Now that was strange!

Ok, I gave it a fair shot and I like it but........
Wonderful thing about having two computers, you get to compare operating systems side by side. If you are immediately drawn to one or the other, you find out.

On the right, the home boy, Ubuntu Linux 9.10, sporting the preview version of the Gnome Shell. On the left various challengers including XP (he gets few calls these days).

Just installed a second drive on this second PC so fresh installs are the way to go. Xubuntu is first, I installed it and the little window size buttons and header bars did not appear or work. Gee, it worked before on this machine. The live-CD runs OK and I am moving windows around, but compared to the Gnome Shell it is extra work to get to stuff. Then another live-CD, Elive 2.0. This OS is a drooler, it is so good looking. Elive has compositing charm but no compositing. This means you can still run it on a low resource machine and get good performance. But wait, darn, I have a warning window that says ATI video cards are known to cause problems with certain drivers and may crash the system. It works but missing icons and quirky actions, drat that ATI. We'll have to try another video card and see how it goes. Elive 2.0 is still racing after the Mac type desktop but has the Linux toys, compared to Gnome Shell?

The Gnome Shell just sits there working with almost no effort (fewer mouse clicks). I don't have to set up shortcut icons and application launchers. I think the work flow is a little smoother. The big shock is accepting how it's setup, you know how Linux users are fiercely resistant to being told what to do and how to do it. The good thing is that so many other desktops exist. I hope if the Gnome Shell becomes the standard, that the windowing desktop folks are use to is not thrown away. Then you can put regular or decaf in the session selector when you log in.

What's strange is I like the Gnome Shell over the what we all are used to in windowed desktops. It reminds me of Konqueror, the file manager/browser/viewer that could do so much and was under appreciated, basically the only thing I liked about KDE. And also a little bit of Matisse desktop, which was mostly in Mandriva Linux. To me, this is what a PC is all about the file manager. Having access to my files is the most important thing, then the program menus. So how to get there has to be short with fewer distractions. I didn't like compositing because you had to "find" a working setup yourself.

Linux is wonderful with all the choice, but the selfish arrogance of some vocal users hampers wider acceptance. A better solution would be configuration recipes posted that other users could immediately appropriate. This way the folks with simple needs can better find their way and the boasters can still show off with gusto. Science is about repeatable results, not just being the first and the most extreme. Community is about forging the way for others also, else wise you are adrift on your own iceberg (global warming anyone?). 

There is the glitz of all kinds or screen manipulation, multi-touch, immersion 3D........... then there is making present technology and user habits more efficient by changing the beginning premise. You can do this in Linux. KDE almost did this and you have to like the way they made it customizable. But KDE is too fidgety. Everytime the cursor passes over something there is possibility for unwanted change. Gnome Shell is more static feels more stable. When I click, I know what to expect. I found the same thing when comparing KDE's BasKet Note Pads to KeepNote. They both allow text and pictures, but BasKet Note Pads requires care because things move and float. So a program can run stable, but is it stable in the user's hands. If the program feels sure in the user's hand, they have confidence to use it more often.

Gnome Shell is cool but make it a standard "option".

the Linuxville Mepis report

Linuxville has it's quirks, one being that distros become the brain-child of groups of developers. One distro might have a better way (at least to you) of doing a thing. Similar distros might feature that unique way compared to another distros. Then some distros are popular inspite of lacking better ways of doing things. Wouldn't it be cool if all the best stuff showed up in one distro? Well I have found that what works well and easy in one distro is a trial in another. There is not usually a problem with the common applications but a few refuse to work even when nudged. This is all in the realm of learning Linux. How is Mepis on my desktop? Mepis is getting a workout as I find out how to do all the stuff I want. While I don't have a single interface to view all my pictures and videos (like Elisa Media Center), I do have several video and picture viewers that do the job well. The saying in Mepis is that it just works, this has been my experience. Not as flashy and exciting as my trek into Ubuntu, but a very good experience none the less. Mepis is very solid and the just works thing takes the edge off many newbie concerns. My only complaint has been the KDE menu which takes time to get use to. So, the trade off is finding where the application or tool is over hunting it down and making it work. Actually, I haven't progressed much beyond the out-of-the-box Mepis as some like whirling and blinking displays as proof of their geekness. Most users don't have the time or the interest to tweak till you geek. Mepis is pleasant to look at from the get. There is a lot to like. Mepis is not on the cutting-edge, not in the back of the pack, not funded by millionaires, not pushed by fanfare and stigma fighters. It is sort of like my Chevy, dependable, capable and reliable, looks good and rides nice.

can Ubuntu survive the desktop?

