Some thoughts on the Fedora Core 5 Gnome desktop

June 30, 2006

I am still testing things on my new machine, so I haven't bothered trying to build my usual highly custom X Windows environment on it. Since I've still been poking around with it, I've been getting a reasonable amount of exposure to the default Gnome desktop in Fedora Core 5.

To my surprise, it's turned out to be a surprisingly usable and livable environment. To a fairly large extent a lot of things just work, without fuss or muss. When they don't work, it's been relatively easy for me to figure out what to do; for example, while CD-ROMs automount and appear on the desktop, floppies don't, but if you open up the 'Computer' icon on the desktop and click on a floppy, that does it.

(I've been conditioned from years of disappointment and irritation to expect default desktop environments to be pretty unusable for people like me.)

I'm not really the right target for the desktop metaphor, because my desktops are invariably more cluttered than I want the computer to show me all the time. It's still pretty usable, and it has been encouraging me to clean keep my computer desktop clean (which I do mostly by making subdirectories and shoving the mess there, though). It's reasonably easy to make things behave and open files with the program I want and so on.

(There are some stupid interface bits there, though. For the love of something, why on earth do I have to feed Gnome the full path to an alternate program when it's already on my $PATH?)

It's also interesting to see how deep the Gnome environment still is, despite the much argued about movement to simplify things for basic users. The default FC5 configuration has virtual desktops. You can make Capslock into another Control key (although this is hiding in the Control section of the keyboard customization, instead of the Capslock section). It's easy to shuffle the system taskbars around (sometimes too easy, since there doesn't seem to be an undo).

Overall I can actually imagine using this environment full-time if I had to, which is not at all what I expected when I started playing around with it. (In a sense I already am, but this is in no way permanent; I still vastly prefer my regular X environment.)

And to my surprise there are things I will miss when I move back to my regular X environment. (However lame it is, I do like having the current temperature and weather conditions displayed in a little taskbar applet.)


Comments on this page:

From 24.98.83.96 at 2006-06-30 22:12:57:

Who uses floppy disks in the 20th century? ;)

- Ryan

By cks at 2006-06-30 22:45:22:

Uses for floppies:

  1. flashing new BIOS versions.
  2. it's the fastest way to get memtest86+ on a machine (USB keys are more finnicky to boot from).
  3. interchanging files with transparent bridging firewalls on old hardware that doesn't do USB.

This can leave me with an inventory of unlabeled floppies and thus a convenient opportunity to both see how FC5's desktop handles them and virtuously clean up a bit of my clutter.

From 68.165.135.79 at 2006-07-01 09:32:58:

...it's the 20th Century?

-- Squiddhartha

From 74.12.143.77 at 2006-07-01 19:59:14:

Check out the desktop of Solaris Express Community Edition (Solaris 11 preview, aka Solaris Nevada). http://blogs.mie.utoronto.ca/roller/resources/oscar/solaris11-screen-1024.jpg

By cks at 2006-07-02 02:27:17:

That Solaris desktop looks pretty (and it looks more or less like Gnome, which I suspect is what it is), but the only way to tell if it really works is to try using it for a while and see if any of the wheels come off. Since Gnome in general is pretty good these days, I'd expect it to be about the same as Fedora Core 5.

Of course, my gripes with Solaris aren't about the appearance but about the administration experience and Sun's patching morass. Somehow I suspect that Sun is not yet willing to replace pkgadd and patchadd with yum or apt.

From 74.12.143.77 at 2006-07-02 11:48:26:

I prefer Sun's pkg and patch approach. It is their Solaris 8/9 update tools that need improving, but the Solaris 10 update manager is already pretty good, with command-line and GUI interfaces. Their Solaris 9 ssh patch was a mess but easy to fix.

Recently a Debian system here got completely messed up after installing a single package with "apt" - about 90% of the system was wiped out before the student stopped it (X, gnome, KDE all gone). I could not figure out how to restore it, any attempt to add a package ended up removing more packages. I had to tell the student to reinstall. I'm not an expert with Debian/apt but that should never happen with any packaging/updating system.

Oscar

By cks at 2006-07-03 01:57:57:

Unless Solaris 10 completely replaces the underlying technology behind the package and patch stuff, it's not improving much. The real problem isn't wretched frontends (although they don't help), it's that the Solaris package and patch system is lacking core things like real dependency support.

The difference between the situation with the Debian machine and the Solaris situation is that the former is clearly a bug but the latter is just business as usual. You can hope to get bugs fixed.

From 24.98.83.96 at 2006-07-03 11:19:08:

Ooops -- I meant to say the 21st century. ;) While Sun's patch process is a nightmare, DTrace, Zones, ZFS, process privileges, FMA (fault management architecture), SBD (secure by default initiative), SMF, and their NUMA and process (I have yet to find an OS with a tool similar to plockstat) tools MORE than make up for the patch annoyances. I am told that Sun is actively working on addressing the install and patch process. Have you checked out Solaris 10 or the newest version of smpatch?

- Ryan

Written on 30 June 2006.
« screen -x
Another annoying RSS feed trick »

Page tools: View Source, View Normal.
Search:
Login: Password:

Last modified: Fri Jun 30 02:04:45 2006
This dinky wiki is brought to you by the Insane Hackers Guild, Python sub-branch.