desktop environment | Technology Tales

Remote access between Mac and Linux: Choosing the right approach

28^th October 2025

Connecting from a Mac to a Linux desktop on the same network can be done in several ways, and the right choice depends on whether terminal access suffices or a full graphical session is needed. Terminal access is the simplest to arrange and often the most robust, while graphical access can be provided either by creating a fresh desktop session or by sharing the one already open on the Linux machine. Each approach trades ease of setup, performance and fidelity in different ways, so it helps to understand the options before settling on a configuration.

Understanding Your Requirements

The choice between methods rests primarily on three questions. First, is command-line access sufficient, or is a graphical desktop required? Second, if a desktop is needed, should it be a new session, or must it mirror the existing physical display? Third, how important is responsiveness compared to visual fidelity and feature completeness?

For administrative tasks that involve editing configuration files, managing services, or running scripts, SSH provides everything necessary. When a desktop environment is required, the decision becomes whether to view the exact state of the Linux machine's monitor or to work in a separate session.

The Three Main Options

SSH for Terminal Access

SSH requires no graphical overhead and works reliably over any connection. For many administrative tasks, this is all that is needed. Setting up SSH access is straightforward and forms the foundation for other secure operations, including file transfer and tunnelling.

RDP for New Desktop Sessions

Remote Desktop Protocol excels at creating new sessions with clean input handling and good performance over imperfect connections. RDP with a lightweight desktop such as Xfce delivers the most responsive experience for new sessions, though it does not support compositing desktops like Cinnamon well. The protocol translates keyboard and mouse input in a way that many clients have optimised for years, making it the most forgiving route when precise input behaviour matters.

VNC for Virtual or Shared Desktops

VNC can either create new virtual desktops or share the physical display. TigerVNC is suitable when a new Cinnamon session is acceptable and continuity with the local environment is valued. It can launch a full Cinnamon desktop in a virtual session, though it may feel less responsive than RDP, particularly when network conditions are suboptimal.

x11vnc mirrors the physical display exactly, making it ideal for monitoring ongoing work or providing remote guidance. This is the only option when the requirement is to see precisely what appears on the Linux machine's screen. However, it shares the same performance characteristics as other VNC solutions and is limited to showing what is already displayed locally.

Making the Choice

The decision ultimately comes down to the specific use case. If the goal is to work efficiently in a fresh desktop session with optimal responsiveness, RDP to an Xfce desktop environment is the clear choice. If maintaining the full Cinnamon experience in a new session is important, TigerVNC provides that continuity. When the task requires seeing or controlling the exact desktop session that is already running on the Linux machine, x11vnc is the only viable option.

In the articles that follow, we will examine the practical setup and configuration of x11vnc for sharing physical desktops, followed by detailed guidance on SSH, RDP and TigerVNC for those preferring terminal access or fresh desktop sessions.

What's Next

Part 2 explores x11vnc in detail, covering everything from basic setup to advanced performance tuning, input handling with KVM switches, clipboard troubleshooting and running x11vnc as a system service.

Part 3 examines SSH for terminal access, RDP with Xfce for responsive remote sessions, and TigerVNC for virtual Cinnamon desktops, along with file transfer options and operational considerations.

Dropping back to a full screen terminal session from a desktop one in Linux

29^th May 2014

There are times when you might need to access a full screen terminal from a Linux graphical desktop. For example, I have needed this when installing Nvidia's graphics drivers on Ubuntu or Linux Mint. Another instance occurred on Arch Linux when a Cinnamon desktop update prevented me from opening a terminal window. The full screen command let me install an alternative terminal emulator, with Tech Drive-in's list proving helpful. Similar issues might need fixing on FreeBSD installations. These latter examples happened within VirtualBox, which has special requirements for accessing full screen command line sessions, which I'll explain later.

