Red Hat Confirms GNOME Classic Mode For RHEL 7 192
An anonymous reader writes "The H-Online is reporting that the upcoming RHEL 7 will use GNOME Classic Mode over Gnome Shell as its Default Desktop GUI. Speaking to TechTarget ahead of the 2013 Red Hat Summit, Red Hat engineering director Denise Dumas said this regarding the decision: "I think it's been hard for the Gnome guys, because they really, really love modern mode, because that's where their hearts are." She added that the same team had "done a great job putting together classic mode" and that it was eventually decided to use it in favour of the more radical modern interface to spare customers the effort of relearning their way around the desktop again."
I use the GNOME Shell (Score:2)
I have been using the GNOME shell in Fedora 15 -> 17. Once they added the "extensions" interface it made it palatable as I have a number of extensions that give me back some of the old features. I do like the http://extensions.gnome.org/ [gnome.org] interface though...makes it easy to find and add the needed extensions. But I can't honestly say that the changes GNOME3 introduced were worth the trouble. The workflow isn't greatly enhanced and the learning curve was bad enough to make me curse more than once.
I hav
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are solutions to things like unified notification. Of course your 90s style desktop workflow wasn't enhanced. They aren't designed to do 90s better they are designed to replace 90s style desktops with desktops that can fully support workers who either use a mobile as a primary devices or a key component of their workflow.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're using KDE, yes, it does.
Yes but if you're using KDE you should be euthanized.
Translation..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Our Corporate customers have Demanded that we don't make the interface change for only trendiness, so we are sticking with what works best for fur paying customers.
Re:Translation..... (Score:5, Insightful)
continued translation ".. and just because Gnome UI designers need something to do doesn't mean that we're going to switch our UI every year".
it's not like the changes are likely to stop either. which is the bullshit part, if the new paradigms are so good why the fuck is nobody sticking to them year after year and how many names do we need for desktop widgets really.
Re: (Score:3)
That's funny, Microsoft is doing the exact same bloody thing and they're not making Linux.
It's the new trend from designers - "everything that currently exists sucks, what I think would be neat is clearly the ultimate design!"
Re:Translation..... (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, this poisonous trend is baked deeply into the school of "UI design". It is now an article of faith among UI designers that letting the users choose is a bad thing. It should be the designers making a choice, and that should not only be the default setting, but the only setting. This article [joelonsoftware.com], written by Joel Spolsky way back in 2000, gives some insight into what these people are thinking when they take choices away from users.
Re: (Score:2)
I just wanted to say that's one of the best articles I've ever read on how 'UI designers' have screwed up the world's computers. One of the things I hate most about Windows is when I'm trying to do something and suddenly it's asking me to configure a feature I've never used before which I couldn't give a crap about and just want to work so I can get my job done.
Re:Translation..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of the problem is Apple's runaway success in the last few years. Everyone wants to rake in the cash the way Apple is, and they figure that the best way to do that is by imitating Apple's our-way-or-the-highway method of doing things. Trouble is, while Apple may have its adherents, there are plenty of people out there who hate Apple, in part because of the way they take away customization options. People like this (myself included) are somewhat less lucrative customers, because we distrust the "app store" model and dislike paying for features that ought to be free.
Apple and Microsoft want users who are happy with being locked down. They're easier to manage and make money from, and above all, they accept what they're given.
Re: (Score:2)
"Apple and Microsoft want users who are happy with being locked down. They're easier to manage and make money from, and above all, they accept what they're given."
This makes sense. What doesnt make sense is how the GNOME program wound up being run by a bunch of idiots that want the same thing. They dont have the same financial incentives to take that position, and based on their origin you would expect them to be exactly the opposite. Yet they are not, and they detoured to their present course many years ag
Re: (Score:2)
Feeling old... (Score:3)
When Red Hat 6 or 7 are mentioned in close proximity I automatically think of the CDs I was installing on my PIII 450 MHz many years ago. Before I visited Fedora, *buntu and Debian.
I still have that PIII... maybe I should boot it up and frustrate myself trying to get LILO to install and then unfrustrate myself looking at pixelated pr0n at 28.8 kbps :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Fully realizing that someone will trump this with something akin to a 300baud modem ...
CR-ROM???
