18.04 = circular login problem on system freeze

[Wade Smart]

I just installed 18.04 this week and have been testing it out.
Earlier today I clicked on Show Applications an the screen froze.
After several minutes it logged me out and when I tried to log back in -
Im immediately logged out. This is a similar problem I was having with
17.10 recently. (This is a fresh install).

Thankfully I have a second account to login with and I was going through
the logs looking for something .. anything at the time this happened. This
is what Ive found so far:

Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]: Error looking up
permission: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown: The
name org.freedesktop.impl.portal.PermissionStore was not provided by
any .service files
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Attempting to re-register
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload; resetting instead
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Item
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload is already registered
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]: Some code accessed the
property 'refreshPropertyOnProxy' on the module 'util'. That property
was defined with 'let' or 'const' inside the module. This was
previously supported, but is not correct according to the ES6
standard. Any symbols to be exported from a module must be defined
with 'var'. The property access will work as previously for the time
being, but please fix your code anyway.
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Attempting to re-register
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload; resetting instead
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Item
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload is already registered
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Attempting to re-register
:1.61/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/dropbox_client_2204; resetting
instead
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Item
:1.61/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/dropbox_client_2204 is already
registered
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]:
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] while calling AboutToShow: Gio.IOErrorEnum:
Method 'com.canonical.dbusmenu.AboutToShow' returned type '()', but
expected '(b)'
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart org.gnome.Shell.desktop[11940]: **
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart org.gnome.Shell.desktop[11940]:
Gtk:ERROR:../../../../gtk/gtkicontheme.c:4261:gtk_icon_info_load_icon_finish:
assertion failed: (icon_info_get_pixbuf_ready (icon_info))
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart org.gnome.Shell.desktop[11940]: == Stack
trace for context 0x561afef634d0 ==
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart indicator-multi[11264]: Unable to connect to
the Notification Watcher:
GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message recipient
disconnected from message bus without replying
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart indicator-multi[11264]: Unable to connect to
the Notification Watcher:
GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message recipient
disconnected from message bus without replying
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session[1831]:
gnome-session-binary[1831]: GnomeDesktop-WARNING: Failed to acquire
idle monitor proxy: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply:
Message recipient disconnected from message bus without replying
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]:
GnomeDesktop-WARNING: Failed to acquire idle monitor proxy:
GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message recipient
disconnected from message bus without replying
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING:
Application 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' killed by signal 6
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session[1831]:
gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING: Application
'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' killed by signal 6
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session[1831]:
gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING: App 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop'
respawning too quickly
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING: App
'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' respawning too quickly
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: Unrecoverable
failure in required component org.gnome.Shell.desktop
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session[1831]:
gnome-session-binary[1831]: CRITICAL: We failed, but the fail whale is
dead. Sorry....
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: CRITICAL: We
failed, but the fail whale is dead. Sorry....
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart dropbox.desktop[2173]: ICE default IO error
handler doing an exit(), pid = 2204, errno = 11
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart at-spi-bus-launcher[1947]: XIO: fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server ":0"
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart at-spi-bus-launcher[1947]: after 15605
requests (15605 known processed) with 0 events remaining.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-xsettings[2092]: gsd-xsettings: Fatal IO
error 104 (Connection reset by peer) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-wacom[2096]: gsd-wacom: Fatal IO error
11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart kernel: [82661.114813] rfkill: input handler enabled
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-power[2069]: gsd-power: Fatal IO error
11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-clipboard[2109]: gsd-clipboard: Fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-color[2108]: gsd-color: Fatal IO error
11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-keyboard[2120]: gsd-keyboard: Fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-media-keys[2117]: gsd-media-keys: Fatal
IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart nautilus-deskto[2174]: nautilus-desktop:
Fatal IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart nautilus[7367]: nautilus: Fatal IO error 11
(Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart firefox[5483]: firefox: Fatal IO error 11
(Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart libreoffice-calc.desktop[5324]: X IO Error
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart pidgin.desktop[10383]: Pidgin: Fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart indicator-multi[11264]: indicator-multiload:
Fatal IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart /usr/lib/gdm3/gdm-x-session[1820]: (**)
Option "fd" "24"

I am unable to log to that account at the moment without it kicking me
right back out.

Wade

[Wade Smart]

This morning while searching for answers I found this in the log after
I was kicked back out:

spice-vdagent,
Cannot access vdagent virtio channel /dev/virtio-ports/com.redhat.spice.0
priority 3

gnome-session-b
CRITICAL: We failed, but the fail whale is dead. Sorry....
priority 2

gnome-session-b
Unrecoverable failure in required component org.gnome.Shell.desktop
priority 3

Though some have had similar issues t was video card related.
This seems to be something else.
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Wade Smart
I just installed 18.04 this week and have been testing it out.
Earlier today I clicked on Show Applications an the screen froze.
After several minutes it logged me out and when I tried to log back in -
Im immediately logged out. This is a similar problem I was having with
17.10 recently. (This is a fresh install).
Thankfully I have a second account to login with and I was going through
the logs looking for something .. anything at the time this happened. This
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]: Error looking up
permission: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown: The
name org.freedesktop.impl.portal.PermissionStore was not provided by
any .service files
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Attempting to re-register
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload; resetting instead
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Item
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload is already registered
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart gnome-shell[11940]: Some code accessed the
property 'refreshPropertyOnProxy' on the module 'util'. That property
was defined with 'let' or 'const' inside the module. This was
previously supported, but is not correct according to the ES6
standard. Any symbols to be exported from a module must be defined
with 'var'. The property access will work as previously for the time
being, but please fix your code anyway.
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Attempting to re-register
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload; resetting instead
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Item
:1.185/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/multiload is already registered
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Attempting to re-register
:1.61/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/dropbox_client_2204; resetting
instead
[AppIndicatorSupport-WARN] Item
:1.61/org/ayatana/NotificationItem/dropbox_client_2204 is already
registered
Method 'com.canonical.dbusmenu.AboutToShow' returned type '()', but
expected '(b)'
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart org.gnome.Shell.desktop[11940]: **
assertion failed: (icon_info_get_pixbuf_ready (icon_info))
Jul 9 17:51:23 wadesmart org.gnome.Shell.desktop[11940]: == Stack
trace for context 0x561afef634d0 ==
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart indicator-multi[11264]: Unable to connect to
GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message recipient
disconnected from message bus without replying
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart indicator-multi[11264]: Unable to connect to
GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message recipient
disconnected from message bus without replying
gnome-session-binary[1831]: GnomeDesktop-WARNING: Failed to acquire
Message recipient disconnected from message bus without replying
GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Message recipient
disconnected from message bus without replying
Application 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' killed by signal 6
gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING: Application
'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' killed by signal 6
gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING: App 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop'
respawning too quickly
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: WARNING: App
'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' respawning too quickly
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: Unrecoverable
failure in required component org.gnome.Shell.desktop
gnome-session-binary[1831]: CRITICAL: We failed, but the fail whale is
dead. Sorry....
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gnome-session-binary[1831]: CRITICAL: We
failed, but the fail whale is dead. Sorry....
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart dropbox.desktop[2173]: ICE default IO error
handler doing an exit(), pid = 2204, errno = 11
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart at-spi-bus-launcher[1947]: XIO: fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server ":0"
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart at-spi-bus-launcher[1947]: after 15605
requests (15605 known processed) with 0 events remaining.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-xsettings[2092]: gsd-xsettings: Fatal IO
error 104 (Connection reset by peer) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-wacom[2096]: gsd-wacom: Fatal IO error
11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart kernel: [82661.114813] rfkill: input handler enabled
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-power[2069]: gsd-power: Fatal IO error
11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-clipboard[2109]: gsd-clipboard: Fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-color[2108]: gsd-color: Fatal IO error
11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-keyboard[2120]: gsd-keyboard: Fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart gsd-media-keys[2117]: gsd-media-keys: Fatal
IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Fatal IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart nautilus[7367]: nautilus: Fatal IO error 11
(Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart firefox[5483]: firefox: Fatal IO error 11
(Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart libreoffice-calc.desktop[5324]: X IO Error
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart pidgin.desktop[10383]: Pidgin: Fatal IO
error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Fatal IO error 11 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0.
Jul 9 17:51:24 wadesmart /usr/lib/gdm3/gdm-x-session[1820]: (**)
Option "fd" "24"
I am unable to log to that account at the moment without it kicking me
right back out.
Wade
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

[compdoc]

Post by Wade Smart
CRITICAL: We failed, but the fail whale is dead. Sorry....

coders = comedians

[Wade Smart]

HAAH I had a few other names for them myself but, yea. :D
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by compdoc

Post by Wade Smart
CRITICAL: We failed, but the fail whale is dead. Sorry....

coders = comedians
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

[Liam Proven]

Post by Wade Smart
HAAH I had a few other names for them myself but, yea. :D

I gotta say, I'm feeling totally vindicated in my decision to steer
very far clear of GNOME 3.

Cinnamon is OK -- I'm using it on one Mint 19 box and another with GeckoLinux.

But my main work machine runs Xfce. Everything just works. It's relaxing.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Wade Smart]

Im reading about a lot of Mint users having various problems.
My laptop though - not a single issue.

G3 might be enough to push me back to 16.04 for a year or so.
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Wade Smart
HAAH I had a few other names for them myself but, yea. :D

I gotta say, I'm feeling totally vindicated in my decision to steer
very far clear of GNOME 3.
Cinnamon is OK -- I'm using it on one Mint 19 box and another with GeckoLinux.
But my main work machine runs Xfce. Everything just works. It's relaxing.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

[compdoc]

Post by Wade Smart
Im reading about a lot of Mint users having various problems.
My laptop though - not a single issue.

Ubuntu Mate does very well for me. I used to install Server and then a
minimal mate desktop, but now just use the minimal option during install.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Wade Smart
Im reading about a lot of Mint users having various problems.
My laptop though - not a single issue.
G3 might be enough to push me back to 16.04 for a year or so.

I have seen some glitches -- Cinnamon needs hardware 3D and good solid drivers.

Xfce doesn't need 3D at all, although it can use it if it's there.
It's lighter than Maté, does pretty much everything Maté does and more
-- such as working vertical taskbars, something Cinnamon and KDE can't
do.

E.g. https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Jim]

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Wade Smart
HAAH I had a few other names for them myself but, yea. :D

I gotta say, I'm feeling totally vindicated in my decision to steer
very far clear of GNOME 3.

My experience is exactly the opposite. I upgraded my laptop from Ubuntu
16.04 to 18.04 and in limited use have seen no problems.

Post by Liam Proven
Cinnamon is OK -- I'm using it on one Mint 19 box and another with GeckoLinux.

On the same laptop I upgraded Mint 18 with Cinnamon to Mint 19. After
the upgrade completed and rebooted Cinnamon crashed and popped up a
dialog saying it had crashed and I was in fallback mode. At this point I
did have a very basic looking but usable desktop.

I did some googling and found other people with problems also. They were
talking about waiting for a kernel update to fix it.

This laptop doesn't have anything important on it so i googled and found
out how to add Mate along side Cinnamon. Mate seems to run fine, now I
can only boot to Mate even if I choose Cinnamon.

I noticed a couple of things after the Mint upgrade. About 10 seconds
after I choose Mint at the grub menu the screen turns purple and the
words Ubuntu 19 are centered on it.

It then takes about 3 and a half minutes to get to to the login prompt.

Once I get a chance I will remove Cinnamon and see if that improves things.

Regards, Jim

[Liam Proven]

Post by Jim
My experience is exactly the opposite. I upgraded my laptop from Ubuntu
16.04 to 18.04 and in limited use have seen no problems.

I upgraded my testbed machine to 17.10 and I was surprised at how well
GNOME picked up my Unity settings -- even adding Unity indicators
(weather, system monitor, etc.) in weird distorted but running forms.

I just don't like GNOME 3. I don't see why I should switch between
separate "activities" and normal views -- my mental workflow doesn't
work like that. I don't run one app per virtual desktop -- I have 2
big monitors on all my desktop machines, home and work, and I use
window management to track stuff. I only use virtual desktops on
laptops. I found GNOME's multi-monitor support significantly lacking:
*I* choose where my top panel, dock and desktop switcher go, not my
desktop's programmers, but with GNOME, I can't. Dock and switcher must
be on the same desktop, putting one of them slap in the middle of my
workspace where I don't want it. I use title bars a lot -- I don't
just move stuff, I send-to-back and roll things up and so on. Can't on
GNOME 3, or it's harder and needs tweaks.

If I could use dash-to-panel to merge the dock thing and the top panel
/and put it on one side/ like I do on Windows, it might be OK, but the
developer doesn't support that -- it's top or bottom only.

So I switched to Xfce and it handles it well. Not perfectly, there are
wrinkles, but it works, better than Maté, better than Cinnamon, better
than KDE, and in a more customisable way than LXDE. LXQt isn't ready
-- I tried it, too.

Budgie can do it but very clumsily and clunkily. I must admit, I do
not see the point of Budgie -- it doesn't do anything other desktops
can't do better.

Post by Jim
On the same laptop I upgraded Mint 18 with Cinnamon to Mint 19. After
the upgrade completed and rebooted Cinnamon crashed and popped up a
dialog saying it had crashed and I was in fallback mode. At this point I
did have a very basic looking but usable desktop.

Yeah, I've seen that too. At least when it falls over, it gets back up
and keeps limping along.

Cinnamon suffers the penalty of being a fork. It's forked off what's
now an old version of GNOME 3. Keep current will be a problem for
them.

If they can persuade the Xfce and Maté developers to share the same
set of accessory apps -- the XApps suite -- then that will take a
significant maintenance burden off all 3 of them.

Post by Jim
I did some googling and found other people with problems also. They were
talking about waiting for a kernel update to fix it.

I blame driver issues, but this is just a guess.

Post by Jim
This laptop doesn't have anything important on it so i googled and found
out how to add Mate along side Cinnamon. Mate seems to run fine, now I
can only boot to Mate even if I choose Cinnamon.
I noticed a couple of things after the Mint upgrade. About 10 seconds
after I choose Mint at the grub menu the screen turns purple and the
words Ubuntu 19 are centered on it.

*Ubuntu* 19? Not *Mint* 19? Typo?

Post by Jim
It then takes about 3 and a half minutes to get to to the login prompt.

Seems like a long time.

Post by Jim
Once I get a chance I will remove Cinnamon and see if that improves things.

If you can, I'd nuke and reinstall.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Jim]

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Jim
My experience is exactly the opposite. I upgraded my laptop from Ubuntu
16.04 to 18.04 and in limited use have seen no problems.

I upgraded my testbed machine to 17.10 and I was surprised at how well
GNOME picked up my Unity settings -- even adding Unity indicators
(weather, system monitor, etc.) in weird distorted but running forms.
I just don't like GNOME 3. I don't see why I should switch between
separate "activities" and normal views -- my mental workflow doesn't
work like that. I don't run one app per virtual desktop -- I have 2
big monitors on all my desktop machines, home and work, and I use
window management to track stuff. I only use virtual desktops on
*I* choose where my top panel, dock and desktop switcher go, not my
desktop's programmers, but with GNOME, I can't. Dock and switcher must
be on the same desktop, putting one of them slap in the middle of my
workspace where I don't want it. I use title bars a lot -- I don't
just move stuff, I send-to-back and roll things up and so on. Can't on
GNOME 3, or it's harder and needs tweaks.

I haven't used it much yet but I am sure I would end up agreeing with
you. I don't like how they keep arbitrarily removing functionality on
what seems like a whim.

Post by Liam Proven
If I could use dash-to-panel to merge the dock thing and the top panel
/and put it on one side/ like I do on Windows, it might be OK, but the
developer doesn't support that -- it's top or bottom only.
So I switched to Xfce and it handles it well. Not perfectly, there are
wrinkles, but it works, better than Maté, better than Cinnamon, better
than KDE, and in a more customisable way than LXDE. LXQt isn't ready
-- I tried it, too.
Budgie can do it but very clumsily and clunkily. I must admit, I do
not see the point of Budgie -- it doesn't do anything other desktops
can't do better.

Post by Jim
On the same laptop I upgraded Mint 18 with Cinnamon to Mint 19. After
the upgrade completed and rebooted Cinnamon crashed and popped up a
dialog saying it had crashed and I was in fallback mode. At this point I
did have a very basic looking but usable desktop.

Yeah, I've seen that too. At least when it falls over, it gets back up
and keeps limping along.
Cinnamon suffers the penalty of being a fork. It's forked off what's
now an old version of GNOME 3. Keep current will be a problem for
them.
If they can persuade the Xfce and Maté developers to share the same
set of accessory apps -- the XApps suite -- then that will take a
significant maintenance burden off all 3 of them.

Post by Jim
I did some googling and found other people with problems also. They were
talking about waiting for a kernel update to fix it.

I blame driver issues, but this is just a guess.

Post by Jim
This laptop doesn't have anything important on it so i googled and found
out how to add Mate along side Cinnamon. Mate seems to run fine, now I
can only boot to Mate even if I choose Cinnamon.
I noticed a couple of things after the Mint upgrade. About 10 seconds
after I choose Mint at the grub menu the screen turns purple and the
words Ubuntu 19 are centered on it.

*Ubuntu* 19? Not *Mint* 19? Typo?

Not a typo on my part. It says Ubuntu 19 on a typical ubuntu colored
background.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Jim
It then takes about 3 and a half minutes to get to to the login prompt.

Seems like a long time.

It does. When I boot to Ubuntu it is much much quicker.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Jim
Once I get a chance I will remove Cinnamon and see if that improves things.

If you can, I'd nuke and reinstall.

I think I will wipe out Cinnamon first and see what that does. I may
give Xfce a try. I briefly ran it years ago.

Regards, Jim

[Liam Proven]

Post by Jim
I haven't used it much yet but I am sure I would end up agreeing with
you. I don't like how they keep arbitrarily removing functionality on
what seems like a whim.

Agreed.

Post by Jim

Post by Liam Proven
*Ubuntu* 19? Not *Mint* 19? Typo?

Not a typo on my part. It says Ubuntu 19 on a typical ubuntu colored
background.

:-o Weird!

Post by Jim
It does. When I boot to Ubuntu it is much much quicker.

I'd bet.

Mint 19 on my girlfriend's PC boots in a quarter of the time Win10
does, and it doesn'ty display any weird messages as it does so. I do
have the nVidia drivers installed, though.

Post by Jim
I think I will wipe out Cinnamon first and see what that does. I may
give Xfce a try. I briefly ran it years ago.

It hasn't changed much. :-)

The only feature I would like, the one thing, would be to be able to
pin app icons to the taskbar. Other than that, it suits me fine. I
don't particularly want a Windows-like UI, but unless someone can
offer me something better -- e.g. as Mac OS X and Unity do -- then
I'll take it.

But if I have one, I want it to do everything Windows does, at least
as well or better. Xfce pretty much does that for my #1 want --
vertical taskbars. None of the other Windows-like desktops apart from
LXDE/LXQt do that well or at all.

Except app-pinning. That's the one new thing since Win7 that I like.

OK, Win10 has virtual desktops, and I like that, but Linux already did
that for a couple of decades.

The only other improvement, IMHO, is the ability to search
subdirectories in a specified tree for drivers. That's a killer
feature, introduced in Vista, and I've never seen a single other
person comment on it. That alone has saved me *hours*.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Wade Smart]

I grabbed by backups and decided to go a different direction.
Tried kde. It feels a lot faster. Also seems to have a lot of
useful configuration. But!!!! Tried to install after many days of
testing and .. the install has no visible words. Just check boxes
and three buttons. I think Im installing 16.04 and just sticking with
Unity. It works, its stable, no problems.
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Jim
I haven't used it much yet but I am sure I would end up agreeing with
you. I don't like how they keep arbitrarily removing functionality on
what seems like a whim.