When running Linux on a physical PC, press CTRL + ALT + F1 to enter a full screen terminal and CTRL + ALT + F7 to return to the graphical desktop. In a Linux VirtualBox guest with a Linux host, these shortcuts affect the host instead. For the guest OS, use [Host Key] + F1 to enter a full screen terminal and [Host Key] + F7 to return to the graphical desktop. The default Host Key is the right CTRL key, unless you've changed it.

X sessions in GNOME and Cinnamon desktop environments support this functionality, but I can't confirm it works with alternatives like Wayland. Hopefully, this feature extends to other setups, as terminal sessions are occasionally needed for system recovery. Such mishaps are thankfully rare and should be virtually non-existent for most users.

Fixing Background Image Display in GNOME Shell 3.10

2^nd May 2014

On upgrading from Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 to Ubuntu GNOME 14.04, a few rough edges were to be noticed. One was the display of my chosen background image: it was garbled. Later, I discovered that there is a maximum width of 2560 px for background images in GNOME Shell these days and that things get messy beyond that.

In my case, the image width was around 6000 px, and I was used to it getting resized in GNOME Shell 3.8 and its predecessors. It appears that the functionality got removed after that though, so the workaround of manual image resizing in the GIMP needed to be employed. Though having big images open in memory creates an additional overhead, not handling them very well at all looks like a bug caused by setting 2560 px as a maximum screen width for the GNOME Shell panel and the complete removal of Nautilus from desktop rendering duties. Let's hope that sense is seen with ever larger screen sizes and resolutions coming our way.

It's the sort of thing that did get me looking at adding on Cinnamon 2.2 for a while before setting background image scaling using the indispensable GNOME Tweak Tool was discovered. LinuxG.net has a useful tutorial on this for anyone with such an adventurous streak in them. For now though, I am OK with my set-up but the GNOME project's focus on minimalism could affect us in other ways, so I can see why Clem Lefebvre started the Cinnamon one primarily for Linux Mint and the desktop environment is appearing elsewhere too. After all, Gedit lost its menu bar in GNOME 3.12 so it's just as well that we have alternatives.

Update 2014-05-06: It appears that the desktop image bug that afflicts GNOME Shell 3.10 got sorted for GNOME Shell 3.12. At least, that is the impression that an Antergos instance in a VirtualBox virtual machine gives me.

Installing FreeBSD in a VirtualBox Virtual Machine

2^nd March 2014

With UNIX being the basis of Linux, I have a soft spot for trying out any UNIX that can be installed on a PC. For a while, I had OpenSolaris on the go and even vaguely recall having a look at one of the BSD's. However, any recent attempt to install one of the latter, and there are quite a few around now, got stymied by some sort of kernel panic caused by using AMD CPU's. With the return to the Intel fold arising from the upgrade of my main home PC last year, it perhaps was time to try again.

The recent release of FreeBSD 10.0 was the cue and I downloaded a DVD image for a test installation in a VirtualBox virtual machine with 4 GB of memory and a 32 GB virtual hard drive attached (expanding storage was chosen so not all the allocated space has been taken so far). The variant of FreeBSD chosen was the 64-bit x86 one, and I set to installing it in there. Though not as pretty in appearance as those in various Linux distros, the installer was not that user unfriendly to me. Mind you, I have experience of installing Arch Linux, which might have acclimatised me somewhat.

Those installation screens ask about the keyboard mapping that you want, and I successfully chose one of the UK options. There was limited opportunity for adding extras, though there was a short list of a few from which I made some selections. Given that user account set up also was on offer, I would have been better off knowing what groups to assign for my personal user account to have to avoid needing to log in as root so often following system start up later. Otherwise, all the default options were sufficient.