You're not old unless you had to go to the store to buy 100 3.5" floppies so that you could download the 76 1.44MB individual disk images over your 14.4k modem connection, rawrite them one at a time, and then spend the afternoon swapping disks as you waited apprehensively for the # prompt of your new slackware installation. Only to have to start again after disk x26 because disk x26 had a bad sector and failed a
Re: (Score:2)
Remember those days VERY well..Around 1994, the company I worked for at the time, was wanting to put up one of those new-fangled thingies called a website..Since we were actually a Novell shop, the rest of the IT department wanted to go with a then-available httpd NLM (Netware Loadable Module) for the webserver. Since I was evaluating Slackware, both on and off-the-clock, I suggested setting it up via Linux and its httpd, which would be FREE vs the several hundred dollars the vendor wanted for the Novell NL
Re: (Score:3)
I can relate. I run VMWare with SUSE8 and SUSE 8.2 virtual machines, partly out of nostalgia, partly because it's neat.
SUSE 8.0 still used Gnome 1.X and I find it much more useful than Gnome 3 (actually I even like it better than Gnome 2, but I know that puts me in the minority). Interestingly, old distros (these are from 2001 and 2002 respectively) are surprisingly useful already and do almost all of what I use a computer for these days, including browsing the web (not all sites, obviously, and yes I'm a
anyone even use red hat ent desktop any more? (Score:2, Interesting)
so many other distros have such superior and polished desktops. And other distros, not redhat, allow access to their repositories by anyone since paying customer pay for *support* and having public access to repos is way of advertising, marketing and getting community goodwill. All have which became foreign concepts to Red Hat long ago. I haven't seen a RedHat enterprise desktop in a decade. and that's a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I find RHEL to be the best out there. It's quite reliable, and they've included the full compliment of apps you might need, without duplication or lots of stuff that half-works and breaks periodically. My only complaint about GNOME on RHEL6 is that it defaults to the Mac-style top taskbar, instead of the old GNOME 0.x style that Windows 7 adopted.
RHEL is
Re: (Score:2)
sad news for you, w3techs found that RedHat became #2 in server space in mid 2012.
You can't complain about anyone "blatantly ripping off RHEL". most of the distro is NOT producted by Redhat but 3rd party projects (linux kernel, fsf compiler and tools, apache project etc.) do the heavy lifting of making any Linux distro while redhat profits from their work.
whether it's most vendor-supported depends on what you want to run. If I run postgresql with nginx or apache front ends maybe my "vendor" isn't Ora
Re: (Score:3)
Complete bullshit. You're massively misrepresenting the story.
The survey was only web servers, and those certainly aren't the majority of all servers. The numbers say nothing about the server space at large.
And RedHat was never #1... Instead, #1 in their ranking was previously CentOS.
Even then, RedHat distros are only behind because they've split their numbers between CentOS, RHEL, and Fedora. Combine those three (or even
Re: anyone even use red hat ent desktop any more? (Score:4, Insightful)
you don't need local desktop manager running for that, you can do remotely with ssh -X
Thank God! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Console looks the same (Score:3)
I don't even have X installed on my CentOS and RHEL servers. It's so much easier to manage from the command line... especially remotely.
But then I'm the kinda guy MS had to come out with "Server Core" for, I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I can make out Microsoft even in Windows Server Core. I was most disappointed to find an admittedly very basic graphical interface with windows server 2012 core.
The Linux equivalent would be still having X11 with twm and some xterms. Sure a lot less overhead than a Gnome desktop, but no a text console interface by any means either.
Default window skin still needs fixing. (Score:2)
A great improvement, but it still seems to use that stupid window skin by default - it appears to be designed to waste as much vertical space as possible in the header of the window. Obviously this makes a lot of sense in a world of 16:9 monitors where vertical space is at a premium.
I can understand the Gnome guys re-working the internals of the desktop to make it more maintainable in the long term, and having been using it now for six months I find some of the features of Gnome 3 are quite nice - e.g. the
What's to stop them killing it? (Score:2)
I bet Gnome kills classic mode because too many people are using it.
Re: (Score:2)
Because, I think, it's just a bunch of extensions, anyone can come along and package them up with ordinary Gnome and ship it as "Gnome, slightly better version" or whatever. So even if they do kill, as in stops supporting it, they would have to kill the entire extension infrastructure to kill the idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm glad someone is keeping their egos in check.
We'll get there (Score:3)
This shows a lot of maturity on the part of the GNOME devs (for creating a usable classic mode), and on the part of RedHat for defaulting on it.