Agreed.

Post by Jim

Post by Liam Proven
*Ubuntu* 19? Not *Mint* 19? Typo?

Not a typo on my part. It says Ubuntu 19 on a typical ubuntu colored
background.

:-o Weird!

Post by Jim
It does. When I boot to Ubuntu it is much much quicker.

I'd bet.
Mint 19 on my girlfriend's PC boots in a quarter of the time Win10
does, and it doesn'ty display any weird messages as it does so. I do
have the nVidia drivers installed, though.

Post by Jim
I think I will wipe out Cinnamon first and see what that does. I may
give Xfce a try. I briefly ran it years ago.

It hasn't changed much. :-)
The only feature I would like, the one thing, would be to be able to
pin app icons to the taskbar. Other than that, it suits me fine. I
don't particularly want a Windows-like UI, but unless someone can
offer me something better -- e.g. as Mac OS X and Unity do -- then
I'll take it.
But if I have one, I want it to do everything Windows does, at least
as well or better. Xfce pretty much does that for my #1 want --
vertical taskbars. None of the other Windows-like desktops apart from
LXDE/LXQt do that well or at all.
Except app-pinning. That's the one new thing since Win7 that I like.
OK, Win10 has virtual desktops, and I like that, but Linux already did
that for a couple of decades.
The only other improvement, IMHO, is the ability to search
subdirectories in a specified tree for drivers. That's a killer
feature, introduced in Vista, and I've never seen a single other
person comment on it. That alone has saved me *hours*.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

[Liam Proven]

Post by Wade Smart
I grabbed by backups and decided to go a different direction.
Tried kde. It feels a lot faster. Also seems to have a lot of
useful configuration. But!!!! Tried to install after many days of
testing and .. the install has no visible words. Just check boxes
and three buttons. I think Im installing 16.04 and just sticking with
Unity. It works, its stable, no problems.

I have had similar problems trying KDE5 in VirtualBox. It is complex,
cluttered and I don't like it.

I think that unless a fairly stable Unity remix of 18.04 appears, I am
going to switch to Xfce and Xubuntu. It's clean, simple, it just
works, and with some easy tweaks it has a pleasing desktop. It is easy
to enable features such as a vertical taskbar, partly-translucent
title bars (à lá Windows 7), and some useful panel applets (system
monitor, weather forecast, virtual desktop switcher).

The single feature I miss from newer versions of Windows is the
ability to pin apps to the taskbar. You still need a separate "quick
launch" area -- so right now, my taskbar contains 2 icons for
Thunderbird, 2 Chromes, 2 Waterfoxes, etc. One is the launcher and the
other is the running instance. This is clunky and feels old-fashioned
to me these days.

It is my only gripe. Otherwise, it works excellently.

Cinnamon is OK but needs OpenGL drivers, so it doesn't work well in a
VM or on some display hardware. Maté is fine but can't do vertical
taskbars. LXDE is fine and does vertical taskbars, but I can't find
how to assign hotkeys to apps (e.g. Ctrl+Alt+T for Terminal), and it's
end-of-life -- the developers merged the project with the RazorQT
project and LXDE will be replaced by LXQt. LXQt itself isn't ready yet
-- it's missing a lot of functionality. E.g. I can't connect to Wifi
on my test machine.

Xfce isn't flashy or modern but it just works. If you want a top-panel
and an icon dock on the left or bottom, like Mac OS X or Unity, it can
do that too.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Wade Smart]

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Wade Smart
I grabbed by backups and decided to go a different direction.
Tried kde. It feels a lot faster. Also seems to have a lot of
useful configuration. But!!!! Tried to install after many days of
testing and .. the install has no visible words. Just check boxes
and three buttons. I think Im installing 16.04 and just sticking with
Unity. It works, its stable, no problems.

I have had similar problems trying KDE5 in VirtualBox. It is complex,
cluttered and I don't like it.
I think that unless a fairly stable Unity remix of 18.04 appears, I am
going to switch to Xfce and Xubuntu. It's clean, simple, it just
works, and with some easy tweaks it has a pleasing desktop. It is easy
to enable features such as a vertical taskbar, partly-translucent
title bars (à lá Windows 7), and some useful panel applets (system
monitor, weather forecast, virtual desktop switcher).
The single feature I miss from newer versions of Windows is the
ability to pin apps to the taskbar. You still need a separate "quick
launch" area -- so right now, my taskbar contains 2 icons for
Thunderbird, 2 Chromes, 2 Waterfoxes, etc. One is the launcher and the
other is the running instance. This is clunky and feels old-fashioned
to me these days.
It is my only gripe. Otherwise, it works excellently.
Cinnamon is OK but needs OpenGL drivers, so it doesn't work well in a
VM or on some display hardware. Maté is fine but can't do vertical
taskbars. LXDE is fine and does vertical taskbars, but I can't find
how to assign hotkeys to apps (e.g. Ctrl+Alt+T for Terminal), and it's
end-of-life -- the developers merged the project with the RazorQT
project and LXDE will be replaced by LXQt. LXQt itself isn't ready yet
-- it's missing a lot of functionality. E.g. I can't connect to Wifi
on my test machine.
Xfce isn't flashy or modern but it just works. If you want a top-panel
and an icon dock on the left or bottom, like Mac OS X or Unity, it can
do that too.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

I'be never looked at xubuntu. Since I'm getting no where fast, I'll check
that out today.

[Peter McD]

Post by Wade Smart

Post by Liam Proven
...
Xfce isn't flashy or modern but it just works. If you want a top-panel
and an icon dock on the left or bottom, like Mac OS X or Unity, it can
do that too.
--

I'be never looked at xubuntu. Since I'm getting no where fast, I'll check
that out today.

I use xubuntu 16.04.4 in virtualbox, it works and has on my computer
about 2/3 of storage requirements compared to KDE.

On the other hand, I use Kubuntu 18.04, 16.04.4 and have been using KDE
in openSUSE for ages because KDE can be tweaked the way I like it.

I played a bit with Gnome in Fedora and Ubuntu, these GUI are simply
different.

I could work with any of them, but I prefer KDE/Kubuntu because of one
of its mini programs, a real "killer widget", the picture frame.

It allows the presentation in several frames of all your thousands of
pictures hidden in the depth of your HDD at an unused space of your
desktop, giving them the chance to be seen at least occasionally.

cu
Peter

[MR ZenWiz]

Post by Liam Proven
I think that unless a fairly stable Unity remix of 18.04 appears, I am
going to switch to Xfce and Xubuntu. It's clean, simple, it just
works, and with some easy tweaks it has a pleasing desktop. It is easy
to enable features such as a vertical taskbar, partly-translucent
title bars (à lá Windows 7), and some useful panel applets (system
monitor, weather forecast, virtual desktop switcher).

I've been a convert to Xubuntu since 12.04 - cleaner, simpler
interface. I was on CentOS 4/5 since 2007, then switched to Ubuntu
10.10. When Unity came around, I didn't like it and jumped to Xfce4
with Xubuntu 12.04 LTS. Never looked back. I've tried Linux Mint,
both Cinnamon and Xfce4,, but it's not quite the same underpinnings
and I don't like it. I don't like SuSE at all, and I much prefer
*bunutu over RH/CentOS, although I use RH/C at work (we use them for
our products).

I don't like launchers at all - I don't like GUIs all that much. In
WinX, launchers were nice, but I've been a UNIX pro and fan since
1987, proprietary text-only systems before that. I use keyboard
shortcuts for most of my apps, and Xfce4 provides a nice, easy way to
set them up and port them from machine to machine. The few launchers
I did use were in the launch panel, which I disabled about 2 years ago
because I got tired of having to keep them up to date when new
versions come out. I find k/b shortcuts easier to maintain and
typically only have to change them when a major revision change comes
out. E.g., when LibreOffice switched from 4.x to 5.x, the old
shortcuts didn't work any more, and I created easy ways to get around
that, too.

OTOH, I'm a really long-time fan of and expert at using keyboards
instead of depending on the mouse and a GUI. If I need to run a
program that isn't in my shortcuts, I just use the menu - it';s easy
enough to get at when necessary. Most of what I really need is in my
shortcuts.

I run Xubuntu 16.04 LTS on three machines - my home desktop (the
powerhouse), my home laptop, and at work in a VM on my Win10 (eh) work
laptop. I also help my girlfriend on her Xubuntu 16.04 laptop, to
which I converted her a couple of years ago and she deals with it
quite well (mainly uses it for web browsing, documents (LibreOffice)
and A/V access.

Hope that helps,

MR, Expert Software Developer
FSF Member #12694 http://www.fsf.org
Registered Linux User #472807 http://counter.li.org/

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop. The first one shows a bottom and left
taskbar. The second one shows two left taskbars and one bottom one.

I don't normally use a vertical taskbar, so I just threw something
together so you could get the idea:

https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

[Dave Stevens]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 23:02:14 -0400

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop. The first one shows a bottom and left
taskbar. The second one shows two left taskbars and one bottom one.
I don't normally use a vertical taskbar, so I just threw something
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

and (OT) if you're a hot pink person by all means check out a book
here
https://www.amazon.com/Fag-Plume-Fiction-Robert-Rodi/dp/0452269407/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1531885952&sr=8-1&keywords=fag+hag

totally over the top

d
--
In modern fantasy (literary or governmental), killing people is the
usual solution to the so-called war between good and evil. My books are
not conceived in terms of such a war, and offer no simple answers to
simplistic questions.

----- Ursula Le Guin

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Little Girl

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop.

I guess Liam dislikes how some items of some panels do behave, if the
panel is used vertically. To mate-panel on the left add "Menu Bar - A
custom menu bar".

He also might miss vertically features of the panel. Instead of
positioning mate-panel completely to the left or right side, move it
somewhere between left side and middle or between right side and
middle, while used vertically.

The above examples show two issues I found out by just running
mate-panel for a few seconds.

However, it's possible to use Mate and to add any other panel.

Actually, on openbox I run two horizontal panels at the same time on
top, lxpanel and fbpanel, the combination of those two panels allows
things that are impossible when using mate-panel or xfce4-panel,
furthermore I add items to the panels to run scripts, to select between
an LCD display, VGA monitor or dual mode, all with different settings
such as different resolutions and among other things, those scripts
handle the panels, so that the panels fit to the different settings.
If I would run Mate or Xfce4, I could use the same combination of
lxpanel and fbpanel. Nobody is forced to use Mate with the mate-panel
or Xfce4 with the xfce4-panel.

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Little Girl

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop.

I guess Liam dislikes how some items of some panels do behave, if the
panel is used vertically. To mate-panel on the left add "Menu Bar - A
custom menu bar".

I misread what Liam had written and read "vertical taskbars" to mean
"vertical panels" when I responded. MATE can do panels, but falls
over on some of the things that can be put into the panels.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
He also might miss vertically features of the panel. Instead of
positioning mate-panel completely to the left or right side, move it
somewhere between left side and middle or between right side and
middle, while used vertically.

Interesting. I'm not able to do that. Mine aren't draggable and don't
offer the ability to define an offset.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
The above examples show two issues I found out by just running
mate-panel for a few seconds.
However, it's possible to use Mate and to add any other panel.

I hadn't considered combining different panel types. That might be a
good thing for Liam to play around with so he can use the desktop he
prefers with the panels from the desktop that does them best.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Actually, on openbox I run two horizontal panels at the same time on
top, lxpanel and fbpanel, the combination of those two panels allows
things that are impossible when using mate-panel or xfce4-panel,
furthermore I add items to the panels to run scripts, to select
between an LCD display, VGA monitor or dual mode, all with different
settings such as different resolutions and among other things, those
scripts handle the panels, so that the panels fit to the different
settings. If I would run Mate or Xfce4, I could use the same
combination of lxpanel and fbpanel. Nobody is forced to use Mate
with the mate-panel or Xfce4 with the xfce4-panel.

I was able to run multiple panels stacked next to each other on MATE
and put that into one of my screenshots.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Little Girl

Post by Ralf Mardorf
He also might miss vertically features of the panel. Instead of
positioning mate-panel completely to the left or right side, move it
somewhere between left side and middle or between right side and
middle, while used vertically.

Interesting. I'm not able to do that. Mine aren't draggable and don't
offer the ability to define an offset.

This is a misunderstanding. Here mate-panel also can't do that, but
xfce4-panel could do it.

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Little Girl

Post by Ralf Mardorf
He also might miss vertically features of the panel. Instead of
positioning mate-panel completely to the left or right side, move
it somewhere between left side and middle or between right side and
middle, while used vertically.

Interesting. I'm not able to do that. Mine aren't draggable and
don't offer the ability to define an offset.

This is a misunderstanding. Here mate-panel also can't do that, but
xfce4-panel could do it.

Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying it.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
I misread what Liam had written and read "vertical taskbars" to mean
"vertical panels" when I responded. MATE can do panels, but falls
over on some of the things that can be put into the panels.

No, that's fine, I absolutely understand. Unfortunately, this is the
default assumption: it's what most programmers of desktop environments
assume.

For non-critical text, vertical alignment is doable.

Post by Little Girl

Post by Ralf Mardorf
He also might miss vertically features of the panel. Instead of
positioning mate-panel completely to the left or right side, move it
somewhere between left side and middle or between right side and
middle, while used vertically.

Interesting. I'm not able to do that. Mine aren't draggable and don't
offer the ability to define an offset.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
The above examples show two issues I found out by just running
mate-panel for a few seconds.
However, it's possible to use Mate and to add any other panel.

I hadn't considered combining different panel types. That might be a
good thing for Liam to play around with so he can use the desktop he
prefers with the panels from the desktop that does them best.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Actually, on openbox I run two horizontal panels at the same time on
top, lxpanel and fbpanel, the combination of those two panels allows
things that are impossible when using mate-panel or xfce4-panel,
furthermore I add items to the panels to run scripts, to select
between an LCD display, VGA monitor or dual mode, all with different
settings such as different resolutions and among other things, those
scripts handle the panels, so that the panels fit to the different
settings. If I would run Mate or Xfce4, I could use the same
combination of lxpanel and fbpanel. Nobody is forced to use Mate
with the mate-panel or Xfce4 with the xfce4-panel.

I was able to run multiple panels stacked next to each other on MATE
and put that into one of my screenshots.
--
Little Girl
There is no spoon.
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop. The first one shows a bottom and left
taskbar. The second one shows two left taskbars and one bottom one.
I don't normally use a vertical taskbar, so I just threw something
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

That's a vertical *panel* but it's not a vertical *taskbar*.

I get told this so often, I put together an Imgur album about a year
ago to show what I mean.

https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy

If you put the Windows taskbar vertically, the elements within it
still remain horizontal... because alphabets generally work
horizontally, and the most widely-used ones, left-to-right.

So buttons should stay the same _height_ but change in width. What
they should _never_ do is grow larger: the idea is to see more rows of
controls, not bigger ones.

All "traditional" desktops are copies of Windows: Fvwm95, IceWM, GNOME
2, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment, etc. They all copy the original
Windows 95 desktop.

But most of them fail to correctly copy the behaviour of the Windows
taskbar when place at the left or right edge of the screen.

The object of the exercise is to remove any top or bottom panels, thus
maximising available vertical screen pixels. On widescreens, height is
precious, width is cheap.

So it needs to contain everything the top and bottom panels contained,
while still showing more, in legible form, than a top or bottom panel
can.

Compare the number of readable app buttons in a vertical toolbar --
mine can hold about 40 with 2-3 words in each -- with the number on a
horizontal panel: maybe 15 before they start shrinking until you can't
read the text and have to guess from a tiny icon, or scrub over them
with a mouse.

GNOME 2 or GNOME 3 can't do this with any number of addons. Cinnamon
can't. Maté can't.

Only Xfce and LXDE/LXQt can, that I know of. Of the two, Xfce is more
customisable, so I use that.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop. The first one shows a bottom and left
taskbar. The second one shows two left taskbars and one bottom one.
I don't normally use a vertical taskbar, so I just threw something
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

That's a vertical *panel* but it's not a vertical *taskbar*.
I get told this so often, I put together an Imgur album about a year
ago to show what I mean.
https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy
If you put the Windows taskbar vertically, the elements within it
still remain horizontal... because alphabets generally work
horizontally, and the most widely-used ones, left-to-right.
So buttons should stay the same _height_ but change in width. What
they should _never_ do is grow larger: the idea is to see more rows of
controls, not bigger ones.
All "traditional" desktops are copies of Windows: Fvwm95, IceWM, GNOME
2, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Enlightenment, etc. They all copy the original
Windows 95 desktop.
But most of them fail to correctly copy the behaviour of the Windows
taskbar when place at the left or right edge of the screen.
The object of the exercise is to remove any top or bottom panels, thus
maximising available vertical screen pixels. On widescreens, height is
precious, width is cheap.
So it needs to contain everything the top and bottom panels contained,
while still showing more, in legible form, than a top or bottom panel
can.
Compare the number of readable app buttons in a vertical toolbar --
mine can hold about 40 with 2-3 words in each -- with the number on a
horizontal panel: maybe 15 before they start shrinking until you can't
read the text and have to guess from a tiny icon, or scrub over them
with a mouse.
GNOME 2 or GNOME 3 can't do this with any number of addons. Cinnamon
can't. Maté can't.
Only Xfce and LXDE/LXQt can, that I know of. Of the two, Xfce is more
customisable, so I use that.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

While taskbars are being debated -- a little note about my original problem:
I found a long thread in the ubuntu-mate forum with similar though not
exact error messages
but the same end result - locked out.

I downloaded kde again and still have no text on the install screen.
Maybe Ill try kubuntu next.
Looked at xubunutu ... kinda plain but I guess it works.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Wade Smart
Looked at xubunutu ... kinda plain but I guess it works.

Yep, that is about the size of it. It's kinda plain, but it works.

Jazzed up shiny GUIs have got to the point now that, while they look
gorgeous, they are often unusable for me _even when they're working
properly_... and they fall over quite readily, becoming totally
unusable for anyone.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Wade Smart
Looked at xubunutu ... kinda plain but I guess it works.

Yep, that is about the size of it. It's kinda plain, but it works.
Jazzed up shiny GUIs have got to the point now that, while they look
gorgeous, they are often unusable for me _even when they're working
properly_... and they fall over quite readily, becoming totally
unusable for anyone.

There is that fine line - nice looking vs stable.
I hear ya on that.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Wade Smart
There is that fine line - nice looking vs stable.
I hear ya on that.

Thanks for switching to bottom-posting. Makes threads much easier to
follow. :-)

On my work laptop, I have Cinnamon, Xfce, KDE 5 and LXQt.

Cinnamon looks nice, is perfectly usable, but it doesn't actually do
anything for me that Xfce does not. I'm mainly using it for the
variety. All the others fail my basic functionality needs.

So I'm asking myself, why am I even bothering? Only one desktop does
all I _need_ and the single feature it lacks is mainly cosmetic. Why
bother with anything else?
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Wade Smart
While taskbars are being debated -- a little note about my original
problem: I found a long thread in the ubuntu-mate forum with similar
though not exact error messages
but the same end result - locked out.
I downloaded kde again and still have no text on the install screen.
Maybe Ill try kubuntu next.
Looked at xubunutu ... kinda plain but I guess it works.