When the installation process was complete, it was time to boot into the new system and all that was on offer was a command line log in session. After logging in as root, it was time to press pkg into service to get a desktop environment in place. The first step was to install X:

pkg install xorg

Then, it was time to install a desktop environment. While using XFCE or KDE were alternatives, I chose GNOME 2 due to familiarity and more extensive instructions on the corresponding FreeBSD handbook page. Issuing the following command added GNOME and all its helper applications:

pkg install gnome2

So that GNOME starts up at the next reboot, some extra steps are needed. The first of these is to add the following line into /etc/fstab:

proc /proc procfs rw 0 0

Then, two lines were needed in /etc/rc.conf:

gdm_enable="YES" gnome_enable="YES"

The first enables the GNOME display manager, while the second activates other GNOME programs that are needed for a desktop session to start. With each of these in place, I got a graphical login screen at the next boot time.

With FreeBSD being a VirtualBox Guest, it was time to consult the relevant FreeBSD manual page. Here, there are sections for a number of virtual machine tools, so a search was needed to find the one for VirtualBox. VirtualBox support for FreeBSD is incomplete in that there is no installation media for BSD systems, while Linux and Solaris are supported along with Windows. Therefore, it is over to the FreeBSD repositories for the required software:

pkg install virtualbox-ose-additions

Aside from the virtual machine session not capturing and releasing the mouse pointer automatically, that did everything that was needed, even if it was the open source edition of the drivers and their proprietary equivalents. To resolve the mouse pointer issue, I needed to temporarily disable the GNOME desktop session in /etc/rc.conf to drop to a console only session where xorg.conf could be generated using the following commands:

Xorg -configure cp xorg.conf.new /etc/xorg.conf

In the new xorg.conf file, the mouse section needs to be as follows:

Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Mouse0" Driver "vboxmouse" EndSection

If it doesn't look like the above, and it wasn't the case for me, then it needs changing. Also, any extra lines from the default set up also need removing, or the mouse will not function as it should. The ALT+F1 (for accessing GNOME menus) and ALT+F2 (for running commands) keyboard shortcuts then become crucial when your mouse is not working as it should and could avert a panic too; knowing that adjusting a single configuration file will resolve a problem when doing so is less accessible is not a good feeling as I discovered to my own cost. The graphics settings were fine by default, but here's what you should have in case it isn't for you:

Section "Device" ### Available Driver options are:- ### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False", ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz" ### [arg]: arg optional Identifier "Card0" Driver "vboxvideo" VendorName "InnoTek Systemberatung GmbH" BoardName "VirtualBox Graphics Adapter" BusID "PCI:0:2:0" EndSection

The next step is to ensure that your HAL settings are as they should. I needed to create a file in /usr/local/etc/hal/fdi/policy called 90-vboxguest.fdi that contains the following:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>  <deviceinfo version="0.2"> <device> <match key="info.subsystem" string="pci"> <match key="info.product" string="VirtualBox guest Service"> <append key="info.capabilities" type="strlist">input</append> <append key="info.capabilities" type="strlist">input.mouse</append> <merge key="input.x11_driver" type="string">vboxmouse</merge> <merge key="input.device" type="string">/dev/vboxguest</merge> </match> </match> </device> </deviceinfo>

With all that set, it is time to ensure that the custom user account is added to the wheel and operator groups using this command:

pw user mod [user name] -G wheel operator

Executing the above as root means that the custom account can run the su command so that logging in as root at the start of a desktop session no longer is needed. That is what being in the wheel group allows, so anyone in the operator group can shut down or restart the system. Since both are facilities readily available on Linux, so I fancied having them in FreeBSD too.

Being able to switch to root in a terminal session meant that I could go on to add software like Firefox, LibreOffice, GIMP, EMACS, Geany, NetBeans, Banshee and so on. Though there may be a line of opinion that FreeBSD is a server operating system, all of these make it more than passable for serving as a desktop one too. There may be no package management GUI as such and the ones that come with GNOME do not work either, yet anyone familiar with command line working will get around that.

While FreeBSD may be conservative, that has its place too, and being able to build up a system one item at a time teaches far more than getting everything already sorted in one hit. So far, there is enough documentation to get me going, leaving me to see where else things go too. So far, the OS hasn't been that intimidating, which is good to see.