Radical change may be exciting for developers and vendors, who are too aware of the usability issues with the "old" desktop paradigm, but it's not trivial to change a culture overnight. We're not all Steve Jobs clones who understand what people want better than they seem to know. iPhones were greeted with love, but the new experimental desktops coming out of the free software world seem to cause more angst than adoration. It takes maturity to recognize that maybe you are going too far all at once.
Slow but steady is the smart way to go: allow for radical experimentations while not breaking usability patterns built over years of using computers.
Good show, everyone involved.
It doesn't really matter... (Score:2)
They'll all just end up copying Windows eventually anyway. There was some really interesting desktop development going on back in the late 90s (and I assume several of those projects are still going) but the tendency has appeared to be to, for the most part, stay with the crowd and suck in Microsoft GUI elements (both good and bad). The pressure to continue doing so, even in the face of the awful Windows 8 will be immense and likely impossible to resist for the KDE and Gnome guys.
Re: (Score:2)
Except the big selling point of Linux on the desktop is that it's NOT Windows 8.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. And one thing that got me into Linux was that it was NOT windows 3.1. That didn't mean that braindead GUI decisions didn't continually get integrated over the years. At least there are (real) choices with Linux.
Re: (Score:3)
>They'll all just end up copying Windows eventually anyway.
You mean like how Microsoft lifted features/concepts from KDE and put them in Vista/7?
>Windows 8 vs KDE and Gnome
I'm not sure about gnome these days, but the KDE guys have a fully fleshed out touch centered interface (KDE Plasma Active), but they keep it entirely separated from the base KDE install, because unlike Microsoft, they reacognize that desktops and tablets are used differently.
This meme that Linux desktop devs blindly follow Microsof
Gnome? What's that? (Score:3)
Ever since KDE stopped sucking around 4.2.6, I've gone back to KDE after hiding out in Gnome 2.x
It has the least amount of derp out of all the desktop environments. The KDE devs flirted with the "hey, let's remove features" fad, but actually came to their senses a lot quicker than the Gnome guys when they started having to don Nomex underwear.
KDE 4.10.x is spectacular. It's chock full of features, and not that much bigger in footprint than XFCE.
As for server stuff, who the heck puts a desktop on a server?
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
Finally!! a bit of common-sense.. I just hope the CentOS devs carry that over to CentOS7..
Re: (Score:2)
CentOS wouldn't make changes like that. Their changes are limited to the removal of branding, and stripping out the RHN stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
GNOME definitely has a long way to go with the new UI theme. I found it fitting for Ubuntu (obviously), but as for Debian 7's default theme... I found myself caught off guard. As "conservative" as the Debian development team is, I'm surprised they defaulted to that.
As for Red Hat, I'm glad they chose classic mode. Maybe it will make the GNOME team step back and fix the annoyances associated with their modern mode.
You are much more diplomatic than I am. I did a Debian install yesterday, first non-headless one in a while, and narrowly avoided spraying acidic bile all over the keyboard when I saw what GNOME has become...
Re: (Score:3)
An easy fix: apt-get install xfce4. For more thorough fix:
echo "deb http://repo.mate-desktop.org/debian [mate-desktop.org] wheezy main" >>/etc/apt/sources.list
apt-get install mate-desktop-environment
And for the love of Yog-Sothoth, remember to clean up the crap Gnome3 pulled in if you inadvertently installed it. Some stuff just wastes disk, some wastes memory, some (like avahi) is a security hole, some (network-manager) is just a wholesale sabotage machine.
Gnome3 Classic Mode is a bad joke: it superficially matches th
Re:GNOME (Score:4, Informative)
If you're performing a new install of Debian and want it to use xfce as your desktop right from the start, edit the install cd boot command and add the following:
desktop=xfce
Or you can go to Avanced Options and choose xfce.
Then your system will be configured for xfce from the get-go.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what I ended up doing(call me a coward, or lazy, or too dumb for Debian; but why bother exhaustively scrubbing GNOME and then installing XFCE, all to save a fresh, 100%-not-yet-customized install that I could just pave over?)
Re: (Score:2)
My question is how DO you install a modern KDE on RHEL/Centos?
OpenSuse has become quite insane and I'm bailing out.
Re: (Score:2)
what's insane about opensuse ?
it still seems to be the best kde distro around.
granted, there are some annoying issues i've encountered in latest & patched 12.3 - rather frequent kwin segfaults and knetworkmanager showing "connection failed" for all connections right after attempting to connect... even if it eventually succeeds :)
Re: (Score:2)
The fonts are a mess on that screenshot. How does that not hurt anyone's eyes?
