemlich viel zu tun. Dann wird aus der gestalterischen Freiheit sehr rasch eine reine Auftragsarbeit.
Allerdings betrifft das zunächst nur RHEL7 und vermutlich SLES 12. Akut wird das obige Problem erst dann, wenn RHEL7 gegenüber RHEL6 (mit Gnome2-Support bis 2020) einen deutlichen Mehrwert auf technischer Ebene bieten sollte.
gnome3-fallback fehlt so einiges wird aber laut Vincent Untz (hab mit ihm gesprochen) leider wahrscheinlich fallen gelassen. Unten hab ich es versucht ein paar Leuten zu erklaeren und fuer das gnome3-panel zu werben, ohne vielversprechenden Erfolg. Ich pastes es mal auf Englisch (keine Lust jetzt das ganze nochmal zu schreiben
KDE:Was once really a great desktop environment but now (after 4.0) it isnot really usuable, the design and themes are awful if you comparethem to e.g ubuntu radiance or ambiance themes. The Activites conceptis again something 95% of users don't want but some developers thinkit's a good idea. The whole Nepomuk/Strigi framework is light yearsbehind zeitgeist (maybe not technikally but well try unity and thethings using zeitgeist and KDE equivalents) and make the whole systemunresponsive if enabled. KDE has no orientation of UI designguidelines e.g the systemsettings is a poor clone of Mac OS Xsystemsettings . Other parts look like poor and ugly windows clone.The dolphin developer switchedback to Windows because situation with KDE and Gnome is helpless sinceboth developed in some areas bad ways.The whole plasma-desktop feels sluggish compared to any other Desktopenvironment e.g if you resize the panel, in height not length oroversize any plasma applet you can feel what I mean. Or comparegnome online accounts with KDE equivalent. Also technically plasma hasa core design issue, the panel, the desktop and the eye-candy widgetson the desktop are one and the same framework, program, command. Youget a widget to crash, your panel and desktop will crash too. Non ofthese parts are productively re-usable in a different desktopenvironment. KDE 3 was good there one program for the panel (kicker),one for the desktop and one for the widgets (superkaramba)Qt framework is one of the most advanced and best supported, KDE hasso much skilled developers and so much great applications (okular,k3b, amarok, dolphin just to name a few) and they made a crap of it.
Xfce:Quite nice desktop, I'd say most stable (maybe despite Mate?!?) andone of the best you can work with at the moment running Linux.Though xfce gives me a pre 2000 feeling, lots of things need to bepolished (but please no new desktop/mobile concept overkillshell/plasma/uebermacht desktop ideas)The panel can be look modern but still vanilla xfce e.g all desktopicons seems marked (as if you clicked on them). It is based ofdeprecated gtk2, gtk3 is the future.
Lxde:See xfce but needs even more polishing.
Razor-qt:Well these guys and you're at the beginning of you development so nobig criticize from me here at this point, just a few notes to them:Delete oxygen theme, try to support gtk themes and write somethinglike xfapplet (so you can support KDE plasma-applets, supportinggnome-panel applets with qt would bemuch more work and unrealistic, but with supporting KDE plasmaapplets, you would have a good start)
Mate:Well it's gnome2 (I like a lot of the design concepts) so what Idislike is that it's technically deprecated and is maintained anddeveloped by users that are maybe enough to maintain a panel)
Unity and Gnome3, Cinnamon: I have them together because they share so much in common positivesand negatives. So what is good with them? Well all tools are good andare elegant e.g the control center, the file manager and all othertools coming with them. Unity has really so many great innovations forthe Desktop, I love the indicators and the Dash, I somehow like theHUD (since it's optional) and unity is the 1st desktop environment Iknow of where you can use all the space of your display for therunning application, without losing the clock, the systray etc.Gnome3 has also some sexy things, the hot corner, also dash could needa window lense since that is also somehow nice in gnome. Cinnamon iswell like gnome with a few minor changes, without another defaultconfiguration and done only by LinuxMint developers and now backportand code updates from gnome to cinnamon is now their duty since theydecided to fork mutter and gnome-shell rather than to enhance andwrite extensions and cinnamon is most likely to not get the sameamount of bug fixes and enhancements in time. So but wrong with all ofthem is the technical concept: each of them has their one and onlyexclusive window manager (no, it's not event the same!) unity hascompiz (definitely best choice for users), gnome has mutter (rewriteof metacity aka Metacity Clutter, which technically may be best) andcinnamon has muffin (fork of mutter, not going to profit from mutterpatches, they will need to be backported and only few developers).This window managers can not be replace with a different. Ok, lets saythat is not that worse, but compiz and mutter *require* 3dacceleration. Sure most PC's Today do 3d with Linux. Sure for theothers is llvmpipe. Do you think any company would run that? You knowwindows server has no aero fancy stuff, at this is not because theycould not do a llvpipe thingy. You see any sysadmin wasting CPUresources for the desktop? On the server? There are so many serversand will be there without a 3d card and seriously it is not rare thatfew users want to login remotely on a server machine. If you have 3-4users running gnome3 on a serverthe best llvmpipe will get your CPU into trouble. Another use-case ismultiseat (the most awesome, less advertised Fedora 17 feature) I havethis at home and with the 2nd seat accelered by llvmpipe your systemgoes unusuable and I have a quad-core!So apart these things can you rearrange applets on the unity,gnome-shell, cinnamon panel easily? No. In unity it's not possible, asfar as I know also not in gnome-shell,extensions may add here and there some stuff, but I still haven't seena gnome-shell that I can modify like gnome2-panel e.g you have agnome-extension to add a 2nd panel at the bottom with a windowlistapplet, so know you need a 3rd extension to move the clock down tothe 2nd panel and a 4th extension to move the menu to the 2nd panel.Now have fun moving the 2nd panel to the left or right side of you display.
THE FUTURE:So what do we need for the future?Well I will be working on gnome3-panel to get a working, customizabledesktop. So why did I choose gnome3-panel? It already integrates wellinto gnome user space.You have all the ubuntu unity indicators running under gnome3-panel.You also have a window buttons applet for the panel. Cardapio, analternative menu is also workingon gnome3-panel, dockbarx, which support unity quick list and is anicon window list that could turn any vanilla gnome3-panel into anunity launcher or a windows 7 panel etc. is on the way. gnome3-panelrecently feels quite stable, only one issue so far with the themingand transparency of it. Vertical panel's respect the size ofhorizontal panels.
So what would need to be done:1) The port of dockbarx to gnome3-panel.2) Implement suppot for Intellihide/dodge active window on gnome3-panel3) Make a accelerated window manager if enabled make some eye candyand true transparency etc.4) Bug fixing.5) Make unity dash and hud startable from gnome-panel if compiz isdetected as window manager
optional: Gnomenu port.
Why didn't choose awn-panel, cairo-dock etc.?Dead upstream. Too much 3d oriented. Unstable. Various other issues.