Surveying changes coming in GNOME 3.10

20^th October 2013

GNOME 3.10 was released last month, but I only saw it when it appeared in the Arch and Antergos repositories. Despite stability risks, this showcases a strength of rolling distributions: they let you see the latest software before others. Otherwise, you might need to wait for the next Fedora release to view GNOME updates. This delay isn't always negative, as Ubuntu GNOME typically uses the previous version. Since many GNOME Shell extension developers don't update until Fedora includes the latest GNOME in a stable release, this approach ensures the desktop environment is well established before reaching Ubuntu. Debian takes this further by using a stable version from years ago, which has merits for system reliability.

As I regularly use GNOME Shell extensions, I'm interested in which ones still work, which need tweaking, and which no longer function. The main change in the top panel is the replacement of separate sound and user menus with a single combined menu. Extensions that modified the user menu now need reworking or abandoning. The GNOME project has adopted an irritating habit similar to WordPress, with frequent API changes that break extensions (or plugins in WordPress). However, GNOME should copy WordPress's approach to documentation, particularly for the API, which is barely documented anywhere.

GNOME Shell theme developers face challenges too. When I used Elementary Luna 3.4, a large border appeared around the panel, so I switched to XGnome Enhanced (found via GNOME-Look.org). The former theme is no longer maintained as its developer has stopped using GNOME Shell. Perhaps someone else could take it over, since it worked well until version 3.8. The new theme works well for me and will be an option if I upgrade to GNOME 3.10 on one of my PCs in the future.

Returning to the subject of extensions, I tested the included Applications Menu extension, which has improved stability and looks very usable. I no longer need to wait for the Frippery equivalent to be updated. The GNOME Shell backstage view hasn't changed much since 3.8, which may disappoint some, but the workaround works well. Several extensions I use frequently haven't been updated for GNOME Shell 3.10 yet. After some success before a possible upgrade to Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 and GNOME Shell 3.8 (though I'm staying with version 13.04 for now), I tried to port some of these to the latest interface. Below are my updated extensions, which you can use until they're officially updated on the GNOME Shell Extensions website:

Frippery Bottom Panel

Frippery Move Clock

Remove App Menu

Show Desktop

GNOME 3.10 brings other modifications beyond GNOME Shell, which is mainly a JavaScript construction. Application title bars continue to be consolidated in GNOME applications, with a prominent exit button now appearing. You can still apply the previously mentioned modifications to Nautilus (also called Files), many of which work with other applications like Gedit. Gedit now includes useful 'x of y' numbering for search results, showing the current match number and total matches. The GNOME Tweak Tool has been overhauled, but no longer includes the setting for showing folder paths in Nautilus. To enable this feature, open dconf-editor, navigate to org > gnome > nautilus > preferences and tick the always-use-location-entry box.

The GNOME project continues on its path established a few years ago. While I wish GNOME Shell were more mature, significant changes are still coming, making me wonder when this will stop. This might be the result of introducing a controversial experiment when users were content with GNOME 2. Fedora 20 should bring more updated GNOME shell extensions. Antergos provides a good way to see the latest GNOME version if it remains stable. Cinnamon fans may be happy that Cinnamon 2.0 is another desktop option for the Arch-based distribution, one that I may discuss this further once the Antergos installer stops failing at package downloads. I'm setting up a separate VM to examine Cinnamon because it destabilised GNOME during a previous review.

Useful modifications for Nautilus in Ubuntu GNOME 13.04

12^th September 2013

The changes made to Nautilus, otherwise known as Files, in GNOME Shell 3.6 were contentious and the response of the Linux Mint was to create their own variant called Nemo from the previous version of the application. On the Cinnamon or MATE desktop environments, the then latest version of GNOME's file manager would have looked like a fish out of water without its application menu in the top panel on the GNOME Shell desktop. It is possible to make a few modifications that help Nautilus to look more at home on those Linux Mint desktops, and I have collected them here because they are useful for GNOME Shell users too. Here they are in turn.