I'm sorry. I didn't intend to hijack your thread. I had sent two
versions of my reply, one accidentally in this thread and another in
a new thread, but the other one must not have arrived. I'll change
the subject on all future posts that aren't about this, specifically.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Liam Proven
So buttons should stay the same _height_ but change in width. What
they should _never_ do is grow larger: the idea is to see more rows of
controls, not bigger ones.

That seems to work for the "tasks" shown by the panel when using the
version mentioned below, but other items are fishy, e.g. a Mac alike
menu is displayed with the fonts rotated by 90°. I'm to lazy to test it
again, but in the morning I tested several panels and even the task of
xfce4-panel under some circumstances could be rotated by 90° when using
xfce4-panel, it might be related to the kind of restart, however, some
items become way to large when using xfce4-panel vertically with a
grown size, too.

I likely have got more panels installed, but I just show the versions
of the panels mentioned by this email:

$ pacman -Q mate-panel xfce4-panel lxpanel fbpanel
mate-panel 1.20.2-1
xfce4-panel 4.12.2-1
lxpanel 0.9.3-2
fbpanel 7.0-2

Post by Liam Proven
Only Xfce and LXDE/LXQt can, that I know of. Of the two, Xfce is more
customisable, so I use that.

While I'm using a horizontal panel on the top, my panel actually are
two panels on top, lxpanel and fbpanel, to get nicer eye candy, as
well as a more customisable panel than the xfce4-panel, let alone that
upstream of lxpanel cares about user's bug reports, see
https://sourceforge.net/p/lxde/bugs/751/ . Try to argue regarding this
or a similar controversial issue with upstream of environments that are
based too much upon gnome'ish crap, such as gvfs. Unlikely that a Xfce4
developer would care, you could be happy if they are willing to fix
important bugs such as the data loss bug Thunar had for much too long.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
That seems to work for the "tasks" shown by the panel when using the
version

^^^^^^^
the version of mate-panel I mentioned seemingly is doing what you want

[Ralf Mardorf]

I'm to lazy to test it again, but in the morning I tested several
panels and even the task of xfce4-panel under some circumstances could
be rotated by 90° when using xfce4-panel, it might be related to the
kind of restart, however, some items become way to large when using
xfce4-panel vertically with a grown size, too.

I see, the "tasks" are fishy when using "vertically", but are fine when
using "deskbar", but even "deskbar" doesn't solve the issue that some
xfce4-panel items are way to large.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
That seems to work for the "tasks" shown by the panel when using the
version mentioned below, but other items are fishy, e.g. a Mac alike
menu is displayed with the fonts rotated by 90°. I'm to lazy to test it
again, but in the morning I tested several panels and even the task of
xfce4-panel under some circumstances could be rotated by 90° when using
xfce4-panel, it might be related to the kind of restart, however, some
items become way to large when using xfce4-panel vertically with a
grown size, too.

I am not sure that I understand. Please do look at the photo gallery
-- it is much easier to show than to explain.

It seems to me that most people have never seen a vertical taskbar. At
some jobs, colleagues have been amazed -- they didn't know you could
move and resize the taskbar.

I have spent a lot of time trying to reproduce this layout in GNOME 2,
Maté, Cinnamon and KDE. KDE can sort of do it, but the start button
becomes *HUGE* (about 200x200 pixels, taking 10% of the whole panel),
other controls get huge.

Maté, Cinnamon, Budgie etc. don't understand that notification area
icons should flow in rows and just make them bigger, which is not only
ugly, it means you quickly run out of room. Weather indicators and so
on become unreadable as the text is sideways.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
I likely have got more panels installed, but I just show the versions
$ pacman -Q mate-panel xfce4-panel lxpanel fbpanel
mate-panel 1.20.2-1
xfce4-panel 4.12.2-1
lxpanel 0.9.3-2
fbpanel 7.0-2

Versions don't tell me much, I'm afraid. A screenshot would be more informative.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
While I'm using a horizontal panel on the top, my panel actually are
two panels on top

See, this is the problem. I don't want a taskbar particularly -- I was
perfectly happy with Unity's Mac-like layout. But I can't have that
any more, just clumsy kludgy recreations like Maté's attempt.

All the other desktops are based on panels. If I must have a panel, I
want it vertical.

So no horizontal panels at all. All removed, merged into a single
vertical panel, with inside it, horizontal text, horizontal rows of
indicator icons, horizontally-displayed indicators, horizontal
window-switching buttons with horizontal text in them.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Wade Smart]

Ive been wondering....

I did this:
gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top true

and when my desktop (crashed/failed/froze/what ever you call it), this is the
last thing I had done. Ive been searching for a way to change this to false
on the other user account though I cant login.

[Ralf Mardorf]

If this...

sudo -u username dbus-launch gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false

...shouldn't work, this...

HOME_BAK=$HOME
HOME="/home/username"
sudo -u username gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME=$HOME_BAK

...should work.

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Ralf Mardorf
If this...
sudo -u username dbus-launch gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
...shouldn't work, this...
HOME_BAK=$HOME
HOME="/home/username"
sudo -u username gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME=$HOME_BAK
...should work.

On the second one (the first did not work as you thought),

If Im in account Wade and Im typing this in the terminal for say Dan - Dan the
account which is not accessible..

***@home:~$ HOME_BAK=$HOME
***@home:~$ HOME="/home/dan"
***@home:~$ sudo -u dan ....
***@home:~$ HOME=$HOME_BAK

correct?

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Wade Smart
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Ralf Mardorf
If this...
sudo -u username dbus-launch gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
...shouldn't work, this...
HOME_BAK=$HOME
HOME="/home/username"
sudo -u username gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME=$HOME_BAK
...should work.

On the second one (the first did not work as you thought),
If Im in account Wade and Im typing this in the terminal for say Dan - Dan the
account which is not accessible..
correct?

Yes

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Wade Smart

Post by Wade Smart
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Ralf Mardorf
If this...
sudo -u username dbus-launch gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
...shouldn't work, this...
HOME_BAK=$HOME
HOME="/home/username"
sudo -u username gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME=$HOME_BAK
...should work.

On the second one (the first did not work as you thought),
If Im in account Wade and Im typing this in the terminal for say Dan - Dan the
account which is not accessible..
correct?

Yes
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

(process:6424): dconf-WARNING ** : failed to commit changes to dconf:
Error spawning command line "dbus-launch --autolaunch(long long
number) -- binary-syntax --close-stderr"

so I tried
the first line you gave and the error is
"No protocol specified"

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Wade Smart
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Wade Smart

Post by Wade Smart
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Ralf Mardorf
If this...
sudo -u username dbus-launch gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
...shouldn't work, this...
HOME_BAK=$HOME
HOME="/home/username"
sudo -u username gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME=$HOME_BAK
...should work.

On the second one (the first did not work as you thought),
If Im in account Wade and Im typing this in the terminal for say Dan - Dan the
account which is not accessible..
correct?

Yes
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https:/e/lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Error spawning command line "dbus-launch --autolaunch(long long
number) -- binary-syntax --close-stderr"
so I tried
the first line you gave and the error is
"No protocol specified"

Im a little confused here.
This is what my terminal is showing:
***@home:~$ HOME="/home/dan"
***@home:/home/wade$

[Ralf Mardorf]

Sometimes I boot an Ubuntu flavour live media and run scripts to change
a few defaults. Since those scripts also run apt command that require
root privileges and because the user of Ubuntu flavour live media has
got the UID 1001 and the script is in a mounted home of a user with the
UID 1000 I run


sudo -i


first, then I launch the script.

A script could contain something like this:


[***@archlinux ~]$ grep flavour= lumatic.sh
flavour="ubuntu-mate" # user name
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep userset\( -A5 lumatic.sh
userset() # Usage: userset <schema> <key> <value>
{
HOME="/home/$flavour"
sudo -u $flavour gsettings set $@
HOME="/root"
}
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep rootset\( -A3 lumatic.sh
rootset() # Usage: rootset <schema> <key> <value>
{
gsettings set $@
}
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep pluma lumatic.sh
rootset org.mate.pluma color-scheme 'tango'
userset org.mate.pluma color-scheme 'tango'
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep Marco lumatic.sh
userset org.mate.Marco.general reduced-resources $redures
userset org.mate.Marco.general side-by-side-tiling $sidetil
userset org.mate.Marco.general theme 'TraditionalOk'
userset org.mate.Marco.general focus-mode 'mouse'
userset org.mate.Marco.general button-layout ':minimize,maximize,close'
userset org.mate.Marco.general center-new-windows true
userset org.mate.Marco.general compositing-manager false


or it does contain something similar to this:


[***@archlinux ~]$ grep u1000= tailsmatic-legacy2.sh
u1000=$(getent passwd 1000 | cut -d: -f1)
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep prof_default= tailsmatic-legacy2.sh
prof_default=$(echo [:$(gsettings get org.gnome.Terminal.ProfilesList default | sed "s/'//g")])
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep bell_tmp= tailsmatic-legacy2.sh
bell_tmp=/tmp/gnome-terminal-bell-$u1000-$(id -u)
[***@archlinux ~]$ grep "dbus-launch dconf dump" -B1 -A9 tailsmatic-legacy2.sh
sudo -u $u1000 echo $prof_default > $bell_tmp
sudo -u $u1000 dbus-launch dconf dump /org/gnome/terminal/legacy/profiles:/ | grep -v audible-bell | grep -vF $prof_default >> $bell_tmp
case $1 in
--bell-off)
echo audible-bell=false >> $bell_tmp
;;
*)
echo audible-bell=true >> $bell_tmp
;;
esac
sudo -u $u1000 dbus-launch dconf load /org/gnome/terminal/legacy/profiles:/ < $bell_tmp


Regards,
Ralf

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Sometimes I boot an Ubuntu flavour live media and run scripts to change
a few defaults. Since those scripts also run apt command that require
root privileges and because the user of Ubuntu flavour live media has
got the UID 1001 and the script is in a mounted home of a user with the
UID 1000 I run
sudo -i
first, then I launch the script.
flavour="ubuntu-mate" # user name
userset() # Usage: userset <schema> <key> <value>
{
HOME="/home/$flavour"
HOME="/root"
}
rootset() # Usage: rootset <schema> <key> <value>
{
}
rootset org.mate.pluma color-scheme 'tango'
userset org.mate.pluma color-scheme 'tango'
userset org.mate.Marco.general reduced-resources $redures
userset org.mate.Marco.general side-by-side-tiling $sidetil
userset org.mate.Marco.general theme 'TraditionalOk'
userset org.mate.Marco.general focus-mode 'mouse'
userset org.mate.Marco.general button-layout
':minimize,maximize,close' userset org.mate.Marco.general
center-new-windows true userset org.mate.Marco.general
compositing-manager false

UID 1000, since this script was used for a Tails (Debian based) live

Post by Ralf Mardorf
u1000=$(getent passwd 1000 | cut -d: -f1)
prof_default=$(echo [:$(gsettings get org.gnome.Terminal.ProfilesList
tailsmatic-legacy2.sh bell_tmp=/tmp/gnome-terminal-bell-$u1000-$(id -u)
tailsmatic-legacy2.sh sudo -u $u1000 echo $prof_default > $bell_tmp
sudo -u $u1000 dbus-launch dconf
dump /org/gnome/terminal/legacy/profiles:/ | grep -v audible-bell |
grep -vF $prof_default >> $bell_tmp case $1 in
--bell-off)
echo audible-bell=false >> $bell_tmp
;;
*)
echo audible-bell=true >> $bell_tmp
;;
esac
sudo -u $u1000 dbus-launch dconf
load /org/gnome/terminal/legacy/profiles:/ < $bell_tmp

Try running

sudo -i
HOME="/home/dan"
sudo -u dan gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME="/root"

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Sometimes I boot an Ubuntu flavour live media and run scripts to change
a few defaults. Since those scripts also run apt command that require
root privileges and because the user of Ubuntu flavour live media has
got the UID 1001 and the script is in a mounted home of a user with the
UID 1000 I run
sudo -i
first, then I launch the script.
flavour="ubuntu-mate" # user name
userset() # Usage: userset <schema> <key> <value>
{
HOME="/home/$flavour"
HOME="/root"
}
rootset() # Usage: rootset <schema> <key> <value>
{
}
rootset org.mate.pluma color-scheme 'tango'
userset org.mate.pluma color-scheme 'tango'
userset org.mate.Marco.general reduced-resources $redures
userset org.mate.Marco.general side-by-side-tiling $sidetil
userset org.mate.Marco.general theme 'TraditionalOk'
userset org.mate.Marco.general focus-mode 'mouse'
userset org.mate.Marco.general button-layout
':minimize,maximize,close' userset org.mate.Marco.general
center-new-windows true userset org.mate.Marco.general
compositing-manager false

UID 1000, since this script was used for a Tails (Debian based) live

Post by Ralf Mardorf
u1000=$(getent passwd 1000 | cut -d: -f1)
prof_default=$(echo [:$(gsettings get org.gnome.Terminal.ProfilesList
tailsmatic-legacy2.sh bell_tmp=/tmp/gnome-terminal-bell-$u1000-$(id -u)
tailsmatic-legacy2.sh sudo -u $u1000 echo $prof_default > $bell_tmp
sudo -u $u1000 dbus-launch dconf
dump /org/gnome/terminal/legacy/profiles:/ | grep -v audible-bell |
grep -vF $prof_default >> $bell_tmp case $1 in
--bell-off)
echo audible-bell=false >> $bell_tmp
;;
*)
echo audible-bell=true >> $bell_tmp
;;
esac
sudo -u $u1000 dbus-launch dconf
load /org/gnome/terminal/legacy/profiles:/ < $bell_tmp

Try running
sudo -i
HOME="/home/dan"
sudo -u dan gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME="/root"
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Same dconf-WARNING : failed to commit changes to deconf: Error
spawning command line 'dbus-launch --autolaunch"

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Wade Smart
Same dconf-WARNING : failed to commit changes to deconf: Error
spawning command line 'dbus-launch --autolaunch"

I'm running out of ideas. Using gsettings this way by a script,
launched when running an Ubuntu flavour live media works for me.

OTOH I'm logged in as the user where I want to change the gsettings,
I'm just doing it with root privileges, not from another non-root user.

Can't you login in text mode by pushing Ctrl + Alt + F2?

If you could do that, log in as dan and run

gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false

If not, consider to use a live media, too and to mount your broken
Ubuntu install, then run

sudo -i
apt update
apt install systemd-container
systemd-nspawn -bqD /mount/Point/of/the/mounted/ubuntu/install

replace /mount/point/of/the/mounted/ubuntu/install, by the real mount
point, which likely is something like /media/foo/bar, or /mnt/bar.

Log in as user dan and simply run

gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false

Ubuntu flavour live media is for an Ubuntu flavour install DVD, by
booting it, without installing it.

Hth,
Ralf

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Wade Smart
Same dconf-WARNING : failed to commit changes to deconf: Error
spawning command line 'dbus-launch --autolaunch"

I'm running out of ideas. Using gsettings this way by a script,
launched when running an Ubuntu flavour live media works for me.
OTOH I'm logged in as the user where I want to change the gsettings,
I'm just doing it with root privileges, not from another non-root user.
Can't you login in text mode by pushing Ctrl + Alt + F2?
If you could do that, log in as dan and run
gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
If not, consider to use a live media, too and to mount your broken
Ubuntu install, then run
sudo -i
apt update
apt install systemd-container
systemd-nspawn -bqD /mount/Point/of/the/mounted/ubuntu/install
replace /mount/point/of/the/mounted/ubuntu/install, by the real mount
point, which likely is something like /media/foo/bar, or /mnt/bar.
Log in as user dan and simply run
gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
Ubuntu flavour live media is for an Ubuntu flavour install DVD, by
booting it, without installing it.
Hth,
Ralf
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

I have not been able to login with Ctrl + Alt + F# key combination.
Ill try to the live image option.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Wade Smart
Ill try to the live image option.

Good luck!

Btw. I suspect the other attempts didn't work regarding variable and/or
dbus issues. A correct workaround might be usage of
'dbus-launch --some-option' or no dbus-launch at all as well as no
manually setting of variables, but instead of using 'sudo -u' usage of
'gksudo -u'.

However, I suspect that it will work with booting in a
container by 'systemd-nspawn' and logging in as dan.

[Oliver Grawert]

hi,

Post by Ralf Mardorf
If this...
sudo -u username dbus-launch gsettings set
org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top false
...shouldn't work, this...
HOME_BAK=$HOME
HOME="/home/username"
sudo -u username gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-
dock show-apps-at-top false
HOME=$HOME_BAK
...should work.

nope ...

$ man gsettings |grep Note 
       Note that gsettings needs a D-Bus session bus connection to
write changes to the dconf database.


this would only work if "username" would have an actually running
session *and* if the calling user would have permission to actually
connect to that running session dbus ...

ciao
oli

[Colin Law]

Post by Wade Smart
Ive been wondering....
gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top true
and when my desktop (crashed/failed/froze/what ever you call it), this is the
last thing I had done. Ive been searching for a way to change this to false
on the other user account though I cant login.

Not sure if this is still relevant, but if you remove or rename
.local/share/gnome-shell that will remove all extensions for that user, so
if the login problem is one of the extensions then that should allow you to
log in.

Colin

Post by Wade Smart
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/
mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

[Wade Smart]

--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Colin Law

Post by Wade Smart
Ive been wondering....
gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top true
and when my desktop (crashed/failed/froze/what ever you call it), this is the
last thing I had done. Ive been searching for a way to change this to false
on the other user account though I cant login.

Not sure if this is still relevant, but if you remove or rename
.local/share/gnome-shell that will remove all extensions for that user, so
if the login problem is one of the extensions then that should allow you to
log in.
Colin

The only thing in that folder is application_state which is just a
list of last seen
apps.

[Colin Law]

Post by Wade Smart
--
Registered Linux User: #480675
Registered Linux Machine: #408606
Linux since June 2005

Post by Colin Law

Post by Wade Smart
Ive been wondering....
gsettings set org.gnome.shell.extensions.dash-to-dock show-apps-at-top true
and when my desktop (crashed/failed/froze/what ever you call it), this

is

Post by Colin Law

Post by Wade Smart
the
last thing I had done. Ive been searching for a way to change this to false
on the other user account though I cant login.

Not sure if this is still relevant, but if you remove or rename
.local/share/gnome-shell that will remove all extensions for that user,

so

Post by Colin Law
if the login problem is one of the extensions then that should allow you

to

Post by Colin Law
log in.
Colin

The only thing in that folder is application_state which is just a
list of last seen
apps.

Hmm, on a clean 18.04 install I see you are right. The built-in Ubuntu
Dock (which is a pre-configured version of dash-to-dock I think) apparently
doesn't have an entry there. My suggestion is useless in this case then,
sorry.

Are you able to get a terminal login for that user? Via ssh or whatever?
If so then you may be able to disable the extension using
gnome-shell-extension-tool as described in
https://askubuntu.com/questions/591757/how-to-activate-deactivate-a-gnome-shell-extension-from-command-line
though I have not tried that myself.

Colin

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get those on the MATE
desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop. The first one shows a bottom and left
taskbar. The second one shows two left taskbars and one bottom one.
I don't normally use a vertical taskbar, so I just threw something
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

That's a vertical *panel* but it's not a vertical *taskbar*.

