-   Linux - Desktop (
-   -   Best alternative to Gnome3 (

brazilnut 06-25-2011 06:32 AM

Best alternative to Gnome3
Why has my practical desktop that I use to do work with turned into a mobile phone?

If this is the route they are going I need an alternative who have aren't some kind of apple mac wanna be's... What is going on? I've been tweaking for 3 days now and there's still loads wrong and impracticable, never mind already being in legacy mode...

What is the best alternative for a non-trendy Wendy who just wants to do some work efficiently?

Knightron 06-25-2011 06:41 AM

Sounds like you liked gnome 2.x maybe try xfce, it's a gtk2 application, so it'll seem some what similar to gnome 2.x

brazilnut 06-25-2011 06:54 AM

I've got a friend who been trying to get me onto xfce for a number of years, but that's the opposite way, feels like win 3.1, but at the moment it is the primary option. I'll dl a live distro later and try KDE. It just feels like Gnome are trying to be awkward! Why?

Snark1994 06-25-2011 07:28 AM

It's a step in a completely different direction, but for productivity I find tiling window managers such as wmii unbeatable :)

hamtavs 06-25-2011 08:09 AM

IMLE, desktops like Xfce and wmii lack integration or critical mass. you may need to use gnome or kde applications anyway to get a feature you need, with an up-to-date application, and they won't integrate with each other, but I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong.

I also find G3 to be a complete disaster for usability. It just doesn't make sense. I'm considering reinstalling gnome2, but I don't know how much it is feasible.

liberalchrist 06-25-2011 08:14 AM

Window Managers or DE's
If you want a different environment, you might consider LXDE. It's lightweight but fairly full-featured. If you want to keep a lot of the Gnome convenience, you could just run a different window manager on top (I prefer Fluxbox). E17 is another option, but it has never been very stable.

rizzy 06-25-2011 08:33 AM

Desktop integration is best implemented in KDE. managing multiple widows probably best done by tiling WMs like awesomewm. So, have the best from both worlds and use kde+awesome. Personaly, gnome 2.3 + openbox does it for me.

acid_kewpie 06-25-2011 08:39 AM

So none of you are aware of the classic / fallback mode for gnome 3??

The new model for gnone 3 might be different, but that doesn't make it bad. People are far too scared of change sometimes. Either way though, you don't need to be, as fallback mode is what you're after.

TobiSGD 06-25-2011 08:45 AM


Originally Posted by acid_kewpie (Post 4395410)
So none of you are aware of the classic / fallback mode for gnome 3??

From the first post:

never mind already being in legacy mode...

People are far too scared of change sometimes.
Gnome 3 and Unity just aren't the way a desktop has to work for me (and others). It may work well on a netbook or a similar (small) device, but on my laptop and desktop I don't want to have that. XFCE with Xmonad works just fine for me. Has nothing to do with being scared at all.

brazilnut 06-25-2011 08:49 AM

I'm already in fallback mode...

From deleting icons on panels, show desktop, that stupid clock, themes, etc, etc, and they are just basic cosmetics. My biggest fear is that the next revision won't have a fallback mode... If they are already thinking this is practical and acceptable, what's next?

brazilnut 06-25-2011 08:50 AM


Originally Posted by brazilnut (Post 4395421)

what's next?

Google OS! LOL

acid_kewpie 06-25-2011 08:52 AM

Fundamentally I think it's fascinating how so many people have slowly become so so used to the arbitrary way a system works that any radical change to that system is interpretted as a negative. For example, you're used to reacting against this when people stupidly complain that installing software in linux is so hard, without a setup.exe, when we all know it's normally significantly easier to install software under Linux compared to Windows. Mac users somehow manage to survive life with only one mouse button... aren't they dumb? Everyone knows you're meant to have 5...

---------- Post added 25-06-11 at 02:52 PM ----------


Originally Posted by brazilnut (Post 4395423)
Google OS! LOL

You mean Chrome OS?

erm... LOL! :confused:

hamtavs 06-25-2011 09:17 AM


Originally Posted by acid_kewpie (Post 4395410)
So none of you are aware of the classic / fallback mode for gnome 3??

The new model for gnone 3 might be different, but that doesn't make it bad. People are far too scared of change sometimes. Either way though, you don't need to be, as fallback mode is what you're after.

I can use both straight and fallback mode. While the latter makes it easier to see menus and active applications, they still lack lots of functionalities that would allow for a more efficient use of the screen, like
  • a desktop area where to place documents, links and removable media. Currently the best you can get is the dock, with a severly reduced functionality,or have Nautilus manage the deskop, in which case you may get your old desktop after having started Nautilus. So, to get an icon on the screen you need to go first to menu>accessories>file first. hmm..
  • panels. The dock is cool but small and not easy to reach. Meanwhile the upper panel lays wasted.
  • to customize menus you have to manually edit a system-wide directory and write a .desktop file. Apart from usability issues, What happens with multpile users?
I don't know whether there's a way to achieve this better than the old one we're used to, but I know that G3 has no sensible way for it now.

brazilnut 06-25-2011 09:23 AM


Originally Posted by acid_kewpie (Post 4395424)
You mean Chrome OS?

erm... LOL! :confused:


You need to be online for most stuff to work! Just a fancy fašade... (never mind it's infancy issues, er, no printer drivers, only online printing!!! c'mon!)

I got into Linux because it was practical, now it appears to be competing against Windows or iThings, all about looking snazzy.

Without fallback mode, I couldn't have one window over another, the apps weren't even listed in way I could access them easily, you had to click on a menu before the whole screen faded out and images of each open window were overlayed, eh, I know what's open and I want access to it as easily as possible, not abstracting and obfuscating it away...

It's common for me to have my text editor open, maybe two consoles, filemanager and probably a browser, who wants to click a button and refocus to see what's available when you could just look up / down and see the choices laid out (as it was).

acid_kewpie 06-25-2011 11:30 AM

You can't just alt tab??

Linux is NOT trying to "look flashy" if you think that's right you clearly don't understand what Linux even is. The Gnome Foundation might well be guilty of what you say, but that's Gnome, not Linux.

You regularly have 4 windows? Is that meant to be a lot??

So many of these things matter because you decide they matter. I couldn't care less what my wall paper or screensaver is. Menu organisation?? Now whilst this is a thing the gnome2 also lost when it first came out, and does seem odd to not have, I couldn't give a toss how the menus are laid out. These things are just not important. You're used to covering your desktop with five dozen pointless documents because that's simply what you're used to, not what makes you efficient. Things change. Move on, and realise how little these petty things actually matter. It's a great feeling to realise you don't give a stuff after all.

Many people also swear by using different workspaces. Personally I never bother, but it can be very simple knowing your browser is on top left, terminal on top right. Makes reaching them painfully simple with hotkeys.

Different != wrong.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:59 PM.