Adding Application Menu entries to Location Options Menu

The Location Options menu is what you get on clicking the button with the cog icon on the right-hand side of the application's location bar. Using Gsettings, it is possible to make that menu include the sort of entries that are in the application menu in the GNOME Shell panel at the top of the screen. These include an entry for closing the whole application, as well as setting its preferences (or options). Running the following command does just that (if it does not work as it should, try changing the single and double quotes to those understood by a command shell):

gsettings set org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.xsettings overrides '@a{sv} {"Gtk/ShellShowsAppMenu": <int32 0>}'

Adding in the Remove App Menu GNOME Shell extension will clean up the GNOME Shell a little by removing the application menu altogether. If, for some reason, you wish to restore the default behaviour, then the following command does the required reset:

gsettings set org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.xsettings overrides '@a{sv} {}'

Stopping Hiding of the Application Title Bar When Maximised

By default, GNOME Shell can hide the application title bars of GNOME applications such as Nautilus on window maximisation and this is Nautilus now works by default. Changing the behaviour so that the title bar is kept on maximised windows can be as simple as adding in the ignore_request_hide_titlebar extension. The trouble with GNOME Shell extensions is that they can stop working when a new version of GNOME Shell is used, so there's another option: editing metacity-theme-3.xml but /usr/share/themes/Adwaita/metacity-1. The file can be opened using superuser privileges using the following command:

gksudo gedit /usr/share/themes/Adwaita/metacity-1/metacity-theme-3.xml

With the file open, it is a matter of replacing instances of ' has_title="false" ' with ' has_title="true" ', saving it and reloading GNOME Shell. This may persevere across different versions of GNOME Shell, should the extension not do so.

Installing the Cinnamon Desktop Environment on Sabayon Linux

26^th January 2013

During the week, I did an update on my Sabayon system and GNOME 3.6 came on board without too much of a bother. There was no system meltdown or need for an operating system re-installation. However, there was one matter that rankled: adding and updating extensions from extensions. gnome.org was impossible. The process would create a new folder in ~/.local/share/gnome-shell/extensions/ but not fill it with anything at all. Populating from another Ubuntu GNOME Remix 12.10 machine didn't seem to achieve the needful, and I am left wondering if it is down to the version of GNOME Shell being 3.6.2. However, even adding an entry for the current version of GNOME Shell to metadata.json for one plugin didn't appear to do what I wanted, so resolving this issue needs further enquiry.

Meanwhile, I added the Cinnamon desktop environment using the following command and will be using that from now on. If the GNOME Shell extension issue ever gets sorted, I may move back, but there is no rush. GNOME 3.8 sounds like it's bringing an interesting option that makes use of the approach Linux Mint took for version 12 of that distribution, and I can await that, especially if it avoids the need for adding extensions on a personal basis like now.

sudo equo update && sudo equo install cinnamon

With the installation completed by the above command, it was a matter of logging out and choosing the Cinnamon entry (there is a 2D version too) from the session dropdown menu on the login screen to get it going. Then, it was a matter of tweaking Cinnamon to my heart’s content. Getting a two panel layout required logging out and in again as well as choosing the appropriate setting in the Cinnamon Panel options tab. Next, I decided to check on what themes are available at cinnamon.linuxmint.org before settling on Cinnamint 1.6. It all feels very comfortable, apart from not having an automatically growing list of workspaces that are a default offering in GNOME Shell. That goes against the design principles of Cinnamon though, so only hopes of someone making an extension that does that are left.

Making GNOME Shell work through extensions and customisation

21^st September 2012

There has been a lot of doom and gloom spoken about the GNOME desktop environment and the project behind it. These days, it seems to be the fashionable thing to go constantly criticising it, especially after what Linus Torvalds said. KDE went through the same sort of experience a few years ago and seems to have got far enough beyond it that some are choosing it instead of GNOME. For a good while, it was the other way around.

