Technology Tales

Widely differing approaches

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 also is 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.

Whither Fedora?

10^th January 2009

There is a reason why things have got a little quieter on this blog: my main inspiration for many posts that make their way on here, Ubuntu, is just working away without much complaint. Since BBC iPlayer isn't working so well for me at the moment, I need to have a look at my setup. Otherwise, everything is continuing quietly. In some respects, that's no bad thing and allows me to spend my time doing other things like engaging in hill walking, photography and other such things. While I suppose that the calm is also a reflection of the fact that Ubuntu has matured, there is a sense that some changes may be on the horizon. For one thing, there are the opinions of a certain Mark Shuttleworth, though the competition is progressing too.

That latter point brings me to Linux Format's recently published verdict that Fedora has overtaken Ubuntu. I do have a machine with Fedora that performs what I ask of it without any trouble. However, I have never been on it trying all the sorts of things that I ask of Ubuntu, so my impressions are not in-depth ones. Going deeper into the subject mightn't be such a bad use of a few hours. What I am not planning to do is convert my main Ubuntu machine to Fedora. I moved from Windows because of constant upheavals and I have no intention to bring those upon me without good reason, something that's just not there at the moment.

Speaking of upheavals, one thought that is entering my mind is that of upgrading that main machine. Since its last rebuild was over three years ago, computer technology has moved on a bit since then, with dual and quad-core CPU's from Intel and AMD coming into the fray. Of course, the cost of all of this needs to be considered too, which is never more true than in these troubled economic times. If you asked me about the prospect of a system upgrade a few weeks ago, I would have ruled it out of hand.

What has got me wondering is my continued used of virtualisation and the resources that it needs. Mad notions like running more than one VM at once will put any CPU or memory through their paces. Another attractive idea would be getting a new and bigger screen, particularly with what you can get for around £100 these days. However, my 17" Iiyama is doing well enough to consign this one to the wish list for now. None of the changes that I have described are imminent, even if I have noticed how fast I am filling disks up with digital images to make an expansion of hard disk capacity a higher priority.

If I ever get to do a full system rebuild with a new CPU, memory and motherboard (I am not so sure about graphics since I am no gamer), the idea of moving into the world of 64-bit computing comes about. Since the maximum amount of memory usable by 32-bit software is 4 GB, 64-bit software is a must if I decide to go beyond this limit. That all sounds very fine, aside from the possibility of problems arising with support for legacy hardware. It sounds like another bridge to be assessed before its crossing, even if two upheavals can be made into one.

Besides system breakages, the sort of hardware and software changes over which I have been musing here are optional and can be done in my own time. That's probably just as well in a downturn like we are experiencing now. Being careful with money becomes more important at times like these, which means that it's fortunate that free software not only offers freedom of choice and usage but also a way to leave the closed commercial software acquisition treadmill with all of its cost implications, leaving money for much more important things.