I looked... and I can see nothing wrong with them!
Re:Fonts (Score:5, Funny)
The straight lines are straight, and lines on different letters have different apparent thickness.The kerning's a little distinctive as well, making the letters each look a little different. All together, this means that after a few minutes of reading text, your eyes will still be able to read the text! This encourages a computer user to actually use their computer, resulting in a higher risk for repetitive-strain injuries like Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.
In contrast, consider the Segoe font Microsoft has chosen for Windows 8 and Office 2013. Its lines are curved, its corners indistinct, and every letter looks identical apart from its shape. The pristine perfection of each glyph allows the brain to properly tangle the shapes together, interrupting the reading process. In my own experience, I've found that after only a few minutes of reading labels in the course of my work, the discomfort in reading is a subtle reminder to get up and look away from the computer for a few more minutes.
From the many interruptions, I'm sure my health has improved, and the total effect on my productivity has been quite noticeable.
Re: (Score:2)
[serious comment which TL,DR]
Hint: after looking, I can see nothing right either.
Re: (Score:2)
[serious comment which TL,DR]
If you thought my comment was serious, you clearly didn't read it.
Re: (Score:2)
[serious comment which TL,DR]
If you thought my comment was serious, you clearly didn't read it.
My apologies... the cross-diagonal reading and the reference to Win8 made me (too hastily) dismissive.
(Now that I corrected that, back to exercising up that CTS of mine).
Re: (Score:3)
He's probably complaining about the greyscale subpixel antialiasing. "Most" people are used to the RGB/BGA/whatever methods instead. In my case I can't stand those, and find the settings in that screenshot to be quite agreeable. ... that said one of the first things that would happen is my setting the fonts to the DejaVu fonts, instead of whatever they are using.
Re: (Score:2)
That and the dreadful fontconfig autohinter.
Care to expand on that?
I recently moved from Ubuntu to Debian and am finding the font rendering to be a bit worse in the Debian configuration (unlike everything else - Debian is just great, and stable as a rock).
I've tried changing the system fonts and while it helped a bit, there are still things that bother me.
Re: (Score:2)
"How does that not hurt anyone's eyes?"
We read it instead of staring at it indefinitely waiting for the meaning to somehow invade our pores without any effort on our part. You should try it sometime.
Re: (Score:3)
ed Hat doesn't include anything that could potentially infringe upon patents. The reason why fonts in Windows and OS X look good is because a lot of man-hours went into developing them, so companies like Microsoft got a patent for things like ClearType. That said, if you need better Linux fonts, look into Infinality.
All font rendering on Linux sucks. This includes Infinality. You don't notice it much on phones or tablets, because of the high DPI, but with a standard low-DPI monitor or TV set, it's painful
Re: (Score:3)
Arial? Man - that's bad for a UI. Even Microsoft doesn't use Arial for their UI. They used Tahoma up through XP and then Segoe starting in Vista.
Truthfully, I don't find Ubuntu's interface font that bad, but I usually switch my interface to use Google'd freely available "Droid" font which is pretty decent.
Also, after much experimenting with the awful looking out of the box Linux GUI's, I actually found that the #1 actual problem with the font setup is mostly just that by default they're too damned big.
Re: (Score:2)
> Arial?
No, apparently he uses aerial.
Re: (Score:2)
I can sit 3-4 feet from your average 1920x1080 monitor and count every pixel in a 9 point font.
Nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Excellent burn
Luddites (Score:2, Informative)
It isn't a tablet interface. It is a more efficient desktop interface. I wish I could get it on my workstations where I work, I am much more productive in it. With the initial release I had the same complaint as most everyone, that when you selected terminal (or any app) the second time it just took you to the first instance. I tried holding control while I selected it thinking that would obviously start a second instance, but it did not. But the second release they added the control thing and it is es
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same with Unity. Sure, OK, I don't like Unity much. But it is in no way a tablet interface. With Gnome 3.4 (what I'm stuck on for now, as I'm still running Ubuntu 12.04) you almost have to use the mouse for most things. Using the touch screen is painful. E.g. to hit the bottom left corner where all the hidden icons sit (at the moment, I have seven, including Rhythmbox).