Since its inception, the GNOME Shell has attracted a lot of adverse comment. However, since my first encounter, it has grown on me to the point that I added it to Ubuntu and Linux Mint and use it as my default desktop environment instead of Unity, Mate or Cinnamon. The first of these may not be so surprising because of the unique approach that has been taken. The use of lenses and an application launch bar are items to which I could adapt, but it is the merging of application menus and title bars with the top panel of the desktop that really puts me off it. Application window buttons can be moved to the right everywhere but on this global menu, so I tend to view things from afar instead of using it every day. There just is something about the experience that won't grow on me. Strangely, that also applies to my impressions of KDE, albeit differently; there just is something less slick about the appearance of the bottom panel, the plasmoids and other items like them.

Given that Mate and Cinnamon continue the GNOME 2 approach to things that dominated my home computing for much of the last five years since I turned to Ubuntu, my decision to use GNOME Shell instead of either come as a surprise. It isn't that the environments aren't slick enough, just that I have come to prefer the way that GNOME Shell handles workspaces, spawning them as you need them. If that could be an option in Cinnamon, then it might become my desktop of choice. However, that seems to go against the philosophy of the project, even if someone adds and extension for it.

For a time, I played with going with LXDE rather than either Unity or GNOME Shell; as it happened, my first impressions of the latter weren't so positive until I spent a day with the GNOME variant of Fedora 15. Being not dissimilar to GNOME 2 in the way that it worked was the main attraction of LXDE and my initial use of it was with Lubuntu running on a netbook; the LXDE version of Linux Mint 12 now runs on it so there hasn't been so much change on that machine.

Sometimes, the only way to deal with change is to have a look at it to see what's coming and to decide what you need to do about it. In the case of GNOME Shell, my day with Fedora 15 on a backup PC changed my impressions, and Linux Mint 11's GNOME 2 desktop looked a bit old-fashioned afterwards. In fact, I popped GNOME 3 on there and have been using it as my main desktop environment ever since.

With computing, there always are some who expect things to just work and be the way that they want them. The need for extra configuration is a criticism that still can be levelled at GNOME Shell. Before going with Mate and Cinnamon, Linux Mint went the same way for a while, leaving me to wonder what can be done with such an approach. Will someone else pick up that baton and do the handiwork so that users don't have to do it? Not yet, it seems. Since no one is following the lead of Linux Mint 12, the need for user tweaking remains, even if I have found which ones work for me.

The first place to begin is GNOME's Extensions website, from where I raid a few extensions every time I do an operating system installation. The Alternative Status Menu extension is among the first to get added so that I have the shutdown option again on the user menu, a common criticism of the default set up. Since I always install the GNOME Tweak Tool from the distro repositories, I add the Advanced Setting in User Menu extension to get an entry in the status menu that grants quick access. Frippery Bottom Panel comes next on the list because of its workspace switcher and application window list. Others like Frippery Move Clock, Monitor Status Indicator, Places Status Indicator, Removable Drive Menu, Remove Accessibility, Shell Restart User Menu Entry and User Themes follow in some order and make things feel more pleasing, at least to my mind.

You aren't stuck with the default theme, either, and I have chosen Elementary Luna from deviantART. For adding your own themes, the above listed User Themes extension is needed. Because I want the Frippery Bottom Panel to match the top panel, I tweaked its stylesheet and that's where the Restart User Menu Entry extension is useful, though some care is needed not to crash the desktop with constant shell restarts.