My mistake. I misread what you wrote and ran with it. Although now
that I've had a chance to experiment some more with this, I think the
orientation of the applets should be considered (and adjusted, when
needed) no matter where they are in the panel. Even better would be
to give the user the choice of which way to orient each applet
independently.

Post by Liam Proven
I get told this so often, I put together an Imgur album about a year
ago to show what I mean.
https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy

Interesting, and I see places where yours handle things elegantly
that MATE doesn't.

Post by Liam Proven
If you put the Windows taskbar vertically, the elements within it
still remain horizontal... because alphabets generally work
horizontally, and the most widely-used ones, left-to-right.

Agreed, and that's as it should be. In cases where it wouldn't make
sense, the applet shouldn't be offered, and, if present, should be
disabled.

Post by Liam Proven
So buttons should stay the same _height_ but change in width. What
they should _never_ do is grow larger: the idea is to see more rows
of controls, not bigger ones.

MATE is falling over on this in several cases. I just created a nice,
fat panel in MATE and put lots of panel applets in it. Some of them
behaved nicely, showing horizontally and with a pleasing size.
Several of them were huge, too small, vertical (surprising on some of
the text ones), and one of them didn't display everything until I
clicked in what looked like empty space, but was actually part of the
applet.

Last, but not least, the TopMenu Panel Applet fell over
completely because it displayed horizontally, so most of it was cut
off. It really ought to not be offered at all when a panel is
vertical.

Part of this seems like it would be an issue to be handled by the
team that develops the panel and the rest would be individually
handled by whoever develops the applets.

Post by Liam Proven
The object of the exercise is to remove any top or bottom panels,
thus maximising available vertical screen pixels. On widescreens,
height is precious, width is cheap.

Okay, I'll try this. That got me some interesting, and telling,
results, showing that the MATE panel and applet developers will want
to take a look at the behavior when the panel orientation changes.

I've updated the web page above, adding in a couple of additional
detailed experiments in which you can see the panels and applets
falling over repeatedly in various ways.

Post by Liam Proven
So it needs to contain everything the top and bottom panels
contained, while still showing more, in legible form, than a top or
bottom panel can.

Or at least showing what a top and bottom panel can, which it
sometimes can't, currently.

Post by Liam Proven
Compare the number of readable app buttons in a vertical toolbar --
mine can hold about 40 with 2-3 words in each -- with the number on a
horizontal panel: maybe 15 before they start shrinking until you
can't read the text and have to guess from a tiny icon, or scrub
over them with a mouse.

I didn't test this, but even with the default number, I lose some of
them just by changing to a left or right panel and I definitely do
when changing sizes.

Post by Liam Proven
GNOME 2 or GNOME 3 can't do this with any number of addons. Cinnamon
can't. Maté can't.
Only Xfce and LXDE/LXQt can, that I know of. Of the two, Xfce is more
customisable, so I use that.

That makes sense.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
My mistake. I misread what you wrote and ran with it. Although now
that I've had a chance to experiment some more with this, I think the
orientation of the applets should be considered (and adjusted, when
needed) no matter where they are in the panel. Even better would be
to give the user the choice of which way to orient each applet
independently.

[[Fumble fingers. I accidentally hit ctrl-enter.]]

No, that's fine, I absolutely understand. Unfortunately, this is the
default assumption: it's what most programmers of desktop environments
assume.

For non-critical text, vertical alignment is doable.

For instance, I quite liked the wm2 window manager, years ago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wm2

http://www.all-day-breakfast.com/wm2/

You probably know what most of your windows are called. You need to be
able to distinguish them but the contents presumably help.

So, vertical window title bars worked for me -- and they save even
more vertical space.

Another example of a fairly common thing I encounter with FOSS desktops.

Made-up example:

"Our window manager is totally customisable! You can apply textures,
animated widgets, and more to window decorations. Anything you want!"
"Okay, cool. Can I have a vertical title bar on the left edge instead
of at the top?"
"..."
"You didn't think of that, did you? So it can't do 'anything', only
decorated top title bars, right?"
"NOBODY WANTS THAT! GO AWAY, THAT'S STUPID AND YOU'RE A DUMB TROLL!"

Vertical panels are fine. If more desktops had _properly_ modular
designs with decent vertical panel support, there wouldn't be the
profusion of dock apps. No need for a dock if you have functional
vertical panels. This is one of the things that irks me about Budgie
-- all that work and it can't do anything LXDE or Xfce can do with
their built-in panels and applets.

Both Xfce and LXDE include default setups with a top panel, à lá Mac
OS X, and a dock at left or bottom, without additional apps.

But for 23 years now, Windows has let you move the taskbar anywhere
and keep it usable, with readable, left-to-right (or R-to-L for
Semitic languages, AFAIK) contents.

BeOS did the same with its Tracker. Its default arrangement was not
"expanded", vertically, at top right -- so it appeared as a box which
grew as you launched more apps.

Loading Image...

That works too. :-)

I liked it in the 1990s, but now, with every computer I use regularly
having widescreens, they are needed more than ever.

GNOME 2 never did it right. MATE still doesn't. Cinnamon doesn't.

KDE, whose devs think it is totally customisable, does it but badly --
many components grow huge. You can't choose options like labelled or
unlabelled window buttons -- it depends on panel size.

Post by Little Girl
Interesting, and I see places where yours handle things elegantly
that MATE doesn't.

*Nod* Thanks for that!

Post by Little Girl
Agreed, and that's as it should be. In cases where it wouldn't make
sense, the applet shouldn't be offered, and, if present, should be
disabled.

I can't offhand think of anything that doesn't work that way. Fly-out
submenus or panels should work. Drop-downs should still work. What
kind of thing were you thinking of?

Post by Little Girl
MATE is falling over on this in several cases. I just created a nice,
fat panel in MATE and put lots of panel applets in it. Some of them
behaved nicely, showing horizontally and with a pleasing size.
Several of them were huge, too small, vertical (surprising on some of
the text ones), and one of them didn't display everything until I
clicked in what looked like empty space, but was actually part of the
applet.

Yup. Just like GNOME 2 did.

Post by Little Girl
Last, but not least, the TopMenu Panel Applet fell over
completely because it displayed horizontally, so most of it was cut
off. It really ought to not be offered at all when a panel is
vertical.

Ah, now, OK, that is a good example! :-)

I think the best way to handle it might be the way that the Windows
Quicklaunch bar does it. This has been disabled since WinXP but it's
still there, still works, and I use it when I have to use Win10.

http://mywindowshub.com/add-quick-launch-toolbar-windows-10/

If it has space, it shows a tray of icons (labelled or not, titled or
not, according to preference settings). But if there isn't room, it
shows the first line, or the title, and a double right chevron:

»

Click the chevron and a small fly-out panel appears with a
vertically-arranged list of labelled icons (assuming you have labels
turned on).

So a top-panel menu would just show the app's name, and when clicked,
it would behave like a context menu, vertically-arranged.

Post by Little Girl
Part of this seems like it would be an issue to be handled by the
team that develops the panel and the rest would be individually
handled by whoever develops the applets.

Agreed.

Post by Little Girl
Okay, I'll try this. That got me some interesting, and telling,
results, showing that the MATE panel and applet developers will want
to take a look at the behavior when the panel orientation changes.

Definitely.

My suggestions would be either LXDE or Xfce. Works quite well in them.
Xfce's implementation is more customisable.

Post by Little Girl
I've updated the web page above, adding in a couple of additional
detailed experiments in which you can see the panels and applets
falling over repeatedly in various ways.

Oh, good job! 👍

Post by Little Girl
Or at least showing what a top and bottom panel can, which it
sometimes can't, currently.

Conceded. Just because there's nothing I use which can't work
vertically, it's still possible.

Post by Little Girl
I didn't test this, but even with the default number, I lose some of
them just by changing to a left or right panel and I definitely do
when changing sizes.

I will see if I can do a screenshot to show what I mean.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
My mistake. I misread what you wrote and ran with it. Although now
that I've had a chance to experiment some more with this, I think
the orientation of the applets should be considered (and adjusted,
when needed) no matter where they are in the panel. Even better
would be to give the user the choice of which way to orient each
applet independently.

No, that's fine, I absolutely understand. Unfortunately, this is the
default assumption: it's what most programmers of desktop
environments assume.

Ah, okay.

Post by Liam Proven
For non-critical text, vertical alignment is doable.

Agreed.

Post by Liam Proven
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wm2
http://www.all-day-breakfast.com/wm2/

It's definitely not my style, and I'd get a crick in my neck if I had
to use it, but I can see why it might be appealing to anyone who's
trying to up their vertical space.

Post by Liam Proven
You probably know what most of your windows are called. You need to
be able to distinguish them but the contents presumably help.

I definitely prefer a label of some sort on any window.

Post by Liam Proven
So, vertical window title bars worked for me -- and they save even
more vertical space.

That makes sense and, in such a case, is the best solution.

Post by Liam Proven
Another example of a fairly common thing I encounter with FOSS
desktops.
"Our window manager is totally customisable! You can apply textures,
animated widgets, and more to window decorations. Anything you want!"
"Okay, cool. Can I have a vertical title bar on the left edge instead
of at the top?"
"..."
"You didn't think of that, did you? So it can't do 'anything', only
decorated top title bars, right?"
"NOBODY WANTS THAT! GO AWAY, THAT'S STUPID AND YOU'RE A DUMB TROLL!"

Oh, I know. Some of my wishes are quite reasonable, but there are
some folks who get all worked up if you bring up those wishes.

Post by Liam Proven
Vertical panels are fine. If more desktops had _properly_ modular
designs with decent vertical panel support, there wouldn't be the
profusion of dock apps. No need for a dock if you have functional
vertical panels. This is one of the things that irks me about Budgie
-- all that work and it can't do anything LXDE or Xfce can do with
their built-in panels and applets.

I have yet to experience Budgie and I'm not quite sure what the
difference is between a panel and a dock other than that a dock is
usually smaller (although MATE panels can be made very dock-like if
you turn off their expansion).

Post by Liam Proven
Both Xfce and LXDE include default setups with a top panel, à lá Mac
OS X, and a dock at left or bottom, without additional apps.

Okay.

Post by Liam Proven
But for 23 years now, Windows has let you move the taskbar anywhere
and keep it usable, with readable, left-to-right (or R-to-L for
Semitic languages, AFAIK) contents.

I didn't realize that. Probably because I never tried. I just left it
at the bottom.

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS did the same with its Tracker. Its default arrangement was not
"expanded", vertically, at top right -- so it appeared as a box which
grew as you launched more apps.

I can see how some people would like that, but the fact that it
changes would bother me. I like things to be however they are and
stay that way rather than fluctuating depending on how I use them.
That's one of the reasons I never enable automatic hiding for my
panels.

Post by Liam Proven
https://www.jfedor.org/shots/beos.png
That works too. :-)

Is that one of the context menu only desktops? I've tried something
like that once and wouldn't have minded it much if there was a way to
access it while a program was full-screen, but would still miss that
bottom left button with a menu on it that's been there for years.

Post by Liam Proven
I liked it in the 1990s, but now, with every computer I use regularly
having widescreens, they are needed more than ever.

I just go for an adjusted resolution to get more screen real estate.
That and using more than one monitor.

Post by Liam Proven
GNOME 2 never did it right. MATE still doesn't. Cinnamon doesn't.

It looks like you're right about that, at least for MATE. I didn't
test GNOME2 or Cinnamon, but I'll take your word for it.

Post by Liam Proven
KDE, whose devs think it is totally customisable, does it but badly
-- many components grow huge. You can't choose options like labelled
or unlabelled window buttons -- it depends on panel size.

Many of the applets become huge in MATE when you do vertical panels,
too.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Interesting, and I see places where yours handle things elegantly
that MATE doesn't.

*Nod* Thanks for that!

Any time. It was well deserved.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Agreed, and that's as it should be. In cases where it wouldn't make
sense, the applet shouldn't be offered, and, if present, should be
disabled.

I can't offhand think of anything that doesn't work that way. Fly-out
submenus or panels should work. Drop-downs should still work. What
kind of thing were you thinking of?

You already saw one down below with the TopMenu Panel Applet. Then
there are the Indicator Applet Appmenu, Timer, and Window Picker,
each of which misbehaves in some way on a vertical panel.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Several of them were huge, too small, vertical (surprising on some
of the text ones), and one of them didn't display everything until
I clicked in what looked like empty space, but was actually part
of the applet.

Yup. Just like GNOME 2 did.

That's very strange behavior and probably not intended by the
developers.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Last, but not least, the TopMenu Panel Applet fell over
completely because it displayed horizontally, so most of it was cut
off. It really ought to not be offered at all when a panel is
vertical.

Ah, now, OK, that is a good example! :-)

And obviously something the developers didn't test or they would have
done something to cause it to be disabled rather than showing up in a
form that renders it completely useless.

Post by Liam Proven
I think the best way to handle it might be the way that the Windows
Quicklaunch bar does it. This has been disabled since WinXP but it's
still there, still works, and I use it when I have to use Win10.
http://mywindowshub.com/add-quick-launch-toolbar-windows-10/

Nice. I hadn't had experience in using that and will be enabling that
in my work computer tomorrow.

Post by Liam Proven
If it has space, it shows a tray of icons (labelled or not, titled or
not, according to preference settings). But if there isn't room, it
»

That would be fine.

Post by Liam Proven
Click the chevron and a small fly-out panel appears with a
vertically-arranged list of labelled icons (assuming you have labels
turned on).

That would also be fine (and I do). The screenshot shows something
very similar to my main menu in MATE. Just some icons with a bit of
text next to them, which is exactly what I like.

Post by Liam Proven
So a top-panel menu would just show the app's name, and when clicked,
it would behave like a context menu, vertically-arranged.

I can imagine that, but I remove that panel immediately after
installation, although it would work the same way with my bottom
panel.

Post by Liam Proven
My suggestions would be either LXDE or Xfce. Works quite well in
them. Xfce's implementation is more customisable.

I've tried both of those a few years ago, but not recently. I
rejected Xfce because it doesn't have a normal desktop. If I can't
store files and directories on the desktop, that's a deal-breaker for
me. I can't remember why I rejected LXDE. Maybe because of its menu
or because you couldn't put the trash in the panel's tray. It's been
too long. I'll have to give both of those a try again.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I've updated the web page above, adding in a couple of additional
detailed experiments in which you can see the panels and applets
falling over repeatedly in various ways.

Oh, good job! 👍

Thanks. I figured you might like those as a comparison to what you
see.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Or at least showing what a top and bottom panel can, which it
sometimes can't, currently.

Conceded. Just because there's nothing I use which can't work
vertically, it's still possible.

Right, and there will be someone who does use those, so they should
still be considered and addressed in some way by the developers.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I didn't test this, but even with the default number, I lose some
of them just by changing to a left or right panel and I definitely
do when changing sizes.

I will see if I can do a screenshot to show what I mean.

Sounds good.

[Ralf Mardorf]

I like things to be however they are and stay that way rather than
fluctuating depending on how I use them. That's one of the reasons I
never enable automatic hiding for my panels.

Hi,

it's the same for me, that's why I've got a thin fbpanel (left) and
lxpanel (right) on top of my openbox session.

https://imgur.com/a/I6QLHzo

If I can't store files and directories on the desktop, that's a
deal-breaker for me.

What ever WM or DE you are using, you can. SpaceFM is just one example
of several possible ways to enable this.

$ spacefm --help | grep 'desktop manager'
--desktop Launch desktop manager daemon

Regards,
Ralf

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Ralf Mardorf

I like things to be however they are and stay that way rather than
fluctuating depending on how I use them. That's one of the reasons I
never enable automatic hiding for my panels.

it's the same for me, that's why I've got a thin fbpanel (left) and
lxpanel (right) on top of my openbox session.
https://imgur.com/a/I6QLHzo

Interesting. It never would have occurred to me to mix and match with
panels.

Post by Ralf Mardorf

If I can't store files and directories on the desktop, that's a
deal-breaker for me.

What ever WM or DE you are using, you can. SpaceFM is just one
example of several possible ways to enable this.
$ spacefm --help | grep 'desktop manager'
--desktop Launch desktop manager daemon

Thanks. I installed SpaceFM just now and tried it out. It's got some
features I would like and, apparently, it can do quite a bit with
some well-placed commands here and there. I might do some exploring
again now that this has all come up.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
https://www.jfedor.org/shots/beos.png
That works too. :-)

Is that one of the context menu only desktops?

BeOS? It's an OS not a desktop.

No it is not context-menu driven. It's sort of a hybrid of classic
MacOS and Windows 95.

Post by Little Girl
I've tried something
like that once and wouldn't have minded it much if there was a way to
access it while a program was full-screen,

Fair point.

Post by Little Girl
but would still miss that
bottom left button with a menu on it that's been there for years.

I never leave it there. It's not. I don't even particularly want a
Start menu at all.

Post by Little Girl
I've tried both of those a few years ago, but not recently. I
rejected Xfce because it doesn't have a normal desktop.

Yes it does.

Post by Little Girl
If I can't
store files and directories on the desktop, that's a deal-breaker for
me.

This functionality is there and works fine.

It's GNOME 3 that had already removed it.

Post by Little Girl
I can't remember why I rejected LXDE. Maybe because of its menu
or because you couldn't put the trash in the panel's tray. It's been
too long. I'll have to give both of those a try again.

I prefer my trash on the desktop but it's not important to me.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
https://www.jfedor.org/shots/beos.png
That works too. :-)

Is that one of the context menu only desktops?

BeOS? It's an OS not a desktop.

I should have guessed from the name.

Post by Liam Proven
No it is not context-menu driven. It's sort of a hybrid of classic
MacOS and Windows 95.

Ah, okay. I'll have to give that a try. I've had very limited
exposure (pretty well look, but don't touch) to MacOS many years go,
so it might be interesting to explore.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I've tried something like that once and wouldn't have minded it
much if there was a way to access it while a program was
full-screen,

Fair point.

You have to wonder if the developers ever take things like that for a
true spin to find out where they fall over.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
but would still miss that bottom left button with a menu on it
that's been there for years.

I never leave it there. It's not. I don't even particularly want a
Start menu at all.

That's why there are different styles and approaches to desktop
and operating system design. There's a little something for everyone.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I've tried both of those a few years ago, but not recently. I
rejected Xfce because it doesn't have a normal desktop.

Yes it does.

I might be getting it mixed up with LXDE.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
If I can't store files and directories on the desktop, that's a
deal-breaker for me.

This functionality is there and works fine.

It's sounding more and more like I got it mixed up with LXDE. I'll
end up grabbing a fresh copy of it to see what I think of it now.
It's been a few years since I tried it.

Post by Liam Proven
It's GNOME 3 that had already removed it.

Ah, my experience with it was prior to GNOME 3.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I can't remember why I rejected LXDE. Maybe because of its menu
or because you couldn't put the trash in the panel's tray. It's
been too long. I'll have to give both of those a try again.

I prefer my trash on the desktop but it's not important to me.

Yep. That's another of those things that matter to some of us and not
to some of you. Then there are things that matter to some of you and
not to some of us. We're each a collection of opinions when it comes
to our computers.

I know very few people who don't care at all what kind of desktop or
operating system they use and don't mind the different interfaces or
approaches. In fact, I've only ever met one person who claims that
that's completely irrelevant to him since they all achieve pretty
much the same thing. I'm the opposite. I like things just so.

I have to say, though, that I hadn't ever explored the use of a
vertical taskbar, and with these wide screen monitors, we all have
more screen real estate than we need, so I may explore adding one
without taking away the one on the bottom.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS? It's an OS not a desktop.