Re: (Score:2)
How else are you going to operate the server with your touchscreen KVM/tablet if it doesn't have a touchscreen-friendly UI?
Added bonus is that we'll now be able to use autocorrect for all those pesky command-line things that unbellyfeel computers still insist on using (at least until they integrated into an app silo anyway, and then removed). That will finally open the door to speech-operated commands which'll dispense with the need to have supposedly "trained" server operators eating into your OP-EX.
Comput
Re: (Score:2)
Computer - export the data please
WHAT?
Computer - format the data please
WHAT?
Computer - send the formatted data into the reporting engine please
WHAT?
Computer - take actions based on the report please
WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO VOICECOMM IN A NOISY DATACENTER?
FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please do give 3 real-world examples of where this scenario would be relevant?
Re: (Score:2)
Workstations. You know, stations that you use to do work.
Re: (Score:2)
see, you cant name a single example and just try to smart-ass your way out of it.
loser
Re: (Score:2)
Does my name look like deusmetallum? No. I just think you're an ass and wanted you to know.
Let me guess, your a Windows shop?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'd also happen to recommend against your managing anything mission-critical.
Re: (Score:3)
So, let me rephrase, for mission critical stuff, you install stuff marked as "technology preview" ?
( cf https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/6.1_Technical_Notes/ar01s03.html [redhat.com] ).
You know, the whole TP that is explicitely written as "not to be used in production" from the same documentation :
https://access.redhat.com/support/offerings/techpreview/ [redhat.com]
So in the end, the vendor say in the release note "do not do this, this may break", and when it break, you just rant bec
Re: (Score:2)
In Debian policy, something that is "unstable" and "unsupported" is still subject to the rules. Ubuntu repositories are organized based on support--main, universe, multiverse--and even things in multiverse aren't to receive breaking changes during a release. They may lag--they might be poorly tested, they might not work, they might not get prompt updates--but they certainly won't break on you.
High-availability is, by the way, a common business case and is in primary support in Ubuntu; but that's just n
Re: (Score:2)
You know, Pixar use RHEL for workstation :
http://www.muktware.com/5536/pixar-animation-studios-uses-red-hat-enterprise-linux [muktware.com]
Now, if this is classified as mission critical or not is a whole debate, but there is desktop that are important for business or you are losing time. Likely less than a server serving several clients of course, but no one will deny that some workstation exist and need to be up or you are losing money ( think trader for example ).
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm a little concerned that the server has a window manager at all.
Some functions are better performed from the command line, and some from a GUI. Insisting that servers be command line only is just pointless obscurantism.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So, where's Wayland's network transparency?
How do I run a Wayland app on my Ubuntu server and display the output on a Windows laptop without resorting to a hideous kludge like VNC?
Let's look at the FAQ, shall we?
"No, that is outside the scope of Wayland. To support remote rendering you need to define a rendering API, which is something I've been very careful to avoid doing. The reason Wayland is so simple and feasible at all is that I'm sidestepping this big task and pushing it to the clients."
So basically,
Re: (Score:2)
Is this the part where we pretend that the X application that you want to forward to another machine is doing anything other than copying a framebuffer around?
No, you don't need to pretend that, because it's not what the apps I use are doing. That's pretty clear when you see how responsive most X apps are over a LAN when compared to VNC.
But feel free to learn something about how X works sometime, before claiming that Wayland (aka 'Let's copy Windows now it's becoming obsolete') is oh so much better.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, that idle GDM session sure eats CPU cycles!
You clearly knew what you were talking about.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Relevant? I wouldnt be surprised if less than 5% of redhat installs actually uses a gui at all. I know non om my RHEL installs has it. If I want a GUI, it measn I want a desktop OS, which is not RHEL (rather ubuntu or fedora). RHEL is for high reliability servers, on which a GUI has no place.
at least thats my $0.02
Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think that's it at all. I think Gnome3 has been weighed pretty well on it's merits. Many people consider it unusable. It made me jump ship for Mint (and I've been primarily running RH/Fedora since the mid nineties). I've tried alot of different desktops (Enlightenment, Gnome 1-3, TWM, KDE 1-4, and then some) . I'm not unwilling to change, and I think that's generally true of linux desktop users. We will try new things, and embrace the good ones. We will also harshly reject the bad ones. That's our c
Re: (Score:2)
I find enabling Gnome fallback mode easier than changing distribution.
Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
Loss of productivity due to needless changes = Bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely this level of pandering is an extremely bad thing?