Doing the above makes GNOME Shell really amenable to me, and I wouldn't like to lose that freedom to customise. Saying that, the continued controversial changes aren't stopping yet. Those made to the Nautilus file manager in GNOME 3.6 have caused the Linux Mint project to create Nemo, a fork of the software, and Ubuntu is sticking with the previous version for now. Taking some action yourself instead of just complaining loudly sounds like a more positive approach, which makes its own statement. However, at a time when many want the GNOME project team to listen to users, the new Nautilus appears and is not to be what they needed to see. Could the project go on like this? Only time can answer that one.

While it appears that many have changed from GNOME to other desktop environments, I haven't come across any numbers. A reducing user base could be a way of sending a message about any discontent, one that makes use of a great feature of free software: there is plenty of choice. If the next version of Nautilus isn't to my taste, there are plenty of alternatives out there. After all, Cinnamon started on Linux Mint and has gone from there to being available for other distros too; Fedora is one example. Nemo could follow suit.

Now that GNOME's constituent applications are seeing changes, GNOME Shell may be left to mature. Computer interfaces are undergoing a lot of change right now, and Microsoft Windows 8 is bringing its own big leap. Though controversial at the time, change can be a good thing too and us technical folk always like seeing new things come along (today saw the launch of the iPhone 5 and many folk queueing up for it; Google's Nexus 7 ran out of stock in its first weeks on the market; there are more). That could be what got me using GNOME 3 in the first place, even if my plan is to stick with it for a while yet.

How the Cinnamon desktop environment offers a conventional alternative to the experimental approaches of others

28^th January 2012

The computer on which I am writing these words is running Linux Mint with the Cinnamon desktop environment, a fork of GNOME Shell. This looks as if it will be the default face of GNOME 3 in the next version of Linux Mint, with the MGSE dressing up of GNOME Shell looking more and more like an interim measure until something more consistent was available. While some complained that what was delivered in version 12 of the distribution was a sort of greatest hits selection, I reckon that bets were being hedged by the project team.

Impressions of what's coming

By default, you get a single panel at the bottom of your screen with everything you need in there. However, it is possible to change the layout so that the panel is at the top or there are two panels, one at the top and the other at the bottom. So far, there is no means of configuring which panel applet goes where, as was the case in Linux Mint 11 and its predecessors. However, the default placements are very sensible, so I have no cause for complaint at this point.

Just because you cannot place applets doesn't mean that there is no configurability, though. Since Cinnamon is extensible, you can change the way that time is displayed in the clock, as well as enabling additional applets. It is also possible to control visual effects, such as the way new application windows pop up on a screen.

GNOME 3 is there underneath all of this, though there's no sign of the application dashboard of GNOME Shell. The continually expanding number of slots in the workspace launcher is one sign, as is the enabling of a hotspot at the top right hand corner by default. This brings up an overview screen showing what application windows are open in a workspace. The new Mint menu even gets the ability to search through installed applications, together with the ability to browse through what's available.

In summary, Cinnamon already looks good, though a little polish and extra configuration options wouldn't go amiss. An example of the former is the placement of desktop numbers in the workspace switcher, and I already have discussed the latter. It does appear that the Linux Mint approach to desktop environments is taking shape with a far more conventional feel than the likes of Unity or GNOME Shell. Just as Cinnamon has become available in openSUSE, I can see it gracing LMDE too whenever Debian gets to moving over to GNOME 3 as must be inevitable now unless they take another approach such as MATE.

In comparison with a revolution

While Linux Mint are choosing convention and streamlining GNOME to their own designs, it appears that Ubuntu's Unity is getting ever more experimental as the time when Ubuntu simply evolved from one release to the next becomes an increasingly more distant memory. The latest development is the announcement that application menus could get replaced by a heads-up display (HUD) instead. That would be yet another change made by what increasingly looks like a top-down leadership, reminiscent of what exists at Apple. While it is good to have innovation, you have to ask where users fit in all of this when Linux Mint already has gained from what has been done so far and may gain more again. Still, seeing what happens to Ubuntu sounds like an interesting pastime, though I'm not sure that I'd be depending on the default spin of this distro as my sole operating system right now. Also, changing the interface every few months wouldn't work in a corporate environment at all, so you have to wonder where Mark Shuttleworth is driving all this, though Microsoft is engaging in a bit of experimentation of its own. We are living in interesting times for the computer desktop, so it's just as well that there are safe havens like Linux Mint, too. Watching from afar sounds safer.