I should have guessed from the name.

Post by Liam Proven
No it is not context-menu driven. It's sort of a hybrid of classic
MacOS and Windows 95.

Ah, okay. I'll have to give that a try. I've had very limited
exposure (pretty well look, but don't touch) to MacOS many years go,
so it might be interesting to explore.

BeOS was a proprietary commercial OS and the company sadly failed
about 15-20 years ago.

There was a freeware eval edition of BeOS 5, and you could run that under a VM.

There is a modern FOSS successor OS called Haiku. That runs better on
modern hardware, but it is unfinished, as yet only poorly-optimised,
and is not ready for prime-time yet.

BeOS, OTOH, was quite mature. It is the fastest OS on x86 I have ever
seen. It would cold-boot from POST to desktop in about 5 seconds on a
spinning hard disk, on a Pentium 200MHz with 128MB of RAM. It was
deeply mutltithreaded and ran superbly on multiprocessor machines. It
could spin a software-rendered OpenGL cube in real time, with a
different MP4 movie on each face of the cube, playing smoothly. All on
a single P200.

Linux is an appalling sluggish bloated mess by comparison -- and I am
talking about Linux in 2000, not now. Now it's 20x bigger and slower.

I don't like Linux -- or Unix -- much. I only use it because it's
better than the alternatives.

Post by Little Girl
That's why there are different styles and approaches to desktop
and operating system design. There's a little something for everyone.

True, but it means developer effort is spread over multiple desktops
and so wasted.

Once, there were basically 2 desktop-model UIs for FOSS Unix: GNOME and KDE.

If you wanted GPL all the way down and preferred C, you worked on GNOME.
If you wanted a more mature, rich GUI toolkit and didn't mind that it
was proprietary freeware, and preferred C++, you worked on KDE.

Both advanced a lot.

Now, we have dozens that duplicate each other, and development is slow.

If all desktops were truly modular and component-based, we could
mix-and-match whatever we wanted.

The current situation is very bad, and getting worse.

Budgie, for example, was clearly developed by a team who did not look
at other desktops properly. There's nothing Budgie offers or does that
other desktops can't. LXDE and Xfce can both reproduce something
identical.

Post by Little Girl
I might be getting it mixed up with LXDE.

LXDE has a normal desktop too, with files, folders, symlinks, trash, etc.

Crunchbang didn't. GNOME 3 doesn't in recent versions. All other
desktop model desktops that I can think of do; that is why they are
called desktops.

Post by Little Girl
It's sounding more and more like I got it mixed up with LXDE.

Nope. Something else, maybe.

Post by Little Girl
I'll
end up grabbing a fresh copy of it to see what I think of it now.
It's been a few years since I tried it.

Post by Liam Proven
It's GNOME 3 that had already removed it.

Ah, my experience with it was prior to GNOME 3.

Recent versions of GNOME are the only common desktop that do not
support desktop icons.

Elementary? Enlightenment? I don't know if they do, I have only played
with them.

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
I prefer my trash on the desktop but it's not important to me.

Yep. That's another of those things that matter to some of us and not
to some of you. Then there are things that matter to some of you and
not to some of us. We're each a collection of opinions when it comes
to our computers.

Sure.

Post by Little Girl
I know very few people who don't care at all what kind of desktop or
operating system they use and don't mind the different interfaces or
approaches. In fact, I've only ever met one person who claims that
that's completely irrelevant to him since they all achieve pretty
much the same thing. I'm the opposite. I like things just so.

Fair enough.

I try to be flexible and there are lots of looks-and-feels I find comfortable.

GNOME 3 and KDE both just annoy me, though. They implement part of a
system; KDE then just fails the rest because they didn't think of it,
whereas GNOME is attempting to remove it, because its devs don't use
things so they think nobody needs them.

Post by Little Girl
I have to say, though, that I hadn't ever explored the use of a
vertical taskbar, and with these wide screen monitors, we all have
more screen real estate than we need, so I may explore adding one
without taking away the one on the bottom.

Happiness and space efficiency lies in having _only_ a vertical one,
and getting all the space back. A hybrid solution is no solution
because you still lose the space.

Stick an eval copy of Win10 in a VM -- it runs fine on VBox, you don't
need to activate it or anything. ISOs are free from microsoft.com.

Windows still does it better than anything. Get a feel for it by
playing around in Windows, then try the Xfce implementation.

I am not saying there is anything _wrong_ with horizontal panels, or
that multiple ones, like Ralf uses, is bad or wrong. Whatever floats
your boat.

All I am saying is this: if your vertical panel implementation works
right, then you don't need anything more. You don't need vertical text
or anything tricksy like that, you just need a working, solid
implementation. All the elements of the Windows desktop model --
taskbar, notification tray, clock, app switcher, start menu,
everything -- all of them were designed and planned to work in
vertical orientation when the first version of Win95 shipped in 1995.

It's just that most Linux desktops copy this model _badly_ and don't
implement necessary functionality. The developers took only a casual
look and copied only the surface appearance, and not how it actually
*works*. So they don't even know that the functionality is missing.

When it works, it's easy, natural, and efficient.

When it is implemented poorly -- e.g. in Xfce -- it works; or if it is
not properly implemented, it is partially achievable but it takes more
effort and does not function right -- e.g. KDE.

When it's not implemented at all, or without thought and
consideration, it doesn't work. E.g. GNOME 2/Maté, Cinnamon.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS was a proprietary commercial OS and the company sadly failed
about 15-20 years ago.
There was a freeware eval edition of BeOS 5, and you could run that under a VM.

Thanks. Ordinarily I'd check it out, but if it's no longer being
developed, it's probably best not to.

Post by Liam Proven
There is a modern FOSS successor OS called Haiku. That runs better on
modern hardware, but it is unfinished, as yet only poorly-optimised,
and is not ready for prime-time yet.
BeOS, OTOH, was quite mature. It is the fastest OS on x86 I have ever
seen. It would cold-boot from POST to desktop in about 5 seconds on a
spinning hard disk, on a Pentium 200MHz with 128MB of RAM. It was
deeply mutltithreaded and ran superbly on multiprocessor machines. It
could spin a software-rendered OpenGL cube in real time, with a
different MP4 movie on each face of the cube, playing smoothly. All
on a single P200.

That kind of makes you wonder why they went under. Hopefully some of
their developers have come over to the Ubuntu team.

Post by Liam Proven
Linux is an appalling sluggish bloated mess by comparison -- and I am
talking about Linux in 2000, not now. Now it's 20x bigger and slower.

I agree that it's sluggish and bloated compared to what it could be.
It's a shame. It doesn't have to be. It's like developers use the
resources they can just because they're there rather than trying to
get their software to run with the smallest resource footprint
possible.

Post by Liam Proven
I don't like Linux -- or Unix -- much. I only use it because it's
better than the alternatives.

I like it all. If it plugs into a wall or runs on a battery and lets
me interact with it, it's a good thing.

Post by Liam Proven
Once, there were basically 2 desktop-model UIs for FOSS Unix: GNOME and KDE.
If you wanted GPL all the way down and preferred C, you worked on
GNOME. If you wanted a more mature, rich GUI toolkit and didn't mind
that it was proprietary freeware, and preferred C++, you worked on
KDE.
Both advanced a lot.
Now, we have dozens that duplicate each other, and development is slow.

The advantage to that is that each of them goes in a different
direction, and we get to pick which direction we like. If there were
fewer of them, we'd have fewer choices despite their ability to
develop faster.

Post by Liam Proven
If all desktops were truly modular and component-based, we could
mix-and-match whatever we wanted.

I agree. We have that, to some degree, by choosing different desktops
to log into, but since each has very certain hooks into system
components, you end up with a lot of excess software when you add
desktops. A cleaner way of doing it would be nice.

Post by Liam Proven
Budgie, for example, was clearly developed by a team who did not look
at other desktops properly. There's nothing Budgie offers or does
that other desktops can't. LXDE and Xfce can both reproduce something
identical.

I'm downloading that right now to try it out.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I might be getting it mixed up with LXDE.

LXDE has a normal desktop too, with files, folders, symlinks, trash, etc.

Yep, I just tried it again and that one has a normal desktop. The
reason I rejected it was because the trash can't be put onto the
panel, which is a deal-breaker for me.

Post by Liam Proven
Crunchbang didn't. GNOME 3 doesn't in recent versions. All other
desktop model desktops that I can think of do; that is why they are
called desktops.

Post by Little Girl
It's sounding more and more like I got it mixed up with LXDE.

Nope. Something else, maybe.

It was definitely Xfce, but it looks like they've fixed it. I just
tried the latest version of Xubuntu and was able to create files and
folders on the desktop. That's definitely going to be kept as a
fall-back desktop for me now in case MATE falls over in the future.

Post by Liam Proven
GNOME 3 and KDE both just annoy me, though. They implement part of a
system; KDE then just fails the rest because they didn't think of it,
whereas GNOME is attempting to remove it, because its devs don't use
things so they think nobody needs them.

I totally agree.

Post by Liam Proven
Happiness and space efficiency lies in having _only_ a vertical one,
and getting all the space back. A hybrid solution is no solution
because you still lose the space.

Although that makes sense and since we definitely have more screen
real estate to give up for vertical bars than horizontal ones, I'm
wondering how long it would take to overcome years of habit and
muscle memory formed by accessing a horizontal bar thousands or
millions (or more) times.

Post by Liam Proven
Stick an eval copy of Win10 in a VM -- it runs fine on VBox, you
don't need to activate it or anything. ISOs are free from
microsoft.com.

No need. I have more than one copy of Windows (10 and otherwise) here
for work.

Post by Liam Proven
Windows still does it better than anything. Get a feel for it by
playing around in Windows, then try the Xfce implementation.

I didn't realize Windows offered it as well. This is something I had
never explored until our recent experimentation with it in here.

Post by Liam Proven
All I am saying is this: if your vertical panel implementation works
right, then you don't need anything more. You don't need vertical
text or anything tricksy like that, you just need a working, solid
implementation. All the elements of the Windows desktop model --
taskbar, notification tray, clock, app switcher, start menu,
everything -- all of them were designed and planned to work in
vertical orientation when the first version of Win95 shipped in 1995.

Interesting. It looks like I missed that entirely back then.

Post by Liam Proven
It's just that most Linux desktops copy this model _badly_ and don't
implement necessary functionality. The developers took only a casual
look and copied only the surface appearance, and not how it actually
*works*. So they don't even know that the functionality is missing.

I suspect the same thing. There's a lot obviously wrong with it the
moment you set it up and start trying things, which they would have
noticed if they'd messed around with it.

[Peter Flynn]

Enlightenment has settings for vertical taskbars, if I understand rightly
what you mean by 'taskbar'. I thought most window managers did...

P

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS was a proprietary commercial OS and the company sadly failed
about 15-20 years ago.
There was a freeware eval edition of BeOS 5, and you could run that under a VM.

Thanks. Ordinarily I'd check it out, but if it's no longer being
developed, it's probably best not to.

Post by Liam Proven
There is a modern FOSS successor OS called Haiku. That runs better on
modern hardware, but it is unfinished, as yet only poorly-optimised,
and is not ready for prime-time yet.
BeOS, OTOH, was quite mature. It is the fastest OS on x86 I have ever
seen. It would cold-boot from POST to desktop in about 5 seconds on a
spinning hard disk, on a Pentium 200MHz with 128MB of RAM. It was
deeply mutltithreaded and ran superbly on multiprocessor machines. It
could spin a software-rendered OpenGL cube in real time, with a
different MP4 movie on each face of the cube, playing smoothly. All
on a single P200.

That kind of makes you wonder why they went under. Hopefully some of
their developers have come over to the Ubuntu team.

Post by Liam Proven
Linux is an appalling sluggish bloated mess by comparison -- and I am
talking about Linux in 2000, not now. Now it's 20x bigger and slower.

I agree that it's sluggish and bloated compared to what it could be.
It's a shame. It doesn't have to be. It's like developers use the
resources they can just because they're there rather than trying to
get their software to run with the smallest resource footprint
possible.

Post by Liam Proven
I don't like Linux -- or Unix -- much. I only use it because it's
better than the alternatives.

I like it all. If it plugs into a wall or runs on a battery and lets
me interact with it, it's a good thing.

Post by Liam Proven
Once, there were basically 2 desktop-model UIs for FOSS Unix: GNOME and KDE.
If you wanted GPL all the way down and preferred C, you worked on
GNOME. If you wanted a more mature, rich GUI toolkit and didn't mind
that it was proprietary freeware, and preferred C++, you worked on
KDE.
Both advanced a lot.
Now, we have dozens that duplicate each other, and development is slow.

The advantage to that is that each of them goes in a different
direction, and we get to pick which direction we like. If there were
fewer of them, we'd have fewer choices despite their ability to
develop faster.

Post by Liam Proven
If all desktops were truly modular and component-based, we could
mix-and-match whatever we wanted.

I agree. We have that, to some degree, by choosing different desktops
to log into, but since each has very certain hooks into system
components, you end up with a lot of excess software when you add
desktops. A cleaner way of doing it would be nice.

Post by Liam Proven
Budgie, for example, was clearly developed by a team who did not look
at other desktops properly. There's nothing Budgie offers or does
that other desktops can't. LXDE and Xfce can both reproduce something
identical.

I'm downloading that right now to try it out.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I might be getting it mixed up with LXDE.

LXDE has a normal desktop too, with files, folders, symlinks, trash, etc.

Yep, I just tried it again and that one has a normal desktop. The
reason I rejected it was because the trash can't be put onto the
panel, which is a deal-breaker for me.

Post by Liam Proven
Crunchbang didn't. GNOME 3 doesn't in recent versions. All other
desktop model desktops that I can think of do; that is why they are
called desktops.

Post by Little Girl
It's sounding more and more like I got it mixed up with LXDE.

Nope. Something else, maybe.

It was definitely Xfce, but it looks like they've fixed it. I just
tried the latest version of Xubuntu and was able to create files and
folders on the desktop. That's definitely going to be kept as a
fall-back desktop for me now in case MATE falls over in the future.

Post by Liam Proven
GNOME 3 and KDE both just annoy me, though. They implement part of a
system; KDE then just fails the rest because they didn't think of it,
whereas GNOME is attempting to remove it, because its devs don't use
things so they think nobody needs them.

I totally agree.

Post by Liam Proven
Happiness and space efficiency lies in having _only_ a vertical one,
and getting all the space back. A hybrid solution is no solution
because you still lose the space.

Although that makes sense and since we definitely have more screen
real estate to give up for vertical bars than horizontal ones, I'm
wondering how long it would take to overcome years of habit and
muscle memory formed by accessing a horizontal bar thousands or
millions (or more) times.

Post by Liam Proven
Stick an eval copy of Win10 in a VM -- it runs fine on VBox, you
don't need to activate it or anything. ISOs are free from
microsoft.com.

No need. I have more than one copy of Windows (10 and otherwise) here
for work.

Post by Liam Proven
Windows still does it better than anything. Get a feel for it by
playing around in Windows, then try the Xfce implementation.

I didn't realize Windows offered it as well. This is something I had
never explored until our recent experimentation with it in here.

Post by Liam Proven
All I am saying is this: if your vertical panel implementation works
right, then you don't need anything more. You don't need vertical
text or anything tricksy like that, you just need a working, solid
implementation. All the elements of the Windows desktop model --
taskbar, notification tray, clock, app switcher, start menu,
everything -- all of them were designed and planned to work in
vertical orientation when the first version of Win95 shipped in 1995.

Interesting. It looks like I missed that entirely back then.

Post by Liam Proven
It's just that most Linux desktops copy this model _badly_ and don't
implement necessary functionality. The developers took only a casual
look and copied only the surface appearance, and not how it actually
*works*. So they don't even know that the functionality is missing.

I suspect the same thing. There's a lot obviously wrong with it the
moment you set it up and start trying things, which they would have
noticed if they'd messed around with it.
--
Little Girl
There is no spoon.
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

[Liam Proven]

Post by Peter Flynn
Enlightenment has settings for vertical taskbars, if I understand rightly
what you mean by 'taskbar'. I thought most window managers did...

It doesn't work.

Again -- see the screenshot gallery I posted for an illustration.

https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy

A vertical _panel_ is easy.

However a vertical _taskbar_ requires that the taskbar controls on the
panel remain in horizontal, left-to-right (or R-to-L if that's how
your script works) orientation within a vertical panel that is
3/4/5/whatever rows wide.

Xfce calls this a "deskbar" and also supports vertically-oriented
controls. I find that useless myself, but whatever turns you on. I'm
not asking for anyone to lose anything. I don't want to take any
features away.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Peter Flynn]

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Peter Flynn
Enlightenment has settings for vertical taskbars, if I understand rightly
what you mean by 'taskbar'. I thought most window managers did...

It doesn't work.
Again -- see the screenshot gallery I posted for an illustration.
https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy

I'm afraid I have given up on that after waiting 20 mins for the page to
load.

Obviously I didn't understand what a taskbar was, so I can't help, sorry.

P

[Liam Proven]

Post by Peter Flynn
I'm afraid I have given up on that after waiting 20 mins for the page to
load.

It's just an imgur gallery with 4 modest-sized pics. It opened in 3sec
from my poor-quality wifi here. I just timed it.

Imgur is one of the most widely-used image-hosting sites on the web.
It's normally quick.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imgur

Try going to the Imgur main page and logging in -- any OpenID will do
-- and then you could go via my member page:

https://liamproven.imgur.com/

Post by Peter Flynn
Obviously I didn't understand what a taskbar was, so I can't help, sorry.

It's OK, I'm not looking for help! :-) I am just annoyed that a basic
feature of Windows for 25y is impossible in most of the Linux desktops
*which are direct copies of that Windows desktop*.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Peter Flynn]

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Peter Flynn
I'm afraid I have given up on that after waiting 20 mins for the page to
load.

It's just an imgur gallery with 4 modest-sized pics. It opened in 3sec
from my poor-quality wifi here. I just timed it.

Quite possibly but not from this side of the planet at that time.

Post by Liam Proven
Try going to the Imgur main page and logging in -- any OpenID will do

I tried logging in with my Google ID but now it wants me to create a
username and every one I pick it rejects. I have tried a dozen,
including some random strings and it still rejects them.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Peter Flynn
Obviously I didn't understand what a taskbar was, so I can't help, sorry.

It's OK, I'm not looking for help! :-) I am just annoyed that a basic
feature of Windows for 25y is impossible in most of the Linux desktops
*which are direct copies of that Windows desktop*.

As I have only used Windows a couple of times, I'm not sure what it is:
do you mean the bar at the bottom which contains an icon for each
program that is running? I always thought that was because Windows only
provides one screen and you click on the icons to flip between
applications. On a Mac it does it in the dock by lighting up a small dot
beside or under the application. In Enlightenment it used to do the same
but now it lights up an underline below the application icon in the dock
which is much more usable. I haven't used KDE or KFC or xfce or any of
the other window managers for ages so I'm not familiar with their layout
but if they don't have a way to show what programs are running, it's an
omission that needs to be rectified.

P

[Liam Proven]

Post by Peter Flynn
Quite possibly but not from this side of the planet at that time.

From your email, you're in Ireland. I'm only 800km away in Czechia.

Post by Peter Flynn
I tried logging in with my Google ID but now it wants me to create a
username and every one I pick it rejects. I have tried a dozen,
including some random strings and it still rejects them.

Baffling. I just used my existing login.