In the latest skirmish for the desktop at least on the Linux front, Ubuntu has the perceived lead. But there is trouble under the surface. Ubuntu which has the Gnome desktop has the continued backing of the Ubuntu designers while Kubuntu which has the KDE desktop is waning. Seems a little thing but KDE seems not able to keep up with the Ubuntu release schedule. KDE is pushing for version 4.0 to be ready for prime time but it is not soon enough for the next release of Ubuntu coming your way. It is not a good thing to have a large part of your user base cut off. I am so surprised at this situation, it begs for the obvious solution. The Ubuntu folks need to return to the Linux idea.
Return to the idea that any desktop or window manager can be used. The present trend toward integrating a particular desktop into Linux results in moving on to a different distribution by users who don't like the desktop. The desktop is not Linux, only the user interface. In the Ubuntu world it is so apparent that users like the whole Ubuntu scenario but want the desktop of their own choosing. If I were trying to insure the continued success of Ubuntu Linux I would pay attention to what users are demanding, GUI choice and a Linux that will run on anything. Personally I believe that both KDE and Gnome desktops are way too big and try to embrace everything all users want. So, what do I recommend? Make Linux better fit to use any desktop or window manager. You might have to sacrifice integration via libraries and devise a more transparent way for the desktop to access Linux. It is all so complicated because all the players are entrenched in their own development worlds. My final stroke has been to use Xfce desktop which is a little less than either KDE or Gnome but is more gratifying to deal with on a daily basis. Linux should not become like Apple or Microsoft, just a third choice of an homogenized product line. What makes Linux is its ability to be configured to the hardware and to the user. One size does not fit all. What direction will Linux makers and users go is so exciting and a work in progress. Computing is still pretty young as technologies go and it isn't the answer to all man's woes as some have hoped but you have to admit cool things are happening.

MS vs Linux steps up a notch

Well, I got tired of bitching about how my Windows XP desktop was cluttered and unresponsive. So I put most of the desktop shortcut icons in a desktop folder, that way I could get at them when I needed them. They weren't being used regularly anyway. Then I installed something called RKLauncher (RKDock). This handy item places a few most accessed icons on the desktop for fast easy access. It looks just like the icon tool bar on the Mac. When you hover over the icon with your mouse, the icon magnifies.
I tried out a few other freebies but they were buggy because of all the security fixes to XP. The best one was called FlyakiteOSX. It looked very, very nice compared to what I could do to the standard XP desktop. It had a DLL relocation problem that I couldn't fix. I really liked the Mac look but would have settled just for the better functionality. All in all I like my XP desktop again. I think it is amazing that some inventive programmers have figured out how to change the look and feel of MS Windows by adding on some software.

My next major shakeup was what to do with the Linux desktop. I have been a Gnome desktop fan since I first installed Red Hat years ago. I didn't like KDE because it was complicated in its look and feel. The little dragon symbol I also thought was hoke. KDE users bragged about the ability to reconfigure the look and feel of the desktop. All I saw was menu after nested menu, especially in the control panel. Gnome was simple to set up, my grandmother could use it. I guess even Linus T. himself had something to say about the simplicity of Gnome. But he was questioning the attitude of its programmers. They were, according to him, underestimating the mental capacity of the users of their desktop. I thought simple was nice so I didn't have a problem. A funny thing happened to KDE, it was improved for the better. So I backed up my personal files and bookmarks, my address book. I installed Kubuntu (with KDE) over Ubuntu (with Gnome). I like what I see of KDE, the convoluted double nested menus are gone. It has a nicer look and feel. It is still tweakable. I am not head over heels satisfied yet, there are some differences to get used to. I want to say out loud that KDE is not like MS Windows and people who say that are smoking something. I thought Gnome was more like MS Windows but thats my opinion. So, I am tweaking my KDE desktop to get the best out of it. I miss the Synaptic Application Manager that was in Gnome, but the Apt-get interface works quite well. KDE seem to have a better variety of programs written for it that integrate well into it. I installed a little program called KoolDock. It again is like the Mac icon toolbar that sits at the bottom of the screen. It is very handy and works with KDE. Change is good and it all seems to get better.