How mobile device interfaces are Influencing desktop computing environment designs

19^th September 2011

Could 2011 be remembered as the year when the desktop computing interface got a major overhaul? One part of this, Windows 8, won't be with us until next year, but there has been enough happening so far this year that has resulted in a lot of comment. With many if not all the changes, it is possible to detect the influence of interfaces used on smartphones. After all, the carry-over from Windows Phone 7 to the new Metro interface is unmistakeable.

Two developments in the Linux world have spawned a hell of an amount of comment: Canonical's decision to develop Unity for Ubuntu and the arrival of GNOME 3. While there have been many complaints about the changes made in both, there must be a fair few folk who are just getting on with using them without complaint. Maybe there are many who even quietly like the new interfaces. While I am not so sure about Unity, I surprised myself by taking to GNOME Shell so much that I installed it on Linux Mint. It remains a work in progress, as does Unity, but it'll be very interesting to see it mature. Perhaps a good number of the growing collection of GNOME Shell plugins could make it into the main codebase. If that were to happen, I could see it being welcomed by a good few folk.

There was little doubt that the changes in GNOME 3 looked daunting, so Ubuntu's taking a different approach is understandable until you come to realise how change that involves anyway. With GNOME 3 working so well for me, I feel disinclined to dally very much with Unity at all. In fact, I am writing these words on a Toshiba laptop running UGR, effectively Ubuntu running GNOME 3, and that could become my main home computing operating system in time.

For those who find these changes not to their taste, there are alternatives. Some Linux distributions are sticking with GNOME 2 as long as they can, and there apparently has been some mention of a fork to keep a GNOME 2 interface available indefinitely. However, there are other possibilities such as LXDE and XFCE out there too. In fact, until GNOME 3 won me over, LXDE was coming to mind as a place of safety until I learned that Linux Mint was retaining its desktop identity. As always, there's KDE too, but I have never warmed to that for some reason.

The latest version of OS X, Lion, also included some changes inspired by iOS, the operating system that powers both the iPhone and iPad. However, while the current edition of PC Pro highlights some disgruntlement in professional circles regarding Apple's direction, this does not seem to have aroused the kind of ire that has been abroad in the world of Linux. Is it because Linux users want to feel that they are in charge and that iMac and MacBook users are content to have decisions made for them so long as everything just works? Speaking for myself, the former description seems to fit me, though having choices means that I can reject decisions that I do not like so much.

At the time of writing, the release of a developer preview of the next version of Windows has been generating a lot of attention. It also appears that changes are headed for Windows users too. However, I get the sense that a more conservative interface option will be retained and that could be essential for avoiding the alienation of corporate users. After all, I cannot see the Metro interface gaining much favour in the working environment when so many of us have so much to do. Nevertheless, I plan to get my hands on the developer preview to have a look (the weekend proved too short for this). It will be very interesting to see how the next version of Windows develops, and I plan to keep an eye on it as it does so.

It now looks as if many will have their work cut out if they are to avoid where desktop computing interfaces are going. Established paradigms are being questioned, particularly as a result of touch interfaces on smartphones and tablets. Wii and Kinect have involved other ways of interacting with computers, too, so there's a lot of mileage in rethinking how we work with computers. So far, I have been able to deal with the changes in the world of Linux, but I am left wondering about the changes that Microsoft is making. After Vista, they need to be careful and they know that. Maybe, they'll be better at getting users through changes in computing interfaces than others, but it'll be very interesting to see what happens. Unlike open-source community projects, they have the survival of a massive multinational at stake.

« Older Entries «