Not necessarily. If the benefits of GNOME 3 aren't worth the costs of retraining, and GNOME 2 is sustainable for a reasonable period of time, then why switch?
Seems most sensible though when there's some planning for the future. Will GNOME 2 support their needs for the foreseeable future, and is this dallying nothing more than short term cost saving with no consideration given for the future?
Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
New != Good
Sticking with the old version != unwillingness to learn
If the old version works better, why should they change? That's looking at it's own merits. Changing just because it's newer isn't.
Change for the sake of change == bad
Re: (Score:2)
If we're telling our sysadmins that they don't have to learn a new desktop environment, what's the point in them learning anything else?
Presumably because something else has functionality they need. Do you think sysadmins have extra brains available to learn a new GUI simply for the sake of learning a new GUI? Make it more functional, and they will eagerly climb the learning curve. That's why they're using UNIX in the first place.
We should be looking at everything in terms of their own merits
And the new
Re: (Score:2)
New != Good either. Gnome 3 is not an improvement over what was there before, it's change for the sake of change.
Telling people they have to learn something new because your designers were bored is never going to go over well.
Re:Isn't unwillingless to learn a big problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
If it is possible for a new desktop to be better than its predecessor, then it is possible for it to be worse.
The users largely hate GNOME 3. Therefore, it has failed user acceptance testing. It is worse than its predecessor.
In this case, it's Red Hat - who pay many of the remaining GNOME devs - saying "dunno what you're here for, but we're here to serve our users." It's nice someone is.
Re: (Score:2)
it's a bit of a shame rh doesn't really offer a decent kde implementation. last one i saw was... terrible. maybe it has gotten better since rhel4-5 or so ?
Re: (Score:2)
The users largely hate GNOME 3.
The people posting on Slashdot are largely full of shit.
See, I can do this too.
Re: (Score:2)
Not the same. At least for your hypothesis, we can find more than 10 years of evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, so lets talk about merits. Lets say retraining costs are zero and every one of your admin's is a rock star 10 years ahead of the crufty enterprise OS, you still have to deal with:
1. Is the new system cheaper/better for productivity?
2. Will the new system help retain cheaper/better staff?
3. Will the new system help other systems work cheaper/better with this one?
If you can't answer these questions about the new design honestly, you'll start to understand why companies stick to things they know and under
Re: (Score:3)
Change for the sake of change is usually not a good thing when it comes to enterprise systems.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no such thing as "sake for the sake of change". Either you change and do exactly the same way with a better architecutre ( so it is more extensiible ), or you rewrite to be more maintainable ( so you can spend more time later on fixing others issues, or offering features ).
But if there is a change, then something improved somewhere, and so the change was not done without reason. That people miss the reason of a change doesn't mean there isn't one, just that they do not see and that it may not matte
Re: (Score:2)
It is not really "not learning", it is more "not learning too much in 1 go", and "not learining too much when you have different versions". I am sure people can learn if you give them time, but usually, you don't give them time. RHEL 7 will come with various news stuff ( systemd is taken for granted, there is story about having xfs by default, and for sure, lots of news other under the hood changes and improvement ), and nowadays, IT is talking about cloud, about puppet/automation, etc, all of them who are
Re: (Score:2)
This. Why people ever moved beyond twm and Norton Commander is beyond me.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why it's interesting that the people who pay the bills are finally calling "bullshit" on the devs' idiot ideas. Red Hat largely didn't care because their market is basically command-line; but GNOME 3 sucked hard enough that their paying customers were displeased.
Re: (Score:2)
And I haven't got a clue why they insist on threatening my productivity. I don't understand what they stand to gain by inconveniencing me. It feels like I'm being punished, and I don't know why.
They made the mistake of hiring 'UI designers'.
Imagine you're a 'UI designer'. Do you:
1. Say 'that UI is just about perfect, lets change a few pixels here and there and call it done' and find yourself on welfare the next week.
Or
2. Say 'that UI sucks, it's got too many options, it's confusing to users, we should throw it all away and build a completely new UI with all these fancy hidden windows that I'll have to design and a bazillion new icons that make no sense to anyone but me' and have a job for years be
Re: (Score:2)
Since Red Hat paid for Gnome 3, I think they'd be a bit too embarassed to switch to MATE. Which, IMHO, is the best desktop around now.
Re:Just moving the it to RHEL 8 (Score:4, Insightful)