Post by Peter Flynn
do you mean the bar at the bottom which contains an icon for each
program that is running?

Yes.

Post by Peter Flynn
I always thought that was because Windows only
provides one screen and you click on the icons to flip between
applications.

Win10 includes virtual desktops.

Post by Peter Flynn
On a Mac it does it in the dock by lighting up a small dot
beside or under the application.

I'm aware. I'm typing on one. :-)

Post by Peter Flynn
In Enlightenment it used to do the same
but now it lights up an underline below the application icon in the dock
which is much more usable.

I don't see a huge difference myself, TBH.

Post by Peter Flynn
I haven't used KDE or KFC or xfce or any of
the other window managers for ages so I'm not familiar with their layout
but if they don't have a way to show what programs are running, it's an
omission that needs to be rectified.

They all have taskbars. Even GNOME 3 has a dock-like thing. Almost all
modern desktops are Windows-like. The ones that aren't can be counted
on 1 hand:
- GNOME 3
- Unity
- Elementary OS
- Budgie
- perhaps, arguably, Deepin

The problem is getting a Windows-style taskbar that is _vertically_
oriented at the left or right edge of the screen, not the top or the
bottom.

As I've been saying in this thread, Windows defaults to the bottom,
but ever since the first version of Explorer in Win95, you can
reposition it on any edge.

This is how it looked in Vista:

https://superuser.com/questions/972492/how-can-i-change-opened-windows-list-placement-to-vertical-in-gnome

Most of the Linux copies of the Win95 desktop fail to replicate this
functionality.

MATE can't, Cinnamon can't, KDE can but very poorly with many compromises.

LXDE/LXQt can and XFCE can and that's it.

The 5th image here shows it under XFCE about 3 versions ago:

http://www.knetfeder.de/linux/index.php?id=148
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Hi. :-)

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS was a proprietary commercial OS and the company sadly failed
about 15-20 years ago.
There was a freeware eval edition of BeOS 5, and you could run that under a VM.

Thanks. Ordinarily I'd check it out, but if it's no longer being
developed, it's probably best not to.

BeOS is dead, yes.

However, if you have hardware old enough to run it, it is instructive
to play with it for a few hours.

As I said before: 20y ago, on (for example) a 133MHz single-core
Pentium with 128MB of RAM, it booted faster and was more responsive
than the machine I'm typing on -- a quad-core Retina iMac with 24GB of
RAM and an SSD.

Almost nobody who is only used to 21st century computers realises how
vastly bloated and underperforming modern OSes are.

Another example: the QNX Demo Disk.

http://toastytech.com/guis/qnxdemo.html

A complete multitasking desktop, plus an Internet stack, and a web
browser, on a single bootable 1.4MB floppy.

No install. Boots from RAM.

Ubuntu can no longer even fit onto a single 650MB CD.

But a functional desktop OS, web-capable, can be fit into under 2 megabytes.

As for BeOS... it sort of lives on.

Be was sold to Access. Be tech made it into PalmOS 6.

https://www.palmsource.com/palmos/cobalt.html

Sadly, no Palm devices with PalmOS 6 ever shipped.

It remains the property of Access: https://www.access-company.com/

However, the beta of BeOS 6 "Zeta" leaked, was completed and shipped.

Here's a nice in-depth look with history and context:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2005/08/zeta-1-0/

It even made it to v1.5:

http://www.osnews.com/story/17518/Review_Zeta_1_5/

Also:

https://www.geek.com/xyzcomputing/yellowtab-zeta-os-version-10-571320/

It's out there if you want a look.

Haiku is alive and well and about to ship beta 1:

https://www.haiku-os.org/

This works surprisingly well -- I have a nightly build on a spare
machine. Wifi, web browsers, the lot.

IMHO it is the most complete and polished FOSS desktop OS out there
after the FOSS Unixes. Haiku is far ahead of Plan 9/Minix/NetBSD and
stuff like that. Personally I rate it ahead of FreeBSD / TrueOS but
others' mileage may vary there.

For a real feel, try it on hardware, not in a VM.

It is very pleasant to use, but far far slower and less responsive
than the proprietary original. Still a lightweight OS today, though.

Post by Little Girl
That kind of makes you wonder why they went under. Hopefully some of
their developers have come over to the Ubuntu team.

No. But one designed the journalling filesystem in Mac OS X, and
co-designed the new Apple Filesystem.

It is far _far_ behind the original Be FS though.

Post by Little Girl
The advantage to that is that each of them goes in a different
direction, and we get to pick which direction we like. If there were
fewer of them, we'd have fewer choices despite their ability to
develop faster.

I would agree if that were happening, but it isn't. They're all
flogging the same dead horse, the Win95 model.

GNOME 3 is a bit different but as discussed it alienates many users.

Budgie is slightly different but it just goes to a vast amount of work
to duplicate what you could do in half an hour of customising Xfce or
MATE.

Elementary OS are doing something slightly different, but not by much.

The developers of both chose to re-invent the wheel instead of seeing
what was out there.

E.g. Elementary reproduces a Mac OS X-like look and feel.

Mac OS X developed from NeXTstep. There's an existing FOSS recreation
of NeXTstep:

http://gnustep.org/

Elementary could be 5-10 years ahead of where it is now if it had
started with GNUstep as its base. I am sure they never even heard of
it, though.

Another innovative desktop I like is ROX:

http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/

No Linux distro includes either GNUstep or ROX, sadly, nor ever has.

Post by Little Girl
I agree. We have that, to some degree, by choosing different desktops
to log into, but since each has very certain hooks into system
components, you end up with a lot of excess software when you add
desktops. A cleaner way of doing it would be nice.

Yes.

Post by Little Girl
Yep, I just tried it again and that one has a normal desktop. The
reason I rejected it was because the trash can't be put onto the
panel, which is a deal-breaker for me.

Ah, yes, I remember now. I don't know -- that isn't something I want.

Post by Little Girl
It was definitely Xfce, but it looks like they've fixed it. I just
tried the latest version of Xubuntu and was able to create files and
folders on the desktop. That's definitely going to be kept as a
fall-back desktop for me now in case MATE falls over in the future.

Yep. As I said, both LXDE and Xfce can do that. I've never seen a
version of either that could not.

Post by Little Girl
Although that makes sense and since we definitely have more screen
real estate to give up for vertical bars than horizontal ones, I'm
wondering how long it would take to overcome years of habit and
muscle memory formed by accessing a horizontal bar thousands or
millions (or more) times.

I persuaded a few colleagues to try at my last full-time job before I
left the UK.

Just before the company downsized, they refreshed their desktop fleet.
They also fired the IT guy and outsourced it.

There was a pile of old PCs and screens in the corner.

I pulled an old LCD out of the pile and hooked it to my PC's unused
VGA port as a 2nd screen. I didn't have admin rights, but for that you
don't need them.

I now had a big wide desktop, and I put the taskbar on the left.

My colleagues marvelled. Never had they seen this sorcery.

I could have 20+ apps open with readable-sized taskbar buttons. They
were amazed.

Some copied me. Some kept it, some didn't.

But a few weeks later, everyone in the office had a 2nd screen on
their computer. :-D

Quite a few of 'em didn't understand how window-management works and
could not get the hang of moving windows on to the 2nd monitor. Having
it sitting there empty embarrassed them so some disconnected them
again.

This is why iPads took off, of course.

Honestly, it takes no more than a day or 2 to get used to a taskbar on
the side. Just do it full time and you'll get used to it. Don't
weaken. It's not hard.

Post by Little Girl
No need. I have more than one copy of Windows (10 and otherwise) here
for work.

Right. So try it. It works on every version of Windows since Windows 95 v1.0.

Actually, it worked in the betas before that -- I ran the later ones. :-)

Post by Little Girl
I didn't realize Windows offered it as well. This is something I had
never explored until our recent experimentation with it in here.

It's been there for about 24 years. :-)

Post by Little Girl
I suspect the same thing. There's a lot obviously wrong with it the
moment you set it up and start trying things, which they would have
noticed if they'd messed around with it.

Exactly.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Liam Proven
As I said before: 20y ago, on (for example) a 133MHz single-core
Pentium with 128MB of RAM, it booted faster and was more responsive
than the machine I'm typing on -- a quad-core Retina iMac with 24GB of
RAM and an SSD.
Almost nobody who is only used to 21st century computers realises how
vastly bloated and underperforming modern OSes are.

Hi,

that is _not_ well-worded. Default kernels of distros are bloated, to
support a variety of hardware, but this has got no impact on the
performance. Regarding performance the kernel is no issue at all. If you
want a smaller kernel, you could compile a very slim kernel:

""make localmodconfig" Create a config based on current config and
loaded modules (lsmod). Disables any module
option that is not needed for the loaded modules.

To create a localmodconfig for another machine,
store the lsmod of that machine into a file
and pass it in as a LSMOD parameter.

target$ lsmod > /tmp/mylsmod
target$ scp /tmp/mylsmod host:/tmp

host$ make LSMOD=/tmp/mylsmod localmodconfig

The above also works when cross compiling.

"make localyesconfig" Similar to localmodconfig, except it will convert
all module options to built in (=y) options." - https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.16/admin-guide/README.html


If you don't use a GUI and if you write scripts for dash instead of
bash, you still will not experience performance issues. The performance
issues are caused by the widget toolkits.

Today I migrated from GTK2 to GTK3 for spacefm on Arch Linux, because
spacefm started crashing.

To ensure that I'm not mistaken with my following claim, I reinstalled
the GTK2 version and then installed the GTK3 version while writing this
email.

[***@archlinux aur]$ sudo pacman -U old/spacefm-gtk2-1.0.5-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
[snip]

When opening the GTK2 version, I'm barely able to notice an empty black
widget.

[***@archlinux aur]$ sudo pacman -U current/spacefm-1.0.6-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
[snip]

When opening the GTK3 version, the empty black widget stays relatively
long.

Post by Liam Proven
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/
No Linux distro includes either GNUstep or ROX, sadly, nor ever has.

At least Ubuntu and Arch Linux do provide ROX:

[***@archlinux aur]$ sudo systemd-nspawn -qD /mnt/moonstudio apt list -qqa 'rox-*'
rox-filer/xenial 1:2.11-1 amd64

[***@archlinux aur]$ pacman -Si rox | head
Repository : community
Name : rox
Version : 2.11-3
Description : A small and fast file manager which can optionally manage the desktop background and panels
Architecture : x86_64
URL : http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/
Licenses : GPL
Groups : None
Provides : None
Depends On : sh libsm gtk2

"ROX is a fast, user friendly desktop which makes extensive use of drag-
and-drop. The interface revolves around the file manager, or filer,
following the traditional Unix view that `everything is a file' rather
than trying to hide the filesystem beneath start menus, wizards, or
druids. The aim is to make a system that is well designed and clearly
presented. The ROX style favours using several small programs together
instead of creating all-in-one mega-applications." -
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/

The problem is, that it's based on GTK2, perhaps still stable today, but
nobody knows for how long.

Regards,
Ralf

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Liam Proven
No Linux distro includes either GNUstep or ROX, sadly, nor ever has.

apt list -qqa 'rox-*' rox-filer/xenial 1:2.11-1 amd64
Repository : community
Name : rox
Version : 2.11-3
Description : A small and fast file manager which can optionally
manage the desktop background and panels Architecture : x86_64
URL : http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/
Licenses : GPL
Groups : None
Provides : None
Depends On : sh libsm gtk2

I forgot GNUstep, also provided by at least Ubuntu and Arch Linux:

https://packages.ubuntu.com/bionic/gnustep-base-common
https://packages.ubuntu.com/bionic/gnustep-make

[***@archlinux ~]$ pacman -Si gnustep-base | head -3
Repository : community
Name : gnustep-base
Version : 1.25.1-3
[***@archlinux ~]$ pacman -Si gnustep-make | head -3
Repository : community
Name : gnustep-make
Version : 2.7.0-3

[Liam Proven]

OMG, Ralf, really?

I know that. I have known that for a decade. I have tried it. I have
built it. Have you?

*It is not a selectable choice of desktop.* It is there, yes, but you
have to build your own desktop, which is far from trivial.

No mainstream desktop offers, or has ever offered, GNUstep or ROX as a
choice of desktop.

Etoilé has never released anything but source:

http://etoileos.com/

Simply GNUstep is just a live demo disk:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/simplygnustep/

So is GNUstep Live:

http://wiki.gnustep.org/index.php/GNUstep_Live_CD

No distro offers this as a choice of desktop. No distro offers ROX
either. None ever has.

Yes you can just apt-get in a window manager such as IceWM or fvwm95
and get a working environment. You can't do that with a full desktop.
It needs a lot of integration. That is what distros are _for_.

Cinnamon, GNOME, Budgie, KDE, LXDE, Xfce, Enlightenment, whatever you
like -- there are a choice of distros which will give you a complete
running working environment with this, all ready to go.

This is not true for GNUstep or for ROX and it never has been true.

We have been communicating on this list for several years now, Ralf.
Please do me the small dignity of assuming that I am not an idiot and
that I actually know what I am talking about.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Liam Proven]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
that is _not_ well-worded. Default kernels of distros are bloated, to
support a variety of hardware, but this has got no impact on the
performance. Regarding performance the kernel is no issue at all. If you

I meant what I said and I can back it up.

Take QNX as an example. Do you think, with _any_ version of Linux ever
released, you could build a full distro in 2MB of compressed code.
Desktop, GUI, shell and file manager, web browser, dial-up or NIC
based TCP-IP stack. The whole thing.

Remember, not optimised for any particular machine -- it could boot
and run on anything.

Download it and try it!

https://winworldpc.com/product/qnx/144mb-demo

Hint: you can't. It's impossible. It has never been done, it never
could be done, it never will be.

Maybe in about 10x that size -- TinyCore Linux is impressive.

But 10x is a _lot_.

Acorn's RISC OS, as runs today on the Raspberry Pi, BeagleBoard etc.,
fits the core OS, all drivers etc, the GUI and desktop, and the core
apps -- file manager, text editor, image viewer etc. -- into 6MB of
ROM.

Not gig. Meg.

It's smaller than UEFI firmware alone.

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Liam Proven
No Linux distro includes either GNUstep or ROX, sadly, nor ever has.

rox-filer/xenial 1:2.11-1 amd64
Repository : community
Name : rox
Version : 2.11-3
Description : A small and fast file manager which can optionally manage the desktop background and panels

That's the file manager only, Ralf. Not the whole desktop.

Nemo is not Cinnamon. Nautilus is not GNOME.

ROX-Filer is not ROX.

Do you think I didn't know that? Do you think I hadn't tried?

Do you perhaps think that I am making this stuff up?

I am not. I do know what I am talking about.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Liam Proven
Download it and try it!
https://winworldpc.com/product/qnx/144mb-demo

It's missing USB support. It might not be real-time capable and/or
provides no multitasking etc. pp.

You only remember the pros, but there were more cons.

The C64 provides better hard real-time MIDI (MIDI is directly available
by the main bus and due to the limited hardware there is perfect control
over the IRQ), than a modern PC (Linux or Windows or whatsoever) does,
but the C64 and similar computers at best provide pseudo-multitasking,
if at all, no professional hard disk audio recording, if at all, no good
graphics, no USB etc. pp. There was no need for security updates of the
C64 kernel. Due to all that limitations programs could be written in
Assembler. At that time a bank robbery by computer was easy to do. That
everything was smaller had some side effects. Keep in mind that old
machines were not faster. How long did it take to calculate the
Mandelbrot set with old PCs in low resolution? It took minutes or hours.
Today we can fly through the Mandelbrot set in high resolution. The
calculation takes ms or us? I don't know, but we don't need to wait for
the calculation.

Post by Liam Proven
ROX-Filer is not ROX.

But it's the main part, not just a file manager, since the ROX
philosophy is based on the UNIX file philosophy and it manages panels,
too.

That other parts are not available seems to be an upstream issue, not
caused by the Linux distributions.

For example, http://roxos.sunsite.dk/dev-contrib/guido/ is a dead link:


"OroboROX
Submitted by Thomas Leonard on Thu, 2006-01-05 18:30

Core software GPL Window management

Summary:
a lightweight Window Manager for ROX
Current stable version:
0.9.7.9
Primary author(s):
Guido Schimmels and Jonatan Liljedahl
Zero Install URL (drag link to AddApp to install):
http://rox.sourceforge.net/2005/interfaces/OroboROX
Downloads:
http://roxos.sunsite.dk/dev-contrib/guido/

OroboROX is a lightweight Window Manager for the ROX Desktop. OroboROX
is in development and not completely stable and could give you problems
with some applications. But many people are using this as their everyday
WM, so don't hesitate to try it out!" -
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/OroboROX


IMO we need better widget toolkits, that we could get, by just going a
few steps back in the development of the current available toolkits such
as GTK.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
It's missing USB support.

It's from over 20y ago. USB barely existed then.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
It might not be real-time capable

It's one of the best Unix-like RTOSes in the world, used in hundreds
of millions of embedded deployments. It's also the basis of Blackberry
10.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
and/or
provides no multitasking etc. pp.

As I said, a full, pre-emptive multitasking microkernel OS, POSIX compatible.

One you have a machine connected to the Web, if you check its IP
address and enter that into any _other_ machine on the Web, you
discover that the 2MB of code _also_ includes a web server as well,
which is serving a page showing a process monitor.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
You only remember the pros, but there were more cons.

I appear to remember rather more than you about this, Ralf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QNX

Post by Ralf Mardorf
The C64 provides better hard real-time MIDI (MIDI is directly available
by the main bus and due to the limited hardware there is perfect control
over the IRQ), than a modern PC (Linux or Windows or whatsoever) does,
but the C64 and similar computers at best provide pseudo-multitasking,
if at all, no professional hard disk audio recording, if at all, no good
graphics, no USB etc. pp.

A fairly simple 8-bit does not compare.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
There was no need for security updates of the
C64 kernel.

There really were, but they only arrived with the C16 and Plus-4, and the C128.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Due to all that limitations programs could be written in
Assembler. At that time a bank robbery by computer was easy to do. That
everything was smaller had some side effects. Keep in mind that old
machines were not faster. How long did it take to calculate the
Mandelbrot set with old PCs in low resolution? It took minutes or hours.
Today we can fly through the Mandelbrot set in high resolution. The
calculation takes ms or us? I don't know, but we don't need to wait for
the calculation.

So?

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Liam Proven
ROX-Filer is not ROX.

But it's the main part, not just a file manager, since the ROX
philosophy is based on the UNIX file philosophy and it manages panels,
too.
That other parts are not available seems to be an upstream issue, not
caused by the Linux distributions.
"OroboROX
Submitted by Thomas Leonard on Thu, 2006-01-05 18:30
Core software GPL Window management
a lightweight Window Manager for ROX
0.9.7.9
Guido Schimmels and Jonatan Liljedahl
http://rox.sourceforge.net/2005/interfaces/OroboROX
http://roxos.sunsite.dk/dev-contrib/guido/
OroboROX is a lightweight Window Manager for the ROX Desktop. OroboROX
is in development and not completely stable and could give you problems
with some applications. But many people are using this as their everyday
WM, so don't hesitate to try it out!" -
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/OroboROX

So?

It's long-neglected. I would like to resurrect it, but currently, I
lack the skills, unfortunately.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
IMO we need better widget toolkits, that we could get, by just going a
few steps back in the development of the current available toolkits such
as GTK.

There are alternatives.

LXDE and Budgie are both moving to Qt. I welcome the prospect of more
Qt-based desktops.

Enlightenment (and the Moksha fork) offers EFL and AIUI that includes
its own toolkit, albeit with apparently a fairly weird, horrible API:

https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/15001/enlightened

GNUstep also has its own.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS is dead, yes.
However, if you have hardware old enough to run it, it is instructive
to play with it for a few hours.

I've got an old laptop that might work for that.

Post by Liam Proven
As I said before: 20y ago, on (for example) a 133MHz single-core
Pentium with 128MB of RAM, it booted faster and was more responsive
than the machine I'm typing on -- a quad-core Retina iMac with 24GB
of RAM and an SSD.

I think the same can be said for booting into a DOS environment as
opposed to any of the environments we boot into today.

Post by Liam Proven
Almost nobody who is only used to 21st century computers realises how
vastly bloated and underperforming modern OSes are.

I'm totally with you on that. I also wish that some of the developers
wouldn't use the resources they know are likely to be available, but
would make it a personal challenge to use as few resources as
possible.

Post by Liam Proven
Another example: the QNX Demo Disk.
http://toastytech.com/guis/qnxdemo.html
A complete multitasking desktop, plus an Internet stack, and a web
browser, on a single bootable 1.4MB floppy.
No install. Boots from RAM.

Bookmarked. Very cool.

Post by Liam Proven
Ubuntu can no longer even fit onto a single 650MB CD.

I know. This was disappointing. We no longer bother burning it to
archive it. We just put it onto a USB stick and overwrite it when
there's a new version.

Post by Liam Proven
https://www.haiku-os.org/
This works surprisingly well -- I have a nightly build on a spare
machine. Wifi, web browsers, the lot.
IMHO it is the most complete and polished FOSS desktop OS out there
after the FOSS Unixes. Haiku is far ahead of Plan 9/Minix/NetBSD and
stuff like that. Personally I rate it ahead of FreeBSD / TrueOS but
others' mileage may vary there.
For a real feel, try it on hardware, not in a VM.
It is very pleasant to use, but far far slower and less responsive
than the proprietary original. Still a lightweight OS today, though.

This one is also interesting. Bookmarked. If I test it in a VM, it
will be on this fast one, but my older laptop would probably give it
a more realistic test.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
The advantage to that is that each of them goes in a different
direction, and we get to pick which direction we like. If there
were fewer of them, we'd have fewer choices despite their ability
to develop faster.

I would agree if that were happening, but it isn't. They're all
flogging the same dead horse, the Win95 model.

I still feel that they're each doing it differently, even if the basic
underlying structure is the same, and I'm glad for the choices. The
thing I dislike the most, as a consumer of anything at all, is being
cornered into one choice or into a small sampling of choices with
none of them being appealing.

Post by Liam Proven
GNOME 3 is a bit different but as discussed it alienates many users.

Agreed.

Post by Liam Proven
Budgie is slightly different but it just goes to a vast amount of
work to duplicate what you could do in half an hour of customising
Xfce or MATE.

I took a quick look at it and it's very similar to the other basic
offerings, but I still feel that's a good thing. You never know which
of them will tweak one or two things to make their offering
absolutely perfect for you.

Post by Liam Proven
Elementary OS are doing something slightly different, but not by much.
The developers of both chose to re-invent the wheel instead of seeing
what was out there.
E.g. Elementary reproduces a Mac OS X-like look and feel.
Mac OS X developed from NeXTstep. There's an existing FOSS recreation
http://gnustep.org/

I'm not at all a fan of Mac OS X. I've never used it, but the
placement of the icons on the title bar, the fact that the menu items
are up in the panel, and the presence of the dock are enough to send
me off in another direction. None of that is my style.

Post by Liam Proven
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/
No Linux distro includes either GNUstep or ROX, sadly, nor ever has.

ROX is rather interesting. I've actually played around with that quite
a bit in the past. It's so different from traditional desktops that I
wouldn't want to switch to it permanently if I didn't have to since
doing so would require a major shift to the usual work-flow, but it
sure is fast and responsive. If I were forced to choose a
non-traditional desktop, I'd definitely go with ROX, though, and I
suspect that, once I got used to how it presents information and how
to navigate around in it quickly, I might even prefer this over more
traditional approaches. It's just that the initial hump of adjustment
would be a bit rough.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
It was definitely Xfce, but it looks like they've fixed it. I just
tried the latest version of Xubuntu and was able to create files
and folders on the desktop. That's definitely going to be kept as a
fall-back desktop for me now in case MATE falls over in the
future.

Yep. As I said, both LXDE and Xfce can do that. I've never seen a
version of either that could not.

It was a few years ago. You'd have to grab older versions of XFCE to
see it. It had what looked like a desktop, but you couldn't create or
put folders or files on it. When we contacted the developers to ask
about it, they said they considered that a feature, so we thought it
was hopeless to expect it ever to change. It's nice to see that
they've rethought or revisited that.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Although that makes sense and since we definitely have more screen
real estate to give up for vertical bars than horizontal ones, I'm
wondering how long it would take to overcome years of habit and
muscle memory formed by accessing a horizontal bar thousands or
millions (or more) times.

I persuaded a few colleagues to try at my last full-time job before I
left the UK.
Just before the company downsized, they refreshed their desktop
fleet. They also fired the IT guy and outsourced it.
There was a pile of old PCs and screens in the corner.
I pulled an old LCD out of the pile and hooked it to my PC's unused
VGA port as a 2nd screen. I didn't have admin rights, but for that
you don't need them.
I now had a big wide desktop, and I put the taskbar on the left.

Do you mean that you spread your desktop out over both monitors? If
so, I've never tried this. When I use multiple monitors, I have an
iteration of the desktop on each one.

Post by Liam Proven
My colleagues marvelled. Never had they seen this sorcery.
I could have 20+ apps open with readable-sized taskbar buttons. They
were amazed.
Some copied me. Some kept it, some didn't.
But a few weeks later, everyone in the office had a 2nd screen on
their computer. :-D

Oh, no argument here from me. Ever. I wonder how I did without two
monitors as long as I did. It's definitely a liberating experience.

Post by Liam Proven
Quite a few of 'em didn't understand how window-management works and
could not get the hang of moving windows on to the 2nd monitor.
Having it sitting there empty embarrassed them so some disconnected
them again.

That's a shame. I had sort of a similar issue when I had mismatched
monitor brands making it so that the screens didn't line up with each
other. One was a bit higher up. I tried to deal with it, but your
mind is a powerful thing. It wanted me to drag things upward because
that's what my eyes saw, but it needed me to drag them straight
across, because that would actually get me where I needed to go. I was
unable to adjust to it after over a month, so I finally put shims
under the shorter monitor to line them up and that solved it. I've
since replaced those monitors, but haven't forgotten that. We need
what we need.

Post by Liam Proven
Honestly, it takes no more than a day or 2 to get used to a taskbar
on the side. Just do it full time and you'll get used to it. Don't
weaken. It's not hard.

I'll think about it.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
No need. I have more than one copy of Windows (10 and otherwise)
here for work.

Right. So try it. It works on every version of Windows since Windows 95 v1.0.

I did and it does work. I'm not a fan of it removing the text,
though, and just showing icons. I like to see a teaser of what I have
open rather than just an icon of the application it's open in. I have
a feeling I'll remain a horizontal panel person who will add a
vertical panel for some things, but not switch over entirely.

Post by Liam Proven
Actually, it worked in the betas before that -- I ran the later
ones. :-)

I believe you.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I didn't realize Windows offered it as well. This is something I
had never explored until our recent experimentation with it in
here.

It's been there for about 24 years. :-)

I guess we don't always realize everything there is to know about an
environment that we find ourselves in if it meets our needs without
causing us to feel compelled to explore it further.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
Hey there

Hi!

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
BeOS is dead, yes.

I've got an old laptop that might work for that.

Probably needs to be roughly turn-of-the-century: a 15YO machine might work.

The free demo version of BeOS is here:

https://archiveos.org/beos/

Its successor, Zeta, effectively BeOS 6, is harder to find as there
was no free version.

This might work:

https://archive.org/details/archiveorg_malenki_Zeta

Zeta was from 2007 or so. Should work on roughly 10YO hardware.

It's deeply multithreaded and really wants lots of CPU cores. A
desktop is more likely to give a good experience than a laptop, as it
may not work well with power management, wifi etc.

Post by Little Girl
I think the same can be said for booting into a DOS environment as
opposed to any of the environments we boot into today.

Well, yes, but BeOS/Zeta is a multicore multithreaded multitasking
multimedia OS with a rich GUI, networking, etc. It's a complete modern
OS, not a single-tasking executable-loader like DOS.

Ditto QNX.

Post by Little Girl
This one is also interesting. Bookmarked. If I test it in a VM, it
will be on this fast one, but my older laptop would probably give it
a more realistic test.

I am running it on a Thinkpad X200. Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM. Works well,
wifi etc and all.

Post by Little Girl
I still feel that they're each doing it differently, even if the basic
underlying structure is the same, and I'm glad for the choices. The
thing I dislike the most, as a consumer of anything at all, is being
cornered into one choice or into a small sampling of choices with
none of them being appealing.

It's like having gone from a whole menu to 6 different types of
beefburger and nothing but beefburger.

I mean, I don't mind a burger now and then, but if I could eat nothing
else but burgers, I don't know if I could face living.

The taskbar-and-start-menu thing _is_ the desktop now.

GNOME and Unity mucked around a bit because they were scared of an MS lawsuit:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2013/06/03/thank_microsoft_for_linux_desktop_fail/

They aren't beefburgers any more.

But they are both sandwiches with bread around a beef filling.

I want stir-fry, I want curry, I want pasta, I want a biryani, I want
tagine with couscous.

I want stuff that is totally different and in no way resembles filling
between or on top of bread.

Why? Because no matter how good it is, there is more to life.

Every smartphone has a radically different UI which is nothing like
the Windows model. And yet virtually everyone who uses a PC also uses
a phone with no context-switching impedance.

We are _all_ mentally flexible enough to do this. We just got lazy.

30y ago the world had a hundred types of restaurant. Now, the choice
is Burger King vs Mc Donald's vs occasionally a gourmet fancy burger.

I am not OK with that.

Post by Little Girl
I took a quick look at it and it's very similar to the other basic
offerings, but I still feel that's a good thing. You never know which
of them will tweak one or two things to make their offering
absolutely perfect for you.

Not really. No taskbar as such. No start menu as such. It's as
different as Unity or GNOME 3.

What annoys me is that they are so lacking in imagination, they
rewrote from scratch something you could build out of Xfce in 10min.

What a huge waste of effort.

Post by Little Girl
I'm not at all a fan of Mac OS X. I've never used it,

Hang on, hang on.

You can't say you don't like something you've never tried!

Post by Little Girl
but the
placement of the icons on the title bar,

What? You mean window buttons? They're the same as Unity.

Post by Little Girl
the fact that the menu items
are up in the panel,

What? It doesn't have "panels". And the menu bar being up there is
from 1984 and is the most tried-and-tested GUI design in the world.
Nothing older survives.

I'm not saying it should be to anyone's taste, but it _works_.

Please, *PLEASE* try something that isn't a damned beefburger! You
have to get out there and live!

Post by Little Girl
and the presence of the dock are enough to send
me off in another direction. None of that is my style.

Nothing wrong with docks. The MS taskbar is a modified dock.

Again you're saying you won't try a plate of spaghetti because it's
not in a bun.

Post by Little Girl
ROX is rather interesting. I've actually played around with that quite
a bit in the past. It's so different from traditional desktops that I
wouldn't want to switch to it permanently if I didn't have to since
doing so would require a major shift to the usual work-flow, but it
sure is fast and responsive. If I were forced to choose a
non-traditional desktop, I'd definitely go with ROX, though, and I
suspect that, once I got used to how it presents information and how
to navigate around in it quickly, I might even prefer this over more
traditional approaches. It's just that the initial hump of adjustment
would be a bit rough.

It worked better on RISC OS because all the apps were compliant. On
Linux most don't integrate. :-(

Post by Little Girl
It was a few years ago. You'd have to grab older versions of XFCE to
see it. It had what looked like a desktop, but you couldn't create or
put folders or files on it. When we contacted the developers to ask
about it, they said they considered that a feature, so we thought it
was hopeless to expect it ever to change. It's nice to see that
they've rethought or revisited that.

All I can say is that I have been evaluating both for well over a
decade and a half and I have never seen what you describe.

However, it does fit Crunchbang, to pick one example.

Post by Little Girl
Do you mean that you spread your desktop out over both monitors? If
so, I've never tried this. When I use multiple monitors, I have an
iteration of the desktop on each one.

Yes. It's the default on GNOME, Unity, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Cinnamon and
every other Linux desktop I have ever tried. On Windows it is the only
way it can work.

Post by Little Girl
Oh, no argument here from me. Ever. I wonder how I did without two
monitors as long as I did. It's definitely a liberating experience.

You need to try Xinerama, then!

Post by Little Girl
That's a shame. I had sort of a similar issue when I had mismatched
monitor brands making it so that the screens didn't line up with each
other. One was a bit higher up. I tried to deal with it, but your
mind is a powerful thing. It wanted me to drag things upward because
that's what my eyes saw, but it needed me to drag them straight
across, because that would actually get me where I needed to go. I was
unable to adjust to it after over a month, so I finally put shims
under the shorter monitor to line them up and that solved it. I've
since replaced those monitors, but haven't forgotten that. We need
what we need.

Never bothered me, but I do arrange my monitors so they're level if I can.

Post by Little Girl
I did and it does work. I'm not a fan of it removing the text,
though, and just showing icons.

In Win8/8.1/10, choose "small icons" for the text to come back.

Post by Little Girl
I like to see a teaser of what I have
open rather than just an icon of the application it's open in.

Hover over the button for that.

Post by Little Girl
I have
a feeling I'll remain a horizontal panel person who will add a
vertical panel for some things, but not switch over entirely.

Then you don't get the benefit of the extra space. So it's not worth
it. It's all or nothing, I'm afraid.

Post by Little Girl
I guess we don't always realize everything there is to know about an
environment that we find ourselves in if it meets our needs without
causing us to feel compelled to explore it further.

One thing that annoys me is that in the few Linux desktops that do
support it, you have to mess around in multiple dialog boxes.

On Windows, it's dead simple:
[1] right-click taskbar
[2] untick "locked"
[3] drag to preferred edge

Done.

When Linux makes stuff harder or more complex than on Windows, it has
failed. There's no excuse.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven
https://archiveos.org/beos/
Its successor, Zeta, effectively BeOS 6, is harder to find as there
was no free version.
https://archive.org/details/archiveorg_malenki_Zeta
Zeta was from 2007 or so. Should work on roughly 10YO hardware.
It's deeply multithreaded and really wants lots of CPU cores. A
desktop is more likely to give a good experience than a laptop, as it
may not work well with power management, wifi etc.

All of these are on my ToDo list. I'll have to go digging in the back
of one of my closets for that old laptop for the first two.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I still feel that they're each doing it differently, even if the
basic underlying structure is the same, and I'm glad for the
choices. The thing I dislike the most, as a consumer of anything
at all, is being cornered into one choice or into a small sampling
of choices with none of them being appealing.

It's like having gone from a whole menu to 6 different types of
beefburger and nothing but beefburger.
I mean, I don't mind a burger now and then, but if I could eat
nothing else but burgers, I don't know if I could face living.
The taskbar-and-start-menu thing _is_ the desktop now.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2013/06/03/thank_microsoft_for_linux_desktop_fail/
They aren't beefburgers any more.
But they are both sandwiches with bread around a beef filling.
I want stir-fry, I want curry, I want pasta, I want a biryani, I want
tagine with couscous.
I want stuff that is totally different and in no way resembles
filling between or on top of bread.
Why? Because no matter how good it is, there is more to life.

I just want a perfect beefburger that's made exactly the way I like
it.

Post by Liam Proven
Every smartphone has a radically different UI which is nothing like
the Windows model. And yet virtually everyone who uses a PC also uses
a phone with no context-switching impedance.

Oh, there was definitely an adjustment period where we had to learn
to tap, double-tap, touch + drag, long touch, side-swipe, pinch,
unpinch, and, most importantly, how to recover when our ear
accidentally turned on airplane mode in the middle of a conversation.

Post by Liam Proven
We are _all_ mentally flexible enough to do this. We just got lazy.
30y ago the world had a hundred types of restaurant. Now, the choice
is Burger King vs Mc Donald's vs occasionally a gourmet fancy burger.
I am not OK with that.

You might want to go exploring a bit more deeply in your area, and if
all you find is Burger Kings and McDonald's, then you'll want to
venture a bit further out. There are all kinds of interesting
restaurants out there.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I took a quick look at it and it's very similar to the other basic
offerings, but I still feel that's a good thing. You never know
which of them will tweak one or two things to make their offering
absolutely perfect for you.

Not really. No taskbar as such. No start menu as such. It's as
different as Unity or GNOME 3.

This is Budgie we're talking about, right? Ubuntu Budgie has a start
menu and a task bar (what I call a panel) at the top. It also has a
dock on the left.

I just messed around with it a bit more while looking at it again to
make sure we were talking about the same thing and it turns out you
can't use "Copy to..." or "Move to..." from the desktop, but you can
from anywhere else and also to the desktop. Interesting.

Post by Liam Proven
What annoys me is that they are so lacking in imagination, they
rewrote from scratch something you could build out of Xfce in 10min.

I'd say the annoying thing is that they changed a few things just to
be different, I guess, and they disrupt the work-flow for anyone
who's used to a traditional way of doing things. For instance, Save
is usually an icon on the left side of the toolbar or a menu entry
inside the furthest left menu in most desktops (at least ones I've
used). In this case, they made it a text entry toward the right side
of the toolbar, which is not where I'd go looking for it.

They also put the icon you click to quit an application on the left,
which is something I also feel disrupts the traditional work-flow.

I'm sure there's more, but haven't rooted around deeply enough to find
out.

Post by Liam Proven
What a huge waste of effort.

They may yet mature into something appealing.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I'm not at all a fan of Mac OS X. I've never used it,

Hang on, hang on.
You can't say you don't like something you've never tried!

I can tell, just by looking at it, that it would annoy me unless I
had the power to configure it to undo the things I can see that I'd
instantly dislike about it.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
but the placement of the icons on the title bar,

What? You mean window buttons? They're the same as Unity.

Yes, and Unity is horrendous, too. I never used it and never would.

I'm going to use this image as a reference for what I see in Mac OS
X:

Loading Image...

When I mentioned the placement of the icons on the title bar, I was
referring to the red, yellow, and green icons in the upper left
corner of the open window in that screenshot. I assume those are the
window controls for minimizing, maximizing, and closing it. I would
find having them on the left disorienting and would rather have them
on the right.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
the fact that the menu items are up in the panel,

What? It doesn't have "panels". And the menu bar being up there is
from 1984 and is the most tried-and-tested GUI design in the world.
Nothing older survives.
I'm not saying it should be to anyone's taste, but it _works_.

Using the same image from the Wikipedia link above:

The menu bar, as you call it, is the thing at the top that looks like
a panel to me. At any rate, every program you open has its menu items
up in that menu bar/panel. I find that disorienting and would rather
have them at the top of the actual program window.

Post by Liam Proven
Please, *PLEASE* try something that isn't a damned beefburger! You
have to get out there and live!

You do and others might, but I really don't. I'm content with the
traditional desktop and am only unhappy with it when developers
decide to change it for change's sake or for some other reason.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
and the presence of the dock are enough to send
me off in another direction. None of that is my style.

Nothing wrong with docks. The MS taskbar is a modified dock.

I find it visually disturbing (and a waste of screen real estate)
that it doesn't go the full length/width of the screen. I also don't
like the look of a dock on the same screen as a panel/menu bar. From
a design perspective, I'd choose one or the other and not a mixture.
It's also excessively (or unnecessarily) bulky.

Post by Liam Proven
Again you're saying you won't try a plate of spaghetti because it's
not in a bun.

I never said I wouldn't try Mac OS X. I'd be happy to try it. What I
said was that its appearance is enough to tell me that I wouldn't
want it. If all of that (and anything else it might do that I would
find disruptive) can be customized to present what I consider to be a
traditional desktop with traditional desktop behavior, then I might
even consider it for more than just a quick trial, but I suspect
that's not the case.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
It was a few years ago. You'd have to grab older versions of XFCE
to see it. It had what looked like a desktop, but you couldn't
create or put folders or files on it. When we contacted the
developers to ask about it, they said they considered that a
feature, so we thought it was hopeless to expect it ever to
change. It's nice to see that they've rethought or revisited
that.

All I can say is that I have been evaluating both for well over a
decade and a half and I have never seen what you describe.

You might not have tested it the way we did. It wasn't that it didn't
look like a desktop. It was that it didn't behave like a desktop. It
had a background and a panel, but you couldn't put files or folders
on the background. In other words, when you right-clicked on the
desktop, there were no sub-menu entries for creating a folder,
creating a document, or pasting. We were shocked and thought it was a
bug, but not nearly as shocked as when we were told that they were
not only aware of it, but proud of it.

Post by Liam Proven
However, it does fit Crunchbang, to pick one example.

It was Xubuntu. I don't remember which version.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Do you mean that you spread your desktop out over both monitors? If
so, I've never tried this. When I use multiple monitors, I have an
iteration of the desktop on each one.

Yes. It's the default on GNOME, Unity, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Cinnamon and
every other Linux desktop I have ever tried. On Windows it is the
only way it can work.

On Windows, I use iterations of the desktop on each monitor rather
than spreading the desktop over the monitors.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
Oh, no argument here from me. Ever. I wonder how I did without two
monitors as long as I did. It's definitely a liberating
experience.

You need to try Xinerama, then!

Oh, yes, definitely. Thanks. That's a keeper.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I did and it does work. I'm not a fan of it removing the text,
though, and just showing icons.

In Win8/8.1/10, choose "small icons" for the text to come back.

That worked.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I like to see a teaser of what I have open rather than just an
icon of the application it's open in.

Hover over the button for that.

Definitely a work-flow disruptor and a show-stopper for someone like
me. I always have a ton of things open and need to tell at a glance,
very quickly, what's where. Being able to accomplish that only by
moving the mouse to one or more precise locations would be a
stumbling point for me.

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
I have a feeling I'll remain a horizontal panel person who will
add a vertical panel for some things, but not switch over
entirely.

Then you don't get the benefit of the extra space. So it's not worth
it. It's all or nothing, I'm afraid.

Not necessarily. I've got plenty of room and am not feeling crunched.
I suppose, on a smaller monitor, it might be an issue, though, but
I'm not hurting for space.

Post by Liam Proven
One thing that annoys me is that in the few Linux desktops that do
support it, you have to mess around in multiple dialog boxes.
[1] right-click taskbar
[2] untick "locked"
[3] drag to preferred edge
Done.

It's two more steps in MATE:
[1] Right-click panel.
[2] Left-click "Properties".
[3] Left-click "Orientation" drop-down.
[4] Left-click one of the choices.
[5] Left-click "Close" button.

Post by Liam Proven
When Linux makes stuff harder or more complex than on Windows, it has
failed. There's no excuse.

As you pointed out in that article you linked to above, GNU/Linux is
created by a large variety of individuals from all walks of life. It
stands to reason that they have varying abilities or strengths, and,
as you also pointed out in that article, different tastes. I suspect
that a lot of the things we don't like about our operating systems
(or some of the software on them) are as a result of a developer
liking or not liking something and making a choice based on that.

I'm a firm believer in offering people choices instead of making
choices for them and I think that's what some of these developers
neglect to do. We don't all like the same things, as this
conversation shows, so it's nice when our software makes it possible
for each of us to make choices that result in a user experience we
consider to be just right.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
I just want a perfect beefburger that's made exactly the way I like
it.

That makes me very sad.

I fear that what you are saying is probably typical of many people,
and it's why anything even slightly different is dying out.

There's nothing wrong with a burger, but like I said, if I had to eat
nothing but burgers ever again, I might kill myself out of despair.

I want variety. Variety is the spice of life. I want different food, I
want to wear different clothes sometimes, listen to different music,
and I want different computer with different OSes and different
desktops once in a while.

Using the same thing all the time is *boring*.

Post by Little Girl
You might want to go exploring a bit more deeply in your area, and if
all you find is Burger Kings and McDonald's, then you'll want to
venture a bit further out. There are all kinds of interesting
restaurants out there.

*That's my point.*

But you're saying that all you want is a burger and you will not even
consider eating anything else than burgers made just your way.

Post by Little Girl
This is Budgie we're talking about, right? Ubuntu Budgie has a start
menu and a task bar (what I call a panel) at the top. It also has a
dock on the left.

OK. I must not have noticed it, and I've deleted the VM and the ISO
now. Ah well.

Panels aren't the same as taskbars. Neither are menu bars. Controls
that you click on windows aren't "icons", they're buttons. Words
matter.

Post by Little Girl
I just messed around with it a bit more while looking at it again to
make sure we were talking about the same thing and it turns out you
can't use "Copy to..." or "Move to..." from the desktop, but you can
from anywhere else and also to the desktop. Interesting.

*Shrug* Like I said, these are such trivial features to me, I didn't
even notice.

Post by Little Girl
I'd say the annoying thing is that they changed a few things just to
be different, I guess,

Well, yes.

Post by Little Girl
and they disrupt the work-flow for anyone
who's used to a traditional way of doing things.

No, no, hang on. I think they were trying to do something better, not
just different for the sake of it.

It's not "traditional". It's a copyright, patented Microsoft-only way
of doing things, which happens to have been copied by the Linux world.

OS/2 didn't use it. Neither Classic MacOS nor OS X use it. DR GEM
didn't use it. CDE as used by everyone from DEC to Sun didn't use it.
SGI IRIX didn't use it. Amigas and STs and Archimedes didn't use it.
Neither did NeXT. Oberon and its descendant A2/Bluebottle doesn't.

It's not a given. It's not just how desktops work.

It's one particular way. And the Linux versions don't even copy it
_well_. They copy only the default layout and most can't cope with the
simple change caused by dragging the taskbar to one side.

It's not some normal, natural, eternal order of things. It's an
artifact of the Linux people having no imagination and copying MS.

Post by Little Girl
For instance, Save
is usually an icon on the left side of the toolbar or a menu entry
inside the furthest left menu in most desktops (at least ones I've
used). In this case, they made it a text entry toward the right side
of the toolbar, which is not where I'd go looking for it.

Moves around a lot in my experience.

Post by Little Girl
They also put the icon you click to quit an application on the left,
which is something I also feel disrupts the traditional work-flow.

This is a trivial implementation detail and can usually be moved.

Ubuntu moved it because it put the status indicators at top right, and
made it possible to merge the title bar of maximised windows into the
top panel. So if the close/maximise/minimise controls stayed there,
they'd mix in with the notification icons, as they do on GNOME 3 if
you use a "pixel saver" addin.

So Ubuntu moved 'em to the side Apple happen to use.

Later they switched to GNOME 3 and moved 'em back. Big deal. I rarely
use 'em anyway -- I use keystrokes. It's quicker.

Anyway, on all these environments, they can be moved to either side
with a trivial couple of clicks in a tweak tool. The location is
_really_ nothing to get excited about.

Post by Little Girl
They may yet mature into something appealing.

I doubt it, given their similarity. I think some will die out and a
huge amount of duplicated work will be wasted.

Post by Little Girl
I can tell, just by looking at it, that it would annoy me unless I
had the power to configure it to undo the things I can see that I'd
instantly dislike about it.

No, you can't decide that. I am telling you that you can't. You have
to try it to know.

You are being offered a plate of pasta and because it's not a burger,
you're refusing to try it.

Not everything is a burger. Some things that are nothing like burgers
are _better than burgers_. Shock horror.

Apple got to be the first $1Tn dollar company in the world selling an
OS with that UI and very limited customisability.

It's not just because they're fashionable. It genuinely works extremely well.

Do not dismiss it because it does not look familiar. Give them some
respect and credibility. They didn't change it just to be different.
macOS is derived from NeXTstep, a 1987 OS, with changes to resemble
the classic Mac system, a 1984 OS with a lot of inspiration from
LisaOS, a 1981 OS.

3 teams of the most brilliant programmers the world has ever known
built those 3 OSes.

You do _not_ get to dismiss it with "the controls aren't where I like"
without even trying it.

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven
What? You mean window buttons? They're the same as Unity.

Yes, and Unity is horrendous, too. I never used it and never would.

It was and is the best Linux desktop I have ever used, and I have used
a lot more of them than you have.

I am not saying that my opinion trumps yours. I'm just saying that you
can't judge something you have never tried.

You dismiss is because it is _different_. There are good reasons for
that, which for those of us with the flexibility to change our habits,
and who are willing to drop our preconceptions, we found better.

You appear to be younger than me. By rights you should be telling me
off for being old, inflexible and hidebound, not the other way round!

Post by Little Girl
When I mentioned the placement of the icons on the title bar, I was
referring to the red, yellow, and green icons in the upper left
corner of the open window in that screenshot. I assume those are the
window controls for minimizing, maximizing, and closing it.

Those are not icons, they are buttons. Please use the standard terms,
it's easier for everyone.

Post by Little Girl
I would
find having them on the left disorienting and would rather have them
on the right.

No you wouldn't. Within 1 or 2 dozen hours you would not even notice.

Post by Little Girl

Post by Liam Proven

Post by Little Girl
the fact that the menu items are up in the panel,

What? It doesn't have "panels". And the menu bar being up there is
from 1984 and is the most tried-and-tested GUI design in the world.
Nothing older survives.
I'm not saying it should be to anyone's taste, but it _works_.

The menu bar, as you call it, is the thing at the top that looks like
a panel to me. At any rate, every program you open has its menu items
up in that menu bar/panel. I find that disorienting and would rather
have them at the top of the actual program window.

It's not a panel. A panel is a customisable, relocatable object that
holds controls to start and switch between apps. The Mac's menu bar
does none of that.

It's also the oldest commercial mass-market GUI in the world, with a
37 year history. You don't magically get the right to refer to it
using different terms from GUIs invented 20 years later.

Post by Little Girl
You do and others might, but I really don't. I'm content with the
traditional desktop and am only unhappy with it when developers
decide to change it for change's sake or for some other reason.

It's *not* traditional. It's _one_ model, of many, and others are as
good or better.

Stop dismissing what you have never tried.

I'm just going to delete the rest of this, because there's no point
arguing over preferences.

I am dismayed to find someone so very close-minded that they will not
even try things slightly different from what they know. It's very
saddening and makes me angry and I do not want to shout.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get vertical taskbars on
the MATE desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop with some samples. The first one shows a
bottom and left taskbar. The second one shows a bottom and two left
taskbars. I don't normally use a left taskbar, so I just threw some
shortcuts onto them so you could see them in action:

https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get vertical taskbars on
the MATE desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop with some samples. The first one shows a
bottom and left taskbar. The second one shows a bottom and two left
taskbars. I don't normally use a left taskbar, so I just threw some
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

To a vertical mate-panel add "Window List" and enlarge the panel to 384
pixels. IIUC what's called "Window List" for mate-panel is what Liam
calls "task bar".

For xfce4-panel it's called "Window Buttons". If you select "Vertical"
for xfce4-panel the "Window Buttons" are 90° rotated, you need to
select "Deskbar" to get what Liam wants to get.

Liam's guess seems to be, that a vertical mate-panel does look like
a vertical xfce4-panel, but actually Liam is mistaken, a vertical
mate-panel does look like a deskbar xfce4-panel, at least for the
"task bar", aka "Window List", aka "Window Buttons".

The versions of the panels might be important.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
To a vertical mate-panel add "Window List" and enlarge the panel to 384
pixels. IIUC what's called "Window List" for mate-panel is what Liam
calls "task bar".
For xfce4-panel it's called "Window Buttons". If you select "Vertical"
for xfce4-panel the "Window Buttons" are 90° rotated, you need to
select "Deskbar" to get what Liam wants to get.
Liam's guess seems to be, that a vertical mate-panel does look like
a vertical xfce4-panel, but actually Liam is mistaken, a vertical
mate-panel does look like a deskbar xfce4-panel, at least for the
"task bar", aka "Window List", aka "Window Buttons".
The versions of the panels might be important.

*Sigh* I have tried this repeatedly before, but OK, I will try again.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Liam Proven]

Post by Ralf Mardorf
To a vertical mate-panel add "Window List" and enlarge the panel to 384
pixels. IIUC what's called "Window List" for mate-panel is what Liam
calls "task bar".

Right. I am back. Along with some other stuff, I tried it.

No, it is not what I mean.

A taskbar is the combination of multiple elements:
* start menu
* quick launch area (optional)
* app switcher
* notification area
* clock

So here is a best-effort with MATE:

https://imgur.com/dBfjico

Note how it is broken in multiple ways.

[1] The menu button is vertical. Should be horizontal.
[2] Quick start icons have scaled with the panel. This is incorrect;
they should stay constant size but arrange in rows with the panel.
[3] The app switcher is sort of functional, but there is no spacing.
[4] Also, AFAICS, I can't pin apps to it.
[5] Note that the system indicators are arranged vertically.

So, as I said:

MATE cannot do vertical taskbars. GNOME 2 couldn't, and as MATE is a
fork of GNOME 2, it is still broken.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
Liam's guess seems to be, that a vertical mate-panel does look like
a vertical xfce4-panel, but actually Liam is mistaken, a vertical
mate-panel does look like a deskbar xfce4-panel, at least for the
"task bar", aka "Window List", aka "Window Buttons".

But that is not enough. The functionality is missing. It is broken.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
The versions of the panels might be important.

Latest available version.

As I said. It does not work.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Liam Proven
* start menu
* quick launch area (optional)
* app switcher
* notification area
* clock
https://imgur.com/dBfjico
Note how it is broken in multiple ways.
[1] The menu button is vertical. Should be horizontal.
[2] Quick start icons have scaled with the panel. This is incorrect;
they should stay constant size but arrange in rows with the panel.
[3] The app switcher is sort of functional, but there is no spacing.
[4] Also, AFAICS, I can't pin apps to it.
[5] Note that the system indicators are arranged vertically.

Yes, I'm getting similar results with my experiments (which I
accidentally put into the wrong thread).

As for item number 4, the good news is that MATE can do that.

If you use the "Main Menu" applet (my favorite), you can right-click
any program in the menu and choose any of these from the context
menu, with the last one offering a sub-menu:
* Add this launcher to panel
* Add this launcher to desktop
* Entire menu >
* Add this as drawer to panel
* Add this as menu to panel

If you use the "Menu Bar" applet, you can right-click any program in
the menu and choose any of these from the context menu, with the last
one offering a sub-menu:
* Add this launcher to panel
* Add this launcher to desktop
* Entire menu >
* Add this as drawer to panel
* Add this as menu to panel

If you use the "MATE Menu" applet, you can right-click any program in
the menu choose from these context menu options:
* Add to desktop
* Add to panel

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Post by Ralf Mardorf

Post by Little Girl

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get vertical taskbars on
the MATE desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop with some samples. The first one shows a
bottom and left taskbar. The second one shows a bottom and two left
taskbars. I don't normally use a left taskbar, so I just threw some
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

To a vertical mate-panel add "Window List" and enlarge the panel to
384 pixels. IIUC what's called "Window List" for mate-panel is what
Liam calls "task bar".

Yeah, even without doing that, I was able to see the misbehavior of
the applets when I did further experiments today. See the additions
to the page above to see the results of my experiments.

The only time the orientation of the applets is consistent and
correct is when they're in a horizontal panel. When the panel is
vertical, the orientation of some is horizontal and others is
vertical. Worst of all, many of the ones that should be horizontal
aren't, making them either difficult or impossible to read/use.

Post by Ralf Mardorf
For xfce4-panel it's called "Window Buttons". If you s
The versions of the panels might be important.

That's true. I think I used an older version of Ubuntu MATE for my
tests. Yep, I used an Ubuntu MATE 16.10 ISO.

[Ralf Mardorf]

Post by Little Girl
That's true. I think I used an older version of Ubuntu MATE for my
tests. Yep, I used an Ubuntu MATE 16.10 ISO.

Off-topic: I'm using openbox and stay with 16.04 LTS as long as
possible for several reasons. Btw. while ROXTerm upstream continues
ROXTerm development, Ubuntu dropped it from the repositories. It was
discontinued for a short while
https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/discussion/422638/thread/60da6975/
but it's no surprise that it is continued
https://realh.github.io/roxterm/en/news.html , since I doubt that any
other terminal emulation can compete with it, it was merely a matter of
time.

[Liam Proven]

Post by Little Girl
Hey there,

Maté is fine but can't do vertical taskbars.

Actually, it's pretty quick and painless to get vertical taskbars on
the MATE desktop. I created a quick blog post and added a couple of
screenshots of my desktop with some samples. The first one shows a
bottom and left taskbar. The second one shows a bottom and two left
taskbars. I don't normally use a left taskbar, so I just threw some
https://mostlylinux.wordpress.com/2018/07/

I answered this in the other thread, but hey.

As I said:

I am not sure that I understand. Please do look at the photo gallery
-- it is much easier to show than to explain.

https://imgur.com/a/fLeAy

It seems to me that most people have never seen a vertical taskbar. At
some jobs, colleagues have been amazed -- they didn't know you could
move and resize the taskbar.

I have spent a lot of time trying to reproduce this layout in GNOME 2,
Maté, Cinnamon and KDE. KDE can sort of do it, but the start button
becomes *HUGE* (about 200x200 pixels, taking 10% of the whole panel),
other controls get huge.

Maté, Cinnamon, Budgie etc. don't understand that notification area
icons should flow in rows and just make them bigger, which is not only
ugly, it means you quickly run out of room. Weather indicators and so
on become unreadable as the text is sideways.

Post by Little Girl
I likely have got more panels installed, but I just show the versions
$ pacman -Q mate-panel xfce4-panel lxpanel fbpanel
mate-panel 1.20.2-1
xfce4-panel 4.12.2-1
lxpanel 0.9.3-2
fbpanel 7.0-2

Versions don't tell me much, I'm afraid. A screenshot would be more informative.

Post by Little Girl
While I'm using a horizontal panel on the top, my panel actually are
two panels on top

See, this is the problem. I don't want a taskbar particularly -- I was
perfectly happy with Unity's Mac-like layout. But I can't have that
any more, just clumsy kludgy recreations like Maté's attempt.

All the other desktops are based on panels. If I must have a panel, I
want it vertical.

So no horizontal panels at all. All removed, merged into a single
vertical panel, with inside it, horizontal text, horizontal rows of
indicator icons, horizontally-displayed indicators, horizontal
window-switching buttons with horizontal text in them.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: ***@cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: ***@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: [phone] - ